Apparently Namco Bandai's problem wasn't with the people making "Splatterhouse" at Bottlerocket. It was the management, or at least its deal with them.

According to a source close to the project, and several others familiar with the situation, Namco Bandai has quietly opened a new office in San Diego to finish production on its game "Splatterhouse" and recruited between 10 and 20 designers, artists, programmers, producers, and other staff from Bottlerocket Entertainment to work on the game.

Remember that Bottlerocket was the original developer on the game, but in February, publisher Namco Bandai took the game away from it and canceled their deal for an unspecified "performance issue," according to Makoto Iwai, COO of the company's American operation.

In the meantime, work has continued on "Splatterhouse at Namco Bandai's internal team that made "Afro Samurai." But switching developers is a difficult process since there's no internal memory of why a game is the way it is, what went wrong in the past, and so on. Getting the game out by later this year, as promised, would be difficult.

So Namco apparently has a solution: Re-hire the key folks who were making the game. Many were of couse available since Bottlerocket has been in financial straits, first because Brash went bankrupt, killing "The Flash" (and likely leaving Bottlerocket, like many other developers, in the hole for hundreds of thousands of dollars), and then because of "Splatterhouse."

As I reported yesterday, Bottlerocket has now been tapped by Genius Products to finish production of "Scratch: the Ultimate DJ." But for the past few months it has been without an assignment and even that new game likely isn't enough to keep all the folks working on "Flash" and "Splatterhouse" employed.

So when Bottlerocket couldn't afford to keep many of them, it's little wonder many on the "Splatterhouse" team took Namco Bandai's offer to finish the project they started.

Of course, we still don't know exactly why Namco canceled its contract with "Bottlerocket" and whether its plan was nefarious in any way, or it's simply executing a necessary backup plan. Either way, it's clear it wasn't entirely unhappy with the work being done at Bottlerocket since it's hiring many of their employees to finish the game. The unspecificed "performance" problem must have had to do with the developer's management, or the terms of the deal the publisher had with them.

Namco Bandai reps didn't respond to a request for comment. Bottlerocket CEO Jay Beard declined to comment.

Sony's much rumored motion sensing controller for the Playstation 3 is real and it will likely be unveiled at E3.

That's what I've been hearing from several sources, one of whom has seen the device and two of whom are familiar with Sony's plans to show it at E3 next month.

Rumors that Sony will come out with a motion sensing device have abounded for over two years, ever since a patent was first reported on in January of 2007.

A good source saw a working prototype several months ago that largely fit what was in the patent. Sony's controller apparently used LEDs (light emitting diodes, essentially little electric light sources) and a small webcam to track the device's movements. Because the camera can read different color lights and the shape and angle of each light, it's much more accurate than the Wii-mote. It can track precise movements, including along the Z axis (pushing toward and away from the TV; something the Wii is really bad at) as well as velocity.

As Kombo.com reported last month, Sony is apparently reaching out to select developers and publishers to get some early software coming.

I'm not sure when the device will be unveiled (later this year or mid-next year, I'd think given the E3 timing) or what software will initially be available. Or even what it will look like (the prototype apparently looks kinda funky with a bulb to house the LEDs on the end). But apparently we'll find out the answers soon.

It will be the second new product shown by Sony at E3, if 1UP's report about a new PSP that will only play downloadable content proves accurate.

A Sony rep declined to comment.

Update: As some astute readers have pointed out, the PS3 of course does have a motion sensing controller already. But this new one will be much more advanced than the Sixaxis and more in the shape of a stick, a la Nintendo's Wii-mote.

Now that it has gotten the game's source code back from its courtroom nemesis 7 Studios, Genius Products is tapping a new developer to complete production on "Scratch: the Ultimate DJ": Bottlerocket Entertainment.

Several sources close to the project confirmed the news.

Those of you who have been paying too much attention to video game industry news will recognize several layers of irony here. For one, the reason San Diego-based Bottlerocket is available to take on this assignment is that it recently had a game it was working on, "Splatterhouse," taken away by developer Namco Bandai. So essentially, its last game was yanked by an angry (petty?) publisher and as a result, it's now taking on as an assignment a game yanked from another developer by an angry (petty?) publisher.

Furthermore, Bottlerocket and 7 have both been in a bad financial situation this year, which contributed to their problems on "Splatterhouse" and "Scratch," for the same reason: the collapse of Brash Entertainment. 7 was working on "Fun Park" and "9" for Brash, while Bottlerocket was doing "The Flash." When Brash went bankrupt, both developers were owed hundreds of thousands of dollars.

And of course, as I previously reported, "Scratch" started life as a game at... Brash. Now we're really entering Alanis Morissette territory.

So now Bottlerocket is about to start (or already started? I'm not quite sure) work to complete "Scratch," while 7 Studios is finishing up "Space Camp," its casual Wii/DS game for new parent company Activision, and likely talking about doing some kind of spin-off or sequel to "DJ Hero" while dealing with being a defendant and plaintiff in court with Genius Products, its former publisher.

And all three of the past half-year's biggest disaster stories in video games -- the bankruptcy of Brash, Namco taking "Splatterhouse" from Bottlerocket, and 7 Studios' legal tussle with Genius -- have become intertwined.

Tragedy or comedy? Hard to say. But I'll have more on the intertwined story soon.

A Genius executive didn't respond to a request for comment (no surprise since the company has only communicated through publicists through its lawsuit against 7 Studios and Activision). A Bottlerocket executive declined to comment.

One of the stories I missed while away for my long weekend was the delay of Universal's "Bioshock" movie.

As Michael Fleming reported in Variety, Universal simply became uncomfortable with the budget that would be needed to fulfill the vision of John Logan's script and director Gore Verbinski's pre-production.

That too-high budget being reported is $160 million, though I've been hearing from sources it was in fact substantially higher: The film was going to need over $200 million for production. Universal balked, Verbinski felt he couldn't come in much lower, and now they're at a standstill.

Apparently there was a substantial amount of work happening on "Bioshock," especially on the early art and visualizations side. There was even some early casting in the works.

But that's all on hold now. The pre-production staff has dispersed and Verbinski is left talking with Universal about whether there's a cheaper version of "Bioshock" to be had.

One question undoubtedly on the studio's mind is "Bioshock's" mature themes. If the film was going to be anything like the game in its horror elements and weighty moral issues, it would have merited an R rating and appealed primarily to adult audiences. After the relative failure of Warner Bros. "Watchmen" adaptation, which has grossed only $107 million so far, Universal would have to be concerned. If it's going to spend anywhere close to $200 million or more, it probably wants a PG-13 film that isn't so heavy it would scare off the teenagers and young adults who drive so much of the ticket sales these days.

But don't count "Bioshock" out. As Fleming reported, it's not at all unprecedented for movies to be put on hold and then go back into production with a new budget. It's certainly in Universal's financial interests to do so. As I reported when the film deal first got made last year, the studio will have to pay publisher Take-Two substantial penalties if the movie doesn't happen.

"The reason I structured it the way I did is to make sure it gets made," Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick, a former movie executive, told me at the time. It looks like his dealmaking savvy is being put to the test.

Sorry for the unexplained delay. I was out of town and didn't get a chance to warn my faithful reader(s) I'd be away. More original reporting and other good stuff coming tomorrow, but here's the big stuff that happened while I was away:

-More rumors that Warner Bros. is one of the bidders for Midway. Wouldn't be surprising at all. The studio would get a lot of IP, and a good brand name, pretty damned cheap, to further its video game ambitions.

-The last remaining in-production Sierra game passed on by Activision Blizzard without a publisher, "Wet," finally found one: Bethesda Softworks.

-Speaking of Bethesda, it landed hot-again Oscar nominee Mickey Rourke to do the voice for its upcoming military shooter "Rogue Warrior."

-Another realistic military shooter, "Six Days in Fallujah," has lost its publisher. Konami chickened out in the face of public controversy and dropped the game. More specifically, the word is that Konami's conservative Japanese executives had no idea what kind of criticism the game might face and quickly told their enthusiastic American subsidiary, which made the deal, to reverse course. Really disappointing news for those of us who would like to see publishers taking risks and pushing the boundaries of the medium and the kind of stories it could tell. And yet more evidence that we're not likely to get that from any of the big Japanese companies.

-Microsoft isn't exactly off to a good start in its efforts to produce original video content for Xbox Live. Writing on his blog, horror director James Gunn, who made a short as part of the "Horror Does Comedy" series the Xbox 360 maker did with Saffran Digital Media to produce its first original video for the service, wrote "Microsoft/XBox was by far the most dreadful, non-talent friendly company I've ever worked for." In short, the company repeatedly censored and cut Gunn's piece (totally rejecting the first one, in fact), acting as if they didn't know what they would get from the maker of "Slither."

This is obviously an attitude and reputation Microsoft is going to have to change since it really does aspirations to be, as Gunn wrote, "their own network, as well as a gaming console, DVR, and way to buy movies."

7 Studios is giving as good as it gets in the ongoing smackdown over "Scratch: The Ultimate DJ."

The game's developer, recently acquired by Activision Blizzard, filed a counter-suit on Wednesday asking for over $1 million in damages and alleging that publisher Genius Products has engaged in a "textbook case of unlawful and unsavory business practices." The Cut Scene obtained a copy.

(The suit is technically being filed by 7 Studios, but the law firm handling it is the same one that has been defending Activision Blizzard in court, so it's certainly not an independent initiative.)

The response comes just a week after Genius and its partner Numark sued Activision Blizzard, 7 Studios, and 7's CEO Lewis Peterson for allegedly trying to delay and interfere with "Scratch" in order to benefit Activision's competing game "DJ Hero."

In a nutshell, 7 Studios' argument is that as a novice video game publisher, DVD distributor Genius was incompetent. Amongst the allegations:

-Genius delayed production because it had trouble getting approvals from Microsoft and Sony to publish on the 360 and PS3 and in fact still doesn't have approval from Sony.

-Genius didn't deliver 7 Studios the music it needed for the game on time. By this January, three months before "Scratch" was supposed to be completed, it had only less than 25% of the tracks.

-The turntable controllers weren't delivered to 7 Studios in time, delaying production by several months. By late 2008, Genius was considering abandoning those pricey accessories, though it ultimately decided against that.

-Due to all those delays, as well as a brief flirtation with making a Wii version, production costs on the game rose. 7 Studios says it started spending more than was budgeted in the initial contract ($5.5 million) to the tune of about $250,000 per month. Genius said it would cover the difference, but it fact only did so for one month (this January) out of six (October-March), leaving 7 $1.25 million in the hole.

-As I previously reported, Genius started approaching other publishers in December. After others passed (including EA, MTV and Ubisoft, though they're not mentioned in the suit), Genius entered talks with Activision, but that deal fell through in March.

-When that didn't work out, in early April, two executives from Numark (manufacturer of the DJ controller, which is now part of a joint venture that owns the game with Genius) allegedly went to dinner with a "Scratch" producer from 7 and tried to recruit him and other co-workers to finish the game for Numark, informing them it would be taken away from 7 shortly.

-Around the same time, Genius tried to terminate its development contract with 7 Studios for cause. First by alleging 7 was insolvent, then, when that was disproved, by saying the developer hadn't delivered materials on time.

Put it all together, and 7 Studios has a succinct story of what it claims Genius Products was trying to do. To quote the complaint:

The promises were made by Genius with the intent to induce 7 Studios to enter into the Developer Agreement, and to continue to develop the game to near completion, at 7 Studios' cost and expense, without adequate support from Genius so that Genius could then take the nearly completed Game and shop it to potential buyers and/or another developer who could complete the game using 7 Studios' substantial, confidential and valuable work product.

 This of course stands in direct contrast to Genius' interpretation of events from its press release announcing its suit:

We believe that Activision and 7 Studios have improperly used confidential information obtained from Genius and 7 Studios to interfere with our efforts to complete our game. In short, we believe that Activision is attempting to sabotage the release of our much anticipated game and prevent it from getting to market prior to the release of "DJ Hero."

So why didn't 7 Studios just return all the code and hardware to Genius and be done with deal after it was bought by Activision? Its story is that it comes down to Genius' attempt to terminate for cause. If it  accepts that the deal was terminated for cause, the developer also has to turn over some proprietary tools it was using to make the game (so another developer can finish it), and give up its rights to royalties.

In a court ruling last week, Genius got an order forcing 7 to turn over the game's source code, even though it included some of the developer's pre-existing tools and technology. Genius also won a restraining order preventing Activision from talking to 7 Studios about "Scratch," but since the publisher's attorney agreed to that order according to a transcript of the hearing, it's not exactly a major victory.

There is one part of the story missing almost entirely from 7 Studios' complaint: Its purchase by Acquisition Activision. Most of the developer's version of events is perfectly plausible given the facts we know: Genius was a novice publisher that has been going through severe financial problems for the past year and it seems tough to believe the game's delays and budget overruns were entirely the fault of 7, an experienced if not exactly AAA developer.

But we still don't have a good explanation of why Activision acquire 7 Studios without having acquired "Scratch," unless it had some desire to interfere with or know more about that game.

Genius executives weren't available to comment. In fact, they have declined to give any interviews, relying only on their publicists to send out press releases whenever they have news to trumpet. Activision Blizzard reps, as well as 7 CEO Lewis Peterson, wouldn't comment either. But they also didn't hire a PR firm and send out their lawsuit to every journalist they could find.

When Activision Blizzard buys a development studio, it generally asks one simple question: Which one of our franchises can these guys work on?

The publisher's business model is based entirely on brands that it "exploits" (sequelizes and spins off) on a regular basis. Once in a while a studio gets to make a new property, like Raven is doing with "Singularity," but most of the time, they're working on a franchise. Infinity Ward has "Modern Warfare," Neversoft took ownership of "Guitar Hero," Vicarious Visions does Wii versions of "Guitar Hero," etc.

So after Activision merged with Vivendi Games last summer and its management took control of the new entity, you know CEO Bobby Kotick and his executive team had only one thought as they perused Vivendi's development studios: Which ones fit a need for one of our franchises?

Meaning no offense to the talent at High Moon Studios and Radical Entertainment, the two of Vivendi's six studios kept on, but it wasn't for their sheer talent alone. Yes, Activision apparently believed enough in Radical's "Prototype," already well into production last year, to finish it up. But in both cases, they have been put to work on their new owner's established franchises (with Radical, of course, potentially going onto a "Prototype" sequel if the first one sells well).

According to several sources, those franchises are "Transformers" for High Moon and "Spider-Man" for Radical. This summer, Activision is releasing its second "Transformers" game tied to a movie, developed by Luxoflux. But CEO Bobby Kotick has already said he wants to turn the shape-shifting robots into an annual franchise. The 2010 non-movie tie-in is being made by High Moon, I have learned.

That's a bit of a surprise, since the obvious franchise for High Moon might have been "James Bond," given that its last game was "The Bourne Conspiracy." And its previous (and first) release was horror action title "Darkwatch." Nonetheless, Activision saw technology it thought could be applied to "Transformers." We'll get to judge the results sometime next year.

As for Radical, its work on "Spider-Man" is more obvious. "Prototype" features an agile hero who jumps and runs along walls in an open world version of New York City. Add web slinging and you've got "Spider-Man" to a tee.

In addition, Activision clearly needs a new developer to help with yearly "Spider-Man" games. Treyarch has previously produced many of them, but it is already making "Call of Duty" and "James Bond" games every other year. It could easily afford to give up the franchise and let Radical share it with Shaba, which worked with Treyarch on 2008's "Spider-Man: Friend or Foe." (I'm not sure which studio is making the "Spider-Man" game expected for this fall, though it's probably not Radical given that it just entered the Activision "family" last summer.)

With that information, it seems like a good time to look at Activision Blizzard's 16 studios and what franchises they're working on. This list is based on publicly available information and my own reporting, but is probably a bit incomplete. And certainly doesn't include any potential new franchises that haven't yet been announced or uncovered.

Beenox: DreamWorks Animation games; "Guitar Hero" compilation "Smash Hits"

Bizarre Creations: "James Bond" games and an original racing title

Blizzard Entertainment: "World of Warcraft"; "Starcraft"; "Diablo"; something new

Budcat: Playstation 2 versions of "Guitar Hero" (which sell surprisingly well)

Freestyle Games: "DJ Hero"

High Moon: "Transformers"

Infinity Ward: "Modern Warfare"

Luxoflux: "Transformers"; DreamWorks Animation titles

Neversoft: Lead "Guitar Hero" developer for PS3 and 360

Radical: "Prototype" and "Spider-Man"

Raven Software: "Singularity," "Wolfenstein," Marvel games like "Wolverine"

Shaba: "Spider-Man"

7 Studios: "Scratch: the Ultimate DJ"; "DJ Hero" (7 was just acquired a few weeks ago and it's in the middle of a lawsuit, so its role is still TBD)

Toys for Bob: DreamWorks Animation games

Treyarch: "Call of Duty"; "James Bond"

Vicarious Visions: Core "Guitar Hero" titles for the Wii; other ports for the DS

(This story previously said I was more confident in the High Moon part than the Radical part. But I have since heard from another source and am equally confident in both halves of my reporting here.)

It's always interesting when companies that very rarely talk to the press suddenly start aggressively doing so.

Case in point: Nintendo of America, which generally has a corporate policy to never say anything interesting to a journalist, talking to two major game blogs after the most recent NPD report showed that "Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars" bombed in its first month on sale.

VP of licensing and head of third party publisher relations Steve Singer spoke to MTV Multiplayer; VP of corporate affairs Denise Kaigler talked to Kotaku.

Their message: Everything is fine here. No need to worry.

They certainly have some valid points. Kaigler noted that "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare" for the DS sold only 36,000 units its first month, but in the 16 months hence has moved a decent 500,000 units. Singer said that "Spore" and "Lego Star Wars" had similar sales curves where they sold the vast majority of their units after the first month (unlike, say, "Grand Theft Auto IV").

But the very fact that these two are out talking, instead of just letting Rockstar and its owner Take-Two defend the game's performance, belies their seeming confidence. When Nintendo executives talk, they have a good reason. Here, they clearly want to send a message to hard core gamers and third party developers: Big franchises and M-rated games can work on the DS, despite the evidence to the contrary. Don't give up on us. We want to expand the DS(i) to as large an audience as possible and rake in as much licensing revenue from a wide variety of games as we can. That requires dispelling the (well justified) stereotype that our portable console is only for kids and casual players.

So we know what their message is. But is it accurate? It's a stretch, to say the least. Singer seems to be missing the point when he makes comparisons to "Spore" and "Lego Star Wars." Those games were both rated E.

I don't think anybody believes that big franchises can't work on the DS. After all, Mario and Zelda are both pretty big franchises. Even the critically derided "Guitar Hero: On Tour" did well.

The problem, most of us think, is that "Chinatown Wars" was rated M. And a very hard M at that. "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare" is the best comparison, but even that game was rated T. Shooting people in war is very different than dealing drugs and killing cops.

In addition, "Chinatown Wars" got much better reviews than any of those three games.

There are 26.3 million DS's in the U.S., more than the 360 and PS3 combined and almost twice the number of PSPs. In its first two weeks, "Chinatown Wars" sold 97% fewer units than "GTA IV" did in its first five days. And the new game had an 83% larger potential audience.

Of course we would expect console versions of "GTA" to sell better, since they're bigger and better and similar to what gamers love. But even the two "GTA" games for PSP, as I previously reported, sold more than "Chinatown Wars" in their first months to much smaller hardware bases.

If "Chinatown Wars" really does follow the same sales pattern as "Modern Warfare," it could do OK. That would put it on track to sell over 1.2 million units. But that's still not a "Pokemon"-size blockbuster.

The fact is, "Chinatown Wars" had everything going for it: A very well known brand, amazing reviews, and a big marketing campaign. Those should all add up to a big launch. But they didn't. Are you willing to bet there are a million adult owners of a DS who weren't interested in "Chinatown Wars" last month but will buy it at some point in the future? I'm not.

When you're playing a video game based on a movie, you have to make comparisons. Not in the "Is one better than the other?" sense, of course, since they're fundamentally incomparable media.

But I do believe that a video game should be thematically and narratively consistent with the film on which it's based; it should extend (or at least retell) the movie's fiction in a way that naturally fits; and, most of all, it should be respectful of its source material. You know how when you go camping you're supposed to leave your campground cleaner than when you left it? I think that's a good idea for video games based on movies as well.

By that standard, "Godfather II" is an abysmal failure. To be sure, the film sets a high bar: It's one of the all-time greats of American cinema, dealing with family, loyalty, betrayal, morality, and, of course, the American Dream (kind of like "Grand Theft Auto IV," except better).

But the game? As I wrote in my recently posted review, it's pretty much all downhill from the start when the developers at EA Redwood Shores decide to try and follow the plot of the film while shoehorning in a new Corleone family don controlled by the player:

Achieving this requires an almost epic rewrite, however. At the beginning of the game, Michael decides to lay low for awhile and make the player’s character, Dominic, don (perhaps just as well, since EA doesn’t have the rights to Al Pacino’s voice or likeness). With the flashbacks to Robert DeNiro’s young Vito entirely erased, “Godfather II” works its way through some of the highlights of Michael’s story, such as the attempted murder of Frankie Pentangeli and Sen. Pat Geary’s rude awakening in a brothel, with Dominic awkwardly grafted onto events.

The plot increasingly strays from the movie, culminating in a ridiculous sequence where Dominic tries to single-handedly assassinate Fidel Castro and fight his way out of Havana. By that point, it’s clear EA isn’t paying homage to a great American film so much as abusing its legacy for a game that could and should stand on its own.

To EA, apparently, "The Godfather Part II" is not a great American film that deserves respect. It's a brand that can be slapped onto a half-finished mafia game.

"Godfather II's" flaws are many, and mostly of the type that scream the publisher simply ran out of interest (or marketing research) to fund it to completion: Sub-par graphics, repetitive missions, a nearly empty "open world" (there's literally nobody in the airport; apparently all 20 people who live in this version of New York City are afraid to fly).

 But there's one key feature of the game that almost makes up for all those problems:

[T]he sequel adds what it calls the “Don’s View,” a three-dimensional map on which Dominic can send Corleone goons to take over rackets or defend their own from attacks. The “Don’s View” is a truly impressive interface, allowing players to manage the family, call in favors and scan sizable maps without ever feeling overwhelmed. It accomplishes this not only through clear visuals and well-laid-out controls, but also aural cues. Soft moans and the cocking of a pistol, for instance, help to indicate whether one is looking at a business involved in adult entertainment or gun running.

"The Don's View" should have been the core innovation behind a great mafia game. Instead, it's the only impressive feature in what's otherwise an interactive middle finger to Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo.

Already rumored on several blogs, Warner Bros. and its many partners today revealed that "Lego Rock Band" is indeed real and coming out for the holidays.

Talk about a marketer's wet dream: You've got two of the biggest brands in the video game world merging along with two of the biggest genres (music and kids/family). This is one of those games that won't take any explaining in the advertising: the name says it all. And practically guarantees good initial sales.

When you think about it, "Lego Rock Band" is the perfect complement to this fall's "Rock Band: Beatles Edition." The latter is looking to extend the franchise's demographics older and the former to move them younger. In both cases, they could help to ease Viacom's "Rock Band"-related financial woes -- Despite solid sales, the games have so far been money losers.

All the merging makes for quite a complex business deal, however. Warner Bros. is publishing the game. Its wholly owned subsidiary TT Games, which has the rights from the Lego Group to make video games based on that license, is developing "Lego Rock Band." MTV is essentially serving as the licensor here, giving Warner the rights to make a game based on its video game brand. And of course "Rock Band" developer Harmonix will be consulting.

What will "Lego Rock Band" be? Essentially "Rock Band," but with adorable, fully customizable characters, and more family-friendly songs like Carl Douglas' "Kung Fu Fighting" and Pink's "So What." No Ramones or Beastie Boys in this game, I'm betting.

I've confirmed that it will be compatible with all the existing "Rock Band" instruments (and probably most of the "Guitar Hero" ones). No official word on whether there will be any unique guitar, drum and microphone controllers made out Legos (or faux Legos), but , c'mon. The odds of that happenings are about the same as the odds of there not being any new "Guitar Hero" games this year

It looks like gamers just aren't ready for mature content on the DS.

Despite stellar reviews, a major marketing campaign and one of the biggest brand name in video games, "Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars" bombed last week. According to new data from the NPD Group, the DS-only version of "GTA" sold a pathetic 89,000 units in its first two weeks on sale.

It was the first effort by any publisher to bring a huge, M-rated franchise that has previously existed solely on living room consoles to Nintendo's portable device. It seemed hard to argue with the logic: The DS is the most popular console in the country and the world by far, with 26.3 million sold in the U.S. The conventional wisdom was that only kids' games and casual titles, as well as ones made by Nintendo, sold well. "GTA" publisher Rockstar decided to challenge that wisdom with "Chinatown Wars." Bad decision.

By contrast, last April's "Grand Theft Auto IV" sold 2.85 million units in just its first few days to a combined Xbox 360 / Playstation 3 install base of 14.4 million. Rockstar's previous two efforts to move "GTA" to a portable device: 2005's "Liberty City Stories" and 2006's "Vice City Stories," sold 158,000 and 108,000 units, respectively, during their first month on sale. And those were both for the PSP, which had (and continues to have) a much lower install base than the DS.

Even the Xbox 360 exclusive downloadable "Grand Theft Auto IV: The Lost and Damned" has, I'm told, sold about 1 million units to that console's 13.5 million owners.

Rockstar has to be devastated by those numbers. And any third party publisher thinking about taking an M-rated franchise to the DS has to be paying attention and thinking twice.

Other important points from NPD video game sales data for March:

-Nintendo's actually sees a... DECLINE. Yes, sales for the Wii and DS both fell in March. It's the first time that has happened since, well, as long as I can find. Given that "Super Smash Bros. Brawl" came out last year, it's understandable on the Wii count. And DS sales have been pretty much flat for a while.

Combine that with the Wii's already infamous slip to second place in Japan last month behind the PS3, thanks mainly to "Resident Evil 5," and it's easy to see why investors have become concerned and Nintendo shares fell 17% on Friday.

But let's keep it all in perspective. Nintendo's sales are still extraordinary. The Wii and DS sold over 1 million units combined last month with no holidays, not even Easter, to boost them, and only one major DS release, "Pokemon Platinum" (which sold a very healthy 805,000 units). And library titles like "Wii Fit," "Wii Play," and "Mario Kart Wii" continue to sell extraordinarily well. Nintendo is like a team that has gone undefeated for several seasons and finally loses a game or two. It's not exactly time to become a Sony Cubs fan. I would have to agree with Barrons that at this point, Nintendo stock is being oversold.

-Industry revenue was down a whopping 17% for the month. But again, that's overblown. As NPD fairly pointed, Easter wasn't in March this year and there was nothing remotely on the scale of "Smash Bros.," which sold 2.7 million units last year.

Still, hardware sales were soft across the board. Every single console except the Xbox 360, which was supply constrained last year, saw a sales drop. So while things aren't -17% bad, they're not good.

The more notable figure may be that for the first quarter, industry revenue grew 0%. As in it was flat. That may be the kind of year 2009 is going to be: low or no growth. Not bad in a recession, but pretty amazing after 19% growth last year.

-"Resident Evil 5" launched big. No surprise there. Over 1.5 million units on PS3 and 360. The only other solid debut was "Halo Wars," which started off with 639,000 units. "Killzone 2," which launched at the very end of February, falls in that category as well. For Feb. and March combined, it sold 592,000 units.

-Sony won the baseball battle. "MLB '09: The Show" sold 305,000 units on Playstation 3, easily beating 2K's "Major League Baseball 2K9" on either console (the 360 version sold 205,000 and the PS3 sold less than that).

-Though they launched in the last week of the month, making it a little tougher to hit the top 10, neither Universal's "Wanted" nor Midway and Ubisoft's "Wheelman," starring Vin Diesel, tore up the charts enough to sell over 200,000 units. It's safe to say neither one will be a major hit.

Turns out there's a lot more backstory to "Scratch: the Ultimate DJ" than Genius Products revealed in its lawsuit this week.

(Update: Genius' request for an immediate restraining order against Activision and 7 Studios was just denied by a judge. However, the suit still continued.)

For one thing, Genius wasn't even the first publisher of the game. "Scratch" has been in the works since early 2007, when Hollywood's dearly departed publisher Brash Entertainment, which went out of business last fall, started working on it with developer 7 Studios. By the summer of 2007, when Brash decided it would focus entirely on games based on movie and TV licenses, it soured on the project. Apparently executives also became concerned about the costs and complex execution of manufacturing and shipping "Scratch'" unique DJ peripheral along with the game.

Genius then bought "Scratch" as part of its move to expand beyond DVD distribution into the video game business (a strategy that has so far resulted in just one release: "Line Rider 2: Unbound"). So when the lawsuit states, "On or about February 26, 2008, Genius entered into a developer agreement with 7 Studios pursuant to which 7 Studios, as the developer, agreed to develop the game for Genius," well, that's pretty misleading. Sure, that may have been when Genius reached an agreement with 7, but it's not when the game started.

Furthermore, the lawsuit's assertion that publishers started to approach Genius with inquiries to buy "Scratch" isn't exactly true either. That may have happened, but it was because Genius was in fact trying to sell the game. By late last year, due in part to higher-than-expected development costs at 7 and also severe financial problems at the DVD distributor that led to a stock market delisting and a sale by previous owner the Weinstein Co. early this year, Genius was looking to get rid of "Scratch."

So when the suit says, "In or about January 2009... Genius received inquiries from a number of notable video game publishers seeking to purchase the Game," that could technically be accurate. But it ignores the primary factor: Genius was inviting those inquiries. They didn't just come out of the blue.

It seems that Genius engaged in talks with several different publishers, including MTV, EA and Ubisoft, but couldn't close a deal with anyone. Then, as the suit indicates, Activision jumped into the mix, partially due to a relationship between Laird Malamed, senior VP at "Guitar Hero" division RedOctane, and 7 Studios CEO Lewis Petersen.

Activision, of course, was interested in "Scratch" due to its similar upcoming "DJ Hero" game (which itself started life at Vivendi Games before that company merged with Activision). It's tough to believe the nation's biggest third party publisher saw the game as a major threat, given that "Scratch" is coming from an inexperienced competitor and doesn't have "Hero" in the title. Nonetheless, it clearly wanted the game, perhaps to integrate parts of it into "DJ Hero" or perhaps to use as a spin-off from or sequel to that franchise in the future.

That's the reason why it decided to buy 7 Studios as well -- so it would have the game and developer. But when Activision and Genius couldn't reach agreement on a deal to buy the franchise, the "DJ Hero" publisher went ahead and bought 7 anyway. That's where things get a bit sketchy and, the sources, I talked to say, where Genius may have something to its case.

Though it had a relationship with Activision from working on budget Wii/DS title "Space Camp," 7 Studios is certainly not a prominent enough developer to be bought purely for the talent. It's only worth something along with "Scratch." So one has to wonder why Activision would go ahead and buy 7 without being sure it could get the game. At best it's a risky move and at worst indicates the "DJ Hero" maker may have been hoping to pressure or interfere with the competing title in some way.

Nonetheless, I understand Activision and Genius were continuing to talk up until when the lawsuit was filed. The fact that Genius not only sued, but aggressively informed the press, indicates that it's now looking to negotiate publicly and get more money than it has so far been offered, either in court-ordered damages or a better sale price.

But Genius is certainly not just an eager little video game publisher that came up with the idea for "Scratch" and then suddenly got attacked by big, mean Activision, as it's trying to portray itself.

The court, the debtors, the owner and the executives have agreed: $30 million is a good sales price for Midway.

That's according to the final version of the Midway's "key employee incentive plan," which was approved at an April 6 bankruptcy court hearing. In its original form, the bonus schedule was called "outrageous" by a court trustee and "disingenuous" by a committee of creditors.

The approved plan, which contains some small changes to the revised version filed two weeks ago, sets a target sales price above which the 28 "key employees" (a mix of executives, developers, and others, but not CEO Matt Booty) get a bonus.

How much? They share a $600,000 bonus pool when an asset purchase agreement is "executed" (or signed) and another $1 million bonus pool when the sale closes (actually happens). In addition, the key employees get more if they sell Midway for more. Specifically, upon the sale's closing, they get $75,000 in extra bonuses for every $1 million above $30 million (So if the final sales price is $34 million, for example, the bonus pool is $1.9 million).

As previously promised by the company, that's significantly less than the $3.755 million bonus pool in the original version.

Given Midway's state and the dismal economy, $30 million seems like a decent price. Then again, just last summer, Midway stock was trading at almost $4, giving it a market cap of around $350 million range. That's quite a fall.

The plan has been approved by everyone involved: Owner, Mark Thomas, the courts, Midway management, and its many creditors. So it's safe to assume this is a price everyone involved thinks is gettable, but just high enough they want to make sure employees are incentivized to make it happen.

While there's no direct indication of how they reached that figure, it was, according to a previous court filing by Mark Thomas, the highest bid Midway has received so far. Perhaps coincidentally, but nonetheless notably, that's also the exact amount of Thomas' secured loan -- the one that he gets paid back before any other creditors receive cash.

Also of note in the approved version of the plan:

Of course, the key employees can also get a bonus ($1.6 million, but no more) for submitting and then getting approved a plan for reorganization or liquidation that "provides for payment in full of the lender's secured claims" -- in other words, gets Mark Thomas his $30 million. That seems extremely unlikely, however (anyone out there know a way to reorganize Midway so it stays in business and gets Mark Thomas his cash?), so a sale for $30 million or more is the most likely outcome if those 28 key employees want a bonus for their months of work at a bankrupt, bereft company.

Activision's effort to kill the competition to "DJ Hero," its upcoming turntable music game, has earned it a very public lawsuit.

Today Genius Products, the DVD distributor that recently got into the videogame biz, sued Activision Blizzard, along with developer 7 Studios, for allegedly trying to interfere with a contract and misappropriate trade secrets related to its "Scratch: the Ultimate DJ" game in order to benefit Activision's "DJ Hero," which comes out in the fall.

In plain English, here's what Genius and its partner Numark industries, the DJ hardare manufacturer that helped to develop the game's controller, are alleging, according to a copy of the lawsuit

A source at L.A.-based 7 confirmed to the Cut Scene that the development studio has indeed been acquired by Activision. As Genius and Numark allege in their suit, and as I know from previous reporting, Activision was in a very good position to make that deal, since the developer was in severe financial straits after Brash Entertainment went bankrupt and owed 7 $581,000.

There's no doubt that Genius' core allegation about why Activision bought 7 Studios is correct: It  wants to avoid a "Guitar Hero" - "Rock Band" situation on the DJ gaming front. If it couldn't buy the competing title outright, it did the next best thing: Buy the competitors' development talent. That way they're, at the least, not exactly incentivized to do their best work on "Scratch" and also won't be available to work on any sequels or spin-offs.

In fact, they could easily end up working on "DJ Hero." Freestyle Games, which Activision acquired after it picked up the "DJ Hero" series when it merged with Vivendi Games, is making the first game. But if it becomes a big hit, the publisher will surely need more developers to work on spin-offs and sequels. Which means it could keep 7 Studios very busy.

However, all that doesn't mean Genius's suit has any merit. That depends on whether 7 Studios, under Activision's direction, has been violating its contract by witholding its work in order to delay "Scratch's" release, as well as sharing proprietary technology with its new corporate owner.

That's a matter of what the contract says. But Genius CEO Trevor Drinkwater seems pretty confident in his position. "We believe that Activision is attempting to sabotage the release of our much anticipated game and prevent it from getting to market prior to the release of 'DJ Hero,'" he said in a recently issued press release.

Genius and Numark are picking a very public fight with Activision by not only suing, but issuing a press release (and even calling this reporter to make sure I was aware of it). That only happens when all attempts at private discussions have failed and the plaintiff wants to embarass the defendant in public. Which, of course, is often a good strategy with a corporate behometh like Activision Blizzard that, for better or worse, isn't particularly beloved by gamers (even though they love its studios like Infinity Wars and Blizzard).

Genius and Numark are looking for "substantial damages," along with the immediate return of all "Scratch" code and products and an injunction preventing 7 and Activision from using any confidential information they have received.

Activision Blizzard reps haven't yet responded to a request for comment.

Meanwhile, I'm told that work continues on "Scratch," even if the developers have no idea who, if anyone, will release their game.

More updates to come, most likely...

(For those who want to read the entire lawsuit, which Genius's publicists have oh-so-helpfully emailed out to the press, Destructoid has uploaded it here.)

As everyone prepares for NPD's report of what was likely a slow- to no-growth March for the video game industry (thanks largely to tough comparisons to last year's mega-hit "Super Smash Bros. Brawl"), I'm particularly struck by this point made by research firm EEDAR in its sales preview:

I've previously written about how important I think DLC is becoming to the Xbox 360 / Playstation 3 business model. To take a recent example, I'm told by a good source (though Rockstar hasn't confirmed) that "Grand Theft Auto IV: The Lost and Damned" has sold around one million units on Xbox Live. That's over $20 million in gross revenue and would be approximately $14 million for Rockstar, if it hadn't already done a $50 million deal for two DLC chapters with Microsoft.

"Call of Duty: World at War" similarly sold a million-plus units of its "map pack 1." That's over $10 million in revenue and more than $7 million forActivision (given the way Bobby Kotick drives deals, I'm willing to bet Activision gets more than the standard 70% from Sony and Microsoft). 

Most importantly, the margins are much better for both pieces of DLC than standard retail games. While they arguably have one-third and one-sixth, respectively of their original games' content (thus justifying the consumer price ratios), the production budgets are much lower than that. After all, they reuse the same engine, art style, user interface, asthe retail titles. That stuff is expensive to design.

For most AAA 360/PS3 games to make an extra 10% in revenue, with higher profit margins, by next year, is a very big deal. But we'll never understand just how important it is. At least not in a systematic way. BecauseNPD doesn't track download sales. Microsoft and Sony, the sellers in this case, guard that data jealously.

Sure, occasionally they or the publishers issue press releases when they have a big hit, as with "World at War." And publishers will inevitably give Wall Street some insight into their DLC revenue as it becomes an increasingly important part of their bottom lines.

But the numbers will be scattershot. We won't have any comprehensive tracking the way we (kinda) do with NPD.

Add PC sales, cell phones, and Web gaming to the growing amount of DLC and there's a huge video game industry outside of the retail consoles sales NPD tracks. Which means the figures upon which most of us analysts, journalists, and other interested folks rely are becoming less representative of the business, particularly its high growth areas.

More and more, it seems like the the NPD figures are becoming for the video game biz what box office grosses are for film: An important set of data that shows only one part of a dynamic and diverse industry.

"Wheelman" has had a long and not-so-smooth history, to say the least. It started production at Midway's Australia studio, only to moved to Newcastle in the UK, where it was then re-started a third time when the publisher decided to do all its development in Unreal Engine.

Then there's the film tie-in. Three years ago, I wrote an article in Variety about Midway's deal with Paramount's MTV Films label to simultaneously develop a "Wheelman" film. The plan back then was to release the game and film, both of which would star Vin Diesel, simultaneously in late 2007. MTV was going to produce the game's soundtrack, sell in-game advertising, and provide significant marketing support.

Three years, numerous delays, and one bankruptcy later, "Wheelman" is finally out. MTV has nothing to do with the project anymore and Midway has handed off publishing rights to Ubisoft in exchange for some badly needed cash.

After all that, perhaps it's no surprise that "Wheelman" feels, well, a couple of years too late. As I wrote in my review, "What might have seemed like competent copying a couple of years ago pales next to 2008's 'Burnout: Paradise' and 'Grand Theft Auto IV.' 'Wheelman' offers a few spectacular racing mechanics, but otherwise fails to meet the mark of those top-shelf inspirations."

Put even more simply, if you're going to so blatantly be influenced by rip off other games, you've got to be at least as good as them.    

That being said, some of the driving action is really fun. Bashing nearby cars with a flick of the right thumbstick; slowing down time to shoot everyone around you (the racing equivalent of bullet time); and even "airjacking" a nearby vehicle by jumping from roof to roof. It all works and it's all good fun, especially when the developers mix things up a bit by putting Diesel's character in a semi truck or sending the race into a narrow pedestrian walkway or through a building.

If the game were limited to its dozens of side missions in which players engage in various types of races to earn badges, it would at least be a consistent, smooth ride. Add in multi-player with all those features and it might have been great.

But perhaps because of the presence of a movie star with his name above the title -- when was the last time that happened in a video game? -- there's a confusing, half-assed, cliched story involving an undercover cop, gangs, and other "GTA" wanna-be material.

"The result of attempting both," I wrote in my review, "is extreme tonal conflict. It's difficult to take anything Milo says or does seriously when he's been jumping from roof to roof in cars speeding more than 100 miles per hour."

Full review: Wheelman

The latest mini-controversy over downloadable content involves "Resident Evil 5's" online"versus" mode. The actual amount of content downloaded for players' $5, 1.8 MB on 360 and 351 KB on PS3, is so small that it has many wondering if it's just a key to unlock content already on the disc.

Capcom's answer is that it's new code, though it does reuse assets on the disc.

But the real answer is: Who cares?

I mean, sure, we all want the best possible value for our $60. But game publishers don't owe us anything. If the DLC is already on the disc and unlockable via a code -- as happened with the costumes in "Street Fighter IV," for instance -- it just means it got made before the game was released and the publisher wants to avoid bandwidth costs to deliver it (especially if they have to pay Sony for that bandwidth).

Why is it less offensive if that content is finished a month or two later and delivered via download at the same price? There's no rational answer to that question, of course.

AsI've written before, DLC is a way for publishers to increase their margins and defray the high costs of development for the PS3 and 360 and their relatively small install base compared to the PS2,Xbox, and GameCube base last generation (the Wii, of course, requires separate development from 360 and PS3 and isn't too supportive of DLC).

It seems particularly fair in the case of online multiplayer. It's easy for those of who play games a lot and use Xbox Live or PSN to forget that millions of people own a 360 or PS3 and never connect it to the Internet. Why does Capcom, or any publisher, have to eat the cost of delivering all those potential customers a feature that they'll never use? At least if they're delivering a good enough value for the initial $60 (which, based on the game's 4 million initial shipments, many people seem to think Capcom is).

With DLC, publishers are extracting dollars out of the minority of a game's intial audience for whom more content is worth more money. That's capitalism and there's nothing wrong with it. It's called price discrimination -- trying to segment products as much as possible to get more money out of people willing to pay more. It's why you can buy half price tickets to a Broadway show if you're willing to wait on line the day of the performance and get the least desirable seats in the house.

If customers don't like the practice, they can and should complain about overall game costs. Or, better yet, just don't buy the DLC. But nitpicking about whether DLC is truly all downloaded avoids the real issue and displays a rather ridiculous attitude of entitlement that gamers need to lose.

Five months ago in a New York Times Magazine interview, Will Wright listed Stupid Fun Club as something he does while "Moonlighting":

Now that diversion is his full time job. Wright, the designer behind "SimCity," "The Sim" and "Spore" is leaving Electronic Arts, his employer for the past 12 years (after it bought "SimCity" publisher Maxis), and the company that we can presume has made him quite rich.

As part of Wright's departure, EA is making is making an equity investment in Stupid Fun Club and getting a first look deal on its project. The announcement describes the organization as "Will Wright's new adventure," without giving any background.

But there's actually a long history. Stupid Fun Club is almost a decade old and is all about robots. Founded in 2001, it at one point had, according to this fan site, two full time employees, a filmmaker and "conceptual design consultant" who Wright met on the RobotWars British TV show, and was something between a think tank focused on robots and a place for Wright to work on robot-related ideas for his first look television deal with Fox (none of which turned into series).

So what is it now? It's tough to tell from EA"s vague description of Stupid Fun Club as "an entertainment think tank developing new Intellectual Properties to be deployed across multiple fronts including video games, movies, television, the internet, and toys." Given that Wright would have had no trouble raising money from EA and others to start a new organization, however, it seems like a reasonable assumption that robots will continue to be a big part of it.

The $64,000 question is, "Why?" To what extent was Wright ready to leave and to what extend did EA want him to leave and help make the move agreeable by investing in what had been his side venture? There's no escaping the fact that Wright's deal is remarkably similar to what happens when most studio executives get the axe: the studio funds a production company and gives the executive a first look deal, allowing him to ride into the sunset with a bit of dignity intact.

One thing that is evident is that EA has been preparing for Wright's departure PR-wise for a while. It makes a lot more sense now why the publisher has been putting Maxis general manager and "Spore" executive producer Lucy Bradshaw front and center, along with or even ahead of Wright, in interviews for the past year.

Nielsen's latest data on video game usage during the fourth quarter shows some not too surprising trends: The Playstation 2 is still the most popular video game console, but falling; Xbox 360 and PS3 owners player more than owners of other consoles; middle aged and older women are heavy PC players and especially love card games.

However the most revealing data didn't have to do directly with gaming, but rather its impact on television. Last year when "Grand Theft Auto IV" was released, I did some research and noticed that there are otherwise unexplainable dips in young male TV ratings the week that big console titles are released.

Nielsen finds even more direct evidence of this phenomenom, which has to be disturbing to television executives:

-For 18-24 year old males in the top third of video game usage, none of the top 10 broadcast television shows they watch air in prime time. And only three of the top 10 cable shows are between 8 and 11.

-Taking a specific look at Playstation 3 players, Nielsen found that amongst 18-24 year old males, none of the top 30 broadcast network programs they watched are in prime time. And only five of their top 30 cable programs are.

The top 10 shows for 18-24 year old males who are heavy gamers and the time periods when they air are pretty instructive. On cable, they're at least what you would expect amongst young guys. On broadcast TV, well, if you have to dig down to the nightly news to find the programs they watch most, you can bet they're playing a lot of games.

And yes, these include up to seven days of DVR-related time shifting, Nielsen has confirmed. So it's not like young guys who play games are just recording their favorite shows in primetime and then watching them later. They're simply not watching much primetime TV.

(It is worth nothing that Nielsen can't differentiate between when we use our consoles to watch a movie vs when we're playing a game. But either way, we're not watching television.)

Sometimes, video games based on kids' movies turn their source material into a fun and dynamic package that outdoes gamers' extremely modest expectations and provide a solid experience that can stand on its own. Think "Lego Star Wars," for instance, or "Kung Fu Panda," or Cartoon Networks' "Fusion Fall."

But too often, they return to a pathetic mean. That's what Variety critics Tom Chick found with Activision's latest Dreamworks adaptation, "Monsters vs. Aliens":

There's nothing here that hasn't been done better in numerous other games. When the "God of War"-style button-pressing sequences, in which players just occasionally press buttons while watching a cutscene borrowed from the film, appear, it's clear the developers have run out of ideas.

To its credit, "Monsters vs. Aliens" moves quickly. Though there's not much variety (it's probably not a good idea to have one of the characters regularly comment on how repetitive the game is), and it's chopped into short alternating segments that might distract a child from noticing he or she is essentially replaying the same bits, but with a slightly different background.

The game does make a nod toward replayability, Tom notes, but not in a very good way. Players can earn unlockables via a "DNA strand" that, well, doesn't actually resemble DNA at all (way to educate the youngsters!).

And there are opportunities to replay a level via a "director's commentary," that's actually the same gameplay, but alternate jokes coming out of the characters' mouths. Given that Tom says the jokes weren't too good the first time around, I would hold out high hopes for that. And, really, since when is the "director" of a video game the person who comes up with alternate dialogue? That analogy doesn't even work for films, let alone games.

Full review: Monsters vs. Aliens

How is it that people in Hollywood (and we journalists who cover the industry) always have a good sense of what movies will gross before they open? It's because there are a variety of tracking services that monitor consumer awareness, intent to buy tickets, and other statistics that combine to give a very accurate indication of how films will perform at the box office.

Now one of the biggest companies in that space is trying to bring the same type of analysis to video games. OTX, which stands out from competitors like NRG and MarketCast (owned by Variety parent company Reed Business) by doing all its research online, is launching its GamePlan service in beta and opening it to customers this week at the MI6 video game marketing conference.

OTX started moving into the space last year, has been compiling data since October, and has been testing the service with about 10 publishers for the past month.

Nick Williams, OTX's director of gaming, previously headed up IGN's GamerMetrics service that does something similar based on what its users are clicking (GameSpot and GameTrailers both have competing offerings). As anyone who has spent time on those sites know, the audience is a bit skewed toward traditional young male gamers. It may be the perfect place to figure out how eager fans are to buy "Killzone 2." But they probably didn't as accurately predict the "Wii Fit" phenomenom.

OTX is looking to change that by doing what's already commonplace in film: interviewing a statistically representative samples of everyone who plays video games.

"Our biggest challenge up front was getting as big a piece of the population who play games as possible," Williams told me. "We range from people who spend three hours a week on Yahoo Games to people who spend 50 hours a week on Xbox Live."

So far, the service has tracked over 23,000 gamers and 500 titles. While most have been retail games, it's also looking at downloadable content like "Grand Theft Auto IV: The Lost and Damned."

The core of GameInsight is its weekly polls to find out what games people are aware of, what they're interested in, what they think they'll buy, and even what they intend to pre-order. It's also the first outside company to offer full access at GameFly's rental data, as well as eBay used games sales data. The latter could be particularly useful for publishers trying to figure out how quickly and in what quantity past games with similar characteristics have hit the resale market and seen their prices fall.

OTX is planning to keep tracking games well after their release. For instance, Williams noted that GameInsight noted that "intent to purchase" of "Left 4 Dead" increased substantially after its release. That reflected growing buzz about the quality of its online experience that led to strong sales well after launch. "Left 4 Dead" undoubtedly had the best "legs" of any action game in 2008.

By the end of this year, Williams says he's hoping to go beyond tracking separate statistics and combine them into actual sales projections, making OTX the first company to do so for the video game industry.

Of course, as with all things in this business, they'll be very closely guarded. Studios get full access not just to how their movies are tracking, but all their competitors' films too. However, Williams says game publishers will only get precise estimates for their own titles. For others, they may just get broad ranges. Game publishers just aren't as willing -- or haven't been forced -- to share their data as movie studios and TV networks are.

Bringing reliable sales projections based on consumers surveys to the video game industry would be a pretty significant advance. But in the long run, OTX has an even more ambitious plan: To bring all its entertainment research together.

"We have a consultant from MIT working with our marketing sciences division to look at the ecosystem of all the data we're collecting in one giant entertainment simulator," Williams explains. "You can look at that model and say, 'Don't launch game X when movie Y is opening.' Because all these things are interconnected now."

One of the most critically beloved games of all time has started its path to the big screen.

"Shadow of the Colossus" is being set up at Sony Pictures by producer Kevin Misher ("The Interpeter," "The Rundown"), sources have confirmed (news first broke at the Hollywood Reporter).

"Shadow" was published by Sony Computer Entertainment, making this a rare example of content cross pollinating between the conglomerate's studio and games division.

The movie will be written by Justin Marks (Disney's in-development "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea," "Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li'), who, I should admit, is a friend (as is Misher's development executive Kevin Chang, who played a key role in putting the project together).

Though it sold decently -- enough to keep the development team behind it, which also made "Ico," at work on a new title -- "Shadow" is best known for devoted praise by critics and fans of "games as art" (including me. It's one of my all time favorites). It's arguably the most emotional video game ever made.

It's also not an obvious candidate for a film. The game is an extremely solitary experience, as the main character, a young man named Wander (though you'd never know his name from playing the game) rides through a mysterious land on his horse Agro, slaying 16 colossi in hopes of bring the girl he loves back to life. As anyone who has played "Shadow" knows, it ends on a truly tragic note.

I understand the folks working on the project are planning to have some of the characters who appear only momentarily in the game, such as those who try to track down and stop Wander, play bigger roles in the film. And despite the game's somewhat "artsy" cred, they're hoping "Shadow" will be a "Lord of the Rings"-style fantasy tentpole.

As always, I do want to remind excitable gamers that getting set up a studio is still very far from actually making it to the big screen. Nonetheless, this is a pretty exciting first step for a not-too-obvious candidate for videogame-to-movie translation

If I had been in business with Brash, I wouldn't want to brag about it either. Nonetheless, it's amusing to see the company erased from corporate history.

Today Majesco announced its deal with Fox to publish the "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian" video game, which I reported two weeks ago. Included in the press release was this quote:

Of course, Majesco isn't "creating" a "Night at the Museum" game at all. The game was created by Brash -- or, more properly, developers Pipeworks and Amaze under Brash's supervision. Majesco simply bought publishing rights to the completed game. It's the equivalent of complimenting Ubisoft for its great work creating "Wheelman."

Still, if you gave video game rights for one of your top films to a publisher that went bankrupt in little more than a year, you probably wouldn't bring it up either. Just remember, Majesco has always been making the "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian" game. And Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

In part two of my interview with Bioware CEO Ray Muzyka and VP, entertainment Greg Zeschuk, we talk about why movies are a key part of the development of the studio's fictional worlds, how they can ensure those movies are good, and how the recession and success of Nintendo is impacting their business plans.

For background on my interviewees, see the introduction to part one.

(the screenshots are from Bioware's upcoming game "Dragon Age: Origins")

Ben Fritz: In terms of the different media connected to these worlds, you obviously developed the games and you’re very involved in the novels… But I know Avi Arad has optioned “Mass Effect” as a movie. What’s your approach to working with a producer like that on one of your properties?

Ray Muzyka: We’re not going into detail on that front right now. I don’t if we’ve explicitly confirmed any of that stuff [they haven’t]. But if we were…

The one thing that’s true, regardless of how our ideas are manifested, is quality is the key. They’ve all got to be awesome and equally satisfying to different audiences in different ways. That’s something we’re unrelenting and uncompromising about. We want to work with the best people in the world on something that’s actually going to be seen as a landmark event. So people can feel it’s a good value for their money, entertaining, and emotionally engaging.

Greg Zeschuk: Another way to see it too is we work with folks who get the properties. Not just get how much the potential return is. That’s one of the important factors. People we build relationships with have to have that same feeling we have. It’s tough finding folks like that.

RM: We’ve been very lucky all the people we have worked with and are working with, past and future, are in that mold. They get it. They’re passionate. I love that. I love the passion.

GZ: I think we’ve reached a transition point media-wise where there’s an understanding that the right games can transition well to other media. There’s some, like light shooters with no story, probably not so much. It’s going to be hard to make something great in other media off a property that’s not founded in a strong world.

Our stuff would probably translate well. What’s interesting is we talk to folks from all over, Hollywood and elsewhere, it’s always amazing to find folks who have played our games. It’s like, “Wow. We love your movies and you love our games.”

RM: Translating our games to cinema is an active goal for us. It’s something we’re actively pursuing. We haven’t necessarily confirmed all the stories. But, having said that, a lot of the stories that have come out have been pretty much on spot.

BF: Still speaking theoretically, of course… If you guys are world builders, as more and more of the same tools are being used to make special effects and animation in movies, is it an active goal for you to be involved in producing those other media?

I've been a fan of Michael Abbot's Brainy Gamer site since I discovered it in the fall, so it was really neat to be invited onto his podcast this weekend, along with a dozen or so much smarter video game writers and bloggers, to talk about what we learned at GDC.

Michael wisely divided us into groups of two or three and then put two pair or trios on each of two podcasts. I'm on the second half of the second podcast speaking with Wes Erdelack of Versus Clu Clu Land and Duncan Fyfe of HitSelfDestruct. (I'll try not to connect that to my semi-ironic suggestion to Michael that he order the interviews based on who was most interesting).

For my loyal readers, this is another exciting opportunity to hear annoying voice. It's been way too long, hasn't it?

You can download the podcast here (and download episode 1 featuring Variety critics Leigh Alexander and Chris Dahlen, amongst others, here). Or, better yet, you can subscribe and get every episode via iTunes here, which I recommend. It's easily the best video game-related podcast out there (which is kind of like being the most attrtactive video game journalist; but I genuinely do mean it as a compliment).

Variety reviewer Chris Dahlen ends his excellent review of "Guitar Hero: Metallica" with an unanswered question that lies at the heart of the career mode:

Who am I? Why do I exist? "Guitar Hero: Metallica's" career mode just doesn't know. Sometimes you're Metallica itself -- but you don't rise to the top. You're already and always are stars.

The rest of the time you're an intro band -- called, none too cleverly, 'Tallica Jr. -- seizing the shot to open for their heroes by playing tracks related to or inspired by the titular band.

Two incongrous parts, in other words, with nothing more in common than the fact that they share a virtual digital stage.

Metaphysical befuddlement aside, "Guitar Hero: Metallica" is really solid, Chris argues. There's a good mix of tracks and difficultly levels and it's well made, giving casual or hard core "Metallica" fans exactly the musical experience they'll want:

"Metallica's" material is perfect for a title aimed at players of all skill levels: the songs selected are melodic and accessible, yet technically challenging. Amateurs can hum along to "Enter Sandman," while expert skin-slappers can woodshed the drum part on "Battery." The disc includes fewer, albeit longer, tracks than the main "Guitar Hero" titles, and metalheads are the key demographic, with classics by Thin Lizzy and Bob Seger straying the farthest from headbanging territory.

But even players who would have preferred a "Guitar Hero: Shawn Colvin" will find the gameplay rewarding, as the set-list boasts a good mix of shredders and ballads, portentous rests and finger-breaking solos.

Perhaps the question ultimately is: Isn't all that enough? Does "Guitar Hero: Metallica" really need a coherent narrative? Because they sure haven't figured out how to do it, but otherwise they've got a great game.

Full review: Guitar Hero: Metallic

For a blog about the the business and culture of video games and their intersection with Hollywood, the guys in charge of Bioware are really well situated. They run a hugely successful RPG [role playing games] developer that was acquired by Electronic Arts in 2006, along with Pandemic, for $860 million. They've worked on one of the most successful licensed games of all time, "Knights of the Old Republic" (with an MMO sequel in the works) and created several hit original properties, one of which, "Mass Effect," is currently in development as a film. And they've got a huge original property, "Dragon Age: Origins," in production that's one of the few bets the newly slimmed EA is taking. (All the screenshots in this post are from "Dragon Age" because, hey, they're new)

In other words, they're at the forefront of the storytelling in video games, cooperation with old media, and the business of developing for the mass market. That's why I was really pleased to get to interview Ray Muzyka [left], the CEO, and Greg Zeschuk, VP of entertainment, for half an hour at the Game Developers Conference.

I think our discussion turned out to be really interesting, so I've transcribed most of it and broken it up into two posts. Today: Our discussion of storytelling in video games, in which I ask them about the relative importance of character development vs. mechanics and they shoot back that it's all about world-building.

Tomorrow: We talk about the process of making movies out of Bioware games and how modern economic realities effect their development process.

Ben Fritz: What I’ve noticed in playing your games and what’s obvious in “Dragon Age” [I saw a demo just before the interview] is their scope. When you’re trying to make a game so massive, do you cut back on the size if you feel like you don’t have the quality? Or is the quantity so important that you first need to get it to the size it needs to be? How do you balance those two things?

 Ray Muzyka: We try and define possibility space want player to engage in and what’s the scope that accommodates that.  We have to make that commercially successful at the same time, so we have to balance the commercial and artistic goals. But, we don’t want to compromise the artistic goals. We aim pretty big. Our ambitions are pretty crazy sometimes. The size of this game is kinda crazy in some ways, because there are a number of permutations and the replayability of it all.

It’s a good endeavor because in the end we trust our fans for supporting us. We’re building a platform more than anything. We’re trying to launch a landmark fantasy event. It’s dark heroic fantasy. It’s a platform for future engagement with our fans: Downloadable content; achievements surfaced on the community site; creation of user-generated content with the toolset we’re releasing. It’s a long multi-year plan.

Greg Zeschuk: There’s another dimension that’s interesting in that honestly we don’t know how big it’s going to be. Because the actual act of discovery is a big part of the development process for any first iteration of a game. Anything big especially, you have to make the tools and all the stuff that allows you to create everything. Then at the end you build it and go, “Hmmmm, how big did it end up being?”

We do set goals, but we tend to overshoot them because everyone’s really ambitious and then we trim a bit. That’s the place where we can really nail the quality. Over the years, what we’ve done is tried and establish an overall quality bar. If something dips below, we used to try and build it up. Now we tend to just excise it.

It isn’t dissimilar from a film where you’re editing. The last sequence of our development process involves editing the game content into the best mix in a sense.

BF: Where do you start, I’m curious? I spoke Monday night to some developers from Ubisoft ["Prince of Persia" producer Ben De Mattes, "Far Cry 2" creative director Clint Hocking] and they said it’s mechanics, you start with mechanics and build a character on top of that. To me that means, no surprise, the character often isn’t as compelling.

On the other hand, if you do character first before you know if he or she works as a mechanic, maybe you’re in the wrong medium. Which do you guys start with and then how do you balance when there’s a conflict between the creation of a compelling character vs. what would make the best player mechanic?

RM: First we build the world. Then we get everything situated. The character and mechanics are elements that need to be consistent with that world. I don’t think we build them separately. It’s all an integrated whole.

Back in November I reported that EA's "Boom Blox" sequel (now known as "Boom Blox Bash Party") was the first title developed under the publisher's distributed Blueprint model, which builds a team out of freelance employees in different locations. As it turned out, it might be the last, at least with the Blueprint name, since the label (division?) was shut down in the fall.

Nonetheless, the model is a fascinating one. The biggest cost for publishers is maintaining personnel and overhead at development studios without feeling rushed to greenlight projects. EA's solution that it has tested with "Bash Party" is to not build a team, at least not in one location.

Instead, as the game's senior producer Amir Rahimi explained to me at GDC, there were developers working all over the world: four folks in Texas, an art director in San Francisco, an engineer in Germany, and so on. All led by a small, core team in Los Angeles. "We pushed the limits of video conferencing technology," he said of the development process on the sequel to last spring's casual Wii game developed with Steven Spielberg.

The first "Boom Blox" sold 450,000 units as of last summer (so it's probably north of 500,000 by now), making it a so-so performer for a Wii exclusive, but hardly a smash hit. One of the ways EA was comfortable in committing to a sequel so quickly was surely the knowledge that development costs would be lower under this distributed Blueprint model. For games that don't require huge teams and aren't identified with a certain studio (like, say, "Mass Effect" with Bioware), the benefits of this model are obvious. And if "Boom Blox Bash Party" is well received, I'm sure we'll see more of it, especially as publishers are trying to cut costs.

Will "Bash Party" be well received? Based on what I saw I'm optimistic. Regular readers know I was a huge fan of the first "Boom Blox" (here's my review). In fact it was my favorite game of 2008. "Bash Party" is, to a large extent, more of the same. Twice as many multi-player modes, about 450 levels, new game types and settings.

But the biggest upgrade, as I've previously written, will be online. EA has added a "LittleBigPlanet" like community to "Bash Party." In the first "Boom Blox," players could make levels, but sharing them with the world was virtually impossible. In "Bash Party," users will be able to upload, rate, tag, and browse levels made by other users, as well as new ones from the developers. That means my favorite title of 2008 is transforming from a game to a platform. So yeah, I'm excited.

The Interwebs are abuzz today over Double Fine honcho Tim Schafer's rather cryptic comment when asked by 1UP about the rumor that there will be a Wii version of his upcoming heavy metal action game "Brutal Legend." "We are making an Xbox 360 and a PS3 version of Brutal Legend," he said.

He's telling the truth. Just not the whole truth. Double Fine is making "Brutal Legend" for the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360. And Electronic Arts is engaging another developer to make a version of the game for the Wii (most likely with Double Fine consulting). I'm not sure who that developer is, but several good sources have confirmed for me that it's in the works.

I also don't know when "Brutal Legend" for Wii will be released, but I'd be surprised it's it's this fall along with PS3 and 360, given that I understand development started fairly recently. But I wouldn't be surprised if it follows the model of the upcoming "Dead Space: Extraction" and comes out a year or so after the original PS3/360 version

Strategically, this is a no-brainer. EA has said its turnaround plan involves fewer, bigger franchises and a focus on the no. 1 console in the market: Wii. If "Brutal Legend" is one of those franchises (don't tell Activision!), it makes total sense EA wants to get it on Nintendo's platform. Especially since the game's main character carries a big-ass axe that it could be fun to swing with the Wii-mote.

An EA rep declined to comment.

I'm definitely a fan of games that limit their scope and fulfill all of their ambitions as expertly as possible. It's much better than games that do too many things half-assed. But no matter how good the execution, there's such a thing as too limited a scope, particularly given current business realities.

Case in point: "Wanted: Weapons of Fate." Universal definitely impressed me with its first self-published AAA title. It's almost impeccably executed. The studio took a risk waiting seven months after the movie's release, and three months after the DVD, in order to get the game to a high quality bar, but it was worth it, as I wrote in my recently posted review:

But with a full priced 360/PS3 title, gamers can reasonably expect they'll have a lot to do with these awesome mechanics. That's where "Weapons of Fate" fails. The single player campaign takes about five hours to complete. That's it. Unless you're really compelled by harder difficulty settings or the option to play through the game as a different character from the movie, the game is over. There's no multi-player, even though the bending bullets and slo-mo shooting could have made for a fantastic twist on the standard online deathmatches (tough to execute, I'm sure; but nonetheless it feels like a glaring omission).

In today's market, putting out "Wanted" with so little content seems like a crazy choice by Universal. "Weapons of Fate" screams rent it or buy it used (no surprise, then, that it topped Gamefly's rental charts for this week). Games rely on selling a certain number of new, full-priced copies to turn a profit. But players have too many options to skip that step if a title isn't compelling enough to justify buying it at $60. And there's simply no reasin in the world to buy and keep "Weapons of Fate." Helll, there are plenty of downloadable titles for $10 or $20 with substantially more gameplay.

Which means, I suspect, "Wanted: Weapons of Fate" will be played and enjoyed by many, but still not do much for Universal's bottom line. The best case scenario might be taking the mechanics of "Weapons of Fate" and expanding them into a sequel with ambitions high enough to justify a $60 disc.

Full review: Wanted: Weapons of Fate

I hesitate to ascribe any meaning to this comparison, since they're very different activities in very different games with differing time commitments and financial costs. Plus one of these includes two systems and the other is an exclusive to the smaller of the two.

Nonetheless, I couldn't help but find these two recently released statistics fascinating when paired together:

Important? Pointless? I have my biases on the importance of downloadable content and general interest in creating platformer levels, but I'll let you readers decide.

Pyramid Head, say hello to your new brother Jigsaw.

Konami has confirmed an earlier Cut Scene report that it bought the rights to bankrupt publisher Brash's in-production video game based on "Saw." It will be released this fall on PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 to coincide with Lionsgate's "Saw VI." (As you've probably noticed, Konami provided us with the first ever screenshots from the game as well).

Though there's obviously no sequel plans yet, the Japanese publisher is undoubtedly hoping "Saw" will become its second survival horror franchise, alongside "Silent Hill."

"Because we have leadership in the survival horror genre, we're passionate about it and wanted to find another property on par with 'Silent Hill," explained David Daniels, director of marketing for Konami.  "'Saw' has grossed over $600 million worldwide and sold over 28 million DVDs, so we felt like it was a great opportunity to align ourselves with one of the most successful horror film franchises in history."

After Brash went bankrupt last fall, rights to the game reverted back to movie studio Lionsgate, which considered but ultimately rejected the idea of handling publishing itself. Konami then picked up the license and engaged developer Zombie, which was handling production for Brash, to finish "Saw" under its direction.

The game's plot will be original, tying into but not directly adapting any of the films. As "Saw" fans might expect, gameplay will center on torturer Jigsaw's signature traps, turned into puzzles. Players control a character in an asylum who has to decide whether and how to solve the puzzles and save Jigsaw's victims.

"One of the big pillars of 'Saw' is the maniacal, twister serial killer Jigsaw's very unusual traps and you can expect that's something we'll carry forward," explained Daniels. "Some traps will even be a direct translation from the movies, particularly the iconic ones fans love."

Daniels declined to comment on whether actor Tobin Bell will voice his character Jigsaw, but I've confirmed from other sources that he will. No word on whether anyone else from the film is involved, except that the producers at Twisted Pictures have been consulting.

Brash had a lot riding on "Saw." It was going to be the company's first AAA title, its first not based on a kids' movie, and its first sure to earn an M rating. As I was reporting on Brash's demise last fall, employees repeatedly said "Saw" was one of a few games in development they had been counting on, if the cash hadn't run out, to help turn around the company's reputation for low quality.

Konami has the opposite problem. Its signature franchise is one of the two biggest in survival horror, along with Capcom's "Resident Evil" (although whether that still qualifies as horror after the last installment is an open question). It doesn't have much to gain with "Saw," critically speaking, but it has lots to lose if the game doesn't measure up. The last thing Konami needs is to lose its survival horror credibility by putting out a mediocre licensed title.

If it works, however, Konami could end up with a pair of horror franchises that complement each other well: One that screws with gamers' minds and the other their stomachs.

"'Silent Hill' is more about psychological terror, but 'Saw' for us is more about graphic, intense horror that overwhelms you," explained Daniels. "We want players to turn away from the screen for just a moment because of the visual intensity."

Two years after taking over the company, Strauss Zelnick and his team finally have put Take-Two's sordid past behind them, with the government anyway, for $3.3 million.

That's how much the "Grand Theft Auto" and "Bioshock" publisher agreed to pay in fines, with $3 million going to the Securities and Exchange Commission and $300,000 to New York authorities.

As part of the settlement, the company is admitting that "certain of its former directors and officers engaged in certain illegal behaviors related to the historical granting of stock options." Essentially, the guys who used to run the place backdated stock options so that it appeared they just happened to be granted to executives on day when the stock closed really low, thus making it possible to sell them later at the greatest possible profit. That is of course illegal. And making matters worse, Take-Two hid the practice in its earnings between 1997 and 2003, so that it reported lower costs and higher earnings than were real.

As a result, in February of 2007, Take-Two had to restate its earnings for that time period to the tune of $42.1 million.

That was two weeks after founder and former CEO Ryan Brant (pictured right), who got some of those backdated stock options himself and helped grant them to others, paid $7.3 million in fines for his role in the scheme. And it wasn't even his first penalty. In 2005 he paid about $3.5 million for another illegal business scheme at the company.

But while the feds are done with their investigation, the past still can't totally be forgotten. Take-Two still has outstanding lawsuits from angry shareholders that it will most likely have to settle as well.

When you've got a video game based on a movie with a studio/publisher (Paramount), developer (Naked Sky), production company (Bad Robot) and licensor (CBS, which technically owns all interactive rights to "Star Trek" and is licensing them to Paramount here), it can take a long time just to get two screenshots approved.
So, to anyone who read my unofficial coverage of "Star Trek: DAC" three weeks ago and official interview last week and is interested in what the game looks like, you can finally get a peek. I've updated last week's post with a couple of screenshots showing the Enterprise in battle against what appear to be Romulans.