The Xbox 360 is losing one of the bigger exclusive weapons in its home entertainment arsenal.  Netflix has announced that it will begin instant streaming of movies via the PlayStation 3 next month.

As an added incentive, PS3 owners won’t have to pay the premium that Xbox Live customers do. (Netflix streaming is currently only available to Xbox Live Gold members – who pay a $50 annual subscription fee.)

The PS3 currently has a much smaller installed base of customers than the Xbox 360 – but is hardly slouching. 9 million US households own the machine, which is roughly 2 million shy of Netflix’s total subscribers.

Watching streaming films via the PS3 will be a little different than it’s done on Xbox. Users will need a special Blu-ray disc (which will be made available for free – request one here) in their system to watch. As with the Xbox version, users will be able to put together a queue via the Web or directly on their console.

It’s a notable expansion for Netflix, which the company teased last week during its earnings call. The question now is when Netflix and Nintendo will tie the knot, since the window of exclusivity has obviously ended. Microsoft’s reaction will also be one worth watching.

Will the company make Netflix streaming available to all customers for free? Will it enhance the service – or might it have another streaming service up its sleeve (perhaps Hulu?) to roll out as a complementary streaming service some time in 2010?

Don’t get me wrong, I love the video game industry – and I fully believe it’s the future of entertainment. But for a field that’s growing at such an exponential rate, it sure has an inferiority complex.

The NPD Group, which tracks video game sales, put out an interesting survey late Wednesday, showing that 63 percent of Americans have played a video game in the past six months while only 53 percent who have gone out to see a movie.

That, inevitably, led to triumphant headlines about the dominance of the industry. Most of those, though, forgot one little thing… the number of people going out to see a movie has been stagnating for some time. DVDs, On-Demand viewings and other forms of in-home entertainment continue to grow by leaps and bounds – and still trump the video game industry.

The most interesting part of the survey was actually buried in the fine print - and had nothing to do with the video game industry's 'battle' with Hollywood. 

Digital downloads are gaining traction at a notable pace. Five percent of the people NPD spoke with have paid to download a video game from the Web. That’s just shy of double the number who did so a year ago. It’s a sign that traditional retailers, who have mostly shrugged off the digital marketplace, might want to start rethinking their attitudes.

Video games may ultimately supplant the movie industry in terms of audience and dollars, but the industry still has a way to go – and, really, there’s no rush to do so. It’s a bragging right, but won’t buy video game developers or publishrs any additional legitimacy or respect. That’s something that comes with time and quality products.

I'm just putting together a piece for NPR that features an interview with Paramount's senior VP of interactive (essentially the top video games guy) John Kavanaugh and noticed that he dropped an interesting tidbit that won't make the final piece: The studio is making downloadable games based on "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder" for Xbox Live Arcade and Playstation Network.

It's not Paramount's first experimentation with those "classic" (as long as I can remember seeing a movie in theaters I refuse to call it "classic" without quotes) franchises as games. There's already a "Days of Thunder" iPhone game and one about to come out for "Top Gun."

For Paramount, which is taking a "crawl, walk, run" approach to games, as Kavanaugh puts it, moving those franchises to XBLA and PSN is pretty obvious. After releasing a slew of iPhone games, the studio is taking the next step into downloadable titles with "Star Trek: DAC" and the upcoming "Warriors." If you have well known franchises that fit perfectly into casual video game genres -- flying and racing -- well, it's not too big a leap. (Not like doing, say, a "Watchmen" game in which you awkwardly shove the film into a familiar video game genre).

Plus, really, can there ever be enough games where you get to live out your fantasies of being Tom Cruise? When there's a "Cocktail," or "Eyes Wide Shut" game, I am so there.

Paramount is also trying its hand at casual titles targeted at female audiences. I forgot to link to it when it was published, but Leigh Alexander wrote an excellent and amusing review of Paramount's three-pack of games based on "Clueless," "Mean Girls" and "Pretty in Pink." Check it out.

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.

Paramount's "Star Trek: D.A.C." game will be all-out, top-down, multi-player space battles.

That's the word from three of the folks behind it, whom I just sat down with at GDC. I reported a few weeks ago that the downloadable game will come out along with the movie and will be a top-down space action title.

But unlike most movie games, it turns out, this one doesn't replicate the story of the film, or even tie into it. There's no single-player campaign. "It's all multiplayer, team-based battles," explains Ben Hoyt, a senior producer with Paramount Digital Entertainment, which is publishing "D.A.C." (And no, I didn't find out what that stands for). "It's designed to be quick and fast-paced. There are multiple ship classes and battles and several different game modes."

Up to 12 people can play the PS3 and 360 downloadable game, which features battles that are inspired by the movie, but not seen in it. Some of the starship designs, as well as the music and sound effects, are taken directly from the film, though.

"Star Trek" fans will remember that the movie was originally supposed to come out in December, but got delayed to May. That's good news for people looking forward to the game,which has been made on a tight schedule. The studio chose to make a downloadable game, rather than a disc one,  so that it could get a high quality title in time for the theatrical release (Just as Warner Bros. did with "Watchmen"). But even that would have been very difficult to get done by December, given that they've been working long hours to get it complete for May.

"We had it structured to develop the game for December," recalls Dave Baranoff, who oversees interactive for "Star Trek" director J.J. Abrams' production company Bad Robot. "But the push of the movie sealed the deal that we would be able to get out a quality game title we all believe in."

Those extra five months won't only help with polish, but have may have played a role in some of the major gameplay decisions. "Going in we said it was going to be a certain way, but luckily we ended up with time to explore and come up with some different things," notes Josh Glazer, Chief Technology Officer of developer Naked Sky.

"D.A.C." marks something of a step forward for Paramount. The only games it has self published previously are iPhone titles. So it's negotiating its first distribution deals with Sony and Microsoft  for this title.

It's also, in a bizarre corporate twist, a licensed game for Paramount, even though it's releasing the movie. When Viacom split into CBS and Paramount, CBS held onto the interactive rights for Captain Kirk et al. So Paramount is actually licensing the property from CBS, much like traditional game publishers usually license properties from studios like Paramount.

But there was one potential barrier bigger than CBS, Sony, Microsoft, or any release date standing in the way of "Star Trek: D.A.C.": J.J. Abrams. As with most movie-based games, the director, along with producer Bryan Burke and others involved in the project, have seen designs and given notes along the way. But the game never got an official greenlight from the director, and thus the studio, until there was a playable version that Abrams came in to try and approve.

"That was a scary meeting," admits Hoyt. "It was do or die for the game." 

Obviously it was "do." Gamers will find out whether they agree with Abrams' call in May.

P.S. Electronic Arts announced today at GDC that it's developing a "Star Trek" mobile game tied to the movie. But after initially offering to show the title, it backed out. So I don't have any more information than the fact that it's in the works

Updated with screen shots, finally.

We all know the drill with video games that become movies and vice-versa. If it starts as a game, the movie comes out several years after the game first becomes popular and, in an effort to reach a mass audience without alienating the core fans, usually ends up pleasing no one. If it starts as a movie, its gets licensed 15 months before release, giving the developers barely enough time to get a game out, let alone one that's high quality.

Some folks in Hollywood are trying to find a new way around that conundrum. The formula is simple: Get some geeky producers, video game developers, studio executives, etc. together at the creation of a property, before there are any dollar signs, release dates, or unit sales to get licensing folks' attention, and develop it for multiple media all at once.

Today comes a really intriguing example of that new approach: Fox Atomic has made a deal with production/management company Union Entertainment and developer Zombie Studios to turn the tactical military game "Blacklight" into a movie and comic book (that's concept art from the project around this post). You haven't heard of "Blacklight?" That's because it's in early development at Zombie, the Seattle-based maker of "America's Army" and the upcoming "Saw." It doesn't even have a publisher yet.

Union, which specializes in putting together games, movies and comics (they made the deal for "The Darkness" game and have the video game concept "Zero G" set up at Fox) took at look at "Blacklight," saw the multi-media potential, and helped sell it to Fox Atomic, the studio's youth-skewing division.

Fox Atomic is now developing "Blacklight" as a movie and comic book and has hired Jason Dean Hall to write the feature script and also create the world that will be drawn on for all media. Meanwhile, Zombie is taking the momentum of a movie deal with it to seek a publisher. Union is attached as a producer on both the game and movie side.

I got on the phone today with everyone involved to find out how this unusual project got put together and what it might mean for the future of games and movies. The conversation included Zombie co-CEO and "Blacklight" creator Mark Long; Fox Atomic development director and comics editor-in-chief R. Eric Lieb; and Union's president Richard Leibowitz, Creative Director Dan Jevons, and manager Dmitri Johnson, who are attached as producer and executive producers, respectively. Here are some excerpts:

Ben Fritz: First tell me what exactly "Blacklight" is and how it was created.

Mark Long: About a year ago, I started thinking about where we were going to go next. We specialize in military [first person shooters]. I began thinking about a team tactical shooter set in the near future. A near enough future that it could be based on science fact, not fiction.

When you have the ability to come up with fantasy weapons, games almost design themselves because you can come up with fun things. But when you're in the tactical realism category, it's really hard. For instance, try to find one real weapon somebody hasn’t already put in a game. That’s how we decided on a covert ops team set 25 years in the future that's given the mission of hunting down and capturing or killing the former commander of their team.

 It's kind of a "Heart of Darkness" story. You deal with your dark self and the repercussions of your policies in a region. It's set in the imaginary city of Balik, Kajikistan. We chose that region deliberately so we could have a Romanesque architecture that has fallen into ruin. Now, 25 years in the future, it's covered with ubiquitous banal advertising. Think "Blade Runner" meets Bulgaria.

BF: And what's different about your game from, say, the Clancy titles or "Call of Duty?"

Count Lionsgate as one more studio getting into the video game space, though it's not ready to dive into the deep end.

In an interview I did with him for Variety's Technotainment blog, Lionsgate digital media president Curt Marvis says his studio is talking with partners about getting into the casual games business, including online and phones:

Another area we’re taking in more specifically for my group is casual gaming and mobile games. There are some huge numbers that are being done by certain successful products in that area. And even not so huge but profitable businesses, particularly in the casual area.

Any games Lionsgate makes would, of course, be based on its own movie and TV properties.

As I reported last month, Lionsgate seriously considered self-publishing the PC/PS3/360 game based on its "Saw" movies that was dropped by Brash after it went bankrupt, but ultimately passed (it was bought by Konami). Without commenting on that title, Marvis confirmed that Lionsgate isn't ready to get into the AAA disc market given the high risk and big financial exposure, stating, "You invest in a real game these days and it's like making a movie."

Which is a shame, since I would love to see a "Madea Goes to Jail" game made in Unreal Engine. Another dream crushed.

For those keeping score, this new information on Lionsgate's strategy puts the movie studios' approach to video games as follows:

As movie studios increasingly publish their own video games, and confront the reality that they usually can't publish a quality AAA game on a film's production schedule in time for theatrical release, downloadable is the new trend.

Warner Bros. did it with "Watchmen: The End is Nigh" and now Paramount is doing the same with its "Star Trek" film reboot. I've actually been looking into this project for a little while, trying to nail down all the details, but they came out today in a surprising way, via leaked art for an insert in the upcoming season one blu-ray release.

As the art indicates, the game is coming out in May and it's being published by Paramount and produced by Naked Sky Entertainment, an L.A. based developer that made the game "Roboblitz."

Based on conversation I've had, it appears the game has been in development for under a year and it's aimed for release on Xbox Live Arcade and Playstation Network (the 360 and PS3's downloadable services) day-and-date with the film on or around May 8. Perhaps no surprise given the relatively short development cycle, it's probably not a fully 3-D adventure, though it is obvious from the artwork that players control the Enterprise in space battle.

Interestingly, Paramount's deal to do a "Star Trek" movie game is entirely separate from Bethesda Softworks' license to do its "Star Trek" games and Cryptic's upcoming "Star Trek Online." Latter two are licensed by CBS, which still owns the TV show, while Paramount, which was previously part of Viacom with CBS, has the interactive rights tied to the movies.

"Star Trek: D.A.C.," as the game is called, will be the biggest self-published title to-date for Paramount's young interactive group, which just started getting into games last year. So far it has only released several iPhone games, as well as three casual PC titles it co-published with Legacy Interactive.

I expect I'll have more details soon on what the game is like, how the downloadable title came together in under a year, and what the hell D.A.C. means.

Paramount has been looking for a new executive to head its videogames group since late last year when Sandi Isaacs decided she would head out.

Today the movie studio, which is still mostly focused on licensing but dipping its toes into co-publishing, tapped her replacement: John Kavanaugh, a former VP at Eidos who is coming off a brief stint heading up British developer Kuju's  U.S. subsidiary in San Francisco, which he launched just a year ago. Though KujuAmerica previously said it was working on a WiiWare game, it hasn't came out (as far as I can tell) and there were some layoffs last week.

There's a good primer on Kavanaugh's past working at Eidos, and its American studios Ion Storm and Crystal Dynamics, as well as the several years he took off before returning to videogames at Kuju, in this Gamasutra Q-and-A.

In his new post as senior VP, interactive at Paramount, Kavanaugh will have to balance overseeing the licenses of big properties to major publishers with the studio's small slate of casual games in which it has started investing. Late last month Paramount released "Iron Man" and "Saturday Night Fever" games for the iPhone and it has three casual games based on library properties -- "Pretty in Pink," "Mean Girls" and "Clueless" -- that it is co-publishing with Legacy Interactive. Originally scheduled for the fall, they're now supposed to come out this month.

It's a big month for Paramount in videogames, since not only does it have its first self-published PC games, but its biggest licensed property, "The Godfather II." After the first "Godfather" game did moderately well, this one will determine whether it becomes a real franchise for EA, or a "GTA" wanna-be that fizzled.

Like Isaacs, Kavanaugh will report to Paramount Digital Entertainment president Tom Lesinski.

If you haven't seen "The Wrestler" and you're a fan of, well, good movies about interesting people, see it. Nothing revolutionary, but great performances and an excellent melding of themes with settings.

But Cut Scene readers might also be interested for the way it uses a Nintendo Entertainment System (NES) as a narrative device. Specifically, Mickey Rourke plays a washed up old pro wrestler who's now suffering for his success, alienated from his family, living in a trailer park, punishing himself mentally and physically by wrestling in third-rate local matches, etc. One of the most poignant, and saddest, moments of the film comes when he fires up an NES in his trailer.

First, just the idea of a grown man playing an original NES -- and not out of nostalgia -- signals how sad his economic circumstances are. Perhaps equivalent to turning on an 8-track player as your only way to listen to music. But much more dramatic is the fact that he's playing a videogame starring... himself. It's an old wrestling game featuring his character, Randy "The Ram" Robinson, in all his 8-bit glory. What better sign is there of faded stardom than seeing your visage in an old NES game?

I thought it was very cool that videogames have now reached the point in our culture that, even in an independenet film aimed at sophisticated audiences, they can be used as a narrative device for which we can assume virtually everyone will understand the meaning. If you ask me, that's convergence, much more than the latest movie studio starting a videogame division.

Hopefully we'll see more use of videogame as narrative devices, especially because as I was watching it I was thinking how easy it must have been. I bet one guy could have made '80s state-of-the-art videogame animations in Flash in, what, a day or two? Simple enough for even this low-budget indie movie to afford.

Update: Variety critic Tom Chick, writing on his Fidgit blog, points out that the NES demo is followed up by a very spot on, and meaningful conversation between The Ram and the 12 year-old kid he was playing his wrestling game with about "Call of Duty 4." Tom even took the time to transcribe the convo. Check it out.

We interrupt this top ten games of 2008 countdown for our final videogame review of the year in Variety: The Tale of Despereaux.

As loyal readers and videogame business nerds (mostly the same, I hope) know, Atari is distributing this game after the demise of Brash. But the origin of the game is a bit more complicated. While Brash funded and oversaw production of the PC, PS2 and Wii SKUs (as well as a 360 SKU that disappeared), licensor Universal Studios was actually overseeing the DS version. Wanna bet which version was pretty good and which sucked?

The answer is obvious, I suppose. Poor, poor Brash. Here's what our critic Chris Dahlen had to say in today's Daily Variety:

The DS version... is a straightforward platformer with elements as old as the first “Super Mario.” Players jump, scurry up walls, swing on nails and solve simple puzzles. The graphics are surprisingly good for Nintendo’s handheld system, with lovingly illustrated levels including the mazelike chutes from the kitchen to the coalmine-like castle dungeon. The rat’s coliseum, where two rather clever boss battles take place, rewards combatants with a colorful three-dimensional backdrop and silhouetted rodents who jeer from the stands...

By contrast, the Wii version proves that there’s nothing as irritating as a platformer that doesn’t quite work. The look and idea are very similar: Despereaux has to navigate one level after another by scaling giant books, jumping from candle to candle or hitching a ride on a moving cup. While the mouse-eye perspective should make the world engaging, the environments lack atmosphere, even in the dankest, most sewage-swamped depths of a dungeon. Poor visibility and dark colors occasionally obscure the path even in well-lit areas, and the camera frequently looks the wrong way or loses track of Despereaux altogether.

It looks like the last game to see a release that was produced entirely under Brash's watch won't exactly bolster the company's reputation. Though there's still a good chance some of the games in the works for next year which will probably see the light of day ("Night at the Museum 2," "Saw") will at least show Brash can start developing a good game.

As for Universal, its new videogame publishing initiative -- which reps the studio's first entry into the space since it sold Universal Interactive to Vivendi nearly a decade ago -- is off to a solid start, critically speaking, at least. After the film's soft opening (due in part to the weather, but oh well), commerical prospects for the game might not be so great.

Full review: The Tale of Despereaux videogame

Paramount's top videogame exec is leaving just as the studio enters the publishing business.

Senior VP of interactive and mobile Sandi Isaacs, who helped lead Paramount from pure licensor to publisher,is leaving, I've confirmed. I'm not sure exactly when or why. But the studio is currently searching for someone new to replace her.

Given Paramount's ambitions, not to mention the growing number of people out of work, I wouldn't be surprised if it's someone fairly high profile in the videogame biz. (Just like Warner Bros. hired Vivendi vet Martin Tremblay to run its videogame unit earlier this year).

After all, Isaacs, who first joined Par to oversee videogame licensing, has started Paramount down the road to becoming a small publisher. Her plan, now underway, is to start with mobile and casual games, most of which are co-published, and eventually move toward more expensive AAA titles (details here).

The first results are two iPhone games, based on "Iron Man" and "Saturday Night Fever," which were released last week. Early next year come casual games based on "Pretty in Pink," "Clueless," and "Mean Girls" that Par is co-publishing with Legacy Interactive (details here). And I've heard rumblings of bigger projects in the works for 2010 and beyond. But it looks like somebody new will be spearheading that effort.

(this post has been edited from the original version for the sake of clarity)

The first of Brash's many orphan games has found a new home.

As I'm reporting in tomorrow's Daily Variety, Atari has bought North American publishing rights for the PC, PS2 and Wii version of the game from Brash (though not the 360; so much for that). It has also picked up the deal Brash made to distribute the DS version for Universal, which is funding and producing that game itself. (Details on the original deal between Universal and Brash are here)

I've been hearing for a little while that Atari was going to pick up a few of Brash's completed games that need a publisher ASAP. Apparently it didn't (or hasn't) bought the completed Wii version of "Six Flags Fun Park," but "Despereaux," which needs to come out before the film's Dec. 19 release date, was more appealing.

Atari, of course, has been on a bit of a spree buying homeless movie-to-videogame adaptations of late, since it also picked up Sierra cast-offs "Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena" and "Ghostbusters" from Activision Blizzard in October (details here).

The newly revived publisher also announced some new games in the works at a London event today, including a new Wii music title from the creator of RezHD, Lumines Live and Every Extend Extra Extreme. GameSpot has a good summary.

Atari won't have any time to market the game and will be relying on primarily on some promotions Universal has in the works. But, as is always true, if a kids' movie is successful and the tie-in game is halfway decent, it should sell just fine. Even the famously abysmal "Alvin and the Chipmunks" moved a few hundred thousand units last year. And Brash ex-employees assure me that "Despereaux" is much better.

The deal is so last minute that Brash actually had the game in production when it shut down. So while Atari is publishing, the box art will say Brash. Making this game, in a sense, the last hurrah for Hollywood's (dearly?) departed videogame publisher.

In July, I reported that Universal was the latest studio to get into the videogame biz. Its first project was a videogame version of the movie "Wanted." That project is still on track and will be released sometime next year. But as it turns out, it won't be Universal's first videogame.

As I'm reporting in tomorrow's Daily Variety, that's "The Tale of Despereaux," or at least the DS version anyway. I know, the typical Cut Scene reader is probably not frothing at the mouth for a videogame adaptation of the upcoming animated film about a heroic mouse performing acts of derring-do in a fairy tale land. Both the game and movie come out in December.

But Cut Scene readers are also smart enough to know that kids games, if done well, can be big business. Especially on the DS. So as Universal cautiously steps into the videogame business, it's a smart step to take. Given what a big bet "Wanted" is -- an M-rated AAA action title that probably costs $20 million-plus to make and is based on a movie that has already come and gone from theaters -- a low cost kids game on the most popular platform coming out day-and-date with the film is probably a good balance for Universal's very small slate.

Universal's top videogame exec Bill Kispert confirmed as much when we talked today. "We made two bets that are very differen types of content which make sense in their own place," he explained.

I also got a look at the game recently in a meeting with the developer Fizz Factor (owned by Foundation 9). It's a pretty sharp looking platformer that seems capture the look of the film well and provide all sorts of amusing settings, weapons and constumes in a mouse-sized world, though it only makes minimal use of the touch screen. (Then again, so did "New Super Mario Bros." and that came out pretty well.)

Universal doesn't have the capacity yet to market and distribute its own games, so it's partnering with Brash, which makes sense since the film-focused videogame publisher already has the license for "Despereaux" on other platforms and is releasing SKUs for PC, PS2, Wii and 360.

Last summer, I reported on Fox hiring former Ubisoft exec Adam Kline to be its head of videogame licensing. Apparently he didn't last too long, since earlier this year I heard he no longer had the job.

Now comes word that Fox is giving it another try. The studio has hired Gary Rosenfield, formerly head of licensing and acquisitions at THQ, for the same post (technically "senior vp of new media licensing").

According to this Hollywood Reporter story, he's working on a number of Fox properties already in the works as videogames, including Avatar (which Ubisoft is making as a 3-D videogame), "Night at the Museum: Battle at the Smithsonian" (which I hear has been set up at Brash, though that's not yet confirmed), "Ice Age 3" (being made at Activision Blizzard, formerly at Sierra), "The Simpsons" (it's a safe bet EA is working on a sequel to last year's successful adaptation) and "Family Guy" (no word on what's up with that since Take-Two did its poorly received version in 2006).

Like pretty much every Hollywood studio, Rosenfield is also apparently looking at spending money on its own videogame development. Assuming that happens, it would be joining Disney (through a sibling unit), Warner Bros, Paramount and Universal, leaving only Sony Pictures as a pure licensor.

He's also looking at working with fellow News Corp. unit IGN, which of course makes perfect sense.

By now you probably know the basic details about "Batman: Arkham Asylum," the new game coming out next year in which the Caped Crusader has to fight his way out of the home for the criminally insane where most of his infamous villains are incarcerated (if you haven't heard, check it out here or here).

Beyond the game deatails, though, there's an intricately convoluted business relationship. According to the release, Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment and Eidos will "co-publish Batman: Arkham Asylum in North America," while "Eidos Interactive will publish the game in all other territories."

So what does that mean? Well, Warner Bros. has licensed Batman to Eidos. So it's the British publisher that is completely funding and overseeing all the development at RockSteady Studios. In that sense, it's just like Warner Bros. licensing to EA or Activision or whoever else. As with those deals, I assume WB is getting some kind of a multi-million dollar advance against royalties for the use of one of its prime pieces of intellectual property.

But there's more to it, because Warner Bros. owns a 20% stake in Eidos (for details, see this April story). So it's more like a license to a favorite son. With the promise that if the game is successful, 20% of the profits flow right back.

And that's not the only way Warner Bros. has a stake in the game. It has an existing deal in place with Eidos to distribute and market all of its game in North America (That's why it's listed as co-publisher in North America.). That means it gets a fee, and/or a cut of sales revenue, for Eidos games sold here, for its trouble.

Long story short:Warner Bros. has a lot more fingers in the "Batman: Arkham Asylum" honey pot than on a standard licensed game

Two big stories about movie studios publishing videogames in today's Daily Variety...

First, Universal is the latest to get into the biz. Apparently I was out of the loop last week and several other news outlets saw a preview of an upcoming game based on the Universal movie "Wanted" that was shown at E3 last week. Not only did I miss that one, but I didn't know it existed.

However, I did some reporting today and found out... It's the first videogame that Universal is self-financing and producing (at least since it had Universal Interactive back in the '90s, which eventually got folded into Vivendi Games when Vivendi bought Universal). I spoke to Bill Kispert, head of Universal's videogame business, and he said the studio is selectively starting to invest in its own games both to get a foothold in the business and get production started sooner so it doesn't have to wait the several months to make a licensing deal (those can be several important months when you're on the already tight schedule of a movie license).

For full details on the "Wanted" game and Universal's approach to videogames, read the story in Daily Variety.

For those keeping count at home, that makes Universal the fourth movie studio spending money on games (either internally or through a sibling business unit), along with Disney, Warner Bros., and Paramount.

Particularly interesting is that Warner Bros. is handling worldwide publishing for Universal. I think that marks the first time that one movie studio has ever published a videogame for another. I'm sure we'll see more of that going forward, just as studios work together on films all the time.

Of course, all the studios have a different approach. Universal is spending tens of millions on a AAA console title for PC, PS3 and 360. Paramount, on the other hand, is starting off small, co-publishing casual titles based on some of its library properties.

Today we have details on Paramount's first three games: Clueless, Mean Girls, and Pretty in Pink. Probably not the most obvious videogames that ever popped into your head, but in the world of casual titles, they make a lot of sense. Personally, I'm hoping to get the chance to play as Ducky. That poor guy deserves to finally kick some ass.

Paramount is co-publishing its first few games with Legacy Interactive. And it has several more in the works for this year and even more on the slate for next year.

Just as with the other story, you can get the full details in my Daily Variety article.

Last week in the middle of the E3 craziness, I escaped for a couple of hours to moderate a panel at AdAge's Madison & Vine conference, which was all about entertainment marketing.

My panel featured Take-Two Chairman Strauss Zelnick, Pandemic president Josh Resnick, T-Mobile director of media marketing Brett Dennis, and Marvel EVP global digital media (meaning he's in charge of videogames) Ira Rubenstein.

I didn't take notes since I was busy moderating, but a few things that Rubenstein, who is new at the job, said during the panel discussion stuck out in my mind. If you, like me, love some Marvel super-heroes and have been disappointed at the quality of some recent games (like the awful "Iron Man"), you may be interested to know:

-He thinks Marvel should start making more games based on its heroes without necessarily tying and timing them to a movie

-When there is a movie, he wants to get to work earlier, even before a script is final. He said he's telling Sega to get started on the "Thor" and "Avengers" games (based on the movies coming out in 2010) now.

-He thinks Marvel should consider making more downloadable and casual videogames based on its properties.

Of course the most interesting question to me, which didn't come up during the panel, is whether Marvel might start using the same self-financing model it has been using for movies (quite successfully this year) and start applying it to videogames. It makes a lot of sense to me that we might soon see Marvel as a videogame publisher.

As expected, Sony finally launched its video download store on Tuesday after announcing it at its E3 press conference. But despite the fact that as of just a few weeks ago it didn't have many studios on board, it has wrapped up thsoe deals quickly.

Every major studio is now renting and/or selling movie downloads via Playstation network except for Universal (which, ironically, just signed onto Xbox Live on Monday). Currently Fox is the only TV network on board though, leaving Sony far behind Microsoft in TV content, though pretty even in movies.

As I reported earlier, film downloads to the Playstation 3 will be transferable to the PSP (the transfer can also be done from a PC to PSP). That's a possible competitive advantage over Xbox Live and it's also a new feature for Internet downloads that, studio insiders say, made these deals more complex than they otherwise would have been.

More details are in my story on today's E3 developments.

Activision's relationship with DreamWorks Animation has been probably the most stable in the videogame biz for as long as I've been covering it. It's like that marriage you thought would last forever.

While other movie studios constantly flirt with different videogame publishers -- and vice-versa -- Activision has consistently put out two games per year, based on every single one of DreamWorks' toons (save for a little spat over 2005 bomb "Wallace and Gromit," which DWA just distributed for Aardman). Hell, sometimes they've been so in love that Activision has put out extra games based on DreamWorks characters, like "Shrek Super Slam" and this fall's second "Kung Fu Panda" game.

But just like with my parents (whoa! too personal?), even the most seemingly perfect relationships can end suddenly. So it is with these two, as DreamWorks Animation announced that it is moving onto THQ starting with the fall 2010 movie tentatively titled "Master Mind." Activision is already committed to make games based on DreamWorks toons through spring 2010's "Shrek Goes Fourth."

What's the reason? According to DreamWorks, it's simple: It went out to the market for "Master Mind" and THQ made the best offer. Activision, for whatever reason, wouldn't or couldn't step up to the plate.

The THQ deal may just be a one-time fling, however. DreamWorks isn't making any commitments. What happens in 2011 and beyond? Will it commit to THQ? Try out some other suitors? Go back to Activision?
We'll have to wait and see. Love can be fickle.

For more details, check out the story on Variety.com.

$104.2 million later, I think we can safely say that "GTA IV" had zero impact on "Iron Man's" opening.  Paramount's Rob Moore was right: "It's crazy to think that young males can't carve out two hours for Iron Man. It's going to be a great week to be a young guy.'' (Pamela McClintock reports in Variety that the "Iron Man" aud was 62% male).

Obviously you can't prove a counter-factual, but when a movie breaks this many records, it sure doesn't look like anything was holding it back.

Pundits who got it wrong: Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello, Wedbush Morgan analyst Edward Woo; the editors of GamePro; Janco Partners analyst Mike Hickey;  and probably others who I'm not finding right now. (additions to this list are welcome)

For the record, I explored the idea that "GTA IV" might impact "Iron Man's" opening b.o., but did a little research and concluded that was unlikely (though I did leave open the possibility that there could be a slight overall effect on movie viewership this summer amongst gamers).

Instead, I wrote in a story on the topic, "GTA IV" was more likely to impact homevideo sales (which is why no DVDs aimed at young males came out last week) and TV ratings amongst the gamer demo. I'll check the TV ratings data this week and find out if that proved true.

Following my story about Paramount getting into video games today, I've had a few questions about just what the status is of various studios in the space. The short answer is that, as I wrote, Paramount and Warner Bros. are the only studios that publish video games. But Disney has a corporate sibling that's a video game publisher, as does Sony, which seems to confuse some people. So here's a short summary of where they all stand:

-Disney: Walt Disney Studios isn't in videogames at all, but the Walt Disney Company owns Disney Interactive Studios (and I'm switching to acronyms now to avoid saying "Disney" anymore). DIS is tight with its corporate siblings and publishes a lot of games based on Disney movies and ABC/Disney TV group shows (which includes those on ABC, Disney Channel, etc.) DIS also publishes some  games not based on existing Disney properties, like "Spectrobes," "Turok," and the upcoming "Pure."

-Fox: Licenses it properties to videogame publishers. It used to have a videogame division, but it sold that to Vivendi in 2003.

-Lionsgate: Licenses its properties to videogame publishers.

-MGM: Licenses its properties to videogame publishers.

-Paramount: Has traditionally licensed out all its properties. Just starting to get into publishing itself.

-Sony Pictures: Its corporate sibling is Sony Computer Entertainment, maker of the Playstation consoles and maker of games for them. Sony Pictures used to own Sony Online Entertainment, but that vidgame division very recently moved under the control of SCE as part of a corporate re-org. Despite its close corporate relationship with one of the industry's biggest videogame players, Sony Pictures licenses out its properties to various different videogame publishers. There is now special relationship with SCE.

-Universal: Licenses out all its properties.

-Warner Bros.: In 2004 established Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment, which has been growing and handling more and more of Warner. Bros.' properties in the videogame space. WBIE owns developer Monolith and is considering buying more developers. It also oversees licensing to other publishers for some Warner. Bros properties that it doesn't handle. Warner's homevideo unit distributes WBIE games at retail and also handles those duties in the U.S. for Eidos and Codemasters. In addition, WB recently bought British developer/publisher Traveller's Tales. It's not yet entirely clear to what extent Traveller's Tales will work with WBIE and to what extent it will operate independently. Oh, and Warner owns a 10% stake in Eidos.

Big news exclusively in today's Daily Variety: Paramount is getting into videogame publishing.

There have been vague rumors about this in the past and wild speculation when an executive said the studio is "very excited" about the space. But we've got confirmed what the interest is and how they're implementing it.

In short, Paramount is going to start publishing and co-publishing games based on its movie properties. It will still do licenses, but it's going to start spending some of its own money and getting more involved in production. I don't know yet what the games will be, but there's a slate in the works and the first few will come out later this year. My sense is that Paramount is leaning more towards casual, mobile, or handheld games given the lower risk, but they say they're looking at everything.

That makes it only the second film studio, along with Warner Bros., to be in the game publishing business. However I know that that several others are considering it, both because they see how much faster the videogame business is growing than film and TV and because they want to try and ensure that there won't be crappy games based on their films. Of course Disney and Sony aren't looking at it though, since they both have sister companies in the videogame biz.

Want all the details on Paramount's entry into the videogame biz? Just click here.