Ask Hal Halpin - Today on GamePolitics

@F**ked up - Actually history is beginning to repeat itself, but the dangerous parallel is with the comic book business. I'm channeling one of my personal heroes, Dr. Henry Jenkins, when I say this, but basically we've reached a crossroads as an industry where we will either be perceived as a medium that one walks up to the store, or walks down the stairs to enter. Comic books faced much of the same lambasting a few decades ago, and for really no better reasons that games are today. Other media, such as movies and music are treated entirely differently and I think that too speaks to the generational gap.


-Hal.

@Ian Bogost - Not at all, it's a fair question. The short answer is that none of the other activities that you mentioned are being threatened on so broad and deep a way. No one is trying to redefine you as a person by the fact that you enjoy sushi, nor saying that certain types of sushi are too vulgar. (I happen to be a fan, but am sticking with your example BTW.) I've heard the argument that people joining groups, by the very act enables isolationism, but I reject it based purely on it being too narrow and easy a perspective. The reality is that groups of like-minded people can and should stick together when faced with adversity and when underrepresented, but especially when their rights are being threatened. Not doing so for the past decade or more has certainly not been effective.

I'd also point to the success of parallel membership organizations, without whom life as we know it would be incontrovertibly altered. Imagine where the elderly would be today without the AARP for instance. In the years before the baby boomers were potential members, previous groups were thoroughly underrepresented and as a result were taken advantage of. In subsequent years, they have managed to turn the stereotype of being retired from a bad thing to a definition that no longer defines one's age. There are tens of millions of proud car-carrying members of AARP for crying out loud! I wouldn't have thought it possible, and yet by coming together they have taken ownership of who they, as a group, are and how they are perceived. I see no difference for the challenges that face gamers and we are simply uniting for that cause.

It is a good and valuable question though, as there are always people that say, "I don't need to do any work, it'll be done by others for me." That too is an attitude that is socially acceptable for some reason that escapes me. Here, we are presenting an opportunity to get in on the ground floor and help shape destiny. To stand idly by and do nothing empowers others to do something which you likely will disagree and empowers the masses to decide how you are defined and create perception.


-Hal.

@Mr. Blond - Another great question. My experience has been that, almost exclusively, legislators introduce violent games bills through their own efforts and impetus. Rarely, they'll blame a nameless constituent who supposedly expressed concern over a cocktail at a fundraiser, but when the media presses them for a name none is forthcoming. Now that's not to say that all politicians aren't motivated for honest reasons, just that an increasing amount of them are stepping up to the plate because it's voter gold. There's no accountability. No one's saying, "Hey, if you push ahead with this frivolous law it'll cost you." All they see is their counterparts in other states getting loads of free media time for "protecting our kids" - and hey, who can't get behind that. The parent's groups are better informed than you may thin they are as evidenced by the ESRB's recent partnership announcement with the PTA.

And to your point, we can and do need to do more, to be more proactive in the messaging to parents. And we have a few ideas that we're working on presently for a Fall campaign, so stay tuned ;)


-Hal.

@Ian Bogost - I think you're reinforcing my point there, as no other medium (recently) has required a group to be so vigorously defended. To the best of my knowledge there are no other membership organizations that one could parallel that fit your criteria, which seems like part of the reason for your hypothesis, which in the end isn't so much productive as it could be combative.

Your other points, however are valid in my mind. The questions aren't what are all the good and valuable things that the ECA could do on behalf of its members - to which you seem to have more than a few suggestions - but rather, where would we as gamers be without it in ten years time? Join us and we'll discover it together. :)


-Hal.

@Ist - We are actually looking for a few open positions. I'd refer you to GameJobs.com (our free job board) for the specifics. Thanks for the inquiry. :)


-Hal.

@brokenscope - Ah the infamous crystal ball question… well, the safe answer is that we'll continue, over the next few years, to see the pendulum swing from the onus being on publisher to retailers to consumers - a fact which started playing out just last year. As politicians find that they're successful in gaining media attention on the issue, but keep losing time and again on constitutional grounds, they'll continue to change tactics (those that don't surprise me every time). Privacy, IP ownership and rights, licensing, DRM will all increase in prominence, and with an effective consumer rights group in place, I honestly believe that we'll be in a better place to work together on them.


-Hal.

@~the1jeffy - Not at all. I appreciate your directness and have a reputation for being a little more "direct" than most in the political arena (probably because it's not my background), but possibly because of my feisty Irish DNA… who knows ;)

I feel very strongly about the members who have chosen to join the ECA early. To me it represents such a statement that it's hard to put into words. Without a clear understanding of all of the benefits, the value proposition, or what any one individual can get out of it, approximately two hundred people signed on, paid their dues and lent un their faith. You're not joiners because it's the popular thing, your Founders because it's the right thing to do!

So OK, before we all get too misty: I believe we just recently update a page on the site (not sure if it's after you login or not) that lists all of the things that you can start expecting now or in the very near term. This list is updated live, as it happens… which is a point of enormous frustration for our amazing public relations firm (ONE PR), who would like to leverage some of them as press opportunities - and understandably so. The reality is that we've been working with most of the sponsors for months ironing out logistical, legal and contractual details before we can realistically offer them. So once we get to that stage, everyone involved wants it launched.

Ok, here's the publicly available version (copied from theECA.com). I believe the better-detailed list is available to register members on the login page:

Chance to win a new PlayStation 3 console
Discounts off of 1up Network
2 free issues of Electronic Gaming Monthly offered from Ziff Davis
5% off of any Hyatt Hotels in the United States
Free copy of new feature- length film "Gamers" as supplies last
Free resume uploads to ECA’s job board site, GameJobs.com
30-day Free Trial to GameFly, the leading online video game rental service to the first 1,000 registered members
Discounts on consumer shows such as GameCon, VGEXPO, and other trade events, conferences and concerts
WarCry free 30 day Trial membership in WarCry Choice for each member
New York Comic Con 2007, 2008 show will give 20% off to all ECA members
VGEXPO will provide ECA members 10% discount off of admission
Career Discover Series offers 10% discount off of admission to ECA members
Hardcore Gamer Magazine™ will offer a discount price off of the 12 month subscription cost of $24.99 to ECA members for $12.99

And there's about double that amount that we're actively working on that we can't, for both legal and PR reasons, go into the details on - although some savvy enthusiast journalists are putting some of the pieces of the puzzle together on their own.

Generally, we're trying to make the value proposition a 10x multiple - which I think I mentioned earlier; for your 20 bucks we hope to deliver over 200 bucks worth of services. The reasoning is simple: we want the organization to be self-funded, meaning that the members are the main source of income and that we're not reliant upon publishers or others for our survival. It helps us remain independent and frankly is the right way to go about it. The risk we run is offering so many free offers, discounts on game rentals and purchases, et al that it's overwhelming. So we're trying to be selective. In the end, we'd like to make the value prop so compelling that gamers will look at it and say, "I'm spending this money anyway, I'd be an idiot not to join."


-Hal.

@Dan - the short answer is that developer's rights being marginalized and publisher's rights being reduced will most certainly have a chilling effect on the medium as an art form. If you think of it from a pure business perspective, you're there as a business first and foremost to make a profit, by definition. No one wants to create a product that can't sell by law. And while history has proven that bad but controversial games will sell better than bad uncontroversial games, I know of no developer whose goal it is to spend a few years of his/her life making a bad game. As for how to localize a US product to meet foreign laws, it depends entirely on the game. I was running a small chain of independent game stores back when Mortal Kombat came out in two versions (SNES and Genesis); one had red blood, the other green.


-Hal.

@Althrun - Wow, thanks. I appreciate your confidence. The truth is, this past summer the Democrats in the Connecticut State Legislature tried pretty hard to recruit me to run for one of the House seats. It seemed the more I said no, the more adamant they became about getting me to run. I'm really not interested in being a politician. I feel like I can affect change in my own way and in an industry that I care very deeply about by just doing my job… and that's a pretty special thing, for which I'm grateful for the privilege.

Thanks again for the kind words though.


-Hal.

@EvilZombie - The Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) is a new non-profit membership organization which was established to give gamers a voice. We're brand new with this entity, but our staff previously ran the retail trade association that represents game merchants. We are working with partners to get the word out about the association, what we're trying to do and why you should join (annual membership dues are $19.99/year) and just recently soft launched. In the past few weeks our marketing has just begun making about 14 million impressions per month via partner magazines, websites, newsletters, MMOs and the like. While consumer advocacy is very important to us and relatively central to our core, we also offer and will be offering a fair amount of services that behoove gamers.


-Hal.

@kurisu - Thanks.

The forums, like a lot of the technology-related matters, are a work in progress. At present, Dennis is establishing and hosting them through this site. But it's very likely that they'll be moved behind the login page on theECA.com going forward, and in that event you'd need to be a paid member to "see" them. We certainly don't want to stymie conversation, but believe that the $19.99 per year membership price is a compelling value proposition (we hope for there to be a 10x return, over $200 worth of value going forward).


-Hal.

@omegaman - Thank you.

1. Humm, that's a challenging question. Generally speaking, the US is certainly more puritanical than many of the countries in Europe and perhaps that's to do with the Judeo-Christian ethos, or perhaps just a newer/younger society… I don't know. I am usually very proud of how the balance that we, as a culture, tend to come out. The eventual understanding and compromise is a learning process, that at times costs us dearly, but it's only through adversity that we learn the truly tough lessons. One of the most significant matters that change the very core of the violence in games debate is our First Amendment and that alone changes the dynamic of the discussion.

2. I have been profoundly interested in this wave of interest overcoming politicians at every level of government. Over the past few years it has become as front-and-center as any other nationally-recognized debate, and that just confounds me. I know that violence and sex in games is topically important and that people feel strongly about it, but really? In the context of health care, war, starvation, homelessness, disease… etc.? I don't know how they, as leaders of their people (here, or abroad) can justify spending valuable taxpayer resources on games as a priority when there are so many other much more worthy concerns in my opinion. A good domestic example for me was Louisiana; people displaced, homeless, isolated, jobless and the legislature spends their time and people's money on passing a law that they new in advance wouldn't pass muster! People should be outraged. OK, rant over… :)


-Hal.