Game Theory with Scott Steinberg Goes Live

August 3, 2010 -

Game Industry TV has launched a new video game show and online magazine, "Game Theory with Scott Steinberg." New episodes and articles are now available at www.gametheoryonline.com. The site and show promise to provide game developers, executives and journalists with an "enlightened forum" to publicly discuss and debate the industry's most pressing issues and offer readers "more informed industry analysis in a language that all can understand."

The first season opens with a multi-part documentary exploring the evolution of the games business, from social games and motion controls to cloud computing and 3D gaming. Hosted by Scott Steinberg, the features appearances by industry leaders including Will Wright, Sid Meier, Trip Hawkins, Peter Molyneux, Cliff Bleszinski and others. The website will offer a blend of commentary, features and analysis with editorials from the likes of hi5 president Alex St. John, futurist Jane McGonigal, ECA president Hal Halpin and others.

For more information on the show and website, visit www.gameindustrytv.com.

[Disclaimer: Game Politics is owned by the ECA.]

Posted in

Comments

Re: Game Theory with Scott Steinberg Goes Live

I'm glad someone is going to be addressing the deeper themes at play in the industry, instead of being just another voice screaming "Omigod omigod omigod, this game is so KEWL!" But...

I just tuned in to watch 'Game Theory', and I have to say I find it almost impossible to watch. I can't stand the freaky pseudo-interference transitions. Whatever happened to the idea that cuts should be simple and clean. If I wanted the image to flicker and go fuzzy every five seconds I'd be watching it on a freaking 1950s TV that I'd spilled coffee on. This is 2010 - we don't need edgy glitch graphics whenever the scene changes from one talking head to the next.

Jeez, I thought we were over this nonsense after all those complaints about shaky cameras making them sick in movies like Cloverfield.

Honestly, I don't mind a few edgy transitions during a show, but when I'm watching a guy talk for just fifteen seconds, and the image flickers three separate times without the camera position changing, that's just too much. I mean, since I started typing this, I sat through the whole show, and I swear I must have seen 50 glitches. It's ridiculous. I can see people getting epileptic seizures from this nonsense.

Re: Game Theory with Scott Steinberg Goes Live

Agreed. Aminute into the show I was starting to get a headache. The post-production crew should be shot.

And honestly? I feel that that is more of an "interview highlights" type of show than an "enlightened forum".

Re: Game Theory with Scott Steinberg Goes Live

I actually watched it again and counted all the glitches. My estimate was only one glitch off - there were 49 of them in a ten minute show. That's one glitch every 12 seconds - and that's not counting the weird transitions that were NOT based on some weird pre-1980s style TV signal interference.

 Maybe they're thinking is that the kids will like this edgy glitchy crap, but this is billed as an in-depth serious look at the industry. If they're aiming that at kids, I fear they're targeting the wrong audience. My daughter's cousins (ages 17, 13 and 10) were visiting just last week, and I can tell that they would probably eat that glitchy nonsense up, but a bunch of industry talking heads would send them to sleep within a minute.

As for me, I'm 48 and a hard in-depth look at the industry is exactly my 'bag', but if each episode comes with a free epileptic seizure I'm just not sure I'm into that. I have enough physical ailments - I don't need one more.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MaskedPixelanteNumber 3: Night Dive was brought to the attention of the public by a massive game recovery, and yet most of their released catalogue consists of games that other people did the hard work of getting re-released.04/17/2014 - 8:46pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 2: If Humongous Entertainment wanted their stuff on Steam, why didn't they talk to their parent company, which does have a number of games published on Steam?04/17/2014 - 8:45pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 1: When Night Dive spent the better part of a year teasing the return of true classics, having their big content dump be edutainment is kind of a kick in the stomach.04/17/2014 - 8:44pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.giantbomb.com/articles/jeff-gerstmann-heads-to-new-york-takes-questions/1100-4900/ He talks about the future games press and the games industry. It is worth your time even though it is a bit long, and stay for the QA. There are some good QA04/17/2014 - 5:28pm
IanCErm so they shouldn't sell edutainment at all? Why?04/17/2014 - 4:42pm
MaskedPixelanteNot that linkable, go onto Steam and there's stuff like Pajama Sam on the front-page, courtesy of Night Dive.04/17/2014 - 4:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, again, please, please, PLEASE get in a habit of linking to whatever you're talking about.04/17/2014 - 4:05pm
MaskedPixelanteAnother round of Night Dive teasing and promising turns out to be stupid edutainment games. Thanks for wasting all our time, guys. See you never.04/17/2014 - 3:44pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the consequences were not only foreseeable, but very likely. anyone who understood supply demand curvs knew that was going to happen. SF has been a econ/trade hub for the last hundred years.04/17/2014 - 2:45pm
Andrew EisenMixedPixelante - Would you like to expand on that?04/17/2014 - 2:43pm
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician