A picture from LittleBigPlanet for the PlayStation 3, coming out later this year.

A long time ago (say, the previous 2 generations), both of the following ideas would of been preposterous: microtransactions and UGC (User Generated Content). For the longest time gaming has always been shown as a world the developers create, and the player roams in, and that's all there is. They define the rules, you play their experience.

Now, these ideas have (over time) gone out the window. No more is the game just about what the developer wants. Even if its small steps for a lot of game series', more and more games are letting the user have input. Halo 3 lets you have near infinite customization of matches and has a map editor. Crysis has a complete map maker utility. StarCraft and WarCraft are both RTS that are somewhat well known for their extensive and powerful map editors, both of which have created game modes that are still played today in e-sport competitions (Defense of the Ancients). As well, no more is a game WYSIWYG. Now you can purchase say, a NEW LOGO to create your team in Madden for a few cents, or something to that extent. Microtransactions as well are becoming more and more prominent.

Microtransactions, quite honestly, are nothing but a way for a developer to make extra much needed cash to make bigger/more original projects/not go bankrupt. Sure, they cost a few cents (or maybe a bit more), but a lot of people eat this stuff up (especially fanboys). It adds up, especially when 99% of the time the microtransaction probably took like, 1 minute to make. (OK, maybe not 1 minute...but still.) That isn't to say there isn't well designed/more expensive microtransactions, they just aren't big yet. The new Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles game for Wii has like pretty huge ones!

I don't personally like microtransactions. They are usually things that could of just been added to the game for a couple cent increase in the games cost anyways.

User Generated Content on the other hand, is something I love. The idea that the developer merely sets the stage, not the rules, and the player gets to do whatever, is awesome. And developers know this. UGC games or games that feature UGC are coming out the ass this year and next. It's crazy!

Little Big Planet demonstration.[/center]

UGC has been popular ever since it started going in small steps years back. Players can mod games any way they choose, hell even in some older games the players have basically balanced the game completely. It's pretty much the way of the future, and I think we're going to see a lot of cool stuff with it. I think it's a bit disappointing that there isn't many indie games really going with this, but oh well.

LBP is the next step in UGC. Before there was map editors, mods, etc, but these are still UGC set by the rules the developers set. Sure, you can blow like half a year changing those rules completely with a mod (hello Natural Selection) but most of the time a mod is used to change the basics. A model. A texture. What not. LBP is basically, one giant map editor, that you can experience with friends. That's very awesome, but more importantly it's original and innovative.

What's your stance on microtransactions? Way of the future, meh, complete disappointment?
What's your stance on UGC?

Next week I'll be wrapping this short series up with Part IV, a look at things to come.

If there weren't so many other UGC games coming out (Spore), I'd assume that Little Big Planet might be a good buy.

That's like saying that if there weren't so many Madden games coming out, you'd assume Halo would be a good buy. They're completely different genres and serve completely different purposes.

I can't wait for UGC to become pervasive enough in the industry to become one of the standards in game development. It's something I have personally been waiting for for a LONG time.

And from the looks of things, that might be happening this year (and after seeing stuff like LittleBigPlanet and Spore, it looks like there are going to be high standards for UGC design already established as it becomes a more mainstream concept).

wow. I really want a PS3 now. That is hands-down the coolest thing I've seen today.

ps3's cost less than 600$ now.

also yes I'll resize the image.

microtransactions to me seem like more of a marketting idea than anything. i recall that with guitar hero it cost more money to buy virtual songs than a physical game expansion disc with the same amount of songs by over double ( http://www.joystiq.com/2007/04/11/guitar-hero-ii-song-packs-now-live-pricey/ ). it's absolutely absurd that downloading songs would be even a cent more than buying a physical retail copy, it really goes to show the whole online business model is going to be just as bad as retail even though the developers see more money. essentially, no one is going to pass the savings on to the consumer. katamari damacy is also a pretty good example of microtransactions gone wrong, day one when the game was released they had more levels and content for the game. i don't have any sources because i can't find it right now, but their logic was that people LIKE TO BUY digital content so essentially cut parts out of the game and sold extra content from day one. i don't really want to get too into digital distribution, but i am pretty disgusted by nearly everything that's out there. amazingly, STEAM, which everyone hated initially and had a lot of problems, is probably the only reasonable digital distribution service out there.

UGC is great, but it needs to be streamlined to be effective. for instance, most online FPS games do a decent job of this where it automatically just downloads maps for you and it requires no effort at all to play custom maps, and servers with mods. if you look at something like boom blox though, it's a game that would do so amazing with UGC but there is no reasonable method of obtaining UGC because it has a terrible online set-up. so yeah, UGC is great, but it needs to be easy to distribute otherwise it's not so great.