The board features the familiar double and triple letter or word scores, but Word Trick adds a new element with green ‘trick tiles’ which give players bonus points when they’re used in groups of three or more.  Up to four players can take part in a single game and players can have up to 21 games in progress at any one time.

Clear?  Good.

Word Trick can now be enjoyed by Facebook and iOS users alike.  On the same game.  On different platforms.  Mind BLOWN.  Truly we are in the FUTURE…

You can also play against other players in the same location by passing your phone back and forth, like a tiny electronic board game of joy.

Word Trick for iOS is available now for your iPad, iPod or iPhone.  There is a free, ad-funded version of the game available now.  A paid for version which removes the adverts will be available shortly.

Go get it.

Gears of Glory: Apex Ace

It’s a top-down racing game in which perfection and total control is rewarded.  The game will feature multiple tracks, achievements and multiplayer options, ensuring every driver is catered for.

Gears of Glory will also come complete with an advanced track editor, allowing players to create, compete upon and share their very own racing circuits and help to build the greater Gears of Glory universe.

The game is currently in development for Windows PCs and will be distributed by the very lovely people at Indie City.

Gears of Glory is being designed with lower specification systems in mind, so that the greatest possible number of players can join in, while the gameplay will allow drivers to jump in and out of the game for short, sharp bursts of driving goodness.

You can follow the progress of the game on the Gears of Glory Facebook page.  Or you can follow Colin himself over on Twitter.

Which is a shame because Codeplay is one of the most technically sophisticated companies in the industry and has been pushing the outer limits of the cutting edge for over ten years now.

To put it simply, Codeplay creates, tests and optimises compilers for very large companies which make devices like games consoles or mobile phone handsets.  The company’s list of projects, clients and successes makes the phrase

The company is also now working on software to help developers squeeze more out of their games and increase performance from Artificial Intelligence (AI) and in-game effects, without increasing the load on the hardware’s main processor.

In addition, Codeplay is also a member of a European-funded syndicate looking into the future of graphics and lower power graphics processing.

If this sounds rather complex, it is.  Codeplay works on incredibly advanced and sophisticated projects and has more brains in-house than the rest of the Scottish games industry should it be gathered, pressed, blended, strained and distilled into a delicious concentrate.

Now Codeplay’s hard work is being recognised.  The company’s new Offload technology, which is used in Eutechnyx’s new online NASCAR game, has been nominated in the Scottish Business Awards.

The awards ceremony take place later this month, so there’s a good chance you may be reading more about Codeplay in these pages in the near future.

In the meantime, Codeplay is hiring AND is always keen to speak to seriously smart people.  If you’re interested in making the future of gaming actually come true, then you could do a whole lot worse than give them a call.

If you’ve not come across them before, One Thumb Mobile is a leading mobile development studio based in Glasgow, specialising in high end and complex mobile development.  The company has a track record of eleven years delivering 2D and 3D mobile games and entertainment apps.

In 2012 One Thumb launched Celtic Heroes, one of the first full scale 3D MMORPGs for mobile platforms and tablets, and has worked with games publishers and some of the world’s leading brands to create groundbreaking mobile games and entertainment products. One Thumb Mobile has created mobile products for brands such as Liverpool FC, Honda, Visa, Nissan and Star Trek, and achieved the number two overall best selling app in Apple’s UK App Store in May 2010.

The number of freelancers, indie studios and start ups is growing rapidly and Dundee has yet to get a hot-desking, open source low cost solution for smaller companies, so this could be a popular move.

What do you think indie/freelance/start-up type readers?

Their so-called promotion will be looked upon by the wider industry with the greatest disapprobation and their concept will be stolen, pirated and released upon the lawless streets of the world before they can draw breath.

Will it be mobile?  Will it be online?  Will it be social?  What genre is it?  THEY DON’T SAY!  There’s literally NO information there.  It’s like the expect people to GUESS or actually wonder what they’re up to.

It’s IMMODEST and crass.

It’s clearly madness!

Looks very nice though.  Count us as impressed.

(Oh and the rest of you.  Yes, you lot.  This is a GOOD idea…)

We checked it was OK to re-post the piece here and present, for your pleasure and delight, Huzutech on social gaming and designing by data analysis…

You can find the post over on the Huzutech blog – and we’d recommend checking it out.

The IPO of San Francisco social games giant Zynga at the end of 2011 highlighted just how polarised opinion is when it comes to this new area of gaming.

The social games scene exploded in last year.  The number of games on the market increased beyond all expectations, as did the variety of games – from simple word and puzzle titles, through to massively multiplayer adventures.

This expansion drew in huge numbers of players and led to massive growth in revenues, from subscriptions, the sale of virtual goods and advertising.

It culminated in late 2011, with Zynga’s initial public offering which valued the company at over one billion dollars.  Not too bad for a company which is not yet five years old.

Despite all of the success however, there remains a lot of cynicism over the future of the social games sector and the long-term value of the games themselves.

Many developers and publishers working within the existing games industry have expressed doubt over many aspects of social gaming.

The fact social games are free-to-play is seen as unsustainable and damaging the value of the game itself.  If a player does not have to pay for a game, the argument states, then they simply don’t value it.

The reliance of social games on the various social platforms (such as Facebook) ties their future into the ongoing success of that platform.  If the network runs into problems (over issues such as privacy), starts to lose large numbers of users, or makes major changes to its support for games, then titles using that network can run into problems.

Then there are the actual games.  Perhaps not surprisingly for a creative industry, this is one of the most fiercely held contentions regarding the social market.  Social games, it is claimed, lack any sort of artistic merit.  They are cynical marketing tools, which use psychological tricks to keep players coming back for more, in order to get them paying.  In short they’re not creative, fun or ‘designed’ in the same way as console, pc or even mobile games, but designed and driven entirely by numbers.

Are any of these claims valid, or even fair?  In part, yes.  However, some of these issues are being viewed in the worst possible light, possibly thanks to the sweeping changes and huge differences social gaming has introduced into the wider games industry.

The social gaming market is something entirely new.  Less than five years ago, it did not exist.  The fact it does now is down to Facebook opening it’s Application Programme Interface (API), which allowed developers worldwide to go and create their own content for the rapidly growing social network.

On any new device, technology or platform which supports consumer facing software, games have very quickly become the most popular type of content.  From the iPhone and Apple App Store, to digital interactive television to social networks, gaming it seems that users are discovering the joys of simple, short and low cost ways to play.

However, the market for these new forms of gaming operate very differently from the existing console and PC sectors.  The most successful games in new social, casual and mobile markets are free.  At least initially.  Users who are looking for smaller, simpler forms of gaming are certainly not going to pay £30/$40 up front for a game they don’t know they’ll enjoy.  While much lower price points ($0.99) have appeared on some markets, the most successful games are those which allow users to download and play them for free.

This business model requires an entirely different approach to creating and marketing a game.  In the ‘traditional’ games market, once the player has bought the game, whether they enjoy it or finish it is almost irrelevant (until you come to release the sequel).  The free-to-play (F2P) model, has to encourage players to return, to play the game again and again, so that new content, new virtual goods and new abilities can be unlocked or ‘sold’ from within the game itself.

Many companies are pushing ahead with this model to great effect.  New levels, new items, character customisation and rare/exclusive items can be sold to enthusiastic players and generate as much, if not more than simple up-front game sales.  Other companies have found success with an up-front payment and then in-game purchases.  Others still have made their entire game free-to-play but have included advertising links within the game.

All of these models are still in their early days, but indications so far are that with care and attention to when and how players are approached, they are willing to buy new content on an ongoing basis.

These points of payment however, have become contentious within the wider games industry, thanks to the data which social games companies can gather from players.  Unlike the PC and console market, where a player’s contact and interaction with the developer/publisher is limited, social games run and interact on a server, so the player is in almost constant contact with the company behind the game.

This gives the social games company far, far more information on how their players act within the game – down to individual mouse clicks, progress through the game and items used.

Many social games companies are using this data to refine and hone their titles, to make them more appealing, more compelling and dare we say – addictive.  This allows them to look for revenue on an ongoing basis, keep users engaged and make sure their players are still their players in the months to come.

This focus has lead to some criticism from the wider games industry that the social market, rather than being creative or driven by design, is actually being driven by data analysis and marketing.  Many developers are looking upon this as a negative thing, taking away much of the creativity and ‘art’ of other forms of gaming.

None of which is strictly fair.  A game which relies upon more ‘casual’ players has to be accessible, simple to pick up and easily understood.  A game which relies upon players returning many times, so that in-game purchases can be made, has to be compelling and addictive – though oddly enough it does NOT have to be ‘fun.

The data on when and how players take part in games, gives social developers the opportunity to really focus on getting players into the game, keeping them playing and encouraging paid transactions.  In turn, this understanding gives social games companies certain rules and mechanisms which can be used in new games and built into experiences which should keep players even more engaged and offer more opportunities for revenue.

There is a case to be made that the console and PC games companies, given access to the same data, would be adopting broadly similar approaches to development and design.  Major console games cost tens of millions and increasingly, hundreds of millions of dollars to create.  The publishers behind those games are not gambling with those sums of money.  They’re focusing just as much on what worked, what was popular and what players will pay for as the companies working on social games.

Does this mean that data analysis can replace the human element and creativity in game design?  Clearly not.  Data analysis can only take you so far.  Since the social games market is still so young, there’s simply no data on long-term use or user response.  Nor can data analysis reveal what isn’t yet on the market.  While many of the leading social games have pulled in millions of players, many more have yet to give games a try.  What is it going to take to address these potential gamers of the future?

Data analysis is a useful tool.  It can help make identify problems in games and allows developers to refine and polish their titles, but it won’t necessarily help create exciting, innovative and unique new experiences which don’t yet exist

As for the new business models being explored by social games companies, again there’s no real long-term data.  However, there are other platforms and indications that virtual good and in-app purchases are being accepted by users worldwide as interesting and valuable.

The mobile markets from Apple and Android feature a variety of apps, not just games, which feature in-app purchases, subscriptions, advertising funded titles and virtual goods.  If the platform is trusted, the revenue model convenient and the content perceived as having value, then consumers seem willing to pay for it.  Even ‘rental’ models for online movies, music and publications are beginning to make an appearance.  Its up to the creators to ensure that their content is seen to have that value.

Online, existing virtual communities such as Moshi Monsters and Club Penguin have also shown that new revenue models can work – even for audiences of a much younger age.

In short, it seems that the opportunities to move away from the traditional retail model is being explored – successfully – by a large number of companies across the online, mobile, social and casual markets.  Which has to be good news for the brand owners, media companies and intellectual properties now looking seriously at these new areas of entertainment for new revenue streams and opportunities to interact with consumers in a new and more interactive ways.

Finally, the concern about relying on a single platform – such as Facebook – is a valid one.  While social networks are still a new phenomenon, there is already substantial evidence that all networks are transient.  Previously booming communities such as Bebo and MySpace have shrunk to a shadow of their former selves.  Yet, Facebook has in many ways rewritten the rules for social spaces.  The open API and critical mass of users suggests this network will be around for a significant time to come.

Which does not, however, make it the only platform in town.  Users are increasingly choosing their own entry point to the Internet.  Some people are Twitter fans and never touch, Facebook.  Others have migrated to Google+.  In many countries around the world, Facebook is not the leading social network by a large margin.

There are opportunities outwith the world’s biggest social network and new channels, communities, networks and routes to market are appearing on an almost daily basis.  So while Facebook may currently by the ’800lb gorilla’ in social gaming, developers, media companies and brand owners need to take a step back and ensure they’re addressing the broadest possible audience.

The bottom line in this new ‘mainstream’ gaming market is that the consumer is king.  You need to be active in the channels they’re using.  You need to be creating games they want to play.  You need to find revenue models that they trust and are comfortable using.

Consumers are increasingly technology agnostic.  They want their favourite content on all of their devices and the artificial barriers created by different devices will start to disappear even more quickly, allowing Facebook users to compete against iPhone owners, Android users, Google+ members and even the new generation of Internet connected televisions.

Far from being a bubble, a fad or a niche, the rise of the social games market is revealing a future for interactive entertainment which is more open, challenging and exciting than it’s ever been before.

Regardless of the platforms, the design methodology, the business models and the routes to market, the future promises to be all about games.  Who knows, there may even be room for fun!

You can find Huzutech online, on Twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn.

Congratulations to the team and we’ll all keep our fingers crossed for another win.

You can find the whole list of nominees here.

Tom DeMajo, Erin Michno and Ian Reynolds, collectively known as Quartic Llama, built Moeba, an side-scrolling, colour-changing action game with a unique organic style. Players have to destroy cells by tapping the phone screen, to keep their character safe.

Abertay University also took the prize for the best university, because it produced the winning team. Three other teams out of the twelve who competed came from Abertay, highlighting the university’s presence within the games sector.

The contest was judged by Samsung and a panel of mobile industry experts.

Erin Michno from the winning team said: “All of the finalists created interesting and high-polished apps, so it was really an honour and a surprise to win the challenge. It was also fantastic to pick up the university prize as it has been great working with the staff and the other Abertay teams.”

Ian Reynolds said: “I’m delighted that our team and university won the competition, and I’ve really enjoyed working with the all the other teams from Abertay that entered. We’re all hugely grateful for the support we got from the University, particularly Iain Donald’s dedication to organising the events at Abertay.”

The team won £5,000 and their game will now be promoted on the Samsung Apps store.

Dr Iain Donald, Computer Games Lecturer and team supervisor, said: “This is an incredible achievement from three very promising young professionals, who have already attracted a lot of attention for their technical skills and creativity.

“A key part of Abertay University’s education is developing industry skills and professionalism – competing against other prestigious universities like Oxford and Imperial College London to win the Samsung bada Student Developer Challenge shows just how well this is working.”

Now go leave a comment on the Denki blog and tell them well done…

Today is kind of a big deal for Denki as it’s the day Quarrel finally launches on Xbox! If you’d rather stop reading at this point and go grab it from Xbox LIVE for only 400MSP I won’t be the least bit offended.  No, really, go right ahead! 

Still with me?  Well, in that case you might be interested to know it’s more than four years since the initial “Eureka!” moment, and more than two years since the game was fully finished and ready to launch.  And, in case you haven’t already heard, getting this game launched wasn’t exactly a smooth ride for us.  To give you some idea of how not smooth let’s just say it was rejected by almost every games publisher in the world.  Sometimes twice; occasionally three times.

And not because their game acquisition teams didn’t recommend signing it you understand, oh no.  Almost without exception every acquisition team we showed it to thought it was a certifiable, bankable HIT – just as we did.  The problems only started once they’d passed Quarrel up the decision tree to their finance and marketing teams – the bit more commonly known as “The Industry“.

“This game is fundamentally broken – how can I possibly win with only 3 letters when my opponent has 8?”;  “We could never sell this because it’s English language only”; “It looks like a kids game, but it’s way too hard for kids” and everywhere (trust me – everywhere) in between.  We heard the same justifications for passing on it over and over again ad nauseam.

However, one signal came through clearer than any other among the general noise of reasons why Quarrel wasn’t for them, and that was this: “Gamers don’t buy word games”.

Really, I thought?  That’s odd, because I’m a gamer, and I’d definitely buy a word game.  And most of my friends and colleagues are gamers, and I know they’d buy a word game.  In fact almost everyone I know is a gamer; I’m sure most of them would buy a word game.  And even the many hundreds of people who played the game during its development said they’d buy a word game.  Providing it was good of course.  So are you absolutely certain gamers don’t buy word games?

Yes.  Yes they were.  Definitely.

So who’s right then: Gamers like myself? Or the Games Industry?  Well, Wednesday January 25th 2012 is “The Day Of Reckoning”.  It’s Gamers vs The Games Industry, and one of us is definitely wrong.

My money is (quite literally) on The Games Industry being wrong. I remain convinced that Gamers know a good game when they see one and will happily invest in it – even if does involve making words instead of headshots.  That certainly seems to be the case if thereaction to the iPhone version is anything to go by anyway, but maybe console gamers are different? What’s most exciting is that we don’t have to wonder or debate much longer because we’re actually going to know the answer soon enough.

What we’d really appreciate though is your support in proving “The Industry” wrong on this one, and there’s two ways you can help ensure victory for Gamers everywhere:

* First is obviously to buy a copy of the game (or four – it’s only 400MSP and supports up to 4 player online multiplayer, so why not gift some points to a few friends who are always kicking your arse at CoD and see how clever they are when it’s about words rather than guns?);

* Second is to tell everyone you can about the game.  Seriously – discovery remains thesingle biggest challenge facing original games these days by far.  I usually assume everyone else already knows about whatever great games I’m enjoying by the time I’ve discovered them, but it always surprises me how often that’s not the case.  So pleasetake time to tweet, blog or whatever else you can do (however small) to help us spread the world about Quarrel – it all makes a difference.  Reference it in your latest film, tell your MP how disgusted you are at its nefarious pseudo-educational undertones, slag it off for not being CoD, despair at the number of obscure or overtly Scottish words it has in its dictionary, rage at all the rude words you can make when the parental controls are off, write a song about it – anything – so long as it helps spread the word!  Whatever helps people to hear about it and not simply ignore it would be most welcomed by us.  Particularly as Microsoft seems to have gone out of its way to relegate games to an afterthought in the most recent redesign of the Xbox dashboard.

Lastly, Quarrel’s come a long, long way since it first appeared looking like this, and has taken a lot of effort from a lot of people to see the light of day.  So a huge THANK YOU again to everyone who has contributed to Quarrel along the way.  There’s a hell of a lot of you, far too many to list here, but whether you pitched the original idea to Dragons’ Denkiback in 2007, filled in a questionnaire at Carronade in 2008, or saw the whole thing through from start to finish in 2012 you have my sincere and eternal gratitude.  You’ve all made Quarrel in to what I consider the best game I’ve ever had the honour of working on – and that’s saying something, as I’ve been lucky enough to work on some great ones.

It wasn’t the easiest journey to get here, that’s for sure.  There were many times when it would have made far more sense to throw in the towel and get on with making another dual-stick shooter or match-3 game.  But for whatever reason we just couldn’t bring ourselves to give up on Quarrel.  After all, as Zaphod Beeblebrox would say “Hey this is terrific. It means we really must be on to something if they’re trying to kill us!” 

We’re all very proud of the Xbox version of Quarrel – the iPhone version is great too of course, but it was originally built with XBLA multiplayer in mind.  We believe that’s whereQuarrel moves from being a good game in to being a great game.  But ultimately, regardless of what those of us who made it might believe we have to leave that for those who play it to decide.  Something we’re only too happy to be able to do at long last.

We hope you like it as much as we do.

See you on the leaderboards!

Colin.