A research team has found that frequent gamers have brains that are structurally different from non-gamers. While what this meant in strict terms was unknown with video gaming addiction being a potential concern, the findings have prompted researchers to encourage parents and society as a whole to monitor the brain activities of these gamers.

The research process

A group of researchers from around the globe investigated if playing games somehow altered the structure of the brain. They ranked the gaming habits of 154 14-year-olds by how many hours they played video games for, with the median being nine hours weekly. Those who played more were called frequent players, with the study declaring none as addicts.

What they found was rather remarkable. Brain scans apparently showed a larger ‘ventral striatum’, widely thought of as the brain’s ‘reward system’ hub, in regular gamers.

Conclusions

Alarmists will immediately hop onto this as further proof that video games are addictive, since the ventral striatum is a key component of the brain used to explain addictions. While the team that was studying the structural adjustments to the brain gaming had made no inferences about video gaming addictions, other scientists are already looking to this study as an explainer of sorts.

Speaking to the BBC, Dr Luke Clark, who is in the experimental psychology department at Cambridge University, called the findings ‘really provocative because this is a central hub in the brain’s motivational system’.

He went on to add that ‘the burning question that this study does not resolve is whether the structural difference is a change caused by the frequent game play, or whether individual differences in this system naturally dispose some people to more excessive play.’ His recommendation – a measured, moderate response – was to continually monitor the brain structure over time.

Video gaming addiction has become a hot topic of discussion, and with smartphone gaming and casual games growing the industry beyond its general core, the better a connected web of psychology theories supported by evidence are developed, the better equipped gamers and parents alike will be able to deal with whatever negatives come with extensive (or excessive) play.

How things change. While Zynga, the social gaming giant founded in 2007, had to fight for legitimacy as a genuine publisher against established publishing giants like Electronic Arts due to Zynga’s casual games at one stage being dismissed off-hand by ‘serious gamers’, the tables have turned, with Electronic Arts saying they were now squarely aiming their targets on Zynga.

It’s a Sim world

EA CEO John Riccitiello is scheduled to speak at a US Chamber of Commerce event today, prefacing his talk by mentioning where his firm has succeeded in the social gaming space in recent months. These victories include Sims Social, which has garnered over 53 million users around the globe, as well as the full userbase of EA’s online title, which is nearing 100 million worldwide.

This is a big turn around from where the company was just a year ago, and shows that the EA social games strategy is slowly beginning to yield some, if somewhat belated, dividends for the company.

The Zynga gap

Perhaps what’s most remarkable is that even with 100 million users of EA social games, Zynga has double that userbase. Furthermore, it’s a great example of startups taking on incumbent giants by not just changing the games they compete with, but by changing the platform. Zynga has very little in the console space, and instead shifted the war for video game publishing dominance to the internet – most prominently Facebook – while EA remained strong in a console landscape that has, in recent months, begun shrinking.

The old versus the new

TechCrunch reports that: ‘Riccitiello has set a $3 billion goal for online revenue. They have a head start on Zynga there, as the move to further monetize their major franchises through subscriptions and DLC is only just starting to really take hold.’ Remember, EA owns venerable franchises like Fifa, Madden, Need for Speed and so on, whereas Zynga has to birth new hits whenever making a run for a market.

Either way, watching the EA social games team behave somewhat like a startup as a result of a very, very young company making life very difficult for an incumbent is encouraging. At least we know they still have the fighting spirit, and social gaming stands to only benefit from it all.

The one glaring omission on Valve’s Steam digital retail service is EA’s library of games. This is especially so now that EA Origin has launched, the video gaming publishing giant’s own digital retail platform. Gabe Newell, the founder of Valve, says he’s determined to win Electronic Arts over by showing them that being on Steam is best for everyone involved.

It’s all a numbers game

Unsurprisingly, Newell thinks publishing games on Valve’s Steam service is the best possible move for any PC publisher – Electronic Arts included. As such his team has a ‘duty’ to prove to EA that Valve was ‘creating value on a regular basis’.

Speaking to Develop, he said: ‘I think at the end of the day we’re going to prove to Electronic Arts they have happier customers, a higher quality service, and will make more money if they have their titles on Steam. It’s our duty to demonstrate that to them. We don’t have a natural right to publish their games.’

Tense relationship

When Develop probed Newell to find out why EA left Valve’s Steam digital retail service in the first place, he said that it was ‘down to a whole complicated set of issues.’ EA was more direct, saying they found that Steam had ‘restrictive terms of service’, and would not, as such, be bringing Battlefield 3 to the service.

Yet, given the two companies’ long relationship, through the EA Partners programme that publishes all of Valve’s console releases, there’s a highly likelihood that executives at high levels in the two companies are constantly trying to figure out how to resolve the differences. For now, it is pretty safe to conclude that Battlefield 3 will be exclusive to the EA Origin service, and will not be available on Valve’s Steam digital retail platform. Whether this will be so for future releases remains to be seen.

Bethesda’s The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim was shown off at QuakeCon 2011 this past weekend, and early sentiment suggests that the game wowed all who saw it. Various gaming outlets say it has the potential to be Bethesda’s best game yet – which is saying something – with a woman going into labour during the demo and sticking out regardless.

First to the game

1UP was on hand to see the QuakeCon 2011 demo of the hugely anticipated RPG, saying The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim ‘already feels like Bethesda’s best game.’ Praising the significantly improved combat, saying that the added sense of gravity and weight served to ‘constantly remind the player that they are firmly grounded in every engagement they take.’ In addition the publication praised the ‘way the game communicates all of its vast levels of information to the player.’ They said this area had the most dramatic improvement, and given the scope of an RPG like Skyrim, this is no mean feat.

Awesome enough to prompt labour – and stay during

All of this amounted to a demo – and short playtime for select members of press – that was met with wows and cheers at QuakeCon 2011. One woman was so impressed, she went into labour during the presentation, and stayed regardless just in case she wasn’t actually in labour. What troopers. Her fiancé, Chaz, sent a message to Game Informer, explaining that ‘During the demo Todd Howard showed off the Frost Dragon. This is what started the whole thing, seeing this must have filled Stevi with so much excitement that it sent her into labor.’

The wait nears its end

Talk about passionate gamers. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim is scheduled to release on 11 November 2011 on the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360. The sequel to the critically acclaimed Scrolls IV: Oblivion, comes more than five years after its predecessor wowed gaming fans and changes the RPG games landscape. It’s apparently so good it could prompt labour.

Bethesda, the guys behind critically acclaimed RPG games including The Elder Scrolls franchise and the revived Fallout franchise, have sent a threatening letter to the creator of Minecraft. Perhaps, more specifically, the developer’s lawyers have sent the letter, saying that the studio’s next titles infringes upon the dev’s Elder Scrolls trademark.

We invented the word ‘Scrolls’, okay?

Scrolls is the name of Minecraft creator Markus ‘Notch’ Persson’s follow-up to his commercially and critically acclaimed Minecraft. The game, which has yet to be given an official release date, will be an interactive collectible card game set in a fantasy world where tactics and strategy will be a key part in succeeding.

Scrolls also happens to be in the word ‘Elder Scrolls’, a Bethesda trademark. Persson revealed he could be in a legal bind, tweeting that he ‘Just got a letter from Bethesta’s [sic] lawyers. They claim “Scrolls” infringes on their trademark and everyone will confuse it with Skyrim.’

Umm, who will confuse the two, exactly?

The Skyrim Persson refers to in his tweet is Bethesda’s The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. The fifth title in the celebrated franchise is scheduled for a November release, with Bethesda recently showing it off to the press at this year’s QuakeCon.

Lawyers, meet PR. PR, meet Lawyers.

Obviously a few immediate questions follow this patent infringement accusation. Firstly, who would legitimately confuse The Elder Scrolls with a game simply titled ‘Scrolls’? This is especially so given these titles have a common audience base in that they appeal to very sophisticated gamers who certainly know their Minecrafts from their WarCrafts, and so on.

Finally, given the industry-wide positivity surrounding Persson’s work, would Bethesda be so irresponsible as to sue an independent developer who is currently an industry darling? The Minecraft creator tweeted. ‘I still <3 Bethesda. This is hopefully just lawyers being lawyers.’ Agreed. PC gaming doesn’t need patent infringement lawsuits being thrown around indiscriminately. What, does Bethesda think this is the smartphone industry?

Peter Moore, who was formerly with Sega and Microsoft before taking up the reigns as head of EA Sports, is moving up the corporate ladder at Electronic Arts. The British-born video gaming executive will now serve as EA COO, in a time when the venerable publisher is attempting to regain its once prominent leadership positioning in the video games industry.

First material restructuring

In a post on Electronic Arts website, CEO John Riccitiello describes this as the ‘the first material re-organization since we established EA’s label structure in 2007.’ Speaking on that reorganisation, specifically, he writes: ‘progress since then has been incredible. We executed against three transformational strategies: (1) Fewer, Better, Bigger, (2) Expanding our digital businesses, and (3) Tighter cost management. Our quality has risen dramatically.’

Moore’s legacy

Moore joined the publisher as head of EA Sports in 2007. Since then the quality of EA’s sporting titles has improved uniformly, with Fifa, most prominently, now considered in critical circles a superior title to long-time rival Pro Evolution soccer.

In addition to EA COO Peter Moore taking up his new position, Frank Gibeu will now serve as President of EA’s labels, BioWare becoming the publisher’s fourth label, and Barry Cottle heading up EA Interactive.

EA Interactive EA’s future?

From a British perspective, Peter Moore’s promotion is a pretty big deal, but from an industry-wide perspective, Barry Cottle may be the man to watch at Electronic Arts. Under EA Interactive fall the company’s mobile and social gaming initiatives, including Playfish, Pogo, EA Mobile, EA’s Hasbro games, and, perhaps most importantly, the newly acquired PopCap studio.

If the meteoric rise of social and mobile gaming on tablets and smartphones is anything to go by, and if it will eclipse console gaming the way it seems set to, his job could become incredibly important for EA. In fact, it already is.

Sony, like several Japanese consumer electronics giants, has posted a loss in its latest earnings call. A continued decline in its TV business, coupled with production problems as a result of the Japan earthquake, is what the company attributes the loss to.

The numbers

For the quarter spanning April to June 2011, Sony had a net loss of 15.5 billion yen (£122 million). Sales saw a steep 15 per cent year-on-year decline as well. The company says the numerous production delays across its Japanese factories coupled with a squeeze in the supplies of components hindered its ability to meet previous performance. The electronics firm made a downward revision on its projected sales for the remainder of the year, too.

Other negative factors

Part of the Sony quarterly loss was also attributed to ‘unfavourable exchange rates,’ with the Japanese consumer electronics giants adding that ‘the deterioration of the electronics business environment’ did not do its operation any favours.

TV sucks

While certain parts of the electronics devices, like smartphones and tablet PCs, are booming, other areas continue to struggle. One such area is the overall television business, which is a big part of the company’s operations. The TV division was the worst hit, with increased competition, decreasing sales, and a price war affecting Sony – and every other firm’s – ability to make money in the sector.

Gaming weird

A decline in sales of the Playstation 3 contributed to the Sony quarterly loss, too. Strangely, the now-ancient PS2 continues to sell well, with sales declining only a few 100,000 units year-on-year. And, finally, the PSP, Sony’s handheld console, saw 50 per cent year-on-year growth in unit sales, selling 1.8 million units compared to 1.2 million units the year prior.

PSN hack?

All in all the decline could have been much worse. Given the PSN hack and the Japanese earthquake all happened in one quarter, the company can take solace in knowing that the Sony quarterly loss is far narrower than it had the potential to be.

EA just bought PopCap for what could amount to $1.3 billion (about £805m). This has brought about a string of reactions from all across the industry regarding price, strategy, and so on. Rovio, the maker of the popular Angry Birds franchise, have also added their thoughts to the mix, with the developer saying it believes it’s worth more than what EA paid for PopCap.

Congrats, but we’re good on our own

Speaking to Eurogamer, Rovio VP of franchise developer Ville Heijari told the publication that while there were acquisition discussions as Angry Birds began to prove its viability last summer, the company has both set the bar ‘pretty high’ for potential suitors, and that ‘really relevant [acquisition] discussions’ have yet to take place.

Worth more than PopCap

Heijari said: ‘Of course like any business if the price is right, ha!’ He added that: ‘But we’ve set the bar pretty high from early on, because we really think we have a lot of opportunities with our Angry Birds IP and there’s a lot of creativity at the studio beyond Angry Birds. It was never a strategy here to quickly cash in on anybody who comes waving a wad of cash our way.’

In case there were serious suitors lurking, he let this tidbit slip: ‘But the valuation from our point of view is somewhere, I dunno, maybe north of PopCap.’ So, in short, if there is a company out there wants to buy Rovio, it should be prepared to offer more than $1.3 billion.

The long haul

With Rovio’s ambitions of becoming a modern day Disney, retailing plush toys and even developing a feature film, one can see why they’re so confident that the Angry Birds franchise could be worth big stacks of money. And with their ambitions starting on smartphones with designs of expanding far beyond that, it probably doesn’t make sense for another big deal publisher swooping in for them the way Electronic Arts did PopCap.

Nintendo’s stock price jumped a dramatic 4.9 per cent off speculation that the company was going to start taking a multi-platform approach with the games it developed. The company quickly put a lid on the speculation, bringing its share price back down to earth. The jump does, however, speak much to what investors would like to see the Japanese gaming icon trying.

Why the speculation

The speculation was triggered by an announcement that the first of possibly many Pokemon iPhone games was on the horizon. Given that Nintendo owns 32 per cent of Pokemon, this immediately fuelled speculation that the company was considering developing for mobile OS platforms.

Calm down, calm down

But a Nintendo spokesperson clarified the situation, telling Bloomberg that his company’s long-held strategy of only making software for Nintendo hardware ‘hasn’t changed and won’t change,’ irrespective of the Pokemon iPhone game.

However Mitsuo Shimizu, a Cosmo Securities Co. analyst, immediately picked up on the investor feelings we sensed. He told Bloomberg that: ‘The share movement showed how much investors are hoping for Nintendo to change its strategy,’ adding that ‘Nintendo should consider developing games for smartphones or players that can also act as mobile phones, as it suits the lifestyles of many people.’

We don’t like free

The thing, though, is Nintendo has been hugely successful for longer than any other video games company in the world, and this must be so for a reason. While high profile competitors like Atari and Sega fell to the wayside, Nintendo remained steadfast in their approach, going through ups and downs, but always ending up on the up.

Now, while it would be a lie to say seeing Mario Bros on mobile devices like Android phones and iPhones would not be great – since it would mean I get to carry one less device – it’s arguable that this affects Ninty’s competitive advantage too much to warrant the sudden influx of ‘new money’. Savour the Pokemon iPhone games, folks, because Mario is certainly not coming to an iPhone near you (anytime soon).

Video games are big business, and research firm Gartner says industry-wide growth will not slow anytime soon. What has changed is how that revenue is distributed in the gaming industry, with traditional platform holders watching their social gaming rivals racking up big sales.

Good growth

Research firm Gartner reports that consumers spent around $67 billion (£41.75b) on gaming in 2010, with this figure swelling to $112 billion (£69.8b) come 2015. This year, the gaming industry will see growth of more than 10 per cent as sales approach $74 billion.

Freemium the future

While the PC platform and consoles have historically been the place where video gaming revenue has been concentrated, social, casual, and mobile gaming has begun taking a big chunk of the pie.

Brian Blau, who is a research director at Gartner says: ‘We find that subscription fees are giving way to “freemium” models, in which the game is provided for free to gamers but is monetized through advertising (both in-game advertising and display advertising) and in-game micro transactions, such as the sale of value-added services or virtual-good purchases.’

Tablets and mobile the future, too

His colleague, Tuong Nguyen, who is a principal research analyst at the research firm, added that: ‘As the popularity of smartphones and tablets continues to expand, gaming will remain a key component in the use of these devices. Although they are never used primarily for gaming, mobile games are the most downloaded application category across most application stores.’ He later added that: ‘For this reason, mobile gaming will continue to thrive as more consumers expand their use of new and innovative portable connected devices.’

Gartner predicts that software such as mobile phone apps and the like will continue to account for the most revenue with total expenditure of $44.7 billion (£27.86b) in 2011. Things in the overall gaming industry sure look rosy.