Lucy's View: Clash of the Titans- Sony vs. Microsoft E3 showdown

The claws were out at E3 last week when Sony released this very tongue in cheek response to Microsoft's Xbox One announcement, which explained that new DRM (digital rights management) restrictions will result in harsher controls on lending, sharing and trading games:



Microsoft claim that the new restrictions will actually improve the gaming market. With a new cloud-based system, Microsoft explained how a user will simply be able to log onto any Xbox One console and access their full games library, and that up to 10 family and friends can have accounts on the same console, and access all content stored on there. Furthermore, this system will allow downloads of new releases at the same time as the disc version enters the shops, so no more late night queuing. And really, what would be the point now that a disc will only be needed once to install the game, then it becomes surplus to requirement. (Anyone else think this screams of PC gaming?)

However, there is a downside to all this. Get banned from Xbox Live and you lose all your game licences, oh, and you can't play offline, and the console has to connect to the internet once every 24 hours if you're playing on your own console, once an hour if you're playing your games on a friend's console.

The Xbox One- someone commented it looks like a VCR,
I can't help but agree.

As far as trading goes, you can digitally give your games to your friends if you no longer want them, as long as they have been your friend on your Xbox account for more than 30 days, and you can only give your game away to one person. As far as I can tell you will be able to trade games developed by Microsoft through traditional means, for example CEX in the UK, but the retailers must pay a fee to be able to resell.


Trying to clear up the confusion

I must state at this point that there is an awful lot of confusion over what these restrictions mean / don't mean for the average gamer. I have done my best to decipher the endless rants (there are literally hundreds), and the occasional bit of praise for the new system. The general consensus though, is that Microsoft brought nothing but bad, and confusing, news to the E3 table.

But before we take our hats off to Sony and claim, as others put it, that they 'won' E3, I decided to have a deeper look into what Microsoft are trying to do, and why.

Under the surface of what seems like a power trip from Microsoft, it appears that the Xbox One, and its new restrictions, are designed to sustain / encourage, (depending on your opinion of the gaming world), social gaming. At the same time Microsoft are handing power back to the publishers and developers, allowing them to opt in to allowing re-sales of their games, and in turn giving them control of the distribution of their products. In fact, this guy argues a pretty good case as to why the new DRM restrictions are not all doom and gloom, and raises the point that developers have to make a living too!

I'm still not convinced...

The Play Station 4- definitely smarter looking in my opinion.

Others have also argued an excellent point though: would this set up work in any other market? Look at books for example. Do I have to have known someone 30 days before I can give them a book? The same goes for DVDs, pens, or anything tangible really. If I have bought a disc, surely that is my copy to do with as I please (within the constraints of the law of course). And this is where Sony's argument sits, they are quite realistic about the fact that people may want to lend or even pass / sell games on. It could be argued that lending leads to more sales, in a 'try before you buy' sense.

Maybe, like hundreds of others out there, I have got the wrong end of the stick. What worries me more is the hundreds that have no idea about any of this, and who's brand-loyal children will be going crazy for the £429 Xbox One this Christmas (it's due for release in November). Yes, that's how much it's going to be. The Play Station 4 undercuts it by £80, at £349, but does not include their camera add on. So there is a lot of money to be invested here. And as a friend rightly pointed out, he is a lot less inclined to spend another £50 on a game, that after a period of time, (either after completion or out of boredom), he cannot sell on to get a bit of money towards their next purchase.

Here at the studio we would love to hear your thoughts on this. I may have opened a can of worms, but who doesn't love a good debate? Leave us a comment or tweet us @ubd_studio



Source of Information:
http://ubersocialmedia.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/sonys-social-agility-thwarts-new-xbox-one/
http://www.wpcentral.com/lets-talk-xbox-drm
http://www.neowin.net/news/anonymous-xbox-engineer-explains-drm-and-microsofts-xbox-one-intentions
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-07-xbox-ones-used-game-policies-to-lie-with-publishers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22850409

Is austerity the new luxury?

An example of the austerity trend from
local jewellery brand, Twopenny Lane.

The financial climate is still tough, and the trends in the economy have been reflected in trends within the packaging industry. Design has been stripped back, muted and simplified, initially to reduce cost in packaging production, but it appears now this has become accepted as 'trendy', but why? Because we think it sits well our price sensitive audience, or conversely, because we think it's the new sign of luxury?








As with everything, there are several sides to this debate. First let's assume that we are designing with the cash strapped economy in mind. Let's suggest that gold still means luxurious and that

Benefit's 'Great Gatsby' inspired collection.

flamboyancy is the way to sell luxury products. Look at The Great Gatsby for example. The Guardian hit the nail on the head when they said that Baz Luhrmann's latest offering is "celebrating opulence". The jewellery for the film was designed by Tiffany, the costumes by Prada, everything about the film screams luxury, and some companies are riding on that wave. Take Benefit cosmetics and their 1920's-inspired limited edition packaging. The luxury cosmetics industry never ditched their metallic, intricately designed boxes, velvet covers and superfluous layers of packaging, for butchers twine and a brown paper bag, yet they are still selling products by the bucket load. They know their products have value and people will pay for it. Fact. So with that said, luxury is the new luxury.

The new Leona Lewis collection from The Body Shop.

So now let's look at another side of the argument. This might be a little controversial, but are we the only ones who think that some of the Benefit packaging looks a little cheap? When you compare it to a brand like The Bodyshop, who have stripped their packaging right back to allow the product to take centre stage, Benefit's packaging just looks a bit much. The Bodyshop have not lost their personality by being more reserved with their designs, they have simply aligned themselves with the austerity trend. Although it is not technically a luxury brand, the price point is towards the higher end of high street make-up brands, making this brand a bit of a luxury when financial times are hard.






Looking at some of the greats in graphic design, such as Herb Lubalin, it's easy to see why design austerity can be such a successful strategy for a brand.  He has been described as proving that "to be effective, all you need is a typeface and a good idea" (Adrian Shaughnessy), removing the need for all the excessive elements of design. Furthermore, it has been argued that because of a change in attitudes towards 'organic' and 'pure' products, (both of which are becoming increasingly important in the cosmetics industry), consumers now associate luxury products with packaging featuring quirky graphics, hand-written styles of text, less focus on colour, and more on texture. In times of austerity, brand loyalty is easily swayed. Packaging plays such a huge role in consumer decision making, and getting that right for your potential, (and existing), customers is paramount.

The power of the typeface. The development of the food wall, designed by Herb Lubalin and Tom Carnase for Lou Dorfsman, director of design at CBS in 1966.

Finally there's the argument that people will buy what people will buy, regardless of the economic situation, or trends in packaging. Suppose that with or without the pomp and ceremony of the golden YSL box that people would still buy the product because they "simply can't live without it", ask the majority of women who own Touche Éclat how many they have bought, and whether they pay that much attention to the packaging!

However we believe that, when a consumer is in the market for a new product, your packaging plays too much of a part in purchasing decisions to be ignored. Once that purchase becomes habit, packaging plays a lesser role. But surely you always want to be attracting new customers, so packaging always matters.

We'd love to hear your thoughts on this, how do you think the economy has affected luxury packaging, if at all? Are you more attracted to the 'shiny' or the quirky?

Sources of information:
http://www.packagingnews.co.uk/design/markets/a-quest-for-luxury-in-austere-times-markets-luxury-packaging/ 
http://www.printmag.com/interviews/designer-for-the-age-of-austerity-adrian-shaughnessy-on-herb-lubalins-life-and-work/  
http://www.jkrglobal.com/design-gazette/flapper-fabulous/#comments

Love? Consumerism? Or because we love consumerism?

Cupcakes in the studio (baked by Lucy)

So it's that time of year again, when people go out of their way to show that special someone how much they care with an overpriced teddy bear or a dozen red roses that cost a fortune. Valentine's Day causes such a stir, with retail businesses loving every second of our need to find the perfect card and gift. Quite often we do this last minute, despite the weeks of warnings around us in every shop we visit.







But why Valentine's Day? Where did it come from? 
And why are we so 'in love' with it?
 
The origins of Valentine's Day could go as far back as the Roman Times, however there are many stories of St. Valentine, and so the true roots of the day of love are still a mystery. Written Valentine's started to increase in popularity in the 1400s, and in the UK the day has been celebrated since the 17th Century.

Now, in the 21st Century the once humble sentiment of Valentine's Day is worth millions of pounds. According to EZBOB, you can expect the average consumer to be spending around £76 on gifts and cards. And if that consumer is female, she may even be buying gifts for her children, pets, or her friends!

Buying in to Valentine's
 
The biggest money maker is cards, with 60% of money spent on Valentine's Day lining the pockets of companies such as Hallmark. But florists, restaurants, and confectioners also get their fair share of revenue. Amazon are even offering same-day-delivery on the day itself, for those forgetful ones amongst us!

We buy into it every year, but are we doing it because we want to treat the one we love, or because it's forced down our necks? Valentine's Day is consumerism in its perfect form, everyone scrambling over each other to wow their significant others with gifts, driven by the hype caused by retailers. And, let's face it, we're all suckers for a good gimmick. But, as The Gauntlet points out, isn't every purchase decision you make just consumerism? The car you drive, your choice of coffee shop, the shoes on your feet, you had been given choices for all these items, and consumerism lead your decisions.

Let's look at it from the other perspective: brands. Without a brand, you have no identity, and without an identity, you're not very likely to have a consumer, let alone lots of them! And without a consumer, how do you expect to take advantage of consumerism? The simple answer is you can't. Your brand is everything! It will cause people to dismiss you or inspire them to queue down the street. Getting it right is paramount, especially when it's a necessity to stand out from the crowd, and on a day like Valentine's Day, that is a must!

If you feel like having a consumerism-free Valentine's Day, why not strip it back and make something for that special person in your life, or those special people if you're all about sharing the love. Here in the studio we are celebrating with cupcakes!

We hope that whatever you decide to do, you have a lovely day. Tweet us with you plans @ubd_studio


Sources of information:
http://www.history.com/topics/valentines-day/
http://www.thegauntlet.ca/story/valentines-day-and-consumerism
http://www.ezbob.com/valentines-day-consumerism-at-its-best/