Enough about merging mediums, what about merging industries?

For the past two and a half years I've been closely watching a rather interesting event - the crossover of creative industry.

Just last week, Nintendo announced its forming of an animation studio for feature production. This, of course, is a new twist to recent news items - mostly around how Hollywood and its children industries have gravitated towards the gaming industry, knowing that a portion of their audience has sided with interactive entertainment as part of their pasttime appetite. Various entertainment corporations have created their own "games division" - some being fairly successful, others not so. While that trend is somewhat old news (and has also fluctuated over the past five years), I've kept an eye on the other end of the spectrum - the games industry exploring its boundaries.

Undeniably, the games industry has become a powerful force in the last 20 years. With this, we've seen game developers and publishers become large corporate machines, that have evolved their identity over the course of time, shifting their business models as well.

In particular is Electronic Arts. A small studio back in the plastic-bag computer games of the 80s, they quickly jumped ahead with classic games such as M.U.L.E. and SimCity. As EA evolved, so did its business, branching into different brands and showing off a slow progression of the corporations' trajectory. In addition, several name iterations of EA appeared -- EA Games, EA Studios, EA Entertainment, etc. - painting a picture of how the company is growing. Last month, EA developed its own record label, partnering with an small publisher Cherry Lane Music - and extending its reach. While this isn't a move to compete with larger music labels such as the Sonys and UMGs of the world, it allows EA to operate on its own without needing to pay heed (and $$$) to music rights and top name talent.

Understandably, this is EA - the largest game publisher in the world. But I believe its a telltale sign of the entertainment industry, which is why the Nintendo move is of note as well. Each see clearly see that they are developing an entity that encompasses a growing audience - and one that will only expand in the future.

So, what does this all have to do with Machinima? Machinima, in its definition, represents the how and why these businesses are coming together. Filmmaking bleeding into animation, which in turn, bleeds into interactive development - and all the variations in between. Thus, we see game publishers forming animation studios, movie studios developing game divisions, etc. I guess this is why I believe in Machinima so much - its evident that as an artform it represents the crossover of entertainment creation. Of course, the creation of entertainment is ultimately where the foundation of these corporations exist. While, I don't believe Machinima will replace currently existing creative techniques, it is interesting to note how the industries are shifting/merging in parallel to the mediums.

Expect more events in the next year to further this process. I anticipate we'll see additional partnerships (if not outright mergers and purchases) between film/broadcast/games/animation studios/software developers - one only needs to consider Alias' purchase of Kaydara earlier this year. It will be interesting to see what transpires. Will 2005 will be the year we see SoftImage partner with Valve to intergrate the Source engine with XSI? Or even larger, a possible partnership between EA and Universal Studios? Stay tuned.