Let’s talk about the Ten Rules of Omni Media Gaming and do some handicapping of platforms and game publishers, to see how well positioned they are for the emergence of OMG.

1.         Less is More.  Advantage goes to mobile and casual game publishers who grew up doing this.  Console, boxed PC and MMO publishers are at a big disadvantage because their brands stand for hardcore immersion.

2.         Socializing.  Current advantage goes to publishers and platforms that enable virality through virtual worlds, social networks and the iPhone.  Console and PC publishers are again behind the curve, and so are the casual game portals that are too much like retail stores.

3.         Convenience.  Big advantage to mobile publishers because mobile devices are the ultimate in convenience and “thin clients”.  Similarly, web services including social games and virtual worlds are capable of making the transition to mobile as the mobile web gets established.  Publishers of conventional web downloadable games, MMOs and boxed games are at a disadvantage because their game files are enormous and not portable.

4.         “Checking In”.  Even the consoles now have online communities but the long-term advantage will go to game publishers that are cross-platform and “in the cloud” rather than being platform-specific.  This is wide open because nobody is yet truly cross-platform or legitimately operating on the SaaS (Software as a Service) model.

5.         Ubiquity.  There is a short list of classic games that, like Tetris, add brand power on top of ubiquity.  But to grow the market it will take many original new games that have mass appeal and that are worth talking about with your friends.  Hence the long-term advantage will go to publishers of the best original casual games.  Again the console, PC and MMO publishers lose the edge because they stand for high performance, not ubiquity.

6.         Short Sessions.  Because they have been doing this for years, the big advantage goes to publishers of the best original mobile and casual games.  Social game companies have been doing this with the so-called “hamster games” but are trying to improve their game design skills.  Once again the console, PC and MMO companies are in the wrong position both in terms of brands and technology.

7.         Personalization.  The virtual worlds and social gaming companies have the lead, but every game company does this to some extent and understands the principles.

8.         Games as a service.  Companies that already operate client-server networked games should have the advantage here, but I don’t believe that brands, technology and skills from an MMO will translate into success with Omni Games as a Service.  Also, all of the network game companies are entirely too native and dug in on particular platforms, ranging from Xbox LIVE to Facebook or even the iPhone.  To succeed with Games as a Service a publisher has to be cross-platform, an area where some mobile publishers have the edge because they have already organized their technology to deal with device fragmentation.

9.         Cross-platform.  Today, nobody really has scaled a product line or a major service across all the relevant gaming platforms, so this concept is wide open.  But again the clear edge goes to companies that already have a development process that plans for all platforms in advance.

10.        Access points.  A big edge here for companies that are already accustomed to free games that are delivered from a server.  Many of the larger and more mature game companies don’t believe you can make money this way, so they are out of position.  This is true whether they are virtual worlds, MMOs, PC, console or even casual web game companies:  all of them want you to purchase and install a large client on one specific platform that will be your only access point.