Sure enough, the year after the Wii controller made its debut, Sony announced that the Sixaxis controller would include motion sensing – and demonstrated it with WarHawk. Later Lair would try to incorporate motion controls as well. Both games failed – and Sony went back to the drawing board. Now we’ve got the PlayStation Move hitting shelves and I have to wonder if it’s déjà vu all over again.

The Move is certainly more precise than either the Wii or the Sixaxis controllers, but it’s hardly intuitive. And the aesthetic design of the controller is, well, questionable – just check out my wife’s reaction the first time she saw it in this Gamasutra column. Those are key factors in attracting the mainstream world. And with Sony stumbling on both, it sets off warning bells.

After being caught off guard by the overwhelming success of things like Wii Fit, I’m nowhere near foolish enough to predict or believe that PlayStation Move is going to be a failure. Sony stays focused on the long-term and has achieved great success by doing so. But I suspect the launch of the Move is going to be a difficult one due to a combination of the controller’s price, the hesitancy of the casual gamer to be an early adopter and the indifference the core gaming community has shown so far.

I’m also curious how Nintendo will react if Move does begin to gain traction, and how the system will compare to Microsoft’s Kinect. One well-timed price cut could be enough to take the wind out of Sony’s sails once more.

The amount of ink wasted bemoaning the sheer volume of crappy movie-based games is copious – and I promise this isn’t more of the same. In fact, for the first time games and movies may have found a good way to co-exist.

Word came out this week from TG Daily that when Disney releases the Blu-ray version of Toy Story 3, it will include the game tie-in with the film.

It’s one of those moves that is so obvious once it happens, you begin to wonder why others haven’t take advantage of this strategy before. Sure, let movie-based games have a life of their own when the film is in theaters. But why not give them a second bite at the apple when the DVD comes out as well, instead of wasting away in deep discount bins?

Publishers are just starting to figure out that there are profits to be mined in their back catalog. Historically, of course, once a game ran its life at retail (a cycle that has gotten shorter and shorter in the last 8-10 years), it was forgotten from a corporate sales perspective.

The launch of GameTap slapped the industry across the face – and showed them that just as films had many lives after their initial theater run (pay-per-view, home video, initial network rights, syndicated network rights, etc.), so too could games.

Services like Good Old Games and Xbox Live Arcade further give publishers a way to capitalize on old titles, but because monetizing those titles hasn’t been an immediate cash bonanza, not a lot of publishers have looked for other opportunities.

Disney, though, could be showing them the way – assuming this report is accurate. But heck, even if by some chance it’s not, the idea is still a good one.

Movie-based games don’t have long tails. They get an initial sales pop when interest is high in the movie. Then, after a few months of horrid sales, they might see a slight bump when the DVD comes out, but it’s nothing like the first. By working with studios to combine the game with the film, the studios get to charge a premium, publishers see a real surge in game sales (yes at a lower price, but I’m willing to bet the overall revenue and profits would still be higher) and consumers get another added bonus.

Disney, of course, made Toy Story 3 – the film and the game – making the integration an easy one. Think any publisher is willing to endure the headaches of dealing with a studio to follow their lead?

There is, of course, the pending Supreme Court case – Schwarzenegger v. EMA. In its October session, Justices will hear arguments on whether states can restrict the sale of violent games to minors. It’s a pop culture story that has both business and entertainment elements – exactly the sort of thing news producers love. The reports that surround the case will bring out the pundits, who will be eager to showcase things like the “No Russian” scene in Modern Warfare 2, RapeLay and whatever controversial elements they can pull from any more recent releases.

Meanwhile, it’s an election year. And if history has taught us anything, it’s that politicians love to bring up video game violence when they’re on the campaign trail. It’s an easy way to polarize crowds – and it’s video friendly (which once again appeals to the media outlets who cover those politicians).

All of this comes right as television stations enter a sweeps period, when ratings are critical. You might notice that every November, February and May, local newscasts have lots of stories about strip clubs, easy ways to save money and “shocking” scandals. They’re meant to drive viewership, which means higher advertising rates. And national media is no different. Games are simply a more national phenomenon.

What does it mean for the industry? Financially, it’s often a boost, as games get free marketing. But reputation-wise, it’s a step backwards. The video game industry has worked hard to achieve parity with film and television in people’s minds – as that represents a legitimacy of sorts.

Data points disproving the link between game violence and real world violence don’t help, unfortunately. This is TV – the theater of the spectacular (even in newscasts). Bottom line? If the gaming world can’t come up with a passionate defender whose personality is large enough to rival the hyperbole-filled opponents before violent video games get placed under the media microscope again, it’s going to be locked in this cycle for a long time to come.

Extended Play is a bi-weekly column examining trends and upcoming events in the video game world. For more articles by Chris Morris, be sure to visit his blog.

Valve Software kicked off the hybrid developer/distributor model in 2003 with Steam, and it wasn’t long before Electronic Arts and Activision followed suit with their own online stores, giving them more control of (and higher margins from) the sale of their games and in-game content. Microsoft and Sony, meanwhile, straddle the fence with the storefronts that are built into the Xbox 360 and PS3.

But the latest – and strangest – entrant to this mash-up comes at things from the other end of the spectrum, though. GameStop recently announced plans to buy social and casual games maker Kongregate – the second developer acquisition from the brick and mortar powerhouse within a year. (The company bought Jolt Online Gaming, a maker of browser-based games, in late 2009.)

Kongregate has 10 million monthly players who spent 23 million hours per month on the site. That’s a lot of eyeballs sticking around for a long time. And it’s a safe bet that the company will make every effort to convert those people into customers – but it’s not likely to end there.

GameStop previously announced that it wants to be an aggregator of digital game content over time. This could mean that games from Kongregate could end up on the company’s retail site, increasing the amount of time that people spend there – and giving GameStop better intelligence on the types of games people like, which will allow them to better customize the shopping experience.

It’s a sound beginning for the strategy, but one that leaves a lot of questions nonetheless. Will people buy more from the company online just because they can play games there? Or, as digital distribution expands, are customers ultimately going to be lured by whoever has the best price?

Despite the questions, the Kongregate acquisition certainly makes more sense than the launch of GameStop’s latest Facebook game – Gangsta Zombies. To play, consumers have to pick up a promotional game card at any U.S. GameStop location. The company is also offering a $10 pre-paid card for premium in-game content.

I get it. They’re hoping to get a piece of the microtransaction pie that’s lining the pockets of Zynga and other social gaming companies. But by requiring people to drop by their store, they’re shooting themselves in the foot. The key to social gaming is convenience – and there are a plethora of other titles on the market. Having to go into a store just to be able to play a Facebook game is the antithesis of convenient.

GameStop may be indeed on the right path with its push to add in-house development to its arsenal, but it seems to be taking a few bizarre detours along the way.

Extended Play is a bi-weekly column examining trends and upcoming events in the video game world. For more articles by Chris Morris, be sure to visit his blog.