[arg_discuss] is ARG just a marketing technique to the press?

[Michael Monello]

Happy New Year, everyone!

To me, the issue that needs to be solved for ARGs to go mainstream is  
to figure out a way that people can work through a game on their own  
schedule, while still keeping the collaborative/community aspects  
front and center.

Sure, it's easy to keep an ARG going for months and months, but the  
real problem is getting someone to join three months into a game in  
progress when the player has to not only navigate characters and  
stories that are well-known to everyone else, but they also have to  
find a safe place within a very tight-knit community that makes them  
fee comfortable enough to contribute, even in the early stages of  
their experience.

One potential solution is to structure an ARG like a television series  
-- not just seasons, like Clark is doing with EE, but episodes as  
well. Short, repeatable "episodes" that allow players to get involved  
while having more control over how and when. There are many potential  
solutions most of which break the traditional model of an ARG, but I  
believe you have to solve that problem before you can rely on micro- 
transactions to provide anything close to real financial support for a  
game.

Best,

Michael Monello
Partner, Campfire
62 White Street, 3W
New York, NY 10013
212-612-9600
http://www.campfirenyc.com



On Dec 31, 2007, at 3:39 AM, Patrick O'Luanaigh wrote:


> RE: Ian's comments about monetization

>

> Does anyone know whether Perplex City broke even and ended up making  

> profit?

> For me, this was one of the bravest and most creative ARGs I've seen  

> so far,

> but I've assumed that because the team didn't go straight into a  

> sequel, it

> wasn't the successful monetization that Michael Smith had hoped for.  

> For me,

> selling puzzle cards at retail doesn't sound like a monetization  

> solution

> that could support more than a few ARGs. My view is that whilst the  

> majority

> of ARGs remain short, free advertiser-funded promotional vehicles  

> (despite

> the best efforts of the creative people behind them) it's going to  

> be hard

> to either:

>

> a) get more mainstream awareness and recognition for this exciting  

> area

> or

> b) find a monetization model that gets players paying to play in  

> some form

>

> The route that interests my company most is taken from the games  

> industry,

> as demonstrated by the superb "KartRider" game from Asia, which is  

> worth

> looking into if you haven't heard about it. It's a superb game that  

> was

> given away for free, but makes lots of money from micro-transactions;

> selling small objects, better clothing, modifications for your kart  

> and so

> on. The key to this was getting lots of people to play the game over  

> and

> over again - once you have a large community playing repeatedly,  

> then it

> seems possible to start charging them small amounts to make their  

> experience

> even better. In this model, the biggest challenges seems to be  

> creating an

> ARG that doesn't end after a month or two (not an insurmountable  

> obstacle),

> and getting the funding to create the game in the first place. Anyone

> agree/disagree? Has anyone tried the micro-transaction model?

>

> Patrick, nDreams

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: arg_discuss-bounces at igda.org [mailto:arg_discuss-bounces at igda.org 

> ] On

> Behalf Of Ian Millington

> Sent: 27 December 2007 15:36

> To: Discussion list of the IGDA ARG SIG

> Subject: Re: [arg_discuss] is ARG just a marketing technique to the  

> press?

>

> Great discussion.

>

> I guess like many other readers I read Brian's mail and thought - yeah

> how unfair, isn't it obvious that  this is the start of something

> significant?.

>

> But is it unfair? Can you think of another creative discipline that:

>

> a) Is appreciated widely (including by the media) in its own right.

> b) has no proven business model for direct monetization.

>

> Nearest I came up with was graphic design, but even then I wouldn't

> say it was widely appreciated in its own right (and certainly wasn't

> appreciated in its own right for half a century, despite considerably

> greater ubiquity than ARGs).

>

> For ARGs (b) is still the 800lb gorilla in the corner of the living

> room. As someone who is not interested in advergaming, but has

> (unsuccessfully) tried to get commercial ARG material funded, I know

> from bitter experience that ARGs are perceived as marketing gimmicks

> by the mainstream games industry as well as the media. The chalk

> outline of Majestic is till tiptoed around with an air of disdain.

>

> I have a depressing sense that unless we crack b - work out how to

> reliably monetise our effort successfully for its own sake - that ARGs

> might be destined to languish in the 'marketing gimmick and academic

> curiosity' for a long time.

>

> Ian.

>

>

>

> On 27/12/2007, Brian Clark <bclark at gmdstudios.com> wrote:

>>> 1) The no-longer appropriate bundling of marketing and non-art.

>>

>> I'm working on a piece regarding this, but sadly the answer I offer  

>> up

> isn't

>> a simple one as it requires providing an alternate framework for  

>> creating

>> sets from this work. In many ways, the complete misreading of "Blair

> Witch"

>> cause-and-effect lead marketers to mistake one (fan building) for the

> other

>> (marketing) -- even though those were two different phases, even for

> "Blair

>> Witch". There are other historical examples in play, but since Mike  

>> is

> here

>> and the BW case study is well (mis)known it is as good of a  

>> shortcut of

> that

>> bigger idea as I can offer up yet.

>>

>> Fan building and marketing can co-exist, but don't necessarily  

>> share the

>> same value structures. Fandom, though, can't be "faked" -- its  

>> appearance

> by

>> definition implies success in forming a connection between a  

>> creator and

> an

>> experiential participant. The disconnect between the implied goals  

>> of fan

>> creation and "mere marketing" are what we're seeing and what we're

> thinking.

>>

>>

>> People want some kind of taxonomy to feel safe with the world  

>> though, and

>> none of the taxonomies put forward articulate the question of intent.

>> Fortunately, it shouldn't have to; it only has to show a diversity of

>> intent, like any media or artform needs to. What craft it is  

>> applied to

>> (entertainment, news, advertising) is almost beside the point.

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> ARG_Discuss mailing list

>> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

>>

> _______________________________________________

> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

>

> _______________________________________________

> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss