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

[Ian Millington]

I think the current standard model of ARGs has many similarities with
interactive fiction (text adventures). There is a narrative which,
abstractly, is split into a linked series of areas (rooms in IF). ARG
players have a narrative area they are in at any point in time and it
defines the set of actions they can try: often they are aware of the
'locked doors' leading forward from the current area. The challenge is
to work out the combination of actions, time and puzzle solutions
required to unlock the next area, and progress the narrative. There is
little point returning to a previous room to play with a solved
puzzle. Old puzzles are solved for everyone. And often it is even
worse, the previous rooms cease to exist (i.e the resources needed to
create that situation are redirected to the current room), so you
can't even visit past puzzles for tourism value.

The problem with agency in ARGs is that whoever unlocks the next room
allows everyone to progress. And a player who's paid $50 to join an
ARG, is very unlikely to be the one who enables that progress. The
more successful the game (in terms of raw numbers), the less likely
any individual is to have any affect on the game world. Which is,
clearly, not something I want to pay $50 for.

IMHO any solution would have to put people in their own rooms, with
their own challenges and individual agency, while keeping the overall
collaborative feeling of the ARG. As Michael wrote, that is a radical
restructure of the mechanism of the ARG.

Maybe it isn't a coincidence that interactive fiction is also a genre
that has almost no direct monetization. But then again, that probably
pushes the analogy too far.

Ian.



On 01/01/2008, Michael Monello <mmonello at campfirenyc.com> wrote:

> Why does paying have to be optional in a non-ad supported model?

>

> I think one issue is that ARGs haven't presented a real value

> proposition to players that would justify them paying for the

> experience the way they will drop $60 on a PS3 game, which is why the

> ad-supported model has been most successful in terms of both

> generating audiences and being a viable business proposition for those

> who want to be paid for their work

>

> I don't think ARGs will be able to get to that level without radically

> restructuring how they are designed and played, which means rejecting

> the modes and styles that have come before (and as a subset rejecting

> many of the features that hard-core ARG players think they want) in

> order to create a more accessible experience without losing the

> elements that make ARGs unique.

>

> 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 9:28 AM, Brooke Thompson wrote:

>

> >> 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

> >

> >

> > I don't want to say that it hasn't been done, but I can't think of any

> > examples of micro-transactions in ARGs and I've been looking for

> > them as I

> > have several games in my head that use such a model. The challenge

> > that I've

> > found is not one of getting funding (I haven't gotten to that point,

> > but

> > don't imagine that it would be difficult) or in a game that can

> > continue

> > month to month, but in maintaining a balance of power.

> >

> > Any micro-transaction will change the power structure in the community

> > where, up to now, the currency of power has been activity based.

> > Whether

> > that activity is interacting with the characters, sorting through game

> > websites for clues, participating in a live event, doing research, or

> > creating & maintaining player resources, people who are more active

> > have

> > more power either within the social/community structure or the game

> > structure (in some cases, both). This dynamic works well for

> > collaborative

> > information based games, such as ARGs. I think it is possible to add

> > micro-transactions and believe that I might have one idea that will

> > work and

> > others that, with a bit of playing around with, may work, but

> > maintaining

> > that balance while keeping the micro-transactions optional (a

> > necessity, in

> > my mind), is the biggest challenge to the design.

> >

> > Brooke

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > 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

>