[arg_discuss] arg list

[Brooke Thompson]

Dan wrote:
 >At first blush, the IGDA is for game developers, which is probably  
one reason why we're having problems.

Yes, that's true - IGDA is for game developers, but I don't see why  
that's an issue. Game developers often choose to create documents for  
and speak outside of their little circle of game developer buddies.  
And, beyond that, game developers often have knowledge that is useful  
to those outside of the game industry. A little outreach isn't such a  
bad thing, especially for ARGs which can have their hands in so many  
other cookie jars. mmmm cookies.


Mike wrote:
 > So does that mean everything produced by it should be for that  
audience? If so, then that's a nice specific audience to help narrow  
down what it should be, no?

I don't think so. Do game developers care what sort of companies have  
used ARGs for promotional purposes? It seems like it would be more  
valuable to people who are researching branded ARGs for some reason.  
Discussion about the list hasn't talked about the platforms used or  
genre of storytelling or anything of that nature - it is a list of  
brands and args that have promoted them. So, from my perspective, the  
people that would benefit from it the most are those that would be  
looking at those sorts of things. I know that you were attempting to  
look at who we wanted to make a list for and then provide the  
appropriate content, but it seems to me that someone's gone and  
gathered the content and so now it's time to figure out who would best  
benefit from it and frame it in that sense.

So, who would benefit from such a list and how would they like to see  
it? Slides seem like a great way to go for the ad types out there and  
maybe we could have a page on ARGology that's echoes the information  
and points to the slides.



Now, the question that seems to be hiding under both of your comments  
relates to the aims of the ARG SIG. According to the site, we aim...  
(t)o bring together a wide spectrum of experts in the state-of-the-art  
of the ARG genre, and to facilitate the sharing of their knowledge and  
promotion of ARG's to mainstream games developers. This SIG will also  
serve as an initial contact-point for the many organizations who have  
trouble knowing where to look but want to work with ARG developers  
both professional and hobbyist.

Is that still the case and/or is that the best phrasing?








On Apr 6, 2009, at 11:13 AM, Michael Monello wrote:


> So does that mean everything produced by it should be for that  

> audience? If so, then that's a nice specific audience to help narrow  

> down what it should be, no?

>

>

> On 4/6/09 10:29 AM, "Dan Hon" <dan at sixtostart.com> wrote:

>

> At first blush, the IGDA is for game developers, which is probably one

> reason why we're having problems.

> --

> Dan Hon, CEO, Six to Start

> m: +44 7870 600 828

> t: +44 33 3340 7490, f: +44 33 3340 7494

>

>

>

>

> On 6 Apr 2009, at 15:25, Michael Monello wrote:

>

>> Without stepping into the definition issue, I'd like to know what is

>> the goal of this list and who is the audience? Is it a resource to

>> CMOs, brand managers, marketers and potential clients to show them

>> what has done and perhaps inspire more new projects? If so, then I

>> think a more effective approach would be a self-guided, nicely

>> designed PowerPoint presentation that is uploaded, properly tagged,

>> and attributed to the ARG Sig to SlideShare. Something that a

>> forward thinking member of a brand team might be able to present to

>> others would be more effective at the above goal, but I don't know

>> the goal of this exercise.

>>

>> Before we even get into what the content is, we should probably look

>> at who the audience is and then determine what the format/content

>> should be. If I had clarity on at least that level, I feel like I

>> might be able to contribute and I imagine others would as well.

>>

>> Best,

>>

>> -Mike

>>

>> On 4/6/09 10:12 AM, "Brian Clark" <bclark at gmdstudios.com> wrote:

>>

>> Christy, I guess I just feel like we've been down this road before.

>> Such

>> lists exist or could be supplemented. It includes stuff that could

>> stimulate

>> debate, and doesn't include stuff that could stimulate debate, but

>> doesn't

>> really by itself add much to the body of published knowledge.

>>

>> Cristy wrote: "I'm trying to be diplomatic here and suggesting that a

>> curated listing may do a better job of avoiding the 'what is an ARG'

>> debate."

>>

>> I understand that, but then the curator is cementing the definition

>> anyway

>> by that curation. This is part of what has gotten us into the

>> situation we

>> are, IMHO, and could prove counter-productive. Instead, to me, it

>> feels like

>> clarity to labels is something fairly appropriate for the SIG to

>> tackle ...

>> and the SIG working together on something seems to also be what the

>> SIG

>> needs. What we need is a new way to work on that problem, rather

>> than just

>> another list.

>>

>>

>> Brian

>>

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

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

>> ] On

>> Behalf Of Christy Dena

>> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 9:57 AM

>> To: 'Discussion list of the IGDA ARG SIG'

>> Subject: Re: [arg_discuss] arg list

>>

>> Hey Brian,

>>

>> Perhaps I wasn't clear. I don't think we should use the list of all

>> the

>> projects Hugh listed. Instead, I'm suggesting a selection of those

>> on Hugh's

>> list and elsewhere. Although there is a lot of disagreement about  

>> what

>> qualifies as an ARG, I think we're in agreement that Hugh's list

>> includes

>> non-ARG projects (Hugh was most likely making a broad sweep for the

>> first

>> draft).

>>

>> I'm trying to be diplomatic here and suggesting that a curated

>> listing may

>> do a better job of avoiding the 'what is an ARG' debate. That

>> discussion is

>> important -- and has been a good reawakener, as Brooke says, about

>> the ARGdb

>> -- but a definition of an ARG does not need to be determined for  

>> these

>> resources.

>>

>> Best,

>> Christy

>>

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

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

>> ] On

>> Behalf Of Brian Clark

>> Sent: Monday, 6 April 2009 23:21

>> To: 'Discussion list of the IGDA ARG SIG'

>> Subject: Re: [arg_discuss] arg list

>>

>> Not to take away from Hugh's list at all, but I personally think

>> we're once

>> again dodging what "it is" so you'll end up with "a list of brands

>> that have

>> commissioned something that someone thought was close enough to

>> being an

>> ARG."

>>

>> If:

>>

>> Christy: "The aim is to provide information for companies who are

>> considering commissioning an ARG."

>>

>> How does this help accomplish that?

>>

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

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

>> ] On

>> Behalf Of Christy Dena

>> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 8:18 AM

>> To: 'Discussion list of the IGDA ARG SIG'

>> Subject: Re: [arg_discuss] arg list

>>

>>

>> Hello Hugh: Well I don't think you expected to have created such

>> controversy! I can see you've done a lot of work in putting that

>> listing

>> together. Fantastic. :)

>>

>> I actually don't think we need to figure out some clustering system

>> for this

>> resource (elsewhere, yes, that would be interesting). The intention

>> behind

>> the Brands resource is to show there are many companies/brands that

>> have

>> commissioned ARGs. What is important therefore is the company/artist

>> and

>> producer or service and how many ARGs they have commissioned.

>> Microsoft, for

>> instance, have commissioned ARGs on several occasions. It is not a

>> listing

>> of ARGs for media properties (eg: A.I.) but the companies that

>> commissioned

>> them (eg: Microsoft). The aim is to provide information for

>> companies who

>> are considering commissioning an ARG.

>>

>> A quick scan through some of my files reveals some big names around

>> the

>> world: McDonalds; Microsoft (Game Studio); NBC; CBS; AudiUSA; Bungie

>> Studios; MTV Brazil; Superinteressante; Deutsche Telekom; EMI

>> Germany; RTL

>> (German Television Broadcaster); Droemer Knaur Verlag (German

>> publisher);

>> Microsoft Germany; Nokia; NBC Universal; Fantasporto (Portugal);

>> Swedish

>> Television (SVT); ABC; Yahoo!7; BBC; Sony; Activision; Electronic

>> Arts; ABC

>> Family Television; General Motors.

>>

>> So, rather than list ALL branded entertainment ARGs (and waddle into

>> the

>> murky water of what is an ARG), I suggest a page that purports to  

>> only

>> offering a sampling.

>>

>> The same with the independent ARGs. I think a sample listing of

>> independent

>> ARGs like Sammeeeees, Eldritch Errors, Chasing the Wish and their

>> sequels,

>> Lockjaw, Metacortechs and so on would be enough. The aim of this

>> resource is

>> not to offer a comprehensive listing of independent ARGs (there are

>> other

>> great resources out there as we know!), but to show how ARGs exist

>> outside

>> of branded entertainment...and that there are high-quality,

>> successful and

>> artistically diverse independent ARGs out there! So, what about an

>> arbitrary

>> number, say 15?, of independents that are representative of older

>> and more

>> recent ARGs. Suggestions?

>>

>> This is how I would recommend progressing.

>>

>> Hugh, how do you feel about this approach? I would work with you to

>> assist

>> with the sampling...and whomever else would like to be involved! We

>> could

>> utilize (and cite) yours and existing ARG databases and go from  

>> there.

>>

>> Wohoo! Thanks Hugh for taking the time!

>>

>> Best,

>> Christy

>>

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

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

>> ] On

>> Behalf Of marcus.helm at gmail.com

>> Sent: Friday, 3 April 2009 21:04

>> To: arg_discuss at igda.org

>> Subject: [arg_discuss] arg list

>>

>> I've shared a document with you called "arg list":

>> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pE0znztln2kmQruQyplrzeA&inv=arg_discu

>> ss at igda.org

>>

>> It's not an attachment -- it's stored online at Google Docs. To open

>> this

>> document, just click the link above.

>>

>> As mentioned earlier this week, I have begun compiling spreadsheet of

>> ARG's towards getting a listing of the all the brands that have  

>> worked

>> with ARGs as well as a listing of independent ARG's for ARGology.

>> Its attached here as an Excel spreadsheet and is very much in the

>> draft

>> stage.

>>

>>

>> I urge one and all to cast an eye over it, correct mistakes and fill

>> any missing info including the many games that I appologise for not

>> including already. Im also open to persuasion about what constituties

>> and ARG as there are likely to be some contentious inclusions.

>> _______________________________________________

>> 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

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> 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

>>

>>

>>

>> ---

>> Mike Monello

>> Partner, Campfire

>> 62 White Street, 3E

>> New York, NY 10013

>> 212-612-9600

>> http://www.campfirenyc.com

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> 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

>

>

>

> ---

> Mike Monello

> Partner, Campfire

> 62 White Street, 3E

> New York, NY 10013

> 212-612-9600

> http://www.campfirenyc.com

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

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