tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13544268417617304092024-03-12T23:09:04.174+00:00The Armchair Designer's notepadDrunk-driving from the back seat.AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.comBlogger89125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-24129986311986572082014-12-02T14:18:00.000+00:002015-10-19T07:44:18.410+00:00PatreonMooseGate the pitfalls of 2.0 indie marketing.<div style="text-align: justify;">
Today's story is about what happens when a genY musician-cum-entrepreneur gets his wires a bit crossed whilst earnestly trying to do good work, and how marginally bad things can come from smart, generally nice people acting without (much) malice.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
First, let me get that out of the way : I'm a bit of a fan of <a href="http://www.pomplamoose.com/" target="_blank">Pomplamoose</a> as an art act. I randomly stumbled upon <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nataly_Dawn" target="_blank">Nataly Dawn</a> singing her take on Louise Labé's <i>Baise m'encor</i> sometime in 2009, which led me to her Pomplamoose duo act along <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Conte" target="_blank">Jack Conte</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I dig their music and stagecraft/videos, I also like what Conte's trying to do with <a href="http://www.patreon.com/" target="_blank">Patreon</a>,
and the pair of them is generally representative of the reasons why
I'll try to give the benefit of the doubt even to hipster-looking types,
as long as they're working at getting shit done.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>[In the interest of full disclosure, I'll state for the record I have zero stake in the
economic success of Pomplamoose, Patreon or any of the individuals and
companies mentioned here, beyond personal well-wishing.]</i></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/lJuKoPaSpOU?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Louise Labé is in da house, or something.</i></div>
<br />
<br />
Now, in case you're coming at this without prior knowledge, here's the backstory :<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Pomplamoose debuted in '08 and has seen growing popularity online since, thanks to their music and visual work, with their very active online presence in the form of vlogs and side projects not to be discounted. 6 years is a long time, you come to realize, when you find Pomplamoose has a friggin <a href="https://myspace.com/pomplamoosemusic" target="_blank">myspace page</a> !<br /> </li>
<li>Then Patreon was launched last year by Jack Conte and partner Sam Yam. <br />In a nutshell, Patreon is a subscription-style crowdfunding platform, which enables fans to act as patrons of the arts for their favorite bands, comic-book artists, podcasters, yni. People can either commit to a monthly fixed donation of their choice, staggered grant style, or pledge an amount of money towards any new work created / released by the artist(s) on a recurring basis (with a monthly cap). Patreon takes a reasonable (by today's standards) 5% cut on that.<br /> </li>
<li>This fall, Pomplamoose went on a month-long US tour of 24 shows across 23 cities, which by standard metrics for an indie band tour qualified as a success : they sold a lot of tickets and merch, filled their venues, and the audience seemed to generally be happy with the shows.<br /> </li>
<li>On Nov 24, Jack Conte <a href="https://medium.com/@jackconte/pomplamoose-2014-tour-profits-67435851ba37" target="_blank">went out and released</a> some of the financial details of the whole operation in the context of a postmortem / expose about the difficulties of running a <i>"mom and pop corner store"</i> music act. <br />…and the shit hit the fan.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Bob Lefsetz, a much-listened to (and rambunctious) voice in the music biz published a scalding commentary on the lacking economics of the Pomplamoose tour in his <a href="http://encore.celebrityaccess.com/index.php?encoreId=490&articleId=50109" target="_blank">Nov 26 <i>Leftsetz Letter</i></a> on Encore, annexing to it some comments from the many readers who apparently pushed Conte's postmortem his way.<br /> </li>
<li>This prompted a number of other people in and around the biz to chime in with their own take on <a href="http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/574-op-ed/" target="_blank">how Pomplamoose could fail to end in the black</a> after a successful tour, but perhaps most critically, some saw the whole financial disclosure stunt as a <a href="http://gawker.com/indie-musicians-viral-tour-diary-was-a-marketing-stunt-1665409710" target="_blank">manipulative marketing ploy</a> by Jack Conte to drive business to Patreon, accusing him of hiding his personal stake as CEO and co-founder of Patreon when he explains how hard it is for a band to make a living by touring.<br /> </li>
<li>Conte was not happy about that last part, and <a href="https://medium.com/@jackconte/bob-lefsetz-published-accusations-about-my-integrity-4a6d03bb099d" target="_blank">op-ed'ed his rebutta</a>l to accusations of dishonesty the next day on the same platform he used to release his original post-mortem.</li>
</ul>
Here, you're all caught up. Follow the links above for the full material, I intentionally left out some that would have been repetitive.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<object class="BLOGGER-youtube-video" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" data-thumbnail-src="https://ytimg.googleusercontent.com/vi/z9KMgg7T_sg/0.jpg" height="266" width="320"><param name="movie" value="https://youtube.googleapis.com/v/z9KMgg7T_sg&source=uds" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed width="320" height="266" src="https://youtube.googleapis.com/v/z9KMgg7T_sg&source=uds" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Not just covers, either.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I find myself largely agreeing with Bob Lefsetz and others to question Jack Conte's conclusions about Pomplamoose's tour ending in the red, namely that it's proof it's <i>too hard</i> to make it as a middle-tier artist on the road : in a nutshell, this tour could, and presumably should have turned a healthy profit without the need for the band and crew to sleep in vans and survive on ramen, and the fact it reportedly lost 12 grand out of 136K income is simply evidence of poor business management, not impossibly challenging economics.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Having watched a number of their videos, and knowing how much care and work they put in their visuals, I would nitpick on some of the criticisms made about the unnecessary expenses on lighting equipment, but some videos are out that make clear the stagecraft on their tour wasn't anything your average live music club couldn't handle with in-house gear or would demand a special lighting setup.</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/jnrb978tC40?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>True fact : some Pomplamoose songs are not in French !</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i> </i></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I don't think Jack Conte tanked the finances of his Pomplamoose tour on purpose to make a point, or that he cooked the numbers to prove the only path to monetary salvation for struggling indie bands was to enroll in Patreon.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Nonetheless, accusations of Conte's dishonesty and supposed attempts to hide his personal take in Patreon are worth taking a minute to discuss.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Conte's argument (in his rebuttal) that he didn't do anything to hide his involvement as not-just-a-user of Patreon kinda works for me : it's there for everyone to see on his personal public profiles, he's done promotion for Patreon and given plenty of interviews about it – Andy Cush was either lazy or disingenuous in his failure to do the homework for his Gawker piece (he since sorta acknowledged the fact in an article update) and that's plain bad journalism.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I also don't see malice in Conte not adding a full disclosure about his co-founder role in Patreon in the post-mortem : the financials tour breakdown was written from the perspective of Pomplamoose-the-band, not Jack Conte the Patreon co-founder, who had no investment in the tour's profitability (or lack thereof).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Either he overlooked pointing his interest in Patreon as self-evident (the intended readership of his postmortem presumably being reasonably educated about who Conte is), or he considered it, then figured bringing it up may muddy the waters when he's been going out of his way to keep the two separate – as pointed in his rebuttal, when he indicates taking zero salary from Patreon and instead being intent on making a living on his artist income alone (at this stage).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With that said, I don't think Conte is beyond criticism, here. My guess is he tried to make the best of a bad situation and it went somewhat poorly.</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/i7X8ZnmLfM0?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Do that on stage, nobody will gripe about the extra lights…</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<i> </i><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Finding his operation down 12 grand after a month of successful touring, with the main financial salvation for his band coming from his other venture (Patreon) may simply have reinforced Conte's belief that Patreon is a great idea (which it is) and is the only credible way for an indie band to make a buck besides iTunes sales and YouTube ads, since touring is doomed to be done at a net loss (which it doesn't have to be).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Coming to a wrong conclusion because it saves oneself self-criticism (Jack sucks at finance) and reinforces established prejudices (Patreon is the way to go) is not exactly unheard of, especially when you throw in the cookie of making a case for something you strongly hope to see succeed (people should see that Patreon is the way to go).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On a personal note, his rebuttal rubbed me the wrong way by not linking to <a href="http://encore.celebrityaccess.com/index.php?encoreId=490&articleId=50109" target="_blank">the source of the Bob Lefsetz piece he was responding to (on Encore)</a>,
and phrasing it in such a way as to imply Lefsetz endorsed the
accusations of cooking the numbers in the service of a marketing ploy
(which he didn't). It's hard to read that as anything but a kneejerk attempt at damning-by-association the valid criticisms made by Leftsetz (among others).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So yeah, possibly, Conte spun his yarn in a way that portrayed touring as financially more grim than he would have if he didn't have an alternative on hand, and certainly he does a disservice to aspiring live artists by failing to take away the proper lesson from his experience : a band can't make a buck from shows without being a bit careful with budget.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He also should have put a full disclosure about Patreon in his piece, and it would not even have been out of place to plug it in there if he had. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If anything, his biggest mistake may have been to post this way too early after the tour, as that's the sort of stuff one
should take notes on while it's hot, then let cool down before the
actual writeup.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That he failed to address any of the substantial critique about money management in his rebuttal is telling of Conte's state of mind at the time : while he clearly took offense at the attacks on his moral integrity, he didn't seem to take issue with the challenges raised against his tour management acumen, which were much more damning to the substance of his original thesis.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It may be a hint that the truth about this is dawning on him.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
~ </div>
<br />AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-3832986817775740232014-07-22T02:40:00.002+00:002014-07-22T02:40:51.698+00:00Symaptico w/ the debil<div style="text-align: justify;">
Call me a contrarian, but the more public discourse seems to break down into a collection of loosely connected, self-referential reality-distorting echo chambers where people congregate based on shared prejudices and unexamined beliefs, the more I find myself going in the opposing direction, reaching out and paying attention to people I intuitively disagree with.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />I remember my marveling, in the early days of the interwebs (circa 94), at how it was suddenly so easy to assemble and exchange according to shared interests and self-selection criteria, rather than by imposition of external factors such as locale, class, age, creed and other opportunity-limiting parameters. <span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>[all subject to the usual caveats about future's uneven distribution, etc.]</i></span><br />It was a nice change of pace.<br /><br />The net created a privileged space where (a subset of the many) voices that couldn't be heard before could speak up and reach like-minded individuals, of the sort previously doomed to the solitude that comes from worshiping at no(t the <i>right</i>) altars, or failing to embrace the local unquestioned consensus — wherever one happened to have been born.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This new information age seemed to open the doors on a much richer, diverse future, and really, so it did.<br /> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Thanks to being fearful, bunchy apes, with sectarian reflexes drilled into us by history as the winning strategy for survival, this explosion in complexity and variety soon led to us seeking safety in exclusionary self-selected cliques. This mindset eventually leaked into meatspace and most venues of public debate as our daily lives got more networked and net-entangled, turbo-charging trends that had started with the advent of the TV age, and trampling whatever semblance of shared normalcy we'd painfully imposed upon ourselves through centuries of self-inflicted mass punishment.<br /><br />Flash forward to now, where simply getting people to agree on basic facts gets problematic, since it's become so easy to tune all inputs, and receive only those feeds that confirm and reinforce one's expectations (good and bad), to engage only with people who share one's worldview.<br /><br />If the takeaway lesson from the 20th century was to be wary of the ideological and military continent-scaled monstrosities enabled by mechanization, modern media and commerce acting as force multipliers for simplistic cure-all utopias, we certainly overdid the formula when we leveraged the wondrous potential of a networked world to create the epidemic of self-assembling cults that now seem to be tearing to bits every attempt at building any sort of social and political consensus.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
* </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Mobs freak me out today more than ever, as they've never been so well-insulated against any call to reason or practicality, now that self-delusions have been promoted to the <i>'new normals'</i>… </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Strangely enough, this proliferation of self-contained insanity bubbles also makes me hopeful in the potential of education and shared intelligence in our technological age.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />If we managed to shred the social fabric(s) that had gone essentially unchallenged for the previous eight thousand years in just a few decades (not to mention ecosystems and climate dynamics), then it could be a hint about our potential to collectively grow out of this phase, too, possibly in no more than a generation or three, and maybe even of us getting a clue before we self-exterminate, as cultures, and as species.</div>
<br /><div style="text-align: justify;">
Hence me no longer seeking out like-minded types — it's good enough for me to know there are, a plenty — and instead looking in the most unlikely spaces I can parse for the sort of intelligence that differs from mine.<br />I'm not saying UFOs (you silly), although if you have some actual (or alleged) space aliens willing to sit down for a drink and a chat, I'm down with that, too.<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<br /><div style="text-align: justify;">
So what do I mean by that ? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Since I've always been driven by curiosity, I must now assume I can't rely on my sense of wonder and adventure alone to take me where I've been a dozen times already, and see better this time around.<br />Instead, I go where I normally wouldn't. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If something or someone rubs me the wrong way, with that familiar "this is beyond dumb" feel, I go against my so-called best judgement and ask myself two things :</div>
<ul>
<li>Why exactly does it trigger my scorn, disgust or mere irritation (when some hold it so dear and / or true) ?<br /></li>
<li>What would it take for me to relate ?</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />I suggest you try it, it's <i>interesting</i>, and often fun.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
***</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-18760816664727428752014-06-12T09:30:00.000+00:002014-06-12T09:41:46.674+00:00Diversity in AAA titles<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span id="goog_1313070639"></span><span id="goog_1313070640"></span>Hello reader : it's been a while.<br />
<br />
<b>Backstory :</b> E3 is upon us, and the <a href="http://www.polygon.com/2014/6/10/5797132/e3-2014-women-at-e3-violence-e3-2014">count of severed heads still beats that of female characters</a> (because that's a metric now, apparently). Many are irked by this, and thanks to fumbling a PR saving throw, Ubisoft has made itself a sausage-shaped lightning rod in this storm of diversity denial, or something.<br />
<i>Assassin's Creed Unity</i> coop mode will not have female avatars, which certainly is not as good as having them, but the real problem is Alex Amancio (creative director @ Ubisoft) <a href="http://www.polygon.com/e3-2014/2014/6/10/5798592/assassins-creed-unity-female-assassins">inadvertently turned a missing bullet point into a scanda</a>l when he said the game sorta-kinda-almost did, yet doesn't, because it was "too much work", which some immediately translated into "not worth the trouble", to be taken as proof positive that female characters (hence players, too) are discriminated against.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If that wasn't enough to fuel the fury, the <i>Far Cry</i> team (also Ubisoft) then offered a <a href="http://www.polygon.com/2014/6/11/5801330/far-cry-4-women-ubisoft">free refill</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<br />
Diversity in videogames is a hot-button issue and the discussion is now reaching into the usual proclamations about <a href="http://www.acronymfinder.com/Western,-Educated,-Industrialized,-Rich-and-Democratic-%28anthropology%29-%28WEIRD%29.html">WEIRD</a> being the scourge of the universe (which should be the new Godwin, btw). The people is Kony2012-levels of angry and I kinda grok the outrage, yet I'm not totally on board, either, hence the poast. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let me mansplain why <i>Assassin's Creed</i> is the wrong kind of game to pick for affirmative action.<br />
<br />
As a pale-skinned, blue-eyed, penis-having, reasonably affluent and educated cis-gendered straight-ish bastard, I still get frustrated by the lack of diversity in blockbuster RPG/adventure games, not just over avatars, but also plot, characterization, etc. <br />
On the other hand, when I pick up a title that centers on ninja-ing through (admittedly gorgeous) scenery with not much more story to it than '<i>go there, kill that, don't get caught'</i>, I don't set my expectations higher than what reads on the tin – if that — and I don't care to identify with the avatar : it's a vehicle with about as much humanity to it as my keyboard.<br />
<br />
Complaining about the lack of depth or diversity of what is essentially an over-polished hack'n'slash game seems as misguided to me as faulting a <i>Monster Trucks</i> show for falling short on character development and long story arcs.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GOc48U0KgQg/U5leGJZA7hI/AAAAAAAAHy8/M81VBouHdpg/s1600/duck-dynasty-season-4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GOc48U0KgQg/U5leGJZA7hI/AAAAAAAAHy8/M81VBouHdpg/s1600/duck-dynasty-season-4.jpg" /><i> </i></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<i>I swear, I'd be all over that if it had playable female characters…</i> </div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With that said, the default-to-white-straight-male thing gets on my nerves, too, and I wish there were more titles where the protagonist was anything else. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Don't count me as one of yours just yet, though, because I really mean that…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I do wish there were more games where we get to play really <i>diverse</i>
characters, like a goblin or a spider, whose mission is to kill
invading 'heroes' in order to protect our family and grow our stash of
gold, or fill the boots of the cleanup crew who's to rebuild NYC every
time the Avengers fuck up the city real good with their overkill
tactics. I wish there were more games where you had to juggle
accountability to your peers, or boss, or kids, while fighting the <i>ebil du jour</i>, and so on.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In short, I hate that most AAA games are unimaginative clichés crapfests, and I feel sorry that so many among the riled-up defenders of minorities rights seem to merely aspire for opportunities to better identify with the seriously lacking protagonists of seriously stupid games - it's like complaining that nobody makes truck nuts for girls.</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2aTnVHZhIAo/U5llGb29iII/AAAAAAAAHzM/qnMGrShj3Pc/s1600/Edsel_Classic_Car_Mission_Beach_090_reszie_logo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span id="goog_1313070637"><span id="goog_1313070642"></span></span><img alt="" border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2aTnVHZhIAo/U5llGb29iII/AAAAAAAAHzM/qnMGrShj3Pc/s1600/Edsel_Classic_Car_Mission_Beach_090_reszie_logo.jpg" title="sean callahan & socalbeachmag.net" /><span id="goog_1313070643"></span><i><span id="goog_1313070638"></span></i></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<i>… anymore.</i> </div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As things stand now, it seems to me engaging the females-in-games issue in their established product lines is, if not a lost cause, at
least an uphill battle for game studios : whatever ridiculously
overblown female archetype they pick for a main character, they'll take
flak (often deserved) for sexism, when they can safely dial the muscular
grizzled warrior to eleven without a peep of complaint from their regular audience.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The solution is to build deeper, less braindead games, and yes, I'd advocate being proactive in bringing more diversity in the <i>teams</i>
that make games to make more diverse games, but I'm not of the opinion
that merely slapping female textures and voicework* on the avatar in 13
year old male fantasy-fulfilling games will magically make them
female-friendly.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…and if GearBox decides to build embarrassing
stereotypical female-fantasy AAA titles, more power to them : I'll
despise those with the same level of scorn I have for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Nukem_Forever">Duke Nukem Forevah</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, give me a good story, with engaging characters, and then I'll get seriously pissy if it all revolves around yet-another white male fantasy.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*[It's actually much more work than that, too, as Amancio apparently failed to get across. Adding a credible protagonist of different gender to a 3D full motion game is about as much work as adding another humanoid alien species.]</span><br />
<br />AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-5655382054102752442013-04-02T06:52:00.003+00:002013-06-21T12:43:13.101+00:00I demand hord-ahr !<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We all know of way more important things going on re: sexism, harassment and broader expressions of dorkery in the gaming industry and culture, but I'm gonna natter lexicon instead, because it won't drive me to a lengthy, foamy rant (can't be arsed, today) :</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
When did <i>'chauvinism'</i> (without the 'male' qualifier) become the default and preferred synonym for <i>'phallocracy'</i>, as opposed to its proper meaning of<i> 'exacerbated patriotism/jingoism'</i> ?</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I get how anything with an <i>-ism</i> attached instantly sounds prejudiced and therefore becomes more suitable to dissing purposes, but </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<ol>
<li> it's confusing two distinct (if often coincident) prejudices, </li>
<li> how could you pass on the opportunity to use <i>'phallocracy'</i> instead, when it literally translates to <i><b>'rule of dick(s)'</b></i> ? </li>
</ol>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Right ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0q0kqKANtck/UVp-GsMVvsI/AAAAAAAAG94/nbIHpamZcKE/s1600/WhatThinkFeminism.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="This isn't a picture about chauvinism." border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0q0kqKANtck/UVp-GsMVvsI/AAAAAAAAG94/nbIHpamZcKE/s1600/WhatThinkFeminism.jpg" title="…a quick google image lookup for "male chauvinism" yielded nothing worth reposting, so there." /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Pic found via <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ewadams">Ernest Adams</a>, the beautiful beardy feminazi…</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…all that, assuming it's acceptable to call someone a dick when he/she/it's being an ass, and there isn't a minority rights group somewhere to object to the misrepresentation of 'dicks' as anything but superiorly endowed in the cognitive department — I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's in their tender bits, of course.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-86124370443262193202013-03-29T14:42:00.002+00:002013-06-21T12:51:55.817+00:00Terroriss' drones, best drones.<br />
There is an <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/03/lets-make-drone-strikes-safe-legal-and-rare/274399/">interesting opinion piece</a> by Conor Friedersdorf, over at <i>The Atlantic</i>.<br />
<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/conor-friedersdorf/">Staff writer</a>, is that a <a href="http://wonkette.com/505155/work-should-you-pay-to-do-it">paid position</a>, these days, you ask ? …who knows, really, but that's not why we're here (full disclosure : I'm not paid by <i>The Atlantic</i>, either. Jealous much ?).<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's about killah drones, and why the US of A should keep using them, if only the home of the brave would show more manners and a modicum of common sense about the whole thing, pretty please, instead of fragging anything that moves, in a vain attempt to look tough and ease the frustration of not being able to get their <a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/tag/f-35-joint-strike-fighter/"><i>for serious</i>, gold-plated warbirds to work</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
According to 'one-N' Conor, and while indeed, drones are here to stay and thrive, the question isn't whether to use them, but how, when and why they should(n't) be put in play. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Common sense, really, yet worth the non-ink bled for it on your screen anyway, as anything that helps straighten the discussion about drones from its usual contorsions of false dichotomy is good. When it comes to debate anything <i>war on terror</i>, the dominant (and very skewed) framing goes "<i>either you're for whatever it is we do to win the WoT, or you're on the terroriss' side !</i>". Merely suggesting the injection of some reasoned argumentation in there is daring, so props for that, Schrödinger hobbyist/journalist you.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In fairness, the issue has been on the agenda for some time, and recently reached such a level of visibility that the Obama administration felt compelled to do something about it… <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/19/exclusive-no-more-drones-for-cia.html">word is</a> they're contemplating a move of killerbot overseeing from CIA to the Pentagon, for which all I can say is it's better than the other way around, but not by much.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Neither Friedersdorf's plea for due process, nor the administration's putative concessions to more transparency really touch on what I reckon is a most crucial flaw with the sky killer robots doctrine, which lies in the negative externalities known as <i>blowback</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Emphatically <b>not</b> painting itself the color of Palpatine's empire is something that should be a matter of import to a nation so adamant on being a beacon of civilization, freedom and justice, especially when reaching out with the strong arm of the largest military in the world to engage in flimsily justified wars, ostensibly waged in response to <i>terror</i> attacks past, and with the purported aim of discouraging repeat offenses of the same flavor.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Why then, elect to put at the forefront the kind of weapon and tactics most likely to bolster any moral superiority claims your opponent might have ? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Short of using bio/chemical weapons or nukes against cities, nothing begs for terrorist retaliation against US civilian targets anywhere, anytime, like the systematic and seemingly careless recourse to drone strikes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's almost as if the doctrine aimed at guaranteeing perpetual war — are Pentagon and C.I.A staffers so worried about their job security that they mean to cultivate ill-will towards the US ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Every time somebody who isn't an obvious <i>player</i> (by witnesses' estimate) gets killed or maimed by drones, resentment amongst the general population against whoever sent or enabled the remote killings grows, much more so than when 'collateral damage' happens with boots on the ground, because a drone strike on civilians is — simply put — nothing like combat : it's remorseless mass-murder, a description applicable to the sort of warfare also commonly labeled "terrorism".</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The remote component only makes it an especially cowardly type of terrorism, which doesn't help anything in the <i>win hearts and minds </i>department.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Such blunders make for powerful media ammunition against the drone sponsors, who come out as brutal, incompetent chickenhawks, and seem like they're doing their utmost to fit snuggly in their <i>evil empire</i> dark costume, giving the shine of righteous fury to the underdogs.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
'Counterproductive' comes to mind…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Not even touching on the notion of <i>'paying the price in blood'</i> (let's keep things simple), and just by looking at the yearly output of movies and TV shows that revel in portraying 'merkuns as freedom fighters in the face of oppressive imaginary invaders, the patriot/heroes often literally depicted as ragtag insurgents resisting killer alien-robots occupiers at overwhelming odds, it defies imagination how the obvious and tragic irony of the <i>RealWorld™</i> drone warfare situation seems lost on the american body politic.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Like Conor <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/22/us/influential-ex-aide-to-obama-voices-concern-on-drone-strikes.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0">and others</a>, I am not opposing drones on principle, nor the validity of targeted assassination as a tactic : both have merit and hold the potential to actually mitigate loss of life on all sides during conflicts, if and when used properly, but it seems to me somebody fell in love with their new toys and got a little compulsive, here.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Understandably, the ability to cripple an enemy organization by taking out their leadership and principals, anytime and anywhere can be intoxicatingly tempting, but the ultimate goal of war, if not outright extermination, is supposed to be the establishment of the requisite circumstances for a return to peace, or at least the goal should <i>not</i> be the perpetual escalation of the impetus for violent conflict.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Point being, a 20th century-style invasion war against foreign nation-states is the last thing the USA have to worry about right now. Terror is indeed the main threat to the country, and it's a danger, as the saying goes, <i>both domestic and foreign</i>, that's well on its way to eat it from the inside sooner than the out. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Angst and disarray in the face of a changing world have led US politics to devolve into a culture of fear, easily exploited for personal gain by demagogues and pillage-capitalism profiteers who are only too happy to see neocon prophecies about <i>clash of civilizations</i> come true, as long as they make a buck on the firesale and grab some power in that new world disorder.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As a result, today's US foreign policy oscillates between clumsy attempts at realpolitik and saber-rattling evangelization, while domestic legislative and executive branches seem to have fully embraced the "kill the village to save the village" doxa on everything but funding defense and megacorporations, leading essential rights and terms of the social contract to be sacrificed one after another on the altars of 'homeland security' and 'saving the financial system'.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Foreign onlookers are therefore justifiably uneasy about these developments, as 'merka looks every year more like a very tense paranoid-schizophrenic driving a truck full of toxic chemicals at breackneck speed through their neighborhood, trying to outrun her own shadow…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
Most of the enmity that has built up against the US in many parts of the world over the last couple decades <a href="http://www.ufppc.org/us-a-world-news-mainmenu-35/3394-documentary-the-power-of-nightmares-by-adam-curtis-summary-of-argument.html">stems from the convergence of largely exaggerated fears</a>, yet there's no bullying people into falling in love again with today's derelict 'merka. The strong-arming that somewhat forces governing bodies of nations to pretend they like it doesn't translate to individuals or non-governmental groups. Since gunboat diplomacy only breeds resentment and hatred, not respect, the only way to win the war on terror is to <i>stop acting out of fear</i>.<br />
<br />
…and it starts at home.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-70948326459987472422013-03-28T06:58:00.001+00:002013-03-29T15:31:29.187+00:00Here, let me ruin your breakfast.<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I was catching up with WIRED's <a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/">Danger Room</a>, always good fodder for the sci-fi inclined, and bumped into YA-doomsday piece by <a href="http://www.wired.com/opinion/author/bruceschneier/">Bruce Schneier</a>, this time about the inevitability of us being wiped out (or kicked back into the stone age) by a combo of purposeful infrastructure mishaps, hobbyist-grade biotech plagues, and any other niceties creative application of natural stupidity multiplied by tech pawah can bring about.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Schneier's latest security alert can be summed up thusly : </div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>As every jackass can print a nuke on their home <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicator_(Star_Trek)">replicator</a>, bad shit happens.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<a href="http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/03/security-when-the-bad-guys-have-technology-too-how-do-we-survive/">Go and read it</a>, I'll wait.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uiILNfN7MVo/UVOyQxrWJhI/AAAAAAAAG9I/wqF5awg9EIQ/s1600/Replicator.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Two blokes in PJs facing a seemingly-empty minibar." border="0" height="346" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uiILNfN7MVo/UVOyQxrWJhI/AAAAAAAAG9I/wqF5awg9EIQ/s640/Replicator.jpg" title="Super-ebola also © Paramount, probably." width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>— I don't know, pale dude… looks empty to me…</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>— That's the cool bit about airborne pathogens : no need to worry about pesky syringes. Feel anything yet, hominid friend ?</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, nothing new, really : we're nearing the point of no-return, and the 21st version of <i>idiots playing with fire</i> will eventually trigger mass-extinction through grey goo, or somesuch.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Only it's starting to feel a bit too real, by now, and while I'm trying hard not to go all <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html">Bill Joy</a> on you, the <i>"are we fucked for real ?"</i> question is ever-simmering on my back burner as I mull over matters of game design and storytelling, or go about other, equally important daily business.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Should one run for the hills just yet ? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Shall one entertain the idea of being <i>the kind of people</i> who run for the hills, even ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…because the company's terrible, as a matter of record : advocates of 'preparedness' tend to also be bloodshot-eyed gun-crazies with overgrown dog-modules and weird notions about what constitutes <i>humane</i> behavior. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
And yet, for all the well-deserved ridicule directed at doomsayers and personal-bunker builders through the ages, we all know how the perfectly workable and sensible (in hindsight) may appear ludicrous at first, until one gets the implementation just right, or circumstances change — and changing they are, fast.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As we relentlessly set everything <i>just so</i> for turning ourselves into an endangered species, or at least usher mankind into a collection of dystopian futures, is there enough wiggle room left to prevent the worst possible tomorrows, and if so, does it entail sacrificing everything we value today, in the name of post-apocalyptic survival ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>"Survive to fight another day"</i> is frequently invoked to justify avoidance or resignation in the face of damning odds, but this wisdom is predicated on a future worth holding out and fighting for. If all we've got to look forward to is the inevitability of paranoid social regression frenzied by technology gone feral, now might be the <strike>best</strike> only time left to not worry about death and taxes, break out the booze and partay ourselves into oblivion, girl.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ilkuR-rUO_Y/UVO96QZQ3mI/AAAAAAAAG9U/Gq0KQcHauNo/s1600/ZombieApocalypse.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img alt="https://plus.google.com/116747581186148686204/posts/XwsXxHwNodY" border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ilkuR-rUO_Y/UVO96QZQ3mI/AAAAAAAAG9U/Gq0KQcHauNo/s1600/ZombieApocalypse.jpg" title="…they won't even bother to pry your gunz from your cold, dead hands, either." /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let's face it : if things turn to extreme crap on a global level, individual preparedness will only be of minimal weight compared to dumb luck. More importantly : how eager will you be, personally, to merely <i>survive</i> for another couple of years, with nothing much to aspire to — for you or your cherished ones — as you trudge through the never-ending 'rough patch' ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Back of the enveloppe, assuming nothing tangy enough to wipe the entire species comes around, we can expect massive depopulation (at least in some areas) to trigger infrastructure cascade-failures, then worsened environmental conditions as a second-order consequence, and massive social regression towards feudal models reliant on explicit might-makes-right power rules.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The people who spend their time reading books, playing videogames and writing blogs make for nice and stimulating company in a world of plenty, but your Facebook followers score and your BS in <i>Virtual Interior Architecture</i> will hardly translate as credentials in your new career as refuse forager and occasional unpaid prostitute for low-ranking pillagers.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
You, dear reader, are more likely than not to be sheared, then enslaved, then eaten, or some equally unenviable fate, unless you off yourself first, because you probably haven't been raised to cope with perpetual duress and misery (I'm making wild assumptions about you here, but if that's enough to rub you the wrong way, you're just proving my point).<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Care to contemplate some alternative options, then ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The natural urge in the face of <i>imminent existential threat</i> (in 'merkan parlance) is to sandbag and/or lash out (preemptively vitrify), but both those stances become decreasingly viable strategies in the face of hobbyist-grade nukes or bioweaponry, against which neither protection nor suppression are practical.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is, in fact, only one winning strategy in that scenario, and that's not an easy or comforting one : it boils down to minimizing discontent with the social order among the population, and hope to weather moderately less awful amounts of catastrophic events than could otherwise prove too much for the social fabric to resist.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In practical terms, it might entail a radical choice to eschew violence and blatant coercion as means of governance — and possibly adding benzodiazepine mist blowers to AC units everywhere.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's a hard sale, granted, and unlikely to pass as the result of a mere sit-down and stern talking-to, because who's going to do that…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As usual, we'll only get serious about changing our ways after all other venues of inaction and flailing around while making things worse are exhausted. It will probably take us single-event death tolls in the 5-6 digits range before we figure throwing more monies into SWAT tanks, airport anal probes, electrified fences and <i>moar</i> killer robots will not work out to anyone's benefit (but that of war profiteers).</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
How bloodied we all get before we accept that doing the same stupid things over and over again will not result in different outcomes remains to be seen, and whether we're in good enough shape by then to act upon that painfully acquired wisdom is just as uncertain.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Considering we've only got more skillful and sophisticated in the ways we inflict pain unto ourselves over the centuries, and have near-mastered the dubious art of engineering consent to our collective abuse, we may very well have boiled the frog, already, so don't get crazy hopeful just yet…</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/suYz5SHFHyA" width="640"></iframe>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Bioterror for beginners, on a budget.</i></div>
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As the distinctions between war, terror and common-law crime become vanishingly artificial, it's time to acknowledge the obvious : while war is asymmetrical, peace demands balance, and it can't be gained or kept as a zero-sum game. With war and peace entangled beyond separation, we have to figure according to which of those states of mind we want to live our days. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Waging peace as low-intensity form of war is what we've been doing since 9/11, and it's not quite working on the global scale, because we're not the ones who get to decide how hot or cold it gets before we call it quits or victory.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Keeping the peace and preserving 'civilization' in some shape we can recognize through the 21st century might turn out to be less about stationing legions in Rome, and more about upping the budget on <i>panem et circenses</i>, for a start, then eventually rework our values systems to reward and foster socially beneficial behavior at the individual level, while mitigating the damage dissenters can inflict on society.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On this week's menu then, here are our specials :</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>~</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Commie on Xanax (picture may differ from actual product)</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>—</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Dead child soldier in the Glorious Army of Dog (your pick of cult/brand/nation)</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>—</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Feudal Warlord (1B$ extra fee, not suitable for non-sociopaths)</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>—</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Hills-people Toxic Waste Forager (exact number of limbs may vary +/- 3)</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>~</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Enjoy your meal, just chew it well… to be safe.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As for me, my coffee's cold and my work here is done. Next time, I'll return to talking about creating cool games and entertaining stories, because I've got nothing better to do, considering.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
</div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-817892561789432192013-03-24T23:30:00.000+00:002013-03-25T01:07:02.431+00:00...on brunch.<div style="text-align: justify;">
This Sunday sermon did not happen, on account of yours truly being on holidays.
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://static.bbc.co.uk/programmeimages/512xn/images/p015lqwb.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="http://static.bbc.co.uk/programmeimages/512xn/images/p015lqwb.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Catch you after recess ?</i> </div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Also, I've been reading (and listenin') a great many things about TV writing lately, and I mentioned <a href="https://plus.google.com/s/%23InTheFlesh">#InTheFlesh</a> not too long ago, so I figured you could do worse than go read <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/writersroom/posts/Writing-In-The-Flesh-with-the-safety-off">this</a> during the hiatus.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
~ </div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-11191844949148955802013-03-20T14:32:00.002+00:002013-03-20T15:03:10.866+00:00Stuff that sells itself — literally.<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the course of my noodling on the commodification or art, I stumbled on <a href="http://www.nerdist.com/2012/08/nerdist-writers-panel-51-book-to-tv-series/">this little gem of a talk</a> by Bob Levy of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alloy_Entertainment">Alloy Entertainment</a>, about the art of commodification, aka pointed trans-media IP creation and marketing : the bit starts at 08'00" into the track.<br />
<br />
Trans/cross-media properties are nothing new, nor is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_packaging">book-packaging</a> or algorithmic storytelling, obviously. What Alloy Entertainment does could be seen as mere incremental refinement of established forms of commercial artistry (think cartoons as promotional vehicles for toys) and IP franchising as a brand strategy, but the outlook here sets itself apart in its conceptual purity.<br />
<br />
No longer is it simply about synergistic marketing, nor opportunistic milking of a successful IP through every possible adaptation or derivative, it's about the design of<i> IP </i><i>blueprints</i> that <i>'tap into the zeitgeist'</i>, then handing those wireframes over to contractors or licensees, for them to develop and iterate in every possible format.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DjaFPqWPF5o/UUnEzJ8TMvI/AAAAAAAAG8s/wpbABVlAB04/s1600/Kirk_surrounded_by_Tribbles800.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="[Kirk examining a tribble] "Character development is gonna be a bitch…"" border="0" height="478" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DjaFPqWPF5o/UUnEzJ8TMvI/AAAAAAAAG8s/wpbABVlAB04/s640/Kirk_surrounded_by_Tribbles800.png" title="…still better than Twillight." width="640" /></a></div>
<i>Character development is gonna be a bitch…</i><br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
What I can't help but find disturbingly poetic here is the mechanization of the entire creative drive, from impulse, through process, to purpose : in the absence of original or initial art or product to derivate from, the entire 'art vs commerce' debate is moot. It's so perfectly <i>commercial art</i> — the artefacts exist only to promote their own existence — it's as creepy and fascinating as watching robots breed.<br />
<br />
Forget about Skynet : somewhere, a freak marketing hacker is busy coding the tween-lit procedural content generator that will eventually unleash the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribbles">tribble</a> scourge upon mankind. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
</div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-27549643790638910972013-03-19T07:56:00.000+00:002013-03-19T10:23:25.860+00:00Back in black.<div style="text-align: justify;">
Today I reverted to a "simple" template, because the so-called "dynamic" thingies are way too slow to render on a shoddy connection. Also some of the content didn't work properly, and I can't be arsed to decipher the CSS and html templates that rule blogspot page layout.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On the downside, that means the blog is no longer mobile-browser aware and will serve you the same page regardless, but I've tried to mitigate that somehow.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The page layout is set for 1400 pix width, which on any proper computer display this side of the millennium should fit comfortably, but in case you're reading this from a tablet or phablet you should be good as long as you can fit 800 pix or thereabouts.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Tested on a TF101 10.1" tablet (1280*800 if memory serves), it takes only a small zoom out to cram the whole thing to screen width, and the fonts are still large enough to read just fine in landscape mode.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In portrait mode, you need no further zoom out to read the main content column, which is designed for a nominal 900 pix width, but reads smoothly enough shrunk into 800 pix width. You'll lose the sidebars however, while clean vertical scrolling becomes sort of a minigame — that's my gift, to you.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
And yeah, it's light-on-dark again, because I dig trog mode, and because not all devices offer a convenient way to swap between <i>night</i> and <i>day</i> modes.<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RMPQI7s9XUY/UUgvb_BU4sI/AAAAAAAAG8c/J-ZW-MMBb5A/s1600/PouredChocolate800.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="…not a chocolate waterfall, either." border="0" height="437" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RMPQI7s9XUY/UUgvb_BU4sI/AAAAAAAAG8c/J-ZW-MMBb5A/s640/PouredChocolate800.png" title="…not a chocolate waterfall, either." width="640" /></a><i> </i><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">When looking for a segue image, do <b>not</b> google <i>"chocolate shower"</i> — just sayin'…</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Unrelated, in the crossing wires department, the following mashup happened in my shower* earlier today :</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>— Adam Curtis :</b> <i>People embrace ultra-conservative views such as theocracy not (just) because they're dog-crazy, but because they've lost faith in the ability of politicians to change the world for the better, on account of political power inevitably leading to corruption.</i><br />
<br />
<b>— Bill Maher :</b> <i>The craziest reactionary ultra-conservative really are a tiny minority, only one so vocal that clueless politicians (whose pulsometers got calibrated forever back in the era of one-way mass-media) can't correct for the distortion and then buy into the fiction the loudmouths really make the core of their constituency.</i></blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Extrapolate.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*[I meant : 'in my head'<i>, while in the shower</i>, wherein neither Maher nor Curtis are particularly welcome to partake in person.]</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-57961465585049607212013-03-17T05:53:00.000+00:002013-05-29T07:21:35.628+00:00The Chocolate Factory - Part 2 : is it worth it ?<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">[I know <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-chocolate-factory.html">I kinda promised</a> an entry about video games as brain-washing, mass-murderer-making machines of ebil, but I got sidetracked in more ways than I care to contemplate right now, so here's a coupon : I'll ring you when we restock on that peculiar brand of bile.]</span></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Today on the Chocolate Factory specials : </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Is striving to design good games in this age of vapid loudness a waste of time ?</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One way video games as a hobby stand apart from many other forms of recreation is by how often gaming enthusiasts are asked to consider whether they may be wasting their time and could, you know, be doing something <i>'constructive'</i> instead.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Provided they make a living of it (or attempt to), game designers are not called out in the same fashion, because <i>"hey, it's work"</i> is justification enough for anything these days, and the gamebiz is one of those few sectors that's still hiring more than it fires.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The stigma on video games is multilayered : not only is playing them seemingly unproductive, it's very often perceived as masturbatory-like behavior …yet that's not even the worst of it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Precisely because they aren't passive and casual distractions, it's for their pointless intensity that video games are oftentimes perceived as worse-than-slacking : they're an affront to our deeply ingrained preconception that the worth of an activity can be judged by the level of engagement it elicits — unless you're prepared to accept games may be of some worth, or that there's something wrong with how you assess the value of stuff.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's why even slouching in front of daytime TV doesn't suffer as much social stigma as videogaming …as long as you don't start acting like you really care about the storyline in that home-shopping show.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
'Casual gaming', and social network gaming platforms offer an interesting contrast : playing a few hands of Solitaire or Bejeweled won't lead people to look at you weird, and — as long as you keep it low-key — diddling around with your virtual garden or fish tank while you hold on a phone call may not be a fireable offense in places where being caught playing a FPS would.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The perception is different because it appears noncommittal to onlookers, keeping the games where they belong, next to the paperclip twiddling and the napkin doodling, and far from the podium of <i>important stuff</i> such as your job at Starbucks, your studying for the realtor license exam, your cookie-baking for church or your buttocks-tightening salsa class… you know : duties.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All of which goes to explain why a frequent argument of gamers and game makers in defense of the hobby goes along the lines of <i>"it's really good for something"</i>, like improved hand-eye coordination, problem-solving skills or self-confidence. Such benefits, and even the 'spirit of discovery' are routinely invoked to make games look less like addictive time-wasters, which I'm sorry to report is a load of crap.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Certainly, games have a wondrous potential as teaching and learning tools, and I'm sure once in a blue moon somebody actually designs a game with such purpose in mind and maybe doesn't screw the pooch too badly on execution, but trying to justify the whole on the merits of the very few, or claiming credit for unintended, second-order consequences falls somewhere at the intersection of manipulative and delusional.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Another, less common argument to defend the hobby is to say games are <i>just like sports</i>, ie you do it for fun and it's still good for you. That's cute, but no dice : it's part of the sports-as-hobby formula that most amateurs do them largely <i>because '</i>it's good for you'<i>,</i> to get/keep in shape, the fun aspect making sports a more pleasant substitute or complement to other forms of workout. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When it comes to video games, on the other hand, aside from the sub-genre of fitness-oriented games and a handful of dance/rhythm games that require players to stand up and move, the overwhelming majority of titles, measured by volumes of sales or cumulative hours spent playing follow no other agenda than pure distraction (which is not to say they don't have other, possibly beneficial, effects).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ultimately, there's little point in such weak attempts to vindicate gaming and game making on other grounds than the value of playing for its own sake, for video games need no further justification than literature, dance or movies do : they're art and entertainment.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've made the case in the past that video games should ostensibly position themselves as <i>fine art</i> rather than mass-market entertainment, as a practical line of defense against would-be censors and other righteous idiots, and that idea still has merit, although I reckon <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2009/11/eventually-stuff-rendered-bland.html">going AO</a> should be more than enough in most cases to ensure creative freedom. Legal standing aside, the notion of video games as <i>creative art</i> holds on its own self-evidence, too, and is not necessarily detrimental to their study and progress as craft and trade, even though I see how it could be a slippery slope and an easy cop-out in some instances.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For being works of art, today's video games are no less heavy machinery, and the craft of them more readily compares to moviemaking than book writing ; such is the nature of the medium that game making faces the exact same challenges and systemic issues other popular hybrid arts suffer from, the same tension between mercantile exploitation and elitist isolation, the same conflicts between the oft-divergent interests of creators, public and financiers, forcing games to grapple with money and technology in the same violent dance movies and TV fiction do.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Facing the apparent disconnect between commercial and artistic value, games creators must therefore individually answer for themselves the same uneasy question so familiar to moviemakers and TV writers : do I want to make <i>creative art</i> that accounts for the need to sell, or <i>commercial art</i> as a means to sell as much as possible ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Strangely enough, the ongoing transformation of the market may be shifting the balance in favor of the first option, as the second approach becomes increasingly irrelevant.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
'Big games' are the exclusive province of large publishers who can back the costs of thumb-thick eyecandy coating, and shoulder the cost of failure when consumers don't bite. These games are risk-averse behemoths that can't afford to get stranded while sailing uncharted waters. Marketing and focus groups reign supreme in this land of ever-cloned franchises, and they all agree : customers want more of the same, only louder, until they don't want it anymore …and then let's clone the next hip thing or die trying.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There's no room for more than a visionary or two per generation in those parts. If that's you, congrats on landing the job, but what are you doing reading this ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
'Cheap games', which can be built on a budget small enough to not prohibit experimentation, break into two categories : <i>junk food</i> and <i>artisanal. </i>They also cater to two distinct types of players.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Junk food</i> games are made by companies that see games as commodities, and go about building, packaging and selling them accordingly. The idea here is to recombine a limited set of cheap elements in a great many variations to give the impression of diversity, pimp them out in attractive, flashy packages, and sell them bite-size so people don't really notice how much they pay in aggregate. Carefully monitor what works best out of your manicloned product line, and iterate.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These are games for people who don't care much, and play for the most part as one would distractedly munch potato chips, except for the few that will develop a strong addiction to some unique recipe of crisps, and are subsequently known by the trade as "whales".</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What is called 'art' in these parts is the monkeywork of churning pirate or steampunk themed sprites by the hundreds for a pittance, in infinitesimally distinct mutations of the same templates, seeking the 'bliss point' of the week. As you can imagine, the demand for creative or inspired game design in that field is minimal, as it would presumably just mess up the conjoint analysis routines.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The last group of 'cheap games' is the most promising for people who care about games worth playing, owing to their being creatively designed and carefully crafted — they're what I'd call <i>artisan</i> games.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These, more often than not, are of the indie scene, and unless <a href="http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/02/28/oscar-bait/">Raph Koster's musings</a> about <i>Oscar Bait</i> games become a real thing (entirely possible), it's still where most <i>'passion projects'</i> will sprout from in the future.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Not that all indie games are passion projects, mind you : a good portion of the derivative drivel currently cluttering various app stores comes from independant developers that aren't backed by a publisher or external investors.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Games that qualify as <i>artisanal</i> might sometimes turn out to merely be 'pretty' art, of the vacuous, faux-simple humblebrag sort that draws hipsters in like flies, and there's already some of that a-plenty in the artsiest corners of the indiesphere. If you can run it on dedicated hardware, say an arduino board encased in amber-looking resin, and sell it as handmade unique pocket arcade system on thinkgeek, you're probably it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Some of those <i>artisan</i> games could also be genuinely fine art, but on that I couldn't comment, because it probably would still look like hipster doo-doo to me (see above).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Alternatively, if you build something that's both disturbingly moving, and still really a game, you could end up making <a href="http://www.quelsolaar.com/love/index.html">Love</a>, or something like it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Point being, if you're into creating games that are unique, innovative, moving, or just plainly <i>fun</i>, and are able to understand they're also products that should account for the reality of players, then your kind of art may speak to some, maybe enough to pay for the work. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Provided you're willing to be just a little accomodating and practical about giving others a chance to enjoy your creations (like not totally ignoring usability, looks and stability concerns), the rest of the industry is currently busy doing you a favor, by making it fairly easy to tell what's what.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
More importantly, the players are learning, too, and fast.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-chocolate-factory.html">mentioned TV last week</a> as proof that good things can come from the less likely places, and I'll do it again : looking at TV fiction and the food business, two fields that are seemingly dominated by the most cynical, exploitative and mediocre products, it seems clear there's also a growing demand (and supply) of alternative offerings that cater to people unwilling to eat crap, however loudly advertised, yet prepared to go out of their way to find the stuff they crave. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It may look like it's all just one big market with some segments only now better served, but it goes beyond that : we're talking about people who will simply <i>not buy at all</i> unless it's good enough for their taste, and will postpone buying rather than settle for an inferior product range, which for them simply doesn't register as a possible substitute.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Anecdotally yours, and keeping in mind how, in addition to my game design interests, I'm also a foodie and a big fan of good storytelling (thus it all may just be a self-serving argument) I find it increasingly easy over the last couple years, not just to find good eateries or good TV shows, but also easier to tell them apart from the <i>junk</i> types at a glance, and not often be disappointed.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As marketing-driven businesses find decreasingly useful to even bother with the overhead of adding any substantial value to their products, instead selling nothing but puffed-up simulacrum, those products that seem carefully crafted are more likely to prove more than just bait, and actually deliver.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<br />
All this hints at some new truth to the old saw that if you make it (and put a little effort in getting the word out), they'll come.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, is it worth the trouble to design deep, or clever, or moving games, even as the marketplace is overflowing with trite tripe coated in bright colors, while creative quality or innovation don't seem to be much of a selling point, judging by the top 100s ? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My bet is yes, there's a public that itches to pay for that, if only they can find the wares, which is what I'll discuss in the next episode.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<br />
<br />AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-44493353047427097772013-03-09T23:36:00.000+00:002013-05-29T07:28:54.822+00:00The chocolate factory.<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In this tentative series, I'm going to explore how videogames and particularly online social/multiplayer ones are both better and worse than we like to think. It doesn't start from a joyous place, and I can't guarantee the end will be a happy one either, but I'm not here to sell ad space, so live with it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Metaphorically and not, the 'civilized' world is sinking in its own waste, and trying to keep its collective nose above the stench by slurping the goop faster than it excretes it — you'll thank me for that image later. Wherever people aren't saturated by pointless crap, they're short of essentials, while a few places such as the US of A manage the incredible feat of routinely combining both, overfeeding toxic slurry to their poorest until their brains melt whilst their bodies inflate, until they can't afford even the most basic physical or mental exertion.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That was just to get the preamble out of the way, because I don't feel like making the full inventory of the many ways we are dooming ourselves. I'm sure there are many different and valid definitions of what civilization means, but a population of mindless blobs tube-fed by hyperactive stepfordian gerbils for the benefit of sociopaths most likely doesn't meet your standards more than it does mine. If we can agree on that, let's move on.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What I really want to talk about here is videogames, and most specifically MMOs, but not only. I'll use games because they're part of the question, and because that's a convenient vehicle for me — if the notional <i>"10k hours of practice makes you proficient in any given trade"</i> holds any truth to it, I'm probably some kind of 3rd dan black belt in gameology.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here's my problem : I do love games, making and playing them, it's been a large part of my childhood, as is likely true of you too, reader, and an even larger part of my adult life, and yet I don't feel so good about that, lately. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Designing and playing simulation, strategy, RPG and action games, on tables and on screens, has shaped my outlook on most things, from personal relationships to politics and from work ethics to parenting. On the balance, games have done me more good than harm, by a wide margin, and I count myself lucky for the help gaming and game making have been in turning me into slightly less shit of a person over the years.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Because of this, I find myself with a bit of a conundrum : when I look at what's on offer these days, at what's most likely to end up on people's phones, tablets and computer screens, I can't help but feel slightly uneasy advocating the idea videogaming is not junk food for thought, because in truth, it mostly is.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is an apt comparison, too, because what makes junk food <i>junk</i> food is not that it's pizza, or meat sandwiches, or fizzy cold drinks, it's that it's those things, only made from the cheapest, most addictive and fattening, sugary, yet least nutritive <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/the-extraordinary-science-of-junk-food.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0">crap the companies can find</a>, with a single objective : leave you hungry and craving for more, no matter how much you gorge yourself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In that regard, MMOs stand out as the worst culprits among videogames, because most of them are predicated on exploiting your frustration. Much like fast food, they need to offer something reasonably attractive to get you through the door, then keep you wanting for <i>just a little more</i> so that you stay and pay rent (subscriptions), or shell out for extras (Freemium). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I could make the easy and common comparison with crack or meth instead of food, for sure, but it really wouldn't be an apt analogy. The worst aspect of the whole affair is this : food and games are not unmitigated evils, they're essentials, and when done right they can play a big part in making our lives better.<br />
If crack cocaine is a nasty virus, essentially sprawling death incarnate, games are the gut bacteria that help you process stuff (otherwise wasted or toxic), unless the wrong sort of bacteria start to proliferate in your system, and things go bad.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Metaphor overload yet ? Me too ; let's back it one step and stick to the food-games thingie.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We're omnivorous apes, and there is an argument that it's been a defining trait throughout our history, for not only did it allow our ancestors to colonize environments otherwise inhospitable, hadn't they been adventurous enough about what constitutes <i>food</i>, but it also favored the quick and smart learners, and contributed to boost our specific inference engine. Our weird regimen also led us to develop technologies like food making, which paved the way for chemistry, pharmacology and in the arts and aesthetics department, at least in places, <i>cuisine</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Many other animals play, among them all mammals (afaik), at least in their young age. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Playing is a low-cost way of learning basic skills and behavioral rules, of socializing and honing one's abilities. Those individuals who are more eager to play are more likely to end up 'good at life', and thus most of their descendants (that's us) are primed to be aroused by preset signals, when it comes to food and play.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The more is known about us as a species, the easier it gets to exploit these traits — once evolved to keep us alive and fit — to now trick us into doing stuff that isn't beneficial but in the shortest term, like scratching itches purposefully designed to get slightly worse every time we touch them. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Much of business, economy, and culture presently revolves not around the satisfaction of needs and urges elicited by our accidental and environmental circumstances, but around engineering the precise type of frustration or anguish that will trigger our <i>feel of want</i> for a designated object.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>So what ? Everybody does it.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
True, and if you agreed on the premise that our world is turning to crap because we've made churning and eating shit a competitive pastime, you may feel a little uneasy about that.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Games are a special case among other mass market artefacts because they're powerful behavior prescriptors, and because playing is nearly as integral to our condition as eating. We simply can't go (far) without eating and playing, and what we choose (and get) to eat and play affects our sanity and capacities, among other things.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In a weird fit of mental acrobatics seldom observed outside tea-party rallies, the same gamers and game makers who will tell you how big of a deal gaming is in their life and world outlook will simultaneously and reflexively dismiss the potency of games as mind-altering devices of any harmful consequence, which is at the very best oxymoronic.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My contention is that, for better <i>and</i> worse, videogames are more powerful magic than the industry cares to admit, and that game designers have no excuse for their shirking the corollary duty to use this power responsibly — which doesn't entail being defensive, nor knee-jerk over anything controversial.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On a brighter note, the more we know about games and how to make them, the more good they can potentially do. If TV, the titular village idiot in the popular fiction family has finally managed to bring us stuff worth watching voluntarily in the last two decades, I want to believe videogames are not cursed to eternal mediocrity, and MMOs can aspire to better things than making professional human traffickers feel woefully inadequate at ruining people's lives.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Inevitably, I'll be talking about stuff that will rub some friends the wrong way, because of unpleasant things to contemplate, and also because <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(activist)">Jack Thompson</a>, but it's all <i>for the children</i>, and also the worthy cause of feeling OK with what you do.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Speaking of which, next episode is about how videogames really cause mass shootings, and stuff. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Nah, just kidding — almost.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>[Sorry, no pretty pics on this wall'o'text : I suck at iconography, plus I don't have the time for it. Suggestions are welcome however, and I'll update the article if warranted.] </i></span></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-77099580480236671352013-02-14T12:02:00.003+00:002013-02-14T12:52:28.447+00:00There's a problem with your Google+ profile.<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…is what I found out yesterday, thanks to a nice robotic email from the "Google+ Team".</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_GJwSgDBae0/URy-1uaPHtI/AAAAAAAAACU/uElmwHc7x1w/s0-d/ArmchairDesignerBan.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="408" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_GJwSgDBae0/URy-1uaPHtI/AAAAAAAAACU/uElmwHc7x1w/s0-d/ArmchairDesignerBan.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>C'mon, you asked for it…</i></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In fairness, I knew this could happen, ever since google decided to <a href="http://www.slashgear.com/google-demands-your-real-name-pseudonyms-suspended-12164521/">enact their RealName™ policy</a>, and I can see where the company is coming from on this issue, even though the case they make for why they need realworld ID is such thinly-veiled BS it's both comical and mildly insulting.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are a lot of moving parts in that single event, and I'm not going to write about those, mostly because tl;dr. Just to get that out of the way : pseudonymity, freedom of speech, trolling, antisocial behavior, dog on the internets, right of privacy, ax-crazy exes, sessual predators, oppressive governments and abusive corporate monsters, bullies, etc, none of which is the main course on today's menu.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Google is in the business of knowing people to better market stuff to them, and enabling convenient communication channels and collaborative tools is just means to that end. At face value, the tradeoff for users is one of convenience vs privacy, not quality, as the quality of Google services may often be improved in direct proportion to how much privacy is sacrificed : you get less disruptive (maybe even useful) targeted ads instead of random boner pills on your webpages, while integrated services algorithmically smoothen the ride by learning and sometimes anticipating your needs. Letting Google know more about you often betters your experience, as long as it doesn't go terribly wrong for you, the individual.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Long story short, I think google is behaving like large corporations do, and is doing what it thinks best according to the business plan. It is certainly not moral, nor respectful of users, but whoever expects morals from a global for-profit operation just because it favors LEGO color schemes and exudes Stepford positivity is just begging for a personality test.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The slightly twisted part here is Google made no effort to clarify this early on, and indeed seemingly did nothing to raise awareness about the possible pitfalls of using your existing gmail handle as your Google+ name, especially during early stages, when the Google+ experience and userbase flowed rather naturally from the (now-defunct) Buzz service (where Google showed they can be trusted <a href="http://news.sky.com/story/758801/googles-buzz-has-serious-privacy-flaws">to act responsibly</a> with their users data and privacy). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To take the case at hand, and as far as I can tell, some asshat took exception to my snarking at the jeebus conservative crowd (something I do quite often, all the while trying to keep things in good humor, and tentatively constructive), and did the honorable thing, reporting my obviously non-christian googlename as <i>illegal</i>, which is what our Vord & Sailor would do, or something. I'm not going to cry over dirty metagaming tactics, this being the internet and all, but certainly it was a bit pissant (as She intendeth, presumably) and it wasted a few hours of my time.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Coincidentally, it also goes to show how exposing your RealID publicly on social networks may not be all that wise, but that's for another day.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://support.google.com/plus/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1228271">As instructed</a>, under penalty of losing access to my profile, I provided proper name and surname, and moved to have <b>Armchair Designer</b> set as my nickname instead, while I was setting up a <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/114525801712852464492/114525801712852464492">g+ Page by the same moniker</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On my freshly renamed Profile, I then added a pointer towards the Page thingie, and inverted the colors palette on my original Profile picture to draw my regular readers/contacts' attention to the changes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While I was fiddling with that, a second message from our friendly robotic overlords dropped into my lap: </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pAfM8arPGc4/URy-04SttwI/AAAAAAAAACM/lLroE9nd9jI/s0-d/ArmchairDesignerNickBan.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="120" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pAfM8arPGc4/URy-04SttwI/AAAAAAAAACM/lLroE9nd9jI/s0-d/ArmchairDesignerNickBan.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>I know there's probably prØn somewhere involving armchairs and designers, but really ?</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Cute. Now I have a name on my formerly-main Google+ profile that's entirely alien to the majority of people who have me in their Circles. Glad we cleared that up.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Understood that — like it or not — Google can insist on users of Google+ (but really all google services) presenting their official ID to the world, the real question is whether it's the best business move Google can make.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The short answer is : yes, but.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Google's thoughts on the matter are no mystery, and the company's position <a href="http://boingboing.net/2011/08/27/eric-schmidt-if-you-cant-use-your-real-name-dont-use-google.html">has been made as clear as one can hope from an opportunistic colonial organism</a>. In de-BS'ed terms, it boils down to the following :</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Google intends to be a central ID provider, starting in its home turf of 'merka, a country where there is no national ID card, the mere mention thereof being cause for riots. Google+ and associated services is Google's private census tool and ID registry initiative, reliant on the users willingness to provide the hivemind with the most minute details of their life so they can be profiled, packaged and properly marketed (to).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From google's perspective, keeping out the small fraction of users who don't feel comfortable sharing their meatspace ID with the entire googlesphere is not a bug, it's a feature. Presumably, the damage pseudonymousers' lack of faith in the panopticon utopia could do to the plussers community morale is not worth the trouble, relative to the value of said minority's business to Google.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
See ? all good.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So why then, considering I'm obviously one of the shy types about my meatspace ID going full-frontal on the internet, do I even use Google+ ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The short answer is I'm a mammal, hence lazy, and also I probably was happy to delude myself in the belief that Google somehow cared about retaining some of its vanishing geek-cool streetcred. In retrospect, that was serious wishful-thinking on my part, something <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Google">Google track record should have discouraged</a>, was I not an idiot.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As for my <i>weak mammal</i> argument, Google apps are rather fantastic tools, and at least until recently they had no competition to speak of (Sheets is still unrivaled, as far as I know). Gmail is fast and extremely convenient, and Google+ in my experience has been vastly superior to Facebook in terms of s/n ratio, ergonomics, spamlessness, plus it doesn't make my eyes bleed from the clutter on screen, and that's without considering Circles, which are its major selling point.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is no reason not to use Google stuff if you have the use for it <i>and</i> you're cool with their policies, and it's clearly a take it or leave it deal.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's the same reason why I did not appeal or fight the name change : per Google's rather fluid EULA, <i>I </i>was in breach, and that they didn't act on it until somebody pointed my way changes nothing. Although I reckon it's a stupid policy, and one that could be largely addressed by allowing people to present themselves under their chosen nickname alone (even with Google requiring people fill optionally public-facing Name and Surname fields in profile), Google's reasoning is what it is and, unless applicable laws say otherwise, is their privilege.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The comedy lies obviously in how easy it is to fake a "true" ID good enough to fool Google's superficial controls (for now), meaning anybody who really means to be a nuisance is a copy-paste away from a brand new Google account, while serious trolls will go the extra mile and prep pre-aged accounts to replace those that fall. Google or not, the only workable ways to adress anti-social behavior in large online groups depend heavily on actionable personal reputation, something Google has nothing to enforce or leverage at this writing.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WDtFVazuQQs/URzPLpybC0I/AAAAAAAAACo/awqdcYs9aW8/s0-d/1102_schwarzer-rauch_420.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="425" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WDtFVazuQQs/URzPLpybC0I/AAAAAAAAACo/awqdcYs9aW8/s0-d/1102_schwarzer-rauch_420.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<i>Episode X : A New Pope ?</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'm not quite ready to ragequit on Google+, because all the stuff I like about it is still true, but a few things radically changed in my perception of the social platform over this relatively minor event, and that will certainly affect how, and how much, I use it.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've been burned, and there's no coming back from that. Google+ will no longer feel homey to me : it's about as personal as LinkedIn or twitter now, which is really not that much. As a result, I'm less likely to use it, push content to it, and help Google know more about those among the supposed 99% of users who are fine with using the name that's on their passport in g+, whenever they interact with me or my content.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
By no stretch of the imagination am I famous, nor even internet-famous, so I guess I'm no big loss to Google, yet I'm left wondering : how many among the outliers to the general blissful population of g+ happen to also be significant outliers, from a data-collection standpoint ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Google is running a mall/farm sort of operation, and I can see how they see as their best interest to maintain public order. A combo of relative segregation among populations (thanks to Circles) and of catering to the least-controversial denominator (thanks to forced exposure and peer pressure) seems like the way to go, and yet…<br />
If my intuition about outliers is correct (big if, indeed), there is a potential downside to Google xanaxed ideal of an aseptic community, and that's a (proportional) drought of exciting things happening in their over-homogenized ecosystem.<br />
<br />
Life is messy, and Google's electronic equivalent of a white picket fence cul-de-sac may prove a little bit boring, in the long run.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-8734062819317248122012-12-21T15:08:00.000+00:002012-12-22T12:46:51.594+00:00To dick or not to dick ?<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Apple has never been known to be a <i>nice</i> company to be around, and is very much alike its iconic co-founder in this regard : fanatically vision driven, frequently bright, proven right against the <i>common wisdom </i>of its detractors (and supporters) more often than its turn, but also certifiably sociopathic …and it's alright to be all those things, really — as long as it serves a greater purpose, and works. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In Apple's case, this manic drive has been a key factor not just in the company's survival (if barely, at times) but also in its changing and shaping the landscape of personal computing, and how we live with our gadgets on a day-to-day basis, whether you use Apple products or not.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-RdYFXwaqioo/UNR0C2P6r2I/AAAAAAAAGTk/4m-bLEVw5dY/s800/SteveJobs-SerialKiller.jpg" width="460" /><br />
<i>When Jeebus was still a mere serial-baby-seal-clubber.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I believe it is no longer the case, and that Apple has jumped the shark from <i>cruel to be kind</i> to <i>drunk on its own kool-aid</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To wit, pretty much everything newsworthy on the Apple front over the past two years has been about it displaying the stupendous amounts of incompetence and dickishness we're more accustomed to expect from the likes of SONY or Microsoft, without much in the way of redeeming flashes in innovative marketing brilliance that are supposed to distract us from the <i>Cult of Steve</i>'s abusive relationship with its followers.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">[Full disclosure : I've been using, fixing, hacking and doing mundane and weird stuff with Macs for over 20 years, professionally at times. I'm also familiar with Microsoft platforms since the DOS era, and have ran a few other OSes as daily workhorses, including BSD variants and BeOS. I'm currently sharing my computing time between MacOSX 10.6 (~65%), Android ICS/JB (~20%), WinXP (~5%) and Win7 (~10%). My browsers of choice are Chrome and Firefox (desktop), Opera Mobile and Dolphin (mobile). I don't really fancy long walks on the beach, but I'll happily meet you at the bar afterwards. Market shares % and other figures in this article, unless explictely linked, result from the conflation of various sources, smoothed with my thumb.]</span></i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-pvwYoOxIuu0/UNR0FAqLCtI/AAAAAAAAGT0/RNANKv7N1yc/s800/jobsbird.jpg" width="564" /><br />
<i>His Jobiness, speaking the truth to his followers.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Of course, much of what can be held against Apple isn't exactly new : the Cupertino firm has always treated its devoted flock like crap, failing to acknowledge the debt it owns to its peculiar ecosystem of loyal customers, employees and third party developers. Only now, it starts to look like the harem of battered wives it has built for itself may think about seeing other people.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For all the self-entitled abuse it imposes upon its users and partners, Apple used to offer a few things no other company did : a comparatively reliable, trustworthy hardware and software environments, access to high-value niche products/customers, plus a strong, if screwed-up brand culture, and enough gems of genuine vision to infuse the whole thing with its unique love-it-or-hate-it flavor. Oh, and also the Mac's cool GUI and (relatively) painless learning curve.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In short, embracing the Apple platform meant paying a steeper price upfront, compensated in uniqueness and consistency (and arguably lower CoO in the mid-term).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It doesn't hurt that Microsoft used to do such a good job of RP'ing the <i>ebil empire</i>, either : going the Mac way was sexy and edgy on a cultural/political level, back when it meant doing the <i>chic</i> rebellious thing (as opposed to the then-<i>loony</i> rebellious thing of running a ghetto OS like Amiga or Linux).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Things have changed quite a bit since, however, and Apple making a killing both in the desktop and mobile markets means it no longer gets to play the underdog card. APPL isn't just valued sky-high, it's also the largest, most profitable single vendor of tablets, smartphones, multimedia handhelds and laptop computers today, which is hardly grounds for anyone to cry over MacOS X still-marginal share of the PC market.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But that's not how Apple sees it, apparently : the <i>with us or against us</i> mentality is still in full force at Cupertino, and it is examplified by the campaign of bullyish lawsuits they've been waging lately, and their generally anti-competitive, gun-crazy stance, all of which have not proven successful enough to vindicate their views in the public eye. Add to that the Foxconn mess, and the down in perceived value of the Apple platform, thanks to SONY-grade <a href="http://www.thenbells.com/2012/11/apple-think-twice.html">horror stories</a> about Apple's declining Quality Insurance and customer service & support practices, and it's no mystery why aftermarket logo-covering shells for MacBooks are selling so well.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Meanwhile, Microsoft has been regaining some ground in public perception, with Windows 7 proving a usable product, and now Windows 8, for the first time ever, possibly putting MS ahead of the Apple curve in GUI evolution... just when Apple is having its own <i>Vista moment.</i> Thanks to many users stubbornly sticking to MacOS 10.6, because the 10.7-10.8 iOS-inspired releases do nothing for them, the supposedly obsolete OS <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9231513/Apple_goes_against_grain_extends_support_for_Snow_Leopard">earned a reprieve</a>.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-dEYYC3-ixPs/UNR0EPh3QnI/AAAAAAAAGTw/BK-S-SK4mSw/s800/WalledGarden.jpg" width="512" /><br />
<i>Apple employees, hard at work to improve the customer experience.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The most glaring example of Apple's worldview drifting towards the pointlessly dickish is probably the 2012 launch of the <i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_(Apple_connector)">Lightning</a></i> power/bus connector : not only does it not add any significative value in terms of features and functionalities over the preceding <i>30-pin</i> connectors, but it introduces an incompatibility with existing peripherals and accessories (both Apple's and third-party's) that can only be (somewhat) solved by buying overpriced adapters from Apple<span style="font-size: x-small;">*</span>.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Much like the Lions-class OSes, Lightning fails to justify its existence to anyone but Apple itself, as it doesn't bring enough extra value relative to the restrictions it imposes to many users and developers to warrant the upgrade, and instead hinges on the certainty that people simply won't have a choice but to go the Apple way. The company is not half-assing it, either, going out of its way to try and stop users and third-party vendors from bridging the compatibility gaps and jump over the garden walls inasmuch as it can.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This <i>walled garden</i> mentality, seemingly vindicated by the success of the iPod/Phone/Pad lines and the iOS Appstore, may turn out to be problematic however, if Apple finds itself facing serious competition on the fronts where it traditionally dominates : ease of use, reliability, and brand prestige.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's not so much that Apple has been losing its marketing edge, although the overhyped <i>Cult of Steve</i> thingie may be backfiring since the demise of Jobs<span style="font-size: x-small;">**</span>, and more about the likes of Google, Samsung or ASUS relentless efforts to best Apple at its own game. Android smartphones and tablets offerings cover a much wider range than Apple's, and no longer fall short in the high-end tier, often matching or exceeding Apple's products in features, looks, polish and ease of use, usually for cheaper.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Meanwhile, the prevalent attitude among Android vendors towards open standards, multiple appstores and interoperability with foreign environments is one of comparative openness : many Android-based hardware makers have opted to no longer interfere with rooting / jailbreaking, and some even go so far as releasing source and documentation to facilitate better support of their devices by third-party devs and the hacker community.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At this writing, Apple keeps the upper hand both on the mobile hardware and OS fronts, and still leads in prestige and brand popularity. Largely because of the plethoric hardware offer on the Android side of things, hardware vendors are reluctant to coordinate and invest in cultivating the Android brand and customer loyalty, which are likely to benefit their competitors just as much as their own product line.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On the other hand, Google — as the standard-bearer of the Android forces — is doing a fairly good job of addressing the brand dilution issue by presenting a simple, easily grasped hardware lineup in its NEXUS series (lately of LG, Samsung and ASUS making) and is having a field day making Apple look like a <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2232708/google-maps-for-ios-sees-10-million-downloads-in-two-days">sourpuss has-been</a>, despite Apple commanding over half of the entire tablet and smartphone market all by itself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On the desktop/laptop front, Apple success is relative to where it's coming back from : at roughly 12% of the total PC OS market, vs about 85% for all Windows variants, it's not exactly in a dominant position, even though it's certainly one of the most profitable hardware vendors, thanks to the top-tier position and higher than average margins of its products line (prices range from $1,000 to $4,000). That leaves Apple way behind the HP-Dell duo in market shares (each controls about 22% of the market), but <a href="http://gadgets.ndtv.com/laptops/news/apples-macs-shine-bright-in-a-declining-pc-market-284211">still growing while the others decline</a>, thanks to a much more loyal customer base and to the gateway drug effect of its tablets, smartphones and handhelds, to end up just as profitable as the leaders — if not more.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/-yBi0853Ed15Rr-3eksZvpWrK-0y1jaGWRvtW3_wbjE?feat=directlink"><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-4m4LVniR-jg/UNR0CnhXQsI/AAAAAAAAGTg/MGXqckergRA/s800/Apple_ThinkDifferent.jpg" width="512" /></a><br />
<i>Apple products are for thinkers, of thoughts.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Apple's core edge lies in the branding and functional synergy between its PC, OS and mobile offers, which currently can't be matched by Android or Windows competitors. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Microsoft efforts in the mobile OS market are doomed to fail, as MS simply lacks the chops to compete with an established leader (MS expertise and culture is all about destroying and co-opting smaller competitors, not besting heavyweights in fighting shape at their own game), and conversely, Android lacks a desktop OS counterpart for seamless integration, something neither Apple nor MS is eager to facilitate on their respective OSes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's something Apple is banking on, too, and the convergence between recent Mac OSX iterations and iOS, interface-wise, owes nothing to chance or lazyness, and everything to Apple's dedication to persuade customers they should forever remain inside Apple's controlled ecosystem.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This could turn out to be a limiting factor, however, as the distinction between mobile platforms and <i>serious</i> hardware gets blurrier : the tablet market, which Apple singlehandedly brought to what it is today, is well on its way to eat the subnotebook, then laptop, lunches. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With the desktop (as a consumer product) limping towards extinction, and mobile gizmos crossing some significant thresholds in performance (3D capability, full HD display, HDD-sized storage capacity), the platform war for the mobile-friendliest desktop OS may be over before it really begins, as the very notion of <i>host OS</i> may soon become obsolete, and the next generations of formerly <i>mobile</i> OSes become able to do everything we expect from a desktop computer, by hooking up to compatible peripherals.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
And this is where the Apple model may hit a pothole, and its hostility to third party vendors and developers could backfire, from the first moment its marketshare in the mobile market significantly falls below the 50% mark — and it will, inevitably. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Developers and hardware makers, if faced with the choice of supporting iOSX vs Android, with Apple at equal or lesser potential marketspace, may decide to focus on the platform that's less likely to leave their products dead in the water overnight, be it by revoking their access to the Appstore or changing the standard of a critical physical interface.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'm certainly not predicting Apple's demise here, but a cascade failure of spectacular proportions may lie just around the corner for Cupertino if it doesn't wake up soon to the reality we're no longer in the age of <i>Bondi vs Beige</i>, or <i>iPod vs Zune</i> : Apple can no longer count on the competition's terrible suckiness to make its products shine and look cool in comparison. From anecdotal evidence, I hear from more and more people switching between iOS and Android <i>in the wrong direction</i> (for Apple), and not many the other way around. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Apple is reaping considerable profits from its mobile/handheld platforms, and the PC business isn't bad, either, especially considering Apple premium-priced, integrated model ensures a comparatively high profit per customer/sale. iOS customers are also spending more on average than their Android counterparts, both in the company Appstore and on Apple and third party accessories. Indeed, Android has a lot of ground to cover before it threatens Apple's lead in revenue, and no individual mobile device vendor can dream of touching Apple as of yet.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Thus, the future looks good for Apple — just not as good as it was before serious competition. Apple still owns the iOS market, but it's simply no longer <i>all the market</i>, and as the iOS expansion slows, it may get closer to saturation, especially if customer loyalty can't be taken for granted anymore.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As Apple has proven numerous times before, it can build great hardware, and software worth paying a premium to run. Now would be the time to get back to that approach, because there's no room left for an iPad Nano to follow the disappointing iPad Mini …it's called an iPhone and everybody who wanted one got one, already.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For largely different takes on the issue, I suggest <a href="http://techpinions.com/why-androids-market-share-is-no-threat-to-apples-ios-platform/12800">this</a> and <a href="http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/26/the-android-engagement-paradox/">this</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*[That is, until it got worked around by enterprising aftermarketers, about 5' after release.]</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">**[If everything good about Apple was of Steve's doing, how good is an Apple without Steve ?]</span></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-41235859990255692012012-12-15T09:31:00.001+00:002012-12-15T10:19:01.542+00:00Agree to disagree ?<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In democracy, politics is the art of misdirection.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Whether you believe in democracy as a virtuous and working system depends strictly upon where you fall, between your urge to be heard, and your distrust of your fellow citizens' ability to make competent political choices.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If getting your voice heard is important enough to overshadow the risk of idiots contributing the majority of the vote, congratulations : you do believe in democracy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If deep down you're terrified by the idiots having any sort of say in public matters, and realize your own opinions may not be that interesting, congratulations : you don't believe in democracy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…yet you likely are even more afraid of something else, like communism or dictatorship, and democracy sounds like the lesser of many evils.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here's a series of well-know facts about us all — they're truisms, but they'll come handy in a minute: </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<ul>
<li>Most people are idiots. </li>
<li>Most people believe most people are idiots. </li>
<li>Most idiots don't know they are. </li>
<li>Most people don't believe they are idiots.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It follows that idiots (who think they aren't) distrust the mental and political competency of most other people (who they believe to be idiots), and yet feel of critical import that their personal opinions are heard and accounted for.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-K2oRAhOhjac/UMxMnqotKyI/AAAAAAAAGSI/_qri5BgmB3E/s800/PlantSnowGlobeDark.jpg"><img src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-4fOZe-Aaoeo/UMxMmmd23kI/AAAAAAAAGSA/AT20hnpxxBw/s800/PlantSnowGlobeClear.jpg" width="640" /></a><br />
<i>C'mon… you know you want to click on me.</i><br />
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The above may seem like an issue unfairly framed, and in some ways it is.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's meant as an object lesson : because of the underlying assumption (shared by most) that a significant portion of the citizenry is in fact politically inept (by virtue of diverging from one's own views or interests), any debate in the context of a democracy tends to be framed in such a way as to either exclude, void or redirect the contributions of the people the speaker disagrees with, and favor those views she subscribes to.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I could write a book about the inherent self-contradictions of democracy as a mode of government (don't taunt me), but right now, here's a simple question for the presumed idiots out there, and also for you, my dear reader :</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Can you imagine a working democratic government system that wouldn't hinge on misdirection ?</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-55823374784040865442012-12-08T06:26:00.004+00:002012-12-09T22:08:13.945+00:00The Bourne Legacy - A Vicarious Postmortem<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The other day I <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-bourne-legacy-as-if.html">almost-reviewed</a> — mostly spoiled and snarked at — the fourth movie in the "Bourne Whatever" franchise, and hinted there was more to come…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Well, here it is.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Today's post is about learning lessons from that wreck, and about the abilities and constraints applicable to spinoffs and expansions in a series.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Also it's a pic-less wall'o'text, because looking for iconography is too much of a timesink, and I'd rather get back to the next episode of <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/p/this-series-will-try-to-tackle-oft.html">The Fair Game</a> series. Deal with it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To start off the right foot, let me state for the record, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bourne_Legacy_(film)">The Bourne Legacy</a>, as it is, is not a bad movie entirely, and falls from only as high, to fail only as hard as it set itself in the first place. What goes wrong mainly happens on the expectations management and internal consistency fronts, two topics dear to my heart.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As may not be obvious from my previous spoilerific review, the first 90-or-so minutes of the movie stand on a firm leg, and really do a quite honorable job of upholding the franchise style and character, that is until the flick suddenly takes the kind of unexpected turn in both style and substance that manages to ruin both everything that has come before and make the — otherwise pretty good — pulp-action in the last half-hour fall on the painful side of campy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That sort of slip-up is especially inexcusable and damaging when applied to a franchise that's entirely about taking a fresh and clever view on otherwise tired genre clichés, and we'll get back to the question of why and how, but for now let's just say the end of the end of the movie was just about as welcome as a strawberry icecream floater lobbed into a garlic clam chowder bowl.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let's have at it, in from-the-hip postmortem style.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>What went right: </b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the absence of the titular character, the writers made the right choice by setting up The Bourne Legacy as a side-story rather than a sequel : this allows for tighter integration of the new story into the mainline storyline and instantly establishes the legitimacy of the expansion as part of the larger verse.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Similarly, most of the defining elements and themes of the early Jason Bourne movies are reused, but not so hamfistedly that it looks like a reboot by any other name. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A particularly nice (if under-exploited) touch comes with the theme of the anti-captain america supersoldier, who owes not so much his physical abilities but his intellectual competency to being a military guinea pig, and fears a demotion to his previous state or metal retardation. It's a rather clever play on the classic <i>allow me to show you my true worth by granting me superpowers</i>, because the protagonist himself believes he isn't worth crap without his spook-special makeover.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Aaron Cross is slightly less of a wandering hero than Jason Bourne, but even though most of the plot is resolved over only three locales, mostly urban, we still get some sense of moving around quite a bit and all the right checkboxes get crossed in terms of scenes that should be in a Jason Bourne movie : the roof chase, the weird/tense meet with a peer agent that ends up in dead peer, the house assault, the epic car chase in economy-class cars/bikes, a bit of improvised weaponry… the works. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The main cast is generally a success : Jeremy Renner works as a footsoldier upgraded way above his comfort zone, in a bit of clever metaplay on the actor's public perception as a second-tier star, and (nearly) gets a chance to grow up throughout the movie into a lead in his own right. Edward Norton is also a nice pick for the half burned out post-facto rationalizing baddie, and Rachel Weisz sells a surprisingly well-written fish-out-of-fishbowl scientist girl. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the extras/red-shirt department, there are a couple nice touches too, with <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0411964/">Zeljko Ivanek</a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0555500/">Elizabeth Marvel</a>, both of TV fame as morally ambiguous typecasts, who make the best from the small parts they're given. Some of the cast from previous installments reprise their roles without fault, which helps bring the whole thing together with the main universe and storyline.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The principal photography is not bad either, and generally fits alright with the atmosphere and codes established in the previous movies, if a bit different, but that's not a bad thing in itself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>What went wrong:</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As subtly hinted in my previous review-cum-spoiler, the entire last quarter of the movie goes horribly wrong, not because it's poorly done (although at times it is), but because it runs off the rails from the entire franchise by moving into over-the-top pulp bombasticness for no apparent reason but lazyness. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I have other gripes with the movie, but they also boil down to lazyness : <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005078/">Stacy Keach</a> is appropriately hamming it as a generic cynical military-turned-conspiracy underboss — but sadly, it's entirely out of place in this specific setting. That kind of characterization is just phoning it in, writing wise, and so are most of the other minor blunders in the movie, so let's focus on the core issues of lack of direction, consistency and proper storytelling.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Where the entire <i>Bourne</i> franchise hinges on stretching believability while keeping it hollywood-gritty and reasonably verisimilar, the Bourne Legacy drifts into a pure pulp from the moment the main arc for the hero is resolved with a fetch quest of a magic cure for his illness/Achilles' heel. At this point, there is no story left in this beast, and the whole thing is runing on fumes, so we're treated to a very intense and spectacular chase against a terminator-like baddie that goes on for the last 20 minutes of action in the movie, yet fails miserably because a) it lacks purpose, and b) it's stylistically off.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b>The point is… ?</b><br />
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From a simple storytelling perspective, the lack of purpose is obviously at odds with the supposedly climactic nature of the big finale chase and confrontation with the baddie, but let's see exactly how and why, because that's a common issue with some action flicks that endeavour to carry more of a story than a dungeon crawler.
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The <i>Bourne</i> series is not about a protagonist kicking the arse of incrementally tougher henchmen until he gets to kill the bigbad. It's about a guy travelling around a world of trouble, in a quest for answers, and hopefully peace of mind — and breaking a few skulls if and when it's the most convenient solution to get baddies out of his way. The face-off with the dragon happens because the dragon is sent after him, not because the protagonist works his way up to to the confrontation as a milestone.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Arguably that's the case in <i>Legacy</i>, too, as the determinator sent after <strike>Bourne</strike> Cross is not somebody Cross looks forward to meet and fight. The problem here is there's nothing at stake : the dragon is an obvious case of last-minute <i>release monster X</i> and his obstruction accomplishes nothing but to slow down the hero's eventual escape from his pursuers, which we know must by law of the genre succeed - the only question here would be whether <i>the girl</i> is to get killed en route, but by that point we already trust she won't, for she's been sticking with him past the point of usefulness, and she's pretty much all he has to show in the way of spoils of war.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The big car chase is supposed to be a serious mountain to climb during the journey, ideally culminating in some flag capture or equivalent milestone in the storyline : in the original movie, it's the clincher to bond Jason and Marie into a team, in the second, it's the pilgrimage en route to Bourne's confession and contrition to the daughter of one of his victims, in the third, it's the opportunity for Bourne to spare the life of a fellow operative at the end of a serious confrontation, who will repay him later by not shooting him when he could. In any case, there is more to come, and the chase happens as Bourne is intent on getting somewhere, not merely escaping, the latter we know he could manage at any time, because duh, he's Jason Bourne.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Yes, this make your ass look huge.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
That's not even the worst part about the final chase : style is the main offender here. Simply put, it doesn't even try to be believable and it's a mess to boot.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When your car/bike chase is so much of a collage of nonsensical show-off tricks that it would be hard to turn into a playable mission in GTA, that should be a solid hint something is wrong with it. Much worse is the fact it just doesn't fit the overall style of the series and manages to make a mockery of everything that came before (and wasn't an embarrassment) by throwing away the <i>Bourne</i> franchise earnest efforts of keeping things mostly realistic (for a blockbuster value thereof) and switching to an action-comedy gear we didn't know was supposed to be there.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There's nothing wrong with action comedy, or Hollwood-amped pulp/B-movie action : I've enjoyed some of Jason Statham and Vin Diesel action flicks without remorse or shame, and I can even go through any of Tom Cruise's ridiculous MI without gouging my eyes out with a spoon. but the moment you throw a trenchcoat on a ninja-zombie and pretend it fits into a John LeCarré spy novel, you'll see me cringe.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><a href="http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/03/avengers-hawkeye-archery/">Bend it like Hawkeye.</a></b><br />
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But let's backtrack to the true moment of derailment, and what it indicates about the true <i>wtf is it you think you're doing ?</i> aspects of <i>The Bourne Legacy</i>.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The <i>Bourne</i> series is a fairly classic lone-spy setting, and revolves around a guy using his talents against his masters to both survive and unveil conspiracies after his being marked for termination. Without going into the minutiae of the franchise, that's the bare essentials.<br />
Where it differs from a pure action flick is in the rather involved story, with multiple reveals, twists and concurrent interests of major players/groups, and a protagonist that is expected to outsmart them all as he's peeling the onion of lies and coverups, all the while struggling with his not-entirely reliable mind. No such thing here, even though everything was properly set from the beginning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is only one conspiracy at play in <i>Legacy</i>, as you can safely ignore most of the mainline Bourne stuff happening in the background : bad guys are worried about being exposed and initiate a wholesale cleanup of all the people involved in the project the hero is a part of, flagging him and <i>scientist girl</i> for termination. The mission therefore, is to go in hiding forever after grabbing a MacGuffin to take care of the hero's addiction to pills.<br />
Thus we're looking at a fairly straight line, with a single waypoint enroute, laid on a flat surface, as opposed to the aforementioned conspirationist onion of the previous Bourne movies. The endgoal is equal to the initial starting condition, with a slight detour. That may be OK for a straight-up action movie, but a <i>Bourne</i> it does not make, legacy or otherwise.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>What could have been done differently ?</b></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We start with an interesting protagonist, who's more the grunt-next-door and less the elite-spook type than Jason Bourne, and who comes with a strong personal motivation : more than his life, which his type is expected to be prepared to risk at every turn, he's running against the clock to save his mind, which he knows only exists thanks to the chemical enhancements provided by his former masters turned enemies. Much like the original Bourne was driven by his compulsion to <i>learn about himself</i>, Cross is forced to get in the thick of things in order to <i>not lose himself</i>, and everything is primed for us to get a taste for the looming curse that's chasing him forward… except it will never happen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We get a glimpse of what could possibly be Cross blanking as the meds start running out, shortly before he reaches the MacGuffin in Manila, but he gets injected with the magic cure for stupidness momentarily, and we never see him in his diminished state (he shakes a cold-like fever overnight, during which he has bad dreams, wow).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's too bad, considering we also have Dr Marta Shearing on call, who it is established is very competent in her field, and has proven to be quite smart and resilient generally. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We'd have ample room here to work in a couple scenes right around or after grabbing the virus sample, where she'd get to carry the ball (and our hero) forward, while his abilities diminish to a rather terrifying point. We know of his potential value to her in his fully-able state, and that would be reason enough for her to put in the effort and risk to try and restore him, while it would go a long way toward explaining why he doesn't dump her the moment he is permanently fixed and she becomes dead weight (OK, we got hints of his good heart and possible crush on her earlier, but still). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All of that could have been sorted just fine by the magic cure not being such a turnkey solution, and requiring a bit of time, work and tools.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That would have entailed a bit of respite for our heroes, which could have been brought about by their fortuitous "death" occuring after… a car chase ! </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are ten different ways to make this work, thanks to the semi-random nature of the chase context : slow down or minimize the chasing party at will, for a minute or more, get the girl behind the wheel because the hero ate a bit of a scenery or just went retrograde, etc.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This also would have given meaning and purpose to the mandatory car chase, and who nows, offered a bit of an opportunity to actually care about the determinator, too, provided he did not die right away — maybe he can't believe they're dead because of his built-in <i>"amped mission fidelity</i><i>"</i>, and thus keeps looking for them after they're declared dead, who knows…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This pace change alone would have solved two out of three problems, provided the chase was not so ludicrously designed (but that's a self-contained issue), and would have added a bit of depth to the whole thing, leaving only the conspiracy side of things a bit light for the price.<br />
…which is convenient, because we might want something to wrap things up, even though reaching the point where the hero recovers his full cognitive abilities could be enough to provide a satisfying conclusion. Of course, that would leave <i>the girl</i> in charge of all the meaningful parts until the titles roll, which in itself could seriously screw with the alpha-male mythos here (although I personally would deem it a nice twist, and argue her doing the dragon in at the end of the bike chase was indeed a step in that direction).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Being an expansion and side-story to the Bourne mainline, there are limitations to what can be allowed, conspiracy-wise : <i>Legacy</i> couldn't afford to break the canonical storyline, nor kill any of the recurring bigbads, and generally had to avoid affecting or triggering verse-shattering events, for fear of closing plot branches and making things harder for the future of the franchise. Still, I'm confident Ed Norton's character is not above using child soldiers in african wars as a test group for new supersoldier juice or something equally disturbing, now that the whole Bournery thing is canonically commoditized in pill form.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
How you get Aaron Cross in the loop, or to care about it, is another question, and one that would have been fitting of another installment in the <i>Legacy</i> subseries.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
ttfn<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-31331253961403829962012-12-05T12:33:00.000+00:002012-12-05T19:04:04.750+00:00The Bourne Legacy - as if…<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Between sourcing my research by tripping on peyote while playtesting games old enough to get their own passport, then editing my ramblings before poasting*, not to mention all the stuff that happens off-stage, this editor sometimes needs a break, and last night I watched a movie…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1194173/">The Bourne Legacy</a></b> </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(IMDB 6.8, RT 56% , MC 61%)</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zInuTQIP_f4/UL8uF29HH-I/AAAAAAAAGQY/W38NzaP0jqo/s1600/The-Bourne-Legacy-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zInuTQIP_f4/UL8uF29HH-I/AAAAAAAAGQY/W38NzaP0jqo/s640/The-Bourne-Legacy-poster.jpg" width="408" /></a></div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Fair warning — for reasons that will soon become apparent, I'm going to spoil the socks off this mother, so if you plan on watching this flick and are keen to preserve your sense of wonder, here's all you need to know — it will be good, while it lasts.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you somehow managed to never see a Jason Bourne movie, here's what you need to know in addition: Jason Bourne is a super-spy, and a wanted man.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Previously on…</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0258463/">The Bourne Identity</a><i> (Matt Damon is Jason Bourne)</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In episode one, he starts as a bullethole ridden amnesiac who soon discovers he has superhuman skills and more passports than fingers (counting the toes). He subsequently goes on a journey of self-discovery across europe, taking along a cute bohemian hipsterette and riding in her mini, all the while chased by people who <i>don't want him to remember</i>. It sounds like it would suck in all the usual boombastic ways, yet really is both good fun and surprisingly verisimilar and low-key (for Hollywood values thereof).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372183/">The Bourne Supremacy</a> <i>(They should have left him alone)</i> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the second installment, our now-retired protagonist is framed by the baddies for the death of several CIA agents, sending the CIA after him. Just to cover every base, the baddies still send an assassing after him (as if) with the net result that the girl eats a bullet, thus sending the hero into a revenge frenzy. If it starts to sound like a Liam Neeson movie, it's because it kinda drifts towards that precipice, but manages to avoid the cliff jump by hanging on a solid thread of _noir_ spy intrigue and deviousness (some cool baddies, too).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0440963/">The Bourne Ultimatum</a> <i>(This summer Jason Bourne comes home)</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Part three is arguably where the series comes into its own, our by now soulcrushed hero is dead set on a course of revenge and redemption, with a side of death wish that gives some consistency to his going against all odds, _fear the one who has nothing to lose_-style. It pulls itself above the tarpit of tired cliché'dness through a fairly clever and earnest treatment and some good acting and direction.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…which brings us to <a href="http://the%20bourne%20legacy/">The Bourne Legacy</a> <i>(There was never just one).</i><br />
A hell of a misnomer of a title to boot, as it takes place <i>concurrently</i>, and not <i>after</i> the run of the original trilogy as you'd expect.** </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The <i>legacy</i> part appears to be a case of nobody remembering to change the working title in time and getting stuck with it, or they just didn't care, who knows. What it really tells you is how the production approached the problem when confronted with the absence of both the titular character/actor and the director who fleshed him out.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Back to basics.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Bourne legacy is a Jason Bourne movie without Jason Bourne, and Tony Gilroy seemingly decided to go back to the original recipe, and do it all over again, with a slight change in flavoring oil, and while keeping the option open to carry on with the original product line in the future.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What it came down to is this : refresh a tired trope with clever treatment.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In this case the tired trope-a-looza is made of : </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<ul>
<li>plentypotent field agent is chased by baddies from a government spook program gone feral, </li>
<li>is not too sure he can trust his own mind, </li>
<li>and takes a cute but-not-Disney-cute brunette along for the ride, </li>
<li>because she's a witness and the baddies want her dead too, now. </li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Also part of the deal, <i>srs bzns</i> car chases using economy-class vehicles, some parkour-ish rooftop acrobatics, improvised weapons, travel to exotic-yet-gritty locales, and a face-off with a dragon of similar background and skills to the hero's.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As pointed above, pulling off the Bourne-sans-Bourne trick is all about tweaking the flavour and treatment, and the extra ingredients here are one dash of <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SuperSoldier">supersoldier</a> sauce, a pinch of extra trope-metagaming with a <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLancer">lancer</a>-to-hero <i>tour de main</i>, and one part <i>moar peppa !</i> in the shape of extra-crippling mental condition.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, does it work ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yes but — quite literally — only up to a point.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
See why after the jump.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><b>*lands*</b></i></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let's have a spoilerific look at this feature shall we ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1d079GWw8w4/UL8iLEBqSeI/AAAAAAAAGPo/NR-ic6ZZtPM/s1600/TheBourneLegacy-GiftToTheLadies.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="A gift to all the ladies…" border="0" height="262" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1d079GWw8w4/UL8iLEBqSeI/AAAAAAAAGPo/NR-ic6ZZtPM/s640/TheBourneLegacy-GiftToTheLadies.png" title="A gift to all the ladies…" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<i>brrr…</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It begins with a rather familiar face, albeit one somewhat disbeautified by sprouts of Hollywood-unkempt facial hair, playing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_vs_wild">Man vs Wild</a> by his lone self around a glacial river for no good reason that we can guess, except maybe training, since a caption helpfully informs us we're looking at some special ops reserved training grounds, in Alaska.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A little more exposition will show us he's hero material, even though he's mostly been featured as sidekick or lancer before, because now we can watch him show off while nobody is around, and take pointless risks for no apparent reason, and yet not get karma slapped for it within minutes. Also, he seems to be popping pills on quite a regular basis, and given his ruggedly stylish pillbox is disguised (not !) as a dogtag, we must assume the chems are service-issue and part of the "special" in special forces.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Meanwhile <i>a girl is a scientist !</i> with nerd glasses and everything, and she's doing a check-up on muscular black guy n°X (no need to keep tabs, he's the lone black guy in the cast, and he dies faster than a gay D&D pothead in an '80s slasher movie). We're also led to understand her lab is where the "special" forces guys are getting their happy pills from, because pillbox dogtag highlight.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Back to <strike>Bear Grylls</strike> Jeremy Renner, who's making a racing day of crossing mountains, and seems kinda worried about running out of meds, which may tell us he's not as self-confident as his manly-man demeanor would like to suggest, or he's up to something, or he's a fucking junkie and just can't get enough of the stuff.<br />
<br />
Eventually he reaches a cabin, where he meets another pill-popping battledroid and they share rather tense looks oved rehydrated rations until Jermey figures the other one isn't here to end him or anything, he's just another soldier sent on a refresher class about the virtues of keeping it within parameters : he's been sent out there as a penitence for falling in love ! (for serious)<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NHiVENEbMCw/UL8iHLf0TLI/AAAAAAAAGPg/GTXSphGPeGQ/s1600/TheBourneLegacy-Bromance.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="264" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NHiVENEbMCw/UL8iHLf0TLI/AAAAAAAAGPg/GTXSphGPeGQ/s640/TheBourneLegacy-Bromance.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Courier New, Courier, monospace; font-size: x-small;">— We don't talk anymore…<br />— Eat your rice-a-rooni and let me read in peace, 'aight ?<br />— <b>You</b> eat your missile. (5 minutes from now)</span></blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The good news is there's a full rack of happy pills stored in the shed next to the cabin, and since they grumpfed in solidarity, they're now pals and Jarmey can have some, too (he lied through his teeth and claimed he lost his pillbox, when really he hid about three days worth of the stuff in his boot, cheeky bastard). Also they send via messenger drone the blood he's been collecting from himself while playing hopping yeti. Sure, why not.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Meanwhile, since we're watching a Jason Bourne movie, we cut to the studios in NYC to report sightings of Matt Damon, if only as a couple of B&W ID shots, which trigger some buggeroo lines from the baddies, as in : </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>— Jason Bourne has been sighted in NYC !<br />— Buggeroo ! Kill everybody remotely related but the essential plot devices, now !</i></blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…and back to your regularly scheduled program.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div>
Oh, I guess I should mention the big bad of the week is Ed Norton, which is always cool, even though he seems to be channeling John Cusack with a colon cancer, which is also interesting in a weird sort of way.</div>
<div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LMmobv95ZoI/UL8iRN6fu1I/AAAAAAAAGP4/NgL0SKjn00c/s1600/TheBourneLegacy-Perv.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="264" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LMmobv95ZoI/UL8iRN6fu1I/AAAAAAAAGP4/NgL0SKjn00c/s640/TheBourneLegacy-Perv.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Courier New, Courier, monospace; font-size: x-small;">— If you don't like my pervy come-ons, just wait a few to watch me go postal on PCP, babe. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Courier New, Courier, monospace; font-size: x-small;">*wink*</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
So… Jarmey Grylls and Scientist Gal are now on the <i>exterminate</i> list, which is enough to keep us and them busy for another half hour before they run into each other, at which point some more exposition ensues about the whole pill thing, the conspiracy behind, and why the hell are you still popping greens, Jarmey they're so last season !<br />
Long story short, there are no more pills to source locally, but she could potentially get him a permanent fix, except it's a long shot and a long flight, because they've outsourced good american jobs to the Philippines, and the doomsday lab is in Manila.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Well, he rightfully points, you're screwed without me, because you're a girl and stuff, care to tag along and save my junkie ass by cooking up some self-metabolitic juice for me ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sure, she says, presumably because you don't say no to a killerbot flirting with steroid psychosis, unless you're on the phone long distance while he's falling into a lava lake or somesuch.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As they prep for their getaway to exotic Philippines, we learn how truly "special" Jarmey really is, and why he's more than a little miffed at the prospect of going cold turkey on the blue pills. See, he used to be borderline retarded (meaning south of the border), and his apparent plentypotence is only the result of him juicing like mad, so he's understandably concerned with the possibility of morphing into a turnip again.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
…meanwhile, other specials drop like flies all around the world as they get refilled with the wrong color of meds.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As you can imagine, our dynamic duo will eventually reach the Manilab (see what I did here ?) where they're supposed to get their hands on samples of a virus to use as delivery device for the permanent fix to Jarmey's pill problem, which fix she stated earlier she ought to be able to cook up (implicitly within a solid day's work, provided the proper tools and materials). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Things take a first turn into counter-intelligence territory when, faced with a fairly basic pacing problem, the writers decide they're too cool for ellipsis, and since they don't have the time after all to explore the subplot they've been setting up for 30' (which would incidentally help make the characters more relatable and even build up to some actual, you know, acting), they will just magick through the whole thing rather than rewrite the premise that's been carrying a full half-hour of the feature and is the hero's main drive. Understandable, I'm sure, but it's a spectacular miss of an opportunity, and only a sign of worse things to come.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, 1h36 into the movie, after our hero has been running through a rain of hurt with a single goal in mind : getting a fix because he's got a government-made monkey on his back that threatens to lobotomize him down to not-even-good-for-infantry retardation levels, the girl just jacks a needle up his arm, and <i>voilà</i> : end of story, roll credits.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Except of course, not. </b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…hey, what was I saying ? Oh yes, worse things to come… right after the big bads figure (exactly as it happens) that our charming couple is busy juicing up with supersoldier virii, in Manila, therefore ensuring there will be no time wasted agonizing over the evolution of the patient's condition (spoiler : he'll get better overnight) — that's when it goes over the cliff.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iaQYJelv0HE/UL8iEkNOo7I/AAAAAAAAGPY/njHKvorZhFs/s1600/TheBourneLegacy-BornToRide.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="264" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iaQYJelv0HE/UL8iEkNOo7I/AAAAAAAAGPY/njHKvorZhFs/s640/TheBourneLegacy-BornToRide.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Courier New, Courier, monospace; font-size: x-small;">— I know you're scared, but look at the bright side : the less </span><span style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace; font-size: x-small;">sense </span><span style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace; font-size: x-small;">it all makes, the more likely it is we're the heroes and we're gonna pull through just fine !</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Courier New, Courier, monospace; font-size: x-small;">— Speak for yourself ! Now that you're all fixed, I seem to recall Franka Potente eating a sniper slug in that other movie…</span></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
By now you can tell the writers have had it and just want to go home to play Halo 4, and they're prepared to throw the towel or just spraypaint howevermany pages with crap, whichever gets them off the hook first, so it's an easy guess what's going to happen next.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We are due an epic finale, because somehow, you can't get away with having the protagonist just make it through a hell of a bad week and get the girl, he still has to own and teabag some emblematic baddie, too, and we're entering overtime, where every move must be punctuated by a lot of noise and camera shaking.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So it comes to that, just 5 minutes after the magicking and injecting of the virus-that-make-you-cleverer-by-half :</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
— <i>"Can we talk about LARX ?"</i><br />
— <i>"Who ?"</i> That's the warden from prison break, trying to make ends meet as a rotten govt extra, because his retirement fund went poof in the '07 crisis.<br />
— <i>"Oh right…"</i>, says Edward Norton, who can't even pretend to care anymore <i>"sure, let's release the krakkinator."</i></blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The good news is, there's only about 25' left to go before the titles start rolling, this time for real, so how bad can it get, really ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Really, that's how bad : really.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
No joking, they send after our hero***, not only Manila's finest plus SWAT, but an hat-rabbit assassin who's introduced thusly — and here I feel compelled to quote verbatim, so you get a feel for how close to the ground we're flying :</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>"LARX is a beta-two stem program : amped mission fidelity, minimized empathy…<br />…It's Treadstone without the inconsistency, Outcome without the emotional nuance — it's looking very strong for us."</i></blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yes, it's reached the point where you can literally <i>hear</i> the wishful thinking of the writer-director leaking through the dialogs.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Cut to the LARX <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Determinator">determinator</a>, an asian-looking dude with an appropriately-clenched jaw (asian, sure : they know kung-fu and they're good at having no human expression, see, plus it's happening in the Philipines and everybody has been really, really white, up to now).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We've definitely reached make-quota territory, so the rest is as predictible as it is out of place in regard to the rest of the movie : some crafty but entirely over the top and unbelievable (relatively) rooftop-then-car-then-bike chase, that ends with:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YSTw7E4HzeI/UL8iOhC0veI/AAAAAAAAGPw/x3i-nra0fdA/s1600/TheBourneLegacy-Kick.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="264" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YSTw7E4HzeI/UL8iOhC0veI/AAAAAAAAGPw/x3i-nra0fdA/s640/TheBourneLegacy-Kick.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>The girl</i> defeating the <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ImplacableMan"><i>Implacable Man</i></a>. </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
By kicking him. </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
Into a pylon. </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
From a speeding motorcycle. </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
While the hero is passed out. </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
…at the handlebar… </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
But by then. </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
It's clear. </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Nobody. </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
Cares anymore.</div>
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--vOtLNbJTro/UL8iXVAh5WI/AAAAAAAAGQI/BdSpkFZS0Tg/s1600/TheBourneLegacy-Ragdoll.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="264" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--vOtLNbJTro/UL8iXVAh5WI/AAAAAAAAGQI/BdSpkFZS0Tg/s640/TheBourneLegacy-Ragdoll.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…and then they get rescued by a nice fishing-boat captain, coz' they're cute, she says "please" while twisting her mouth, and also the hero can bribe them with the fake gold-plated Rolex he scored earlier, in a bout of impulse shopping during a conveniently mild stampede of pink-hatted factory worker bees (you guessed it, it happened shortly after the magic-virus point of no return).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gZGQwWPjrtM/UL8iUEqN_EI/AAAAAAAAGQA/vUlTbEj1y1M/s1600/TheBourneLegacy-Please.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Please ?" border="0" height="165" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gZGQwWPjrtM/UL8iUEqN_EI/AAAAAAAAGQA/vUlTbEj1y1M/s400/TheBourneLegacy-Please.png" title="Please ?" width="400" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
Titles roll, at long last</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
OK, that was longer than I thought, as usual, so let's wrap this one for now, and return later to explain how this thing is not an unmitigated carnage, after all, and what can be salvaged from its wreck.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
ttfn</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">* [Believe it or not, the walls of texts you have to climb are typically only a third to a fifth as high as they were prior to the blue pencil wallop.]</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">**[Because any set of three consecutive movies nowadays is deemed a trilogy, as that's what it takes to justify a Gold boxed DVD set, or something.]</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">***[Who's busy sweating his way through a viral fever of _the smartness_, and the hallucinatory memories supposed to make up for the summarily disposed-of subplot I mentioned earlier.]</span></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-92212565245625526312012-12-03T13:49:00.001+00:002012-12-04T03:43:02.274+00:00The Fair Game, Part 4 - Mores, morals and morale.<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When talking videogames, and upon approaching anything remotely related to morality, one must tread carefully — there be landmines everywhere, but in the quicksands.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I order to to keep the odds of making it through in one piece ever so slightly in the positive range, here's a short list of what I will emphatically <i>not</i> discuss today :</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
• <b>Morality within videogames :</b> or how morality issues are portrayed and tackled in videogames. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
• <b>Moral teachings of videogames :</b> what are the implicit or explicit moral teachings (if any) that can be channeled through design and gameplay, and what should we make of that. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
• <b>Morality of videogames :</b> somewhat connected to the two questions above is the (less interesting) one of whether videogames should(n't) touch on some topics/settings that may be morally objectionable to some, and why.*</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sticking to the <i><a href="http://tinyurl.com/Acdpad-TheFairGame">Fair Game</a></i> angle, my primary focus will be instead on current gamebiz mores, on the morality issues at hand in gamemaking as a trade and craft, how it relates to the morale and morals of gamedevs and players alike, and why it should be a defining aspect of a Fair Game studio's corporate policies, practice and culture.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img border="0" src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-Ug1kAI1rhzs/ULyKgDQnRII/AAAAAAAAGLY/6jmKx2g_IEM/s800/MysteryMenL.jpg" width="500" />
<br />
<b>There's no business like show business…</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Few industries are fluffy bunny happy places, certainly ; in most people's mind suckiness is even sort of a defining element of what makes a job — or you wouldn't get paid for it. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are exceptions of course : some people land jobs they'd be willing to do regardless of compensation as long as they can manage, because that's the very thing they love to do (think artists, athletes, many other trades that result from a hobby or spawn one), and sometimes, simply landing the job is its own reward and the chance to achieve otherwise unrealistic ambitions (think astronauts, Formula 1 pilots, key players in large goal-oriented teams).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Although these may be the exception rather than the norm (why it is so reaches beyond the scope of this article), the outlier cases of the jobs (some) people <i>really want</i> regardless of pay help us outline what makes a job worth doing, and why it even exists in the first place : desirability.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The odds of a job's existence are proportional to how badly everybody or somebody want it to happen, relative to its resources requirements. Whatever else comes attached to a job, be it profitability and monetary rewards, or prestige and reputation, or power — all are simply mitigating or accelerating factors in balancing that equation.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the beginning, it all starts with somebody who badly wants to do something, or somebody who badly wants it done — and sometimes both. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Like most commercial arts, videogames are built on a foundation of people with a strong desire to do something, namely play and also make games, to a point where it's often impossible to disentangle both motivations at the individual level. Most composers and songwriters start as musicians, and eventually come around to write the music and lyrics they crave to play, much like most writers begin as avid readers, and moviemakers are movie buffs themselves more often than not.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Past the first generation in their art, creators typically grow up as fans (which can be a mixed blessing, artistically speaking, but that's another issue), and those who decide to make a career and a living from it do so out of love for the medium, and — especially in hybrid arts — count themselves lucky just to get there and <i>be a part of it</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Were the entire game industry populated with avid gamers who make the kind of games they love for kin-spirited players, all would arguably be for the best… in fantasyland. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Despite the bad rap I've given until now to publishers in this series (and I'm not quite through yet), the fact we have an industry at all should largely go to the credit of early publishers who sometimes acted as enlightened patrons of the arts, true believers and enthusiasts, yet with enough of an eye on the bottom line to keep things rolling and snowballing. It's they who enabled gamemaking to graduate from garage industry to heavy iron, to take on projects that would have remained out of reach without the resources and scope enabled by a broader market reach, and who led to an economy where videogames and electronic entertainment are now the largest driving force for innovation and development both of hardware and software at large.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Granted, most among those key early publishers were often gamers themselves, and cared just as much about making great games for their own sake than about balancing the books, which isn't necessarily true anymore. Still, what they did back then is exactly what a Fair Game self-publishing studio should be about, accounting for two significant changes : games are now a trillion dollar, no-longer-cottage, industry, and studios are no longer first-gen'ers on uncharted waters — as such, they should heed the lessons of history so as to prevent it from stammering too badly.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img border="0" src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-minNrqlOjRE/ULypI6xhAdI/AAAAAAAAGMc/deBVSDJehJk/s800/RobinBatmanHug.jpg" width="500" /><br />
<b>Breeding love slaves.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The past twenty years have been about games getting bigger, more expensive, and on the whole more profitable for all but gamedevs themselves. Although a handful of studio-founders gamedevs got seriously rich, the average salaries and benefits for skilled labor and talent have notoriously failed to get on par with other media and mass entertainment industries, while people in marketing, business and legal positions have reaped the largest monetary rewards.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Although things <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/167355/Game_Developer_reveals_2011_Game_Industry_Salary_Survey_results.php">seem to slightly improve lately</a> with people in development and production across the board seeing raises, and some rebalancing of salaries in favor of new recruits, the publisher-driven part of the industry (which is still the largest employment pool) remains primarily focused on making shareholders and executives rich, and regards concessions made to rewarding work, skill and talent in development and production as the <i>regrettably inevitable</i> costs of doing bussiness.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Comparisons abound in the commercial arts and hobby industries to show how consumer markets built on activities people are willing to undertake out of passion rather than strict utility, profitability or convenience make for great exploitative opportunities for the less morally constrained entrepreneurs : workers practically beg to get shafted. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are more people with an actual paying job in the business of catering to the needs of aspiring professional musicians or actors (agents, publicists, coaches, publishers and music/AV prosumer gear) than people who make a living from acting or playing music alone. And that's not factoring the larger entertainment industries' free or underpaid workforce of volunteers, interns, assistants or on-trial "juniors", who essentially pay for the privilege of doing the most crappy jobs less <i>motivated</i> temps wouldn't accept (for the price).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In effect, mass-market hobby industries have enabled the democratization of old practices previously only known to businesses that catered exclusively to the rich and bored, like sailing for fun or breeding race horses : <i>a rich man's hobby, and a poor man's job</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While the games business never quite got there in terms of abusing aspiring gamemakers by selling them coaching and middlemen services**, it's proven quick on the uptake when it comes to making the most of its workforce eagerness to join the party. Un-or-barely-paid internships abound, as do volunteer programms, and while lack of job security is accepted as par for the course in a boom'n'bust project-centric business model (which is that of most studios), less-than-stellar workplace environment and sometimes downright abusive labor conditions are also frequently tolerated by employees who see it as the <i>normal</i> of the industry, perpetuated by many veterans who "got through it, too" and see it as paying one's dues.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img border="0" src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-Id9SNZqpbkA/ULyOyXZo1oI/AAAAAAAAGL4/HYsQtz5eIqw/s800/super.jpg" width="500" /><br />
<b><i>Do unto others…</i></b>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Behind the conservative business common sense argument that working your employees to death for shit pay may not be the smartest course of action in an increasingly competitive environment where loyalty of both customers and employees rises in value, and slow and steady may prove to be the best policy for indie studios, there is an obvious moral one. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Fortunately, and for once, morals aren't necessarily at odds with business interests : not only is treating employees poorly morally dubious, it creates a vicious feedback loop where people who don't feel valued are less likely to value their own work, the product, the company, and ultimately the customer, which — thanks to some cognitive bias I don't know the name for — they come to regard as both a sucker (for eating up the crap shoveled their way) and the enemy (because customers are indicted as the ultimate cause of gamedevs' predicament).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Obviously, bitter devs could just as easily <i>hate on the suits</i> instead, and they do, yet one can only focus on that for so long before figuring gamedevs are the sheeple being sheared, while blaming the customer here is enough of a <i>non sequitur</i> that it's less likely to be questioned : you can't argue with crazy. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So here we are, with an industry that is as good at chewing the naive and spitting bitter, broken shells of burned out talent as if it had been designed to do just that, from middle to top and bottom. Executives are comforted in their certainty that suckers are meant to be shafted by their ever-increasing salaries and bonuses, while gamedevs have long learned the lesson that loud beats imaginative every time and is easier to replicate. As for gamers, they're trained from infancy to love quantity (in explosions, polycount, play length, content and players) rather than quality (of challenge, gameplay, mechanics, story, people), with the result of their ever more fleeting commitment to a given title or brand, never sated hunger for <i>something more</i> (which they can't even see really means <i>something better</i>), and ever growing frustration and impatience with the HFCS-infused gruel they can't stop themselves from gulping, even though it stopped being pleasurable sometimes around last century.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's how we got from thinking good games were a good enough reason to do it, to making bad games for no good reason, and how we segue from the issue of morals to that of morale.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.pierreeliedepibrac.com/"><img border="0" src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-tYJArPZSBd4/ULyKfOdt1zI/AAAAAAAAGLU/sE4V7_PVZpk/s800/RLSH-Pierre-Elie%2520de%2520Pibrac.jpg" width="500" /></a><br />
<b>Mutant Force assemble !</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As hinted above, harnessing enthusiasm into churning doo-doo by the truckload under slave labor conditions works only until depletion of the existing reserves of enthusiasm, since there is little to feed back positively towards the slaves and resplenish their giddy glands. So far, the industry has managed to make do and thrive nonetheless, terminating in droves those that start to shoot mostly bile and replacing them with freshly hatched noobs. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Nowhere is it more true than in the MMO side of the industry, where it applies equally well to players and gamedevs, and is also where we can observe the comparatively long term impact of this way of running business.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>[For the next few paragraphs, I'll speak with MMO gamedevs and players in mind, because of the remarkable similarity of their conditions and experiences with the business of making or playing games, both in terms of initial enthusiasm and commitment, disenfranchisement and disenchantment, burn out and eventual recovery or termination as gamers and gamemakers.]</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As more and more people people — players and gamedev alike — individually go through a transformation from bright-eyed n00b to jaded bittervet at increasingly fast rates, they also develop immunities to entire genres and companies, looking for the traps before drooling for the bacon, and as they pass that sad wisdom on to their younger peers, and help each other getting out***, they slowly inoculate a growing portion of the herd against the attraction of exploitative gaming practices.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What becomes of these gamers and gamedevs, seemingly lost to the industry ? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Some certainly are burned out beyond return, and the mere idea of sitting in front of a computer game triggers PTSD-like flashes of angst and codependant stress in their crippled minds, ensuring they'll never go near anything remotely social in gaming (if not at large) again, and they'll keep their gaming to pointedly casual genres, if any.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Some, probably most, eventually come to the point they make peace with the "not worth it" aspect of the whole thing, and while they keep a vested interest in the medium, they know full well why they don't want to return for seconds, at least until something changes radically to bring the offer closer to what they could deem tolerable.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Finally, a fraction of players and gamedev have simply learned a different lesson, which is that the stuff they so badly want simply isn't to be found on the shelves of big boxes retailers, brick'n'mortar or online, and that it's up to them to go out and either find it, or make it happen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Because these people, as a group, are self-selecting to be both experienced and discerning gamers and gamedevs, they're in a better position than most to recognize and value all the same qualities big name publishing is lacking, and when they find each other, to realize there's enough of them around to make it worth building games that cater to that otherwise forgone playerbase.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If anyone asks, that's where the "indie" craze comes from : the higher morale that comes from having morals.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<img border="0" src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-LNDGDiOTXwE/ULynuwv1qpI/AAAAAAAAGMQ/CsA0C1fIvJ8/s800/TheHeckler4-DoNotPush.jpg" width="500" /><br />
<b><a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KnightInSourArmor">Third gen'ers : the doubting Thomases.</a></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As the industry matures, and the public for videogames has long reached beyond the proverbial teenage pimpled male to go after the juicy targets of… well pretty much everyone, the question of moral obligation, or at least accountability becomes harder and harder to dodge. People grow up with videogames like they grew up with TV a generation ago, and likewise are expected to keep playing through their adult life, while they raise their kids to be the third generation of videogamers. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As gamers and gamedevs both are increasingly aware, gaming has become a major part of our global culture, and the games we pick and play not only tell something about us, but contribute to inform our thoughts, sensibilities and outlooks, just like books, movies and TV do, only more efficiently, as they engage directly, and more and more frequently ask us to physically commit to the experience (think new game peripherals and ARG just for the most obvious), thus helping the messages they convey to sink faster and deeper into our minds.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It is only right that we've come to question the morality of the amoralist stance which used to be the party line among gamedevs on the grounds that <i>it's only games</i>, and don't leave that question to the bigots, Luddites and opportunists anymore. Gamers don't turn into reactionary idiots just because they have kids, they simply lose the privilege to evade serious questions the industry has for too long feared to confront, and which we should, gamers and gamedevs alike be eager to explore, as it leads to a better understanding of our medium of choice.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Opening this post, I promised I wouldn't go near <i>morality in games</i>, and I'm steering dangerously close now, by touching on the moral responsibility that comes with handling powerful machinery around trusting people… That's as far as I go today, and only to mention how, as a group, the gamedevs and gamers that are going out of their way to find and make different games are increasingly self-aware and thoughtful in their practices.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Anyone who's being a cynic when going after that market better be as smart as they think they are, or they're in for a surprise : unless they target objectivist useful idiots, they may be oustmarted by their marks before getting around to scam a penny in funding from that crowd.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…which reminds me : next installment will focus on <i>Fair Game</i> monies, where to find them, how to use then, and why you don't want to waste precious doubloons on booth babes, these days. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
ttfn</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
~</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small; text-align: start;">* [Quick answer to that one, because it's easy : I believe everything is fair game, in principle. What is OK or not in practical terms is a matter of good or poor taste and falls under artistic discretion, to be weighed against how it can affect the business end of things — for better or worse.]</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small; text-align: start;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">**[Although gamebiz-oriented schools and classes are sprouting left and right, many of those are actually teaching no-less valuable skills than what you'd learn by mastering in fine arts to the end of becoming a game artist, so why not.]</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">***[Informal therapy groups of in-game/work friends who collectively help each other to move out and on from their shared grounds of sorrow are both heartwarming and rather depressing things to witness]</span></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-62842141260894592162012-11-29T23:49:00.001+00:002012-12-03T14:22:29.215+00:00The Fair Game - Part 3 : who ?<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In parts <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-fair-game-part-1-why.html">1</a> and <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-fair-game-part-2-what.html">2</a> of this <a href="http://tinyurl.com/Acdpad-TheFairGame">series</a>, I poked my way around the notion that times are a-changing for game development and especially "indie" studios, as self-funding/publishing is likely to become the norm rather than the exception for mid-to-biggish budget titles. I've rather haphazardly covered what is happening, and going to happen in the business (imnsho), why it is so, and what kind of gamedevs and studios will be able to make the best of these new circumstances.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'd like to spend a bit more time on the matter of <i>who</i>, now, because that's where the real meat is : games really are made for people by people, and games are generally better when (some version) of the humanity involved gets to shine through.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
First, and it's as long overdue as my poasting, let's put a few stakes in the ground and white line the field to bring things in sharper focus, as we enter the always fuzzy and blurry space of human affairs.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Working assumptions :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">[If you strongly disagree with any of the bulleted points below, please head to the comments section of part <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-fair-game-part-1-why.html">one</a> or <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-fair-game-part-2-what.html">two</a> and show me where I took a wrong turn back then, this chapter is for me to get it wrong in all new and different ways. Thanks.]</span></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• Thanks to crowdfunding, early fans/consumers involvement, committed investors <i>et al</i>, it is now realistic for "indie" studios to develop and produce high production value games — which used to be the exclusive province of big publishers. Distribution and retail are already cheaper and more accessible than they've ever been, and no longer a hindrance to self-publishing of any kind. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• No matter the odds of success at first, studios have little to lose by taking their chances as self-publishers, and it will become the <i>new normal</i> of the industry. Since few among the current crop of studios that would like to get out from under the heel of publishers to build AAA titles are prepared to deal with the extra workload and demands of being their own publishers, most will fail in horrific, predictable, yet hilarious ways. Others will take advantage of the availability of publishing consulting services and for-hire talent that are bound to appear in response. It will not be pretty, for a while at least.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• The traditional publisher-centric business model hinges on the cost of failure being unbearable for client studios unless they get publisher backing, and on studios not turning enough profit to buy their ticket out of indentured servitude. Lowering the barrier to entry in funding, distribution and retail is not enough for indie studios to reliably take on heavy duty projects, they also need business models that don't make undertaking primetime projects sound like playing russian roulette with a minigun (hint: it's not easy, and it ends in tears).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• The first step towards turning a profit from making (good) games is to not saddle the business with the dead weight of PR and ad costs that are only really needed if products and company are an embarrassment : don't suck, and you've cut your incompressible overhead by more than half, which brings you that much closer to breaking even without depending so much on chance.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• Traditional marketing and promotion are made largely irrelevant by the global village grapevine, and the bang / buck return one can hope to get from big advertising campaigns now requires hearing aids to be detected. Because of the new funding models and the predicted explosion in the number of contenders for players' monies and attention, the first order of business for a self-publishing studio is to build and cultivate its very own loyal community of fans, which are expected to provide relatively reliable sources of funding and/or revenue, and to evangelise for 'free' — in exchange for shweet shweet lub from the devs and for the opportunity to buy games that don't suck.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>…and we're back on track.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Factoring all of the above, it becomes patently obvious that in order to survive, endure and thrive as a self-publishing studio (SPS), what used to just be clever PR is to become the cornerstone of any successful venture : a studio's first, core, and locomotive product is the studio itself, and the primary mesure of equity is to be customer goodwill and brand loyalty.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Because the cheapest way to earn and grow customer goodwill is to do right by them and make sure they realize it (without pissing them off, that is), and since small SPS can't afford to buy their way into customer love or out of public humiliation with expensive PR campaigns (bound to backfire sooner than later), the smart thing to do is to go by the <i>Fair Game</i> model and be the good guys (or RP the part, if you're a pragmatic sociopath who needs a change from Zynga).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Let's get meta, girlfriend !</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Regardless of what you're building, a social game or a solo CRPG, your studio's online presence will have to rally fans and manage the slow burn of building interest and goodwill around your products and brand for the long haul, which is a game in itself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Accurately, it's a coop tactical FPS set in a MMORPG, with few saves, no replay, and precious little chance of respawn… on the plus side, you can get reinforcments (if you're good) and more importantly you get to study the map at length before you join the game.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Some gamedevs may cringe at the notion of having to hug and press the unwashed masses' (even virtual) flesh, and though the attitude is not helping, it's worth acknowledging : community relations aren't for everyone, and require both a taste for it, plus a spoon of skill and talent.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To sum up: if community relations should be deemed important in any consumer business, they are the life or death of a <i>Fair Game</i> studio, and it's something you should take seriously enough to be proactive about, and factor in your every move.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As a small company — it bears repeating — it's much easier to get it right and take advantage of many small opportunities to build goodwill at little extra cost, and to avoid the ruin of your reputation over silly or misguided moves. Conversely, it's much harder to cover up or fix a damaged image because you'll lack the marketing firepower and clout to silence critics or efficiently redirect attention.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let's break down the <i>let's make a name !</i> game to its core elements, and that which it really boils down to : <i>peeplz</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>Hardcore fans :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
They're your first line of PR, CS and advertising outside of your official website/pages/boards …whether you like it or not ! They will take upon themselves to spread their interpretation of the gospel on your behalf, so you better make sure they don't misconstrue your plans, because people won't sourcecheck where the buzz is coming from when they start building entirely unrealistic expectations about your products or company.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>Silent majority :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Those are only a few lurkers at first, who subscribe to the newsletter and FB/g+/Twitter streams, and maybe come to check the website and devblogs once in a while, if you're proactive about teasing them the right way. They will/should steadily grow in numbers during open beta and after release, provided your evangelists do their job properly. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
You'll have a hard time telling if or when they break up with you in droves over some stunt you pulled off, unless you manage a paid-for subscription game, because they won't bother with the usual <i>"You shits broke my heart, I quit forever, I hope you die of aids in a fire, bitches !".</i> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
They're less obviously committed, but for most games they'll make a good chunk — at least a third — of your paying customer base. Those you want to monitor carefully, and survey whenever possible (again, without being obnoxious) to get a clue about what they think.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>Pundits : </b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Self-appointed leaders of opinion, they like to think they are influential enough to make or break you, and sometimes are right about that. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Some may focus exclusively (or primarily) on your game/brand, and more likely than not have risen from the ranks of your hardcore fans, while some will be genre enthusiasts with an interest in your products directly related to how closely (or how far) they think you fall relative to their ideal for the genre. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Tame those you can, ignore and casually dismiss the rest as haters, you can't win them all over. Since they typically live outside of your company's controlled ecosystem, on blogs, fansites and e-zines, they may have more bearing on prospective users than on your established userbase, unless they embraced punditry as a way to gain status inside the community and are soapboaxing inwards.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>Caravans :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
They come to your game as a community, if there's anything to support their collective identity in or around your game and brand ID. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
You may or may not want them around, and you may, or (more likely) may not have a say in the matter. In any case, make up your mind about how you want to handle them. Properly charmed, they're a pre-heated PR machine working on your behalf that brings in an already cohesive sub-community to your userbase, and in turn can be a good recruitment tool and anchor for extra subgroups. If they turn on you, however, they will put the same amount of energy and coordination to hit you back with a vengeance, with a disruptive potential that shouldn't be overlooked.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>The haters :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Hardcore fans, pundits or caravans, turned sour, they are a lot of work to contain or flip over. The best way to handle them is to identify the leaders and coopt (or undo) them in some way while being politely neutral with the rest to avoid making things worse. If you manage to convert or mollify opinion leaders in your favor, you're halfway there. Even if they fail in turn to steer their infuriated sheeple herds back on the path of truth and justice, at least you'll have seeded the roots of discord among them, and the ensuing infighting is that much distracting them from messing with your stuff.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>Community manager(s) :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Start with one, and make sure it's a good one. It's better if your CM is closely related to CS, but if at all possible, try to avoid saddling the same poor soul with more than one lead role. CS is a great place to look for potential CM reps and even lead if you don't have one for your next project, but you should have someone in charge of community relations before even you need CS (pre-beta).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>Mods :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Your (hopefully) affable, tireless, incorruptible and thick-skinned bobbies, and your first "official" line of CS and damage control. They work under the supervision of the CM and they can either be CM staffers or (more likely) volunteers pulled form the hardcore fanbase pool.<br />
Beyond keeping the tone of discussion reasonably civil on your public pages, they also should act as GMs of sorts in the community building game, and help people find their way around and get busy. Keep in mind if you decide to keep volunteers around during the commercial phase of a game, you may soon need to hire a dedicated lead mod to handle HR and operations, because your CM may not be able to do both. It may sometimes be at once cheaper and more advisable to promote two interns from CS to paid mod positions than pay an extra manager to herd a dozen volunteers. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>Project Face : </b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the case of the studio, it's likely to befall your CEO, while for any given game it may be the lead designer or producer, usually whoever is first to accidentally step in the limelight, or is the most outspoken. If your 'natural' candidate sucks at PR, have the CM vet everything they say before they open their trap, or find someone else with better dispositions, which you can curse with an Executive Producer title and send to the frontlines instead.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>The team :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Keep in mind whenever a team member speaks, it will be heard as the voice of god and contractually binding, even if said speech is clearly presented as personal opinion, or in jest. Whether you decide to allow anyone or no one to speak their mind (or stick to a script) is your call, but not having a clear policy on the matter is ruinous and will drive your CM that much closer to her already looming meltdown.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• <b>Griefers & Trolls :</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
No listing of key players in the community game would be complete without a nod to the antisocial club, and as a small-ish company presumably catering to a niche market you're in a better position than most to mitigate the noxiousness of bullies and pissants to your users and community, for reasonable costs. This is a standard CM matter however, and going by the <i>Fair Game</i> party line doesn't significantly alter the in and outs of tackling this issue.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As should be obvious, your hardcore fans are to be your main marketing and customer acquisition force. Your official and concerted outreach and ad efforts may yield some results in awareness raising, yet fans can and should do more to drive interest and conversion rates up than anything else you do. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What is up to you is how smart you are about attracting those few early apostles of your new cult, because they will contribute to set the tone of your player community and self-select kindred spirits, which will inform both the flavor and size of your potential customer base. Later on, hardcore fans management is mostly a matter of providing them with the right PR ammo to subtly train them towards the right targets, and let them loose, locusts upon the world …because you can't stop them, short of turning them into Haters.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>You only get one chance…</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Assuming you start without baggage as a debuting studio, the timeline of your coming out and starting to build your image and community relations is entirely in your hands. Obviously there are reasons to make noise early, because you need to raise funds, recruit talent, negotiate deals, all the exact things some brand recognition and a community network are supposed to help with, but… </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
as previously hinted, once you get the ball rolling, you can't afford to stop. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Slowing the pace of community outreach and communication will shortly curse you with the stink of death, something that's really tricky to recover from, and which is incredibly damaging to your staff morale, too. Gaming and gamemaking alike are fueled as much by enthusiasm as they are by money, and here, like in many places, riches beget riches.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Motivated staff and fans will feed on each other's enthusiasm, which can drive productivity, creativity and hopefully sales up, but this sort of euphoria is as close as it gets to collective hallucination, and can be dispelled by the slightest whiff of a faith crisis.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…All of which is not to say you should fake it, and behave like ever-smiling corporate drones living in plastic-y bliss, because a) it's creepy, b) nobody buys it for long, and c) you'll have to deal with some bad shit eventually. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rather I advocate the opposite : be open from the get go about the hurdles and the difficulty of the task ahead, and always show how you're going about solving problems. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Never whine or complain, as it won't get you any sympathy ; don't brag, as it'll make you look like pricks, and come to bite you back eventually ; be upbeat and resolute, or be a prophet, whichever you reckon you can pull off for the duration and matches more closely your identity, that of your project, and the expectations of your fans. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In any case, you need to be lucid and practical about how you want to present your company, team and project to the world, and who should be on the frontlines : don't try to pretend you're something you're not as individuals or as a team, and instead strive to behave like the best version of yourself you can muster — it may even rub off on you in a good way, over time.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Defining, projecting and maintaining a public image is like UI design and Quality Insurance : get it right and most people won't even realize that's why the product <i>feels</i> right. Screw up, and everything else you do is for naught. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One person (at least) should be in charge of PR and CM (which are essentially the same in a Fair Game studio) from day 0, and be recognized as part of the core team, on par with your money guy, lawguy, lead producer, codewiz, designers and artists — and I mention those in pointed order because the last ones are those you weren't going to forget and credit as your core team. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In essence, you want to go about your studio and project coming out into public view as you go about producing a game : see what assets you can realistically mobilize (your people, mainly), consider your acceptable timeframe, and within those constraints, put together a design document or a bible about your brand, community relations and PR, then implement it — amending as you go because plan, enemy, etc.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Think about launching your first website as <i>public beta time</i>, be mindful of how much or how little noise you want to make initially, and where you want to go from there.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>The limits of virtue…</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One massively cool thing about the Fair Game model is how, for once, it may genuinely pay off to do the obvious right thing, which in business matters has frequently proven to be a sucker's game. It's probably why the <i>bittervet</i> in me has a hard time believing myself, because it's just too good to be true.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The luxury of being a budding indie studio is it's entirely within your purview to not need any coverup of your abject business practices : you haven't screwed the pooch yet, and you just have to keep it that way. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Gamers are, as a rule, passionate people who're just looking for stuff to get excited about, and if you can earn their love and respect, work hard and smart and don't betray their loyalty in ways they can't forgive, they can in return grant you the opportunity to do the exact stuff you dreamed of when you signed up for this career : make games you really care about, for people who will appreciate your work, in good company, with decent-to-good pay and labor conditions. Getting rich and/or laid are also distant possibilities, but let's not get crazy, here…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As ridiculous as it may sound amidst the bright-eyed optimism of my previous arguments, it's important not to be naive about this game, however : you will not win by virtue alone, and your heroic stance in the face of greedy exploitationism is only worth anything to your audience insofar as they hear about it. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While it may simply feel right to you individually to be the good guy and to play fair at all times (which I personally applaud), and while it's generally good policy under the <i>Fair Game</i> doctrine (because it's the intarwebs and you must assume everything worth mocking will find its way to youtube, eventually), the fact remains you will have to whore your goodness at least a little to make sure it registers. The best self-promoters have mastered the art of making sure everybody knows when they modestly refuse to take credit or brag, because nobody ever heard of the truly unsung heroes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-fair-game-part-4-mores-morals-and.html">next episode</a> we'll talk some more about morale, and — shockingly — morals.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-50945352610280900522012-11-28T05:48:00.001+00:002012-11-30T00:20:59.841+00:00The Fair Game - Part 2 : what ?<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-fair-game-part-1-why.html">part 1</a>, and all through <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/p/this-series-will-try-to-tackle-oft.html">this series</a>, my working hypothesis is that mid-to-biggish budget videogames will increasingly be funded, marketed, distributed and retailed without the involvement of classic publishers, and mostly through channels that exist already, only a bit more refined and mature than they are now. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The distribution and sales end of the circuit is pretty much sorted out by now : indie studios can already release and retail their titles through established online app stores or run their own webstore for little to no upfront costs, and get to bite a significantly larger share of the moneypie from gross sales (currently averaging at 70% of gross in appstores, roughly the reverse of the best case scenario 30% a studio can hope from a big name publisher if they don't get screwed out over 'hidden costs').</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On the funding side of things, I'm reasonably confident crowdfunding (or something very much alike) and committed investment will become the dominant channels to secure development and production funds over the next five to ten years, as traditional publishing loses relevance in all but mega-budget projects, leading to a very fertile ecosystem of specialist fundraising and financing platforms, and spawning a middlemen industry of fundraising campaign managers, transparency certificators and patrons of the arts agents.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In this section I try to outline what species of gaming studio are most likely to thrive in this new environment, and it comes as no small surprise to me (spoiler alert) that it's mostly good news for gamers and gamedevs alike.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Whether I banged my head and am hallucinating is for you to tell, because obviously, I can't. So let me paint you a picture.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-oNPqf6KWfzk/ULRsso95RrI/AAAAAAAAGHE/d-2iUm4arxE/s800/JoinMeMaybeL.jpg" width="400" /><br />
<i>No, I can't draw…</i></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The first good news, although we'll see it's a mixed blessing, is more games will be produced.<br />
Well, maybe just as many as today, for the recent explosion of the browser and mobile games platforms has more than compensated for the draught of offer during the mid-naughties, but the cornucopia theme is here to stay, as more studios and gamedevs try their luck, thanks to a generally dev-friendly context.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It may not all be good or interesting games necessarily, and I expect Sturgeon's Law to hit in full force, possibly cubed, during the early euphoria. Much like youtube, blogs and podcasts reduced the barrier to entry to publishing in other media, and cheap prosumer electronics have enabled anyone to start filming, recording and editing on a budget, I expect to see prosumer-grade middleware and game-building toolboxes to flourish and lead to a mudslide of terribad fan-made games to flood the various app stores in the next couple years.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The positive aspect being, from this smelly soup shall emerge actual talent, who may end up creating great games, at some point. But it will be a storm of (e)sc(h)atologic proportions in the meantime.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
During that feisty period and beyond, the gamedevs and studios that are most likely to thrive will be those that properly account for three critical notions: </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<ul>
<li>The newly opened gates of publisherless funding, promotion, distribution and retail means indies can now compete with big name companies on fairly even footing, and should go for it without fear, <i>provided they pick their battles.<br /> </i></li>
<li>Riding on the coattails of big hits is no longer a valid survival strategy : it's all about differentiating oneself and growing a loyal community of fans, customers and employees.<br /> </li>
<li>The endgame for an indie studio should not be about hitting the jackpot, so much as to endure and keep going, slow and steady, long after competitors crash'n'burn.</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Because the main challenge for indie studios in this world of plenty will be to rise above the noise in order to find and secure founding, talent and customers, that aspect of the business will become an integral, and quite large, part of a studio's operations.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That last bit was true already under the previous publisher-centric model, but once publishers are largely removed from the picture, it behooves the customer/players/fans themselves to decide the fate of games and studios from a much earlier stage than used to be customary.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Such a shift in the balance of power may very well be the best thing ever to happen to commercial videogames, because it holds the potential to benefit equally well players and gamedevs, which is only (if belatedly) fair.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-qyVHOkG99yI/ULWKYDTntnI/AAAAAAAAGHc/kYrQLOgkwLY/s800/FimGbtih.jpg" width="600" /><br />
<i>Friends, seen here groped by the invisible hand of the market.</i></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Fair Game doctrine can be summed thusly : do right by your players and your crew, and they'll do right by you. It takes more skill and committment, and is trickier at first than the old <i>rape and pillage</i> trick, but it's better business in the long run, because <i>golden goose</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div>
Most if not all gamedevs are passionate gamers themselves, and the way they prefer to go about their business is not dissimilar to the way avid gamers go about their patronage : they're both willing to put all the time and resources they can afford to satisfy their desire for <i>good game(s)</i>, and share the belief games ought to be judged (and succeed or fail) on their own merits.</div>
<div>
</div>
<br />
Conversely, publishers have little incentive to care for good games, as they're not in the business of making games and keeping studios going, but in that of selling game boxes. It's <i>common wisdom</i> for publishing execs that there is no more proportionality between development/production costs and quality of the product than there is correlation between gameplay value and revenue generated : once bare minimal requirements are met to avoid scaring away customers, the theory goes it's all up to marketing and good luck.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In a context of instant global grapevinery, of plethoric quantity and variety in offerings, advertising dollars will only get you so far : beyond raising awareness about the existence of your product, promotion firepower no longer has the juice to make things happen and close sales but with the least discriminative of buyers.<br />
As the market segments into well-catered to niches, and the old blob that happily swallows anything coated in enough eyecandy shrinks accordingly, it may become increasingly difficult to justify ad-spending, except in those market segments where competition remains constrained to a few players and the Matthew effect works well enough that an initial overwhelming show of marketing force might still pay off.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My hypothesis then, is the key to financial health for self-publisher studios in the near future will be frugality in all expenses that aren't directly contributing to increased product value or to stronger customer and employee loyalty.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Profit shall no longer be expected to come from artificially pumping volume up, but from reducing overhead and the cost of closing sales, leveraging customer loyalty and word-of-mouth to supersede advertising dollars, and from cutting on the hidden costs of high turnover and burnout rates, to instead capitalize and cultivate in-house talent and assets.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All of the above may seem self-evident, as it's nothing but conservative, common sense practical advice for small businesses, and yet, that's not the way most studios have operated to date, which is why it's worth pointing out they now can, and should, adjust their SOP to their changing circumstances.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What's happening to alter the deal so fundamentally is, once again, the end of the publishers' hegemony on mid-to-biggish budget productions. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Unless they were lucky enough to be sitting on a fairly fat war chest, or to be savvy enough to secure funding from committed investors, studios who wanted to venture into productions that cost more than a decent car had to submit to the conditions of a publisher. This meant pretty much losing control over both treasury and calendar (and often original IP, too) to an entity whose primary goal is to ship fast'n'cheap, take the money and run, as it itself must answer to shareholders concerned only with the bottom line and quarterly profits — possibly brand and reputation of the publisher's, yet only insofar as it could impact stock value.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In any case, what publishers cared little about, and arguably couldn't much afford to, was the health and growth of the individual studios providing their wares, unless they incorporated them, and then had a vested interest in their not tanking days after release, and keep on churnin' titles out.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With their priorities at odds, publishers see studios as disposable resources, while the studios more often than not don't plan to disband the day after the wrap party, and instead hope to push onwards to the next game or ten, which in truth is not for them to decide, as they're unlikely to make enough royalties to ever fund a title on their own, or afford to concern themselves with the career development of their staff with what crumbs the publishers toss their way.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Thus studios tend to operate with the overhead and immobilization of small factories, yet the bubble'n'burst economics of movie production gigs, which goes a long way towards explaining why this industry has got into the bad habits of eating its young and burning through talent like it's crack cocaine.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-fair-game-part-3-who.html">part 3</a> of this series, we'll look further at talent and players as assets and partners, and how to make the most of them to run a successful silent killer of a Fair Game shop.<br />
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-82702117131861692872012-11-26T11:00:00.000+00:002012-11-28T05:59:06.337+00:00The Fair Game - Part 1 : why ?<div style="text-align: justify;">
Or why a <i><a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.se/p/this-series-will-try-to-tackle-oft.html">Fair Game</a></i> doctrine of game making is the sensible thing to embrace now.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With the seemingly irreversible onward march of online distribution, cloud gaming and DLC, and the probable end of brick and mortar retail, along with traditional console gaming business models, the incentives for small studios to throw themselves into soul'n'blood-sucking publishing deals are vanishingly reduced.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Those among the present set of big publishers that are swift enough to make the transition certainly won't die anytime soon, if ever, as they have plenty of wiggle room to cultivate walled gardens that should prove profitable for years to come, yet they are liable to lose huge segments of the market to the self-publishing studios pushing titles on comparatively 'open' platforms (Android, cloudgaming, possibly some desktop OSes), funded through crowdfunding and 'committed investors', and which manage their growth mom'n'pop style (profits reinvestment) as opposed to bubble'n'burst.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Although the shiny exposed bit of the crowdfunding iceberg right now is mostly outlier cases that raise millions in minutes, rather than slow and steady boutique studios doing solid work, and while some bubble economy useful idiots want to believe in neverending riches through yet-another gold rush, I believe the core model is here to persist after the dust has settled, as it is the most fertile environment for game production in the internet age.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In this context, the key factors for this new generation of self-publishing studios (SPS from now on) are to be differentiation and brand recognition, and customer acquisition and loyalty.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As is obvious from the most casual tour of the — comparatively well-tended and variably walled — gardens of Apple, Google or Amazon app stores, sorting through the offerings isn't exactly straighforward. Even ignoring for a moment the toxic waste of mal/spy/adware ridden ripoffs of other games, repackaged with complimentary keyloggers, sifting through the chaff of cheap ports and gimmicky flash games is a daunting task.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A slightly deeper look at this market shows two things, though : companies that release consistently solid products gain recognition fast, and the need for triage is quickly filled by fan sites and "personal shopper" apps and services that feed from the player community to highlight the good bits.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Inevitably some-to-most of these helper services will go the way of the gaming press and quickly turn into for-hire mouthpieces for big name publishers, but the quickloop feedback provided by other channels like gamer forums and trusted fansites is already easing the metagame of telling which advisors customers should trust.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From the gamer perspective, the online distribution channels are thus fast becoming a much nicer and satisfying shopping space, and the only question is how good the actual videogame offerings might be in the mid-to-long run.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Except for a few occasional exclusives, owing to a walled garden owner also being their backer and publisher, it seems the cat is already out of the bag, and if the Android gaming dynamics are anything to go by, many titles may end up showing on more than one app store (at comparable pricepoints), with those acting essentially as retailer outlets.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Even Apple, although it likely won't open its gates anytime soon, might unwittingly be helping and soon find itself circumvented by cloud gaming service providers, wherever broadband wireless/cellular is becoming ubiquitous.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>[ISPs and cellphone operators may actually have a strong card to play here, by bundling cloud gaming services with cellular data plans, cable TV style, but that's a topic in its own name, so I won't elaborate here.]</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: center;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you're a gamedev, this should speak to you in more than one way.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As the pressure from a very real competition which doesn't spend more on advertising than production increases, making money from the umpteenth rehash of a tired franchise will prove increasingly difficult for big publishing houses, as the costs to market and promote big-budget games done the usual way will increase geometrically to achieve no better than linear revenue growth (which is the only metric that matters to a publicly traded publisher). This could mean a serious downtrend in budget sizes by big name studios, or a suicidal arms' race between major publishers if they fail to realize it's not their share, it's the pie that's shrinking. In any case, expect a lot of suddenly 'freed' talent to hit the gamebiz job market soon.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On the plus side, as the crud filter of community fansites and shopper helper services gets better at keeping the good wares flowing, SPSes that manage to build a good reputation* will have an increasingly easier time funding projects, recruiting talent, and making a pretty penny from their games, thanks to much lower overhead in customer acquisition and loyalty cultivation costs, and lesser interference from short-term revenue demands by their shareholders.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In time, as more of the videogaming action moves to on-tap model, existing entities that are well-established both as distributors, service and infrastructure providers, which includes notably Google, Amazon, Akamai and Microsoft (and likely more than a couple cellular network operators) will all find themselves in a very favorable position to claim a large stake of 'real' cloud gaming, by ignoring or circumventing net-neutrality hindrances and saving prime morsels for their own offerings both in bandwidth and computational access.<br />
This once again may put comparatively "indie" shops at a disadvantage, but unless the hardware consumer market for general purpose / gaming devices crashes horribly, leaving nothing behind but dumb terminals streaming pre-rendered HD from the cloud, SPS should still keep enough of an agility and creative edge that they don't have to sell themselves into slavery, for a while.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If I'm even half right in that bucketload of unsubstantiated prophesies, we're looking at a pretty good ten years for gamedevs interested in making high-quality genre games, and an equally unfriendly period for those who expect business to run as usual and still believe you can make big bucks by wrapping lowest common denominator turds in shiny eye candy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Not to say braindead big splashy titles will stop hogging the limelight in gaming "press", on TV and walls of your cities, but odds are you'll see fewer of them, further apart, as — unless the aforementioned fratricide arms' race ensues — I expect the megapublishers to begin flirting with cartel-style practices anytime now, to protect their bottom line.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-fair-game-part-2-what.html">part 2</a>, I'll ramble about what makes a <i>Fair Game</i> self-publishing studio, and some more on why that's what you should go for if you want to make interesting games for a living.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">*[Good reputation is to be understood as producing good games, but also as being a good company, because crowdfunders and committed investors are more likely to put a premium on company values, not just value]</span></i></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-16953343022314745232012-11-26T02:23:00.000+00:002012-11-26T02:49:41.094+00:00The great crowdfunding scam (?)<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Psychochild is <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/104424702290149874363/posts/HvqUwLNhHxg">slightly pissed off</a> (which only means he's not dead, granted), and he's not alone, today.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Go read <a href="http://effingarcade.tumblr.com/post/36277287313/molyneux-and-fucking-kickstarter">this</a> and come back after the break, please : I'll wait here.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Alright, I see where these guys are coming from, and respectfully, I think they're wrong on the parts that really matter, like does Molyneux acting like a bit of a greedy prick change anything for the worse, for you, and who is you ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you're a budding or career indie gamemaker, I don't reckon it seriously hurts your odds of getting crowdfunded, even if you happen to hunt on what could seem like Kickstarter "big name" reserved grounds. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Molyneux' high profile and overpromising will, more likely than not, get a lot of people excited about the very possibility of more good <i>god games</i>, which some came to believe was something of a lost art, and thanks to the unrealistic expectations that come with overhype, this project is likely to disappoint people way before it hits beta and gets ready to under-deliver <i>for realsies</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you're in the same line of design, this could actually be good news for you, assuming <i>a)</i> your project doesn't suck, and <i>b)</i> you're aware of that dynamic being in play, and factor that in fundraising and project management.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are good reasons why you have same-kind-wares-themed alleys in most commercial spaces : people who don't find the shoes they're looking for in a given shop are more likely to enter the shoe shop next door because, hey, they came here to buy some effin' shoes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So think of the greedy big name opportunists on Kickstarter as your personal, pro bono, unwilling hecklers. There.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Moving on, and killing a strawman at one fell swoop : it won't hurt Kickstarter good name's, and indirectly your odds of crowdfunding there, if/when Molyneux next big thing turns out to be a dud. Kickstarter is big enough by now that it has its own momentum, and too many smart and endearing projects find their way through it for the occasional trainwreck to discourage pledgers. It's a rule that anything visible enough will draw criticism, if only because that's a way to differentiate when tackling an obligatory topic — and Kickstarter deserves criticism a-plenty for some reasons, but that's not one of them.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On the the really meaty part of the discussion : <i>poor, deserving indies vs greedy fat cat exploiters of gamer naivete</i>… yeah, that is bullshit, too.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The line is not drawn here, because many indie devs' life ambition is to make it big, while it is entirely conceivable for <i>big name devs</i> to make <i>big games</i>, with big teams, from the heart (it's just a freakishly daring endeavour and comes with a whole different problem set than that facing the budding indie dev).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If a line must be drawn to set apart what is ethically OK crowdfunding and what starts to look like a con job, or at least a tiny bit scammy, it should happen on the grounds of business ethics, and overall business model.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If your primary goal is to make games and incidentally a living out of it, because that's what you love and believe you can be good at, and certainly could commit more of your time and talent to it, didn't you have to keep a dayjob besides to pay the bills, then crowdfunding sounds fair : you're basically striving to make the sort of pro grade fan art kindred spirits might deem worth sponsoring and encouraging. This type of practice harks back to the time-honored subscription model, which has played a critical role in the development of many other art forms, and first among those, genre litterature (through magazines), and arguably some early pay-per-month MMORPGs.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If your main goal is to make a lot of dough by shearing a faceless herd of sheeples, the fact you happen to be a dishevelled nerd working from your three-jobs girlfriend's garage, or this week's flavour of rebellious trust fund hipster doesn't make you different from the most predatory corporate drones EA, Zinga or SONY has on staff.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
* </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Banging the Gavel of Obviousness +5, once again : it's all about <i>why</i> you're in the game of making games, or art, or tablecloth, and <i>how</i> you go about it — it has nothing to do with how big or how small a dog you are, and everything to do with your personal politics, ethics, and aesthetic preferences.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Also I'm really not sure I like Kickstarter that much, as it is now, but I'll get back to that sometime.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On to some constructive thoughts, because it's sunday… tune in tomorrow to check episode 1 of my new <i>The Fair Game</i> series.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-10943912472427311902012-11-17T22:43:00.001+00:002012-11-26T02:10:17.470+00:00On the day after Obama's reelection,<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…I started drafting a post meant to cheer up the non-batshit-insane portion of the losing camp, namely <i>Classic Republicans</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The gist of my argument was : </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• If you hold free market and fiscal frugality as cardinal values, and also agree that not only is a general election a popularity contest-a-looza, but that the nature of political campaigning today has evolved to become so largely fact-agnostic and divorced from reality that it is now a self-contained, self-referential show business devoid of any real ideology and ethical concerns (but what the audience can <i>go for</i>), then you must agree to the following:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Whoever wins an election, by whatever means, however ethically, legally and constitutionally dubious is <i>a priori</i> deserving of having won, since the sole available gauge to judge the worth of a candidate is the proxy of his/her campaigning, and the only true judgement of which campaign is best is the pass/fail test of winning or losing the election.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That was the <i>free market at work</i> part of my case, meant to do away with any after-the-game objections and debates about whether Obama's victory was legit, whether he should have won, whether results-affecting voter fraud had taken place, and so on. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Surely, that kind of whining is only for people who concern themselves with "fairness" of elections, be it only when it suits them (wingnuts), or most of the time (bleeding heart liberals), and would be anathema to staunch free-market believers, for which democracy is truly the marketplace of ideas, and who trust its natural self-correcting abilities to (either/both) digest or negate electoral fraud, propaganda and manipulations so that all is right in the end, at least at the meta-level where it counts.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Thus, the best man-campaign won, and this should be the end of it as far as <i>Classic Republicans</i> are concerned : as soon as they get over their (entirely natural) disappointment of finding themselves on the losing team after the adrenaline has worn of, all will be peachy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• Fiscal frugality then, was the clincher of my semisardonic attempt at comfort : by all verifiable accounts, Obama's campaign and its supporters made more conservative use of their war chest <b>and</b> won the election. </div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Not only did the Obama camp arguably spend less (if you put together superpacs, greyish and official campaign funds) in grand total, but they more often than not got a better bang for their buck on individual expenditures, such as the price they paid for airtime, and generally how much they spent by vote they moved around.<br />
In stark contrast, albeit consistent with the republican track record of republican presidential mandates, the Romney campaign was plagued with poor spending decisions, multi-layered leeching of resources by consultants and contractors, showing that <i>CEO in the banking</i> sector may sometimes not be a reliable indicator of one's financial acumen. <span style="text-align: justify;">Never was so much spent by so few with so little results.</span></blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…all of which I argued are good news for my <i>Classic Republican</i> friends, because the most fiscally frugal (ergo conservative) candidate won, which made this urban guy closer to their views than the wastebasket of a mormon-robot the ballot market rightfully <i>corrected</i> out of the picture. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At the end of the day, if your major gripe with big governement is ill-advised, inefficient, bloated federal spending, BarryBamz is your guy, so you sorta half-won this one, cheers !</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yeah, I was quite happy with myself, and I managed to milk this spider-demon of a cow to spin my yarn for a page or three before I got kinda bored with the ridicule of it all… </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Plowing ahead my line of talking specifically to <i>reasonable conservatives</i> (as opposed to delusional bigots) I kept bumping on the same rock-like question : how could one be <i>reasonable</i> while self-defining as a <i>conservative</i> (Republican is after all just a brand and no longer an ideology, if it ever was) ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Short answer: one shouldn't, and yet…</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Just to get the obvious strawmen out of the way, I'm aware there are many conservatives who show every evidence of being reasonable people, just as I don't even need an effort of imagination to dream up church-going christians and mosq-going muslims who aren't god-crazy holybook-thumpers/burners — I personally know a few, which is enough to disprove a negative. Moreover, I'm (rather self-servingly) cool with quirky people being at large in the genpop, as long as they don't act entitled to do harm to others on the grounds of their feeling threatened by anyone who fails to share their views.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My point being, unoriginal as it is, that it's hard to reconcile being reasonable — as in amenable to reason and rationality — with the belief you can (and should wish to) stop anything from changing, which is what conservatism boils down to.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Plainly, the level of commitment to magical thinking required to uphold conservative views as central to one's political identity (as different from conservative bias on set issues, which is a another matter) seems hard to reconcile with the minimal required intellectual balance to be called reasonable. And yes, that's where the "<i>Reality has a liberal bias"</i> zinger comes from, although liberals in general don't show any greater indication of their views being tied to objective reality, but that's, again, a different topic and not on today's rambling menu.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The contradiction between the last two paragraphs is only apparent, too : one can indeed behave reasonably whilst holding unreasonable views about big-picture issues like political ideology and the (non)existence of sky-fairies playing a part in our everyday life, much like one can be a well-read, seemingly level-headed rationalist and still end up cowardly pleading guilty to a crime of passion in front of a jury. It could be argued most interesting stories revolve around the contradictions between thoughts, feelings and actions. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Where was I going with this ? Not quite sure myself, at this point… mainly, it's about me growing tired of the BS, I guess, starting with mine, pretending I'm content playing smartass while the world is rotting on its feet.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll get back to that, I guess.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Meanwhile, merkins of all political creeds should rejoice and/or mourn in unisson : they have a new prez, same as the old prez, who's also a right-of-Reagan Democrat, so there's plenty to go around.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Also, the worse of the two ebils on the ballot has been avoided, for while Mitt Romney may be a non-quantity as an individual, and certainly not the devil, the people who paid for his excursion into big city politics, and to whom he'd had to answer had he been elected, most certainly don't have <i>your</i> best interests at heart (unless you're part of the 0.01%, and then you don't give a toss about who wins, seriously).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-89604462129384215432012-10-16T12:42:00.000+00:002012-10-16T12:54:18.692+00:00King Kong Théorie<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Je finis a l'instant King Kong Théorie de Virginie Despentes, et je n'ai pas perdu mon temps — c'est déjà mieux que souvent.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
C'est court, certes: 145 pages à l'allure de la voix, soit une paire d'heures, quand beaucoup n'auraient pas entrepris un tel sujet sans lui accorder moins de 300 pages — serious biznesss, tout ça.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Pas Despentes, qui ne livre pas une thèse ou un essai, en tout cas pas dans le sens convenu, et — malgré le titre en clin d'oeil narquois — propose moins une théorie qu'elle n'expose le chantier en cours de sa réflexion.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Mais sur quoi, à la fin ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
D'après la 4è de couv', il faudrait y voir un <i>"manifeste pour un nouveau féminisme"</i>, ce qui est bien normal : avec <i>théorie</i> en fronton, et quand on essaie de pousser du papier, l'hyperbole semble appropriée …même si ça n'a rien a voir avec le contenu.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Pour faire court, c'est l'histoire de comment Virginie Despentes a fini par accepter plus ou moins qui elle est, du nombre de montagnes a escalader pour en arriver là et dont elle/chacune pourrait se dispenser si le monde n'était pas organisé pour nous rendre tous (et systématiquement) esclaves du diktat social.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ça bat la campagne, et c'est normal: on est dans la discussion d'après déjeuner, du genre qui fait oublier de retourner au boulot, trop occupés à beaucoup s'écouter, s'interrompre, pas pouvoir se laisser dire des conneries pareilles, et même parfois avoir un déclic et reconsidérer les évidences d'hier d'un oeil frais.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Il n'y a rien de neuf, et c'est là ou on pourrait parler de tromperie sur l'emballage, peut-être, si n'étaient le ton et la forme.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On est a l'envers de l'essai à la française : il n'y a ni postulats bien assis, ni élégante démonstration, et pas plus de bibliographie. Les citations sont des tremplins pour un discours en roue libre qui ne sépare pas l'intuition du moment de la profession de foi, et qui se pose ou il peut, juste assez longtemps pour trouver de la traction et repartir dans une autre direction.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Alors oui, il y a des connexions entre l'oppression classiste et sexiste, les bourreaux sont aussi/parfois/souvent des victimes qui se mentent, et le ressort profond de l'asservissement tient a l'internalisation par les soumis de leur <i>"juste place"</i> dans le système. Et oui, ça mérite surement d'être dit, pour le bénéfice de ceux qui ne se seraient jamais posé la question sous cet angle — c'est en partie le propos de l'auteur, qui souligne combien la France a choisi d'ignorer des pans entiers de la réflexion et de la littérature féministe mondiale postérieure aux années 70, et comment le sujet même du féminisme en France a été confisqué par les "bourgeoises blanches" qui se veulent 'féministes mais féminines' ou un truc de ce genre, et qui tiennent a se démarquer du courant 'vieilles gouines poilues des pattes'.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ça la gonfle un peu, Virginie, que le débat sur le féminisme soit balisé comme ça, et on peut la comprendre ; elle le fait bien comprendre.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
King King Théorie est moins un manifeste pour un nouveau féminisme qu'une leçon de choses : <i>comment je me suis bien pris la tête avec la condition de femme qu'on veut me faire, et où j'en suis avec ça, perso.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On est dans l'inventaire et le carnet de notes, on raconte comment les idées se nourrissent de ressenti, n'existent que comme outil pour organiser le chaos des choses vécues — jamais tout a fait justes ou exactes, jamais tout à fait réductibles a la pensée sèche et nette qu'il est convenu d'attendre d'un essai, et pourtant c'est ce qu'elle fait, à la lettre: essayer.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Elle dit, elle montre, elle tire des fils entre les trucs, avec plus ou moins de réussite. Son argument pivot, sur comment découpler symboliquement <i>puissance</i> de <i>virilité</i>, et plus largement de la question du genre, avec un King Kong surpuissant et asexué, a sexualisé, qui incarne la menace d'une <i>puissance</i> qui ne serait pas asservie par l'ordre social viril est esthétiquement attrayant, rhétoriquement et théoriquement bancal, mais qu'importe: elle le pose en pleine vue, fais-en ce que tu pourras, lecteur.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
De même quand elle choisit d'évoquer ses fantasmes de viol a quelques pages de son experience du viol, et de pointer l'évidente difficulté de la juxtaposition, l'intolérable difficulté faite spécifiquement a son sexe de la culpabilité d'être victime, intolérable au cube par l'obligation culturelle d'endosser le statut de victime à l'exclusion de tout autre.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Elle fait oeuvre utile, c'est sûr, au moins là, quand elle met la complexité et la confusion en évidence, pour tous ceux qui soupçonneraient vaguement que rien n'est si simple mais auraient peur de passer pour des crétins en affichant leurs doutes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Et si elle cite en vrac Angela Davis et Freud, c'est probablement en partie un effet du style punk rock qu'elle revendique et assume, mais je crois qu'on se méprendrait en y voyant l'invocation de paroles d'autorité: Virginie Despentes n'a pas besoin de se cacher derrière les mots des autres pour avancer.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Elle prend quelques précautions oratoires, tout de même, pas négligeables ni inutiles, comme de reconnaître pour celles à qui autrement va bien le droit légitime de ne pas l'imiter. Elle a cet égard pour les autres qu'à elle on a très souvent dénié, de ne pas préjuger de ce qui convient et est convenable à et pour autrui. Quand elle décrit comme lorsqu'elle cite, elle ne condamne ni n'endosse: ou bien quelqu'un a déjà assez bien dit ce qu'elle veut dire, ou bien elle plante un fanion, là où sa réflexion prend un tournant au contact de la parole d'un autre.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Intrigante aussi, l'unique question autour de laquelle elle tourne et que jamais elle ne confronte, alors que tout le reste est exercice de monstration : l'intuition qu'elle semble avoir de l'homosexualité comme seule réponse valide aux frustrations endogènes à la norme hétérosexuelle. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Peut-être parce que celle-ci appellerait 400 pages à elle seule, ou parce qu'elle se confond pour l'auteur avec le problème — vieux comme le féminisme — du refus des codes 'féminins' qui plus souvent qu'à son tour résulte dans l'apparente imitation des codes 'masculins'.<br />
Panier de serpents et boite de Pandore, sans doute, mais à effleurer dix fois le sujet sans le toucher quand tous les autres sont peints au pochoir, il en reste une image particulière et forte, même si et parce qu'en creux.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline" /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Moins théorie qu'exhibition, le bouquin est court. Moins un manifeste qu'une invitation au dialogue: <i>"Regarde, moi je vois ça…"</i> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Le <i>"…et toi ?"</i> est implicite, et explique qu'on en sorte avec un gout de trop peu.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
C'est un livre à trier les cons, du genre qui donne envie à certains d'aller boire un coup avec Virginie Despentes, et découragera les autres.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-72522073913433787072012-08-07T11:20:00.001+00:002012-08-07T11:20:22.657+00:00Policy change: not.I just removed the "adult content" flag from this blog, because that was getting in the way of sharing on G+, which I kinda dig as it still only reaches out to people who are presumably willing and able to read my ramblings more or less as intended.<br />
<br />
This is a technical issue, not an editorial one, and I'll keep posting under the assumption some minimal and arbitrary thresholds in literacy and mental balance are met by the reader, despite the removal of the safety label from the box.<br />
<br />
Feedback is welcome and encouraged, via email over comments field.<br />
Extensive contributions shall be posted as comments or submitted via email first, at your discretion and best judgement.<br />
In any case, your right to free speech and other weird notions that you may or may not misconstrue from your local legal system or culture are largely irrelevant to this space: you have the rest of the internet for that.<br />
<br />
I'll try to turn this into a cover page with autoload for non-reg users at some point, if and when I get around to it.<br />
Meanwhile, if in doubt about what to expect here: <a href="http://acdpad.blogspot.fr/2008/01/oops.html">RTFM</a>.<br />
<br />AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1354426841761730409.post-16715444748302063942012-08-07T10:49:00.001+00:002012-08-07T11:02:55.576+00:00Contact (it's all about) - part 1<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are plenty of reasons why we each, individually and collectively, do the things we do.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Aside the obvious and as-yet unhelpful "we're just moist robots, all we need is to revengineer our source to grok how we roll", we're left with models and theories of the mind that range from cargo-cult to bewilderingly naive deconstructions, with some interesting-if-broken leads that seem to work alright, some of the time.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of my personal faves, because it is both flexible and reasonably self-consistent while turning out right more often than not (where applicable) I like to call the Historical Fiction Writer model — shortened as HFW, and rehydrated into "How ? Fuck, why ?" shape for handy use.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It goes roughly like this:* </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
as individuals, we are the product of our history, both from the <i>history of life </i>perspective (which shaped our genome and innate abilities, passed along to their offspring — without much intent — by those who lived long enough to breed), to the societies and families that carried themes, beliefs, values, customs, knowledge and prejudices downstream to where we individually happen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From there, we sail along when we can, we drown or take over if we can't.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…and we become, knowingly or not, HFWs, in the sense that we constantly copyedit, add, revise and rewrite our individual and collective history to build as close to comfortable a fiction about ourselves and others as we can manage.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What defines us, and <i>'why we do the things we do' </i>then becomes a matter of reconciling the story we tell ourselves into a fleetingly coherent whole, despite possibly conflicting sources, such as Reality™ slapping us in the face, or others' delusions crossing paths with ours in disturbing fashion.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Like everything else, we drift towards a place of rest, and in the process contribute to the general agitation. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At no point in this process is it really necessary for our consciousness to inform our actions: for all we know, we might just be watching our lives unroll like some foreign language film which we try to make sense of as we comment the show, until we start to believe we're actually running the story. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Whether we decide anything consciously or simply pretend (to ourselves) after the fact that we did is up for discussion, but certainly we do act, and my hunch is the real influence of our conscious mind and higher cognitive functions is less in the decision-making process proper, and more in the way they tweak the filters of what we'll prioritize and pay attention to at a non-conscious level in the future.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lest this starts sounding like a lot of baloney, let's get practical and consider why people embrace specific carreers, or why they get excited about any given activity, and we'll find it barely ever has much to do with the 'objective' qualities of the purported goal or object, and more about how it makes us 'feel'. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
…and then we try to figure a good enough story to explain why we should do what we're/we've already doing/done.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At least that's how <i>I</i> roll:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
1/ I get excited (doesn't have to be a good feeling: solid frustration and burning anger work just fine, too). </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
2/ I get depressed (almost never feels good, although it usually doesn't last long, and I sometimes welcome it with a relative sense of relief because it's part of my cycle, and getting excited gets taxing after a while). </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
3/ I even out by thinking stuff through, but that's emphatically *after* I bounced from the down-bottom. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
4/ Rinse and repeat, with a slightly different set of parameters I'll respond to in step 1 and 2, according to what I came up with in 3.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I trust not everybody goes to through that kind of roller coaster on a daily basis, yet I reckon the core dynamic is a fairly common one: we learn from experience inasmuch as we process and internalize whatever story we tell ourselves about what <i>did</i> happen, but we really have little say about the what & why — <i>while we're doing</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
*</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is a slight departure from the otherwise interesting theory that consciousness is essentially an artifact of malfunctioning brains, a useless parasitic commenter deluded about its contributing anything to a process that's entirely out of its control. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My quick-bake HFW model instead posits our conscious self gets to debrief <i>after the match</i>, or at least stand in line and ask questions during the exit press conference, and may even sometimes influence upcoming games and inform the playbook — as any other outside voice can/would.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll get into the things that prong me/us in the next installment, but for now I have to saw some wood beams and lay some concrete.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
***</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>*[Usual disclaimers apply, this is a work in progress — a polite way to say I'm making this up as I go, and I'm no more privy than you to we're I'm headed: journey > destination and all that.]</i></div>AcDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16533478098912963611noreply@blogger.com0