unforum

[rose]

Indie/Student ARGs

[skilletaudio]

Your screenwriters, actors, and production crews are putting everything that have into their productions, so whether or not it is blockbuster stuff, it is heartfelt and meaningful. I dont think anyone is arguing against the benefit of quality indie work.

The only problem is the ones that are nowhere near anybody putting their all into what they have. Now, in the case of theatre and film, theres certain places you can go to be assured that you are at least not going to see someones ten cent production. I likened it recently to carnagy hall.
You're productions may not be what your audience is looking for, thats fine, thats the risk an audience takes. But is it a safe bet that you wont be paying money there to see a couple 14 year olds act out slightly modified script from The Matrix? Probably. In the real world, you might just be able to tell based on the handwritten flyers on typing paper vs the playbills in the local newspaper.
But here, theres just here. This is carnagy hall, as well as your mom's basement, so to speak, and so we seek a way to tell the crayon-and-cardboard attempts from the heartfelt attempts. Sadly this seems to be coming back as "Rarr, we dont like INDIE". Its not true, its just that we're starting to hedge our bets because the initial filter doesnt exist like it does in the real world.

If your kid is in the high school play, it might suck, but it might be truly spectacular. THeres no way to tell until you get in the door, because you are going out of support, not for entertainment. BUT, if the local high school had been known for doing piss-poor productions three quarters of the time, you might just be biased against going "just for fun" on a saturday. Its not saying "we hate high school plays", its just putting odds on it. Odds dont get made up, they come from experience. Theres no cliquish conspiracy to squash talent, here. This is just people betting even odds on the better chances because they got taken before by the house.

The odds will improve when the push results in more careful launches, not when we ignore the fact that there is a quality differential and label it as bias.

[weephun]

So are they then above criticism because they are not supposed to be good? And what happens when the quality of some games matches better with my junior high renditions of "indiana weephun vs random bad-guys all played by weephun's best friend" or my sister's yearly productions of "4-16 year old's 'dancing' the Nutcracker". If you are expecting off-broadway quality or even student/indie film quality, would you not also be furious to receive this level of quality?

[skilletaudio]

Let me pose a theoretical situation: you want to be a playwright. You've recently been inspired and you've just written 10 pages of your first drafted concept, and you want to see how it goes.
Do you take out a loan, rent theater space, and put up signs all over town?
Hell no, you'd be a damn fool. You get some friends or family in the front room, and they help you rehearse it. They point out flaws. Maybe you show a teacher who helps you a bit. Thank you teach, back to the drawing board. Then you cast a glance at the local theater troupe and repeat to yourself, "someday."

Tell me, why then do people whip up an idea and go barreling to the forums? Because its the only thing to do. There is no coffee shop, no basement, no living room.
Some of us might be willing to help you test your first play, but we dont want to be told that its a full fledged game experience. Lets have some realism here.
Reality check one: Trailheads are mysterious. Thats their job. Only thing is, mystery implies confidence. Nobody ever looked at a secret message and said "Oh look, somebody trying to gain experience." THey say "AH HA, the game is afoot, watson!" So get ready.

So here we are. We've got helpful people, willing to give something a shot and we've got people who want to play games who know what they are doing. If only we could find a way to put them in the right camps. Currently, any trailhead is saying "Every player, come play." That was fine, except there were enough PM's just "taking a shot at it" and enough players wanting something they could see through to the end that now we have hard feelings we it didnt work out.

Proposal:

Another reality check: people dont post mysteries to random forums. So then, can we assume that a trailhead is a singular breach of the fabric of this alternate reality space-time, a singularity where for some reason, a mysterious person would invite a select group of people to hop into a mystery?
If we can poke a hole like that in the universe, then we can poke the hole just a little bit bigger, for the sake of everybody involved.
I say, if its your first time, if you just want to test the waters, if you're looking for "friends and family" to read your script in the frontroom, then just add a little more to your trailhead. While we are sealing the breach in the universe from "Whoops, I tripped on the internet and ended up in an alternate reality" then we can meta-assimilate a little clue that this is an indie/student thing, or a personal venture. Just a little hint that says "Be gentle." Your own, personal, "YMMV". Without it, it doesnt matter what your -intentions- are, once you have put on your mask, and posted your mysterious clue, you've basically said "Ready for prime-time, baby!"

I dont believe this is a bad thing.

I write music. There was a time when I wasnt good at it. I would ask friends, "What do you think of my music?" when it was half-done and they would say "Its not very good." Because I didnt say: Hey, Im new, or this is a work in progress, they were expecting a finished song. When you say "What do you think, this is a work in progress", then it comes in a different light and you get better support.
In this forum, where mystery is the key, trailheads as we know them say "Ready to roll, give it your best shot."
How about just a little something, some clue, something that is the ARG equivalent of saying "I'm looking for willing players for an idea". Because as things work now, any rabbithole could lead us to carnegy hall or your moms basement.


If we can reduce the number of misunderstandings, then the overall feelings will improve.

Its only fair that people be allowed to create in a supportive environment. Its also only fair to tell the audience what kind of show they will be seeing.


Edit: In summation:
Yes, I believe concerted indie efforts should be lauded and priaised, and that beginners should be allowed to find their way. I also understand that indie talent an be cultivated, and that being indie does not immediately lump you into Failure land.
But it is foolhardy to argue the a novice at ANY craft should be given the same measures as cultivated talent. You dont hire a novice to sing at your wedding. You dont send a high school ball player to the olympics, and you dont send your first song you ever wrote(I'll play it for you if you want. Its horrendous) to the radio station. You cultivate, and you make it understood that you are doing so. That is what I think we need, for novices to be able to admit as much so that we can give them the proper attention, rather than running in fear of an ARG Implosion. We have a craft here built on secrecy, which causes novice attempts to initial be indistinguishable from people having a real go at it. I say lets find a way to cultivate that "Coffee shop" environment alongside carnegy hall, not both trying to occupy the same brain-space.

[imbri]

[Phaedra]

[skilletaudio]

Imbri, I realized and acknowledged that fact. There are a great many skilled and dedicated indie PMs and games. But all novice games -are- indie games, if we exclude first-time corporate ARGs.

Therefore, my suggestion was that to help distinguish the novice attempts from the more prepared experienced indie teams, we could advise a policy of self-awareness.

I can concieve of a day where two ARGs launch similar trailheads. One is a novice attempt from a PM who would just like to try their hand at the ARGing biz, and one is a successful indie PM ready with their next big swing. I'd like to see an extra meta-step involved in the launch process where those who are feeling particularly adventurous or helpful might launch into the novice attempt (Remember, something basically saying "YMMV" but out of honesty, not a label coming from somebody else), or at the least encourage the people who do not feel up to a more introductory game from joining up in something that has a better chance of falling apart on them when they were really counting on it being seen through.

Like I said, just making sure you have the right audience, because we have a peculiar situation here where the experiencec level is diliberatley hidden, and now that a lot of new PMs are taking their first swing, people who really would like better odds of a complete gaming experience are getting dissappointed.

Its one thing to willingly go to a high school play, its quite another to show up thinking you're going to be treated to a more professional show, and feelings can and have been hurt over it.

So, we can take the pressure off the players to be eternally forgiving for demolished games, and lord help us, we can take the pressure off these poor first-timer PMs by just encouraging a method by which they can identify, without "breaking reality" that this is a dress rehearsal/opening night/first attempt/whatever vs a more experienced PM like yourself who has their feet firmly on the ground and is just heading back up to deliver a strong game experience.

Edit: I've got a good example of a possible system. Coming up. Watch this space.

I used to play on a MUCK called Stellar Convergence. MUCKs, if you dont know, are basically like connected chat rooms that are made to be like locations, with descriptons, exits, etc, and they form an overall world where people interact, chat, and roleplay.
Every so often, people would create a game, not unlike launching an ARG. THey would design a multiplayer experience from the POV of a PM, and it would usually be something that a lot of people would get involved in, it would incorporate a bunch of NPC's, but mostly be managed by laying out the structure and then turning the players loose and seeing what conclusion it came to(example: once, someone's game involved us uncovering a sealed canister from space. Upon opening it, we released a virus and had to deal with sickness and mutants, etc etc.). These pre-planned roleplaying experiences were called TinyPlots, or TPs.

There was nothing stopping any random person from just launching a small TP on any given day, but if you were really planning one, and wanted to strike up some interest, you submitted it. Thats right, you told people ahead of time that you were going to start one. This did not diminish the fun, it only hastened the excitement for the upcoming game. So, any player could look at the upcoming TP board, and would see: "<Name of game> Beginnning: <date>, contact <person>" Now, this is exactly the wrong kind of data must of us would want to be known, but what if we used this model to make a sort of ARG registery.

One could, if one wished, submit a name for your ARG, "The dissolution of Time", lets say, and a start date if you wanted to, or just a teaser tagline. Foremost, one would categorize your ARG: "First Time", "Indie", "Student", etc, and then at least you could have people getting excited, and preparing for the type of game they are interested in playing.

I know, I know, if we start announcing our ARGs, we'll take all the fun out of being surprised and all that junk...well, launches are starting to come out more often...right now, a week doesnt go by that a small ARG doesnt launch, so frankly I dont see whats left to be surprised about, ,except the content your ARG has to offer, and thats what its all about, really. I'm not saying an ARG registery is a perfect idea, but its a thought.

In the end, theres a certain amount of meta that happens before the game starts. You create forum accounts, never to be used again, you hunt down people who you never should have logically heard of for your characters to contact, etc. I don't see a problem with having a push in the community for one more step: identify your ARG in some way, and we'll all have a better time. The players will get the games they want, and the PMs will get the players that will be most receptive to what they have to offer. In my idea, if an ARG starts, and you cant tie it in with one thats on the list, then its either a rebel, a complete noob, or something wicked awesome trying to take us all out of left field. At least then you're signing off on the gamble by participating, so theres no complaining, but if you can piece clues from the trailhead together, ID the game from the list, you can say, without investing weeks, "Yes, this is a game I was interested in" or "I'm not comfortable spending time on a "first time" projecct, I'll look for something else."

Im all about just reducing the amount of hurt feelings.

[Ozy_y2k]

[Nightmare Tony]

One of the hallmarks though of the rabbit hole is the mystery, in how DEEP it goes. It is actually rare for the PMs to make an announce about their game or who is behind it all. I throw props to Colin for giving the word about Wildfire without giving the game away.

It is up to the style and mechanics of the PM team whether we get an exciting and wild trip ahead of us even with limited resources, or a huge game with lots of money that can be boring as heck. You can have a series of the hardest puzzles in the world, but I prefer that they relate to what your game is about first. Even an aim game can enthrall and excite, as long as your players love and want more.

[rose-not logged in]

a fliter

[imbri]

Re: a fliter

[skilletaudio]

Re: a fliter

[rose]

language

[Nightmare Tony]

Not all indie games die out, some of them go onto quite sucessfull conclusions. Tranquil Valley and Wildfire/Synagoga and Strange Dreams I can name off the top of my head.

An implosion will mainly depend on one thing which is true at ALL levels of expertise and financial: the commitment to finishng the game out for the players and concluding it on a sucessful note. A game killed if the pm's little brother spills the game secrets will have the same sour effect oin players as a corporate game that thje company abandoned because they decided to rebudget things. (I refer to the reading of the forums in Sable & Shuck, literally, where did the game go?)

[SpaceBass]