Thoughts on Blogging Part 21
When you initially start blogging, your aspirations tend to be very straightforward. Choose a title, find a niche and get into the habit of writing. Simple tasks that can still take a while to master. Once your blog is established and has endured for a while, you may not have any further long term goals other than to just keep going. However, if you feel that you want to achieve more then you have to tackle a new set of problems. There is a great deal of “advice” in the public domain about growing and monetising your blog. A lot of it is questionable but there are some approaches that do work. However, these require you to write to a specific process, chasing the ever changing whims of your potential readership. You have to compromise. And for many bloggers, that is the deal breaker.
When you initially start blogging, your aspirations tend to be very straightforward. Choose a title, find a niche and get into the habit of writing. Simple tasks that can still take a while to master. Once your blog is established and has endured for a while, you may not have any further long term goals other than to just keep going. However, if you feel that you want to achieve more then you have to tackle a new set of problems. There is a great deal of “advice” in the public domain about growing and monetising your blog. A lot of it is questionable but there are some approaches that do work. However, these require you to write to a specific process, chasing the ever changing whims of your potential readership. You have to compromise. And for many bloggers, that is the deal breaker.
Hot takes, “ambulance chasing” and generally attempting to move from bandwagon to bandwagon may well find you an audience and possibly a line of revenue. But it strikes me as a soulless and empty way to write. I much prefer to write about what interests me, although I recognise that some of that is going to be extremely niche specific. However, some subjects can prove quite popular and can gain traffic. I find that film reviews and essays can gain traction and have the advantage of longevity. Writing detailed guides, FAQs and tips for specific subjects can also prove fruitful. It is harder to gain an audience by being a raconteur but some writers do maintain an audience through their personality or reputation. Remember that blogs are very personal things and your personality is a factor whether you realise it or not.
Assuming you have an online presence with a big enough audience to seriously consider monetisation, the next stage is to decide exactly what method you wish to adopt. Personally I don’t consider advertising to be viable anymore. The halcyon days of having banner ads on your blog are gone mainly because ad blockers are ubiquitous and broadly speaking people find advertising pervasive and annoying. For it to work you need a lot of traffic before you see a red cent, so I really don’t think it is a solution for many bloggers. Plus there are ethical concerns as you may not necessarily have any control over what advertising is shown to your readership. Hence, the most logical business model to pursue is one of reader patronage, where they can subscribe to show support and access an additional source of exclusive content. Patreon or something similar.
If you pursue reader patronage then you have to produce extra content to justify their support. This will require either having exclusive material on a third party site or having a members area on your existing website. Naturally it will entail extra work and you can argue that the moment you embark upon a process of monetisation you have fundamentally changed the nature of your writing. You now have an obligation to serve the needs of your customers. At the very least the commercial nature of your blog may impact upon what you choose to write about. Alternatively, you can simply add a donation facility to your site which is less transactional. However, it may not yield a reliable source of revenue and a lot of bloggers just find this approach uncomfortable. All of which are good reasons for bloggers to think long and hard about the ramifications of monetisation.
Many bloggers are content to just write as and when they like and do not have any plans beyond that. That is a very healthy mindset, providing very comfortable parameters to work within. But some bloggers, myself included, have an itch to see if they can grow their blog. To try and increase their reach. If one writes publicly, then there is some aspiration that someone will read it. However, this is not an easy thing to achieve. The “blogosphere” is not a meritocracy, seeming more often like a race to the bottom. You may often find what you consider to be your best work is ignored and something you deem inconsequential gains traction. There are no definitive paths to success. But if you already have a blog and have been maintaining it for a while, you are already ahead of those who have stopped and those who elevate procrastination into an artform. As with most things in life, it’s important to maintain forward momentum while you’re trying to figure the details out.
Wordle
Over the Christmas holidays, I started noticing lots of people posting images of some sort of grid composed of coloured squares in my Twitter timeline. Then the hashtag #wordle provided a name and it became apparent that all this activity was to do with some sort of game. Eventually my curiosity got the better of me and I did a Google search and discovered the exact nature of Wordle. The game was originally created by software engineer Josh Wardle for his partner, Palak Shah. Family and friends played the game and it proved popular. So Wardle then decided to make it available online, last October. By November 90 people were playing Wordle. However, after a share online button was added to the game the audience rapidly grew. As of 2nd January it had over 300,000 players with several high profile celebrities among that number.
Over the Christmas holidays, I started noticing lots of people posting images of some sort of grid composed of coloured squares in my Twitter timeline. Then the hashtag #wordle provided a name and it became apparent that all this activity was to do with some sort of game. Eventually my curiosity got the better of me and I did a Google search and discovered the exact nature of Wordle. The game was originally created by software engineer Josh Wardle for his partner, Palak Shah. Family and friends played the game and it proved popular. So Wardle then decided to make it available online, last October. By November 90 people were playing Wordle. However, after a share online button was added to the game the audience rapidly grew. As of 2nd January it had over 300,000 players with several high profile celebrities among that number.
The game involves trying to guess a five-letter word each day. The player has six attempts available. Each time you make a guess, it will show if the letter you used was correct and in the right space, correct but in the wrong space, or not in the word at all. Wordle uses a colour code system to show players their respective success or failure, with letters turning green if they’re in the right space or yellow if they’re in the wrong space. There is only one word available each day and the word is the same for everyone playing. Players can share their results with each other. There is also a hard mode for players who want an extra challenge, forcing them to use the letter hints given by the game in subsequent guesses and restricting what they can guess next.
I am not an active player of Wordle. I gave it a go while researching this post and decided it’s not for me, which is odd for someone who likes words and language. However, that’s not to say it’s appeal and charm is lost upon me. I can understand why a game such as this gains traction with people. There is no bar to entry, no cost and the game’s rules are straightforward and unambiguous. The game is also educational and an opportunity to expand one’s vocabulary. Plus every player is guessing the same word each day, which adds a sense of a shared experience. Posting on social media means that people can swap scores and engage with each other about the game. It is this social element that has undoubtedly contributed to the games success. It’s traction on social media has attracted a lot of press attention. Josh Wardle was recently interviewed on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, which is a prestigious UK news vehicle.
My interest in Wordle stems from what Josh Wardle said during the course of his BBC interview on Wednesday 5th January. Especially in light of the triple A video game industries current infatuation with NFTs and blockchain technology; their latest monetisation fetish. “I don't understand why something can't just be fun. I don't have to charge people money for this and ideally would like to keep it that way. Wordle is very simple and you can play it in three minutes, and that is all you get. There are also no ads and I am not doing anything with your data, and that is also quite deliberate”. Wordle currently exists as a web based game. When asked regarding a mobile app version, he stated “I am a bit suspicious of mobile apps that demand your attention and send you push notifications to get more of your attention. I like the idea of doing the opposite of that; what about a game that deliberately doesn't want much of your attention”.
I wonder what Yosuke Matsuda, the President of Square Enix, would make of Josh Wardle’s philosophy? Matsuda stated recently in a corporate press release that "goodwill” and "volunteer spirit” were "inconsistent personal feelings” and essentially looked down upon them as they were difficult to monetise. I think what Josh Wardle’s comments highlight is the intrinsic difference in mindset between those who personally create art and those third parties who see it purely as a means to profit. Reflecting upon both positions, I know which one I feel most well disposed towards and which one I will afford a degree of goodwill. I believe that there is a valuable insight to be gained here as well as an important life lesson. However, I suspect that one party is too busy counting their money to learn either of them.
Why Play For Fun When You Can Play to Contribute?
In an open letter released on January 1st 2022, Square Enix president Yosuke Matsuda, presented a roadmap of the company’s intentions for 2022 and beyond. What made this communication so unusual was not so much the commitment to both NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens) and blockchain which are the current industry wide flavour of the month, but the language employed to describe the established gaming status quo, its business model as well as player motivation. It also was a timely reminder that multi billion dollar corporations ultimately have no interest in anything that they cannot generate revenue from. And again we return to a recurring problem associated with video games culture. Many gamers still do not see themselves as consumers and still erroneously think that developers and publishers are their friends and they have a different kind of relationship with them. Hopefully this letter will help lift the scales from such peoples eyes.
In an open letter released on January 1st 2022, Square Enix president Yosuke Matsuda, presented a roadmap of the company’s intentions for 2022 and beyond. What made this communication so unusual was not so much the commitment to both NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens) and blockchain which are the current industry wide flavour of the month, but the language employed to describe the established gaming status quo, its business model as well as player motivation. It also was a timely reminder that multi billion dollar corporations ultimately have no interest in anything that they cannot generate revenue from. And again we return to a recurring problem associated with video games culture. Many gamers still do not see themselves as consumers and still erroneously think that developers and publishers are their friends and they have a different kind of relationship with them. Hopefully this letter will help lift the scales from such peoples eyes.
Now it is pertinent to consider that this is a corporate press release and that it was more than likely originally drafted and completed in Japanese. Reading through the English version it is at times a little difficult to parse and fully construe the exact sentiment being expressed. Corporate speak is very similar to political oratory and both are at times intentionally ambiguous and lend themselves to being recanted or “reinterpreted”. That being said, there is sufficient information to be able to determine the overall sentiment of the message. The quote below is especially relevant as it shows quite clearly how Square Enix perceives their customer base and what their mindset is towards them. There is a separate debate to be had about the failings of NFTs and blockchain (and I would recommend that you read Wilhelm Arcturus’ post on this for further insight) but I wish to focus more on the semantics of this statement and what that shows us about the video game industry’s philosophy.
“I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players have voiced their reservations toward these new trends, and understandably so. However, I believe that there will be a certain number of people whose motivation is to “play to contribute,” by which I mean to help make the game more exciting. Traditional gaming has offered no explicit incentive to this latter group of people, who were motivated strictly by such inconsistent personal feelings as goodwill and volunteer spirit. This fact is not unrelated to the limitations of existing UGC (user-generated content). UGC has been brought into being solely because of individuals’ desire for self-expression and not because any explicit incentive existed to reward them for their creative efforts. I see this as one reason that there haven’t been as many major game-changing content that were user-generated as one would expect.”
When Matsuda talks about how some people play games to have “fun” there is a palpable sense of bemusement and possibly even contempt. It’s a very odd position to adopt as it is the foundation upon which the video games industry was built. Like any other business, there is an exchange of goods or services for money. In this case it is a piece of recreational software, designed to elicit amusement, mirth and enjoyment. At present Japanese gamers spend $20 billion a year in the pursuit of fun so it seems a little odd to be averse to it. But video game monetisation trends in recent years clearly show that big business per se is done with one off payments. Free to play, microtransactions, loot boxes, season passes and other live services have spearheaded a drive towards recurring monetisation. Hence, Matsuda now wants more players who “play to contribute”.
Video games have a long history of players contributing both to the games themselves and the communities that grow around them. Player created mods add value, fix long term problems and prolong a games lifespan. Guilds and social groups organise events, as well as play through content that some players would not attempt otherwise. Blogs, live streams and podcasts curate important data associated with games, build and sustain communities and often provide free public relations for the video game industry. Yet according to Matsuda “goodwill” and “volunteer spirit” are inconsistent personal feelings and are therefore unreliable. Clearly the human desire to share, help and support others out of a sense of common good is utterly alien to him. He clearly thinks that socially inclined players need a formal framework to work within. If their “goodwill” and “volunteer spirit” is monetised then it will be more dependable. Let us take a moment to reflect on the utterly bleak mindset that harbours such thoughts.
At first glance it seems illogical to eschew an existing business model that has proven lucrative, to focus on something new and untested. Such a sea change is not necessarily going to happen overnight. Gamers have already rebuffed Ubisoft’s ongoing Ubisoft Quartz project to introduce NFTs to Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon: Breakpoint. However, I would advise extreme caution in so readily dismissing such rapid change. Again I say take a look at the video games monetisation over the last decade. What is beyond the pale to a 50 something gamer is now just the way it is for a 20 year old. Also, consider the iniquities of the triple A video games industry that were frontpage news in 2021. Despite a very vocal public outcry, has it really harmed the bottom line? For every gamer who is aghast, there are two others that either don’t know or don’t give a shit. The industry knows this. Remember what former President Trump said. “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters”. The same thing applies here.
So here we are again at a crossroads. Or if not at a crossroads, at least a very clear indication of the direction that the video games industry wants to take. Turning a popular triple A game into a virtual online sweatshop is not going to be an easy task and I’m sure at some point governments and law makers will get involved. But considering how big business usually gets its way, I don’t see “play to contribute” being wished away anytime soon. If the dystopian dream of working in your leisure time and chasing some get rich scheme does arrive, I shall not participate. But others will and it could become the new normal. Our children and grandchildren may well come of age in a world where they chase a buck in absolutely every aspect of your life, be it work or play. A world with superficial modern trapping but essentially based upon Mediaeval Feudalism.
NB. When I initially read Yosuke Matsuda’s press release, I found his baffled tone in respect to human compassion, empathy and decency very reminiscent of the following Monty Python sketch. Here it is for your amusement and edification. Who said that the decline of human civilization had to be dour. We can at least laugh while it happens.
Financing LOTRO
Back in December 2008, I bought a “compilation pack” that contained both the The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadow of Angmar base game, along with the newly released Mines of Moria expansion. I paid £20 for the lot. After the obligatory free months access, I then became a regular subscriber right up until about summer 2012. Since then I’ve subscribed and played whenever new content is released, meaning that for about six months of the year, I’m paying for the “luxury” of playing LOTRO. I’ve also purchased all the expansions over the years. Because I enjoy the game, I am not averse to buying additional LOTRO points when my monthly stipend doesn’t cover the cost of the items I want. I never availed myself of the opportunity to become a lifetime account holder, which is something I regret. It certainly would have been very good value for money, considering that LOTRO is over a decade old.
Back in December 2008, I bought a “compilation pack” that contained both the The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadow of Angmar base game, along with the newly released Mines of Moria expansion. I paid £20 for the lot. After the obligatory free months access, I then became a regular subscriber right up until about summer 2012. Since then I’ve subscribed and played whenever new content is released, meaning that for about six months of the year, I’m paying for the “luxury” of playing LOTRO. I’ve also purchased all the expansions over the years. Because I enjoy the game, I am not averse to buying additional LOTRO points when my monthly stipend doesn’t cover the cost of the items I want. I never availed myself of the opportunity to become a lifetime account holder, which is something I regret. It certainly would have been very good value for money, considering that LOTRO is over a decade old.
Although F2P games offer the benefit of reaching a wider market, I do believe that the business model is troublesome and causes more problems than it solves. Lootboxes similarly can break a game, as content is retrofitted to accommodate monetisation, rather than serve the exclusive needs of the customer. The monetisation per se of the gaming industry remains a perennial debate and one that is not going to be solved anytime soon to every one’s satisfaction. It is certainly a matter that is causing Standing Stone Games to tie themselves in knot at present. Lootboxes have been present in LOTRO for a while but they were never integral to progression through the game until the release of the Mordor expansion. Let it suffice to say that there has been a great deal of player push back against this decision and that SSG have been trying to address this matter in Update 23, which is due for release soon. However, the current proposals are complex and are very much a work in progress. They also seem to be causing a great deal of consternation among players.
I won’t attempt to summarise the latest “plan” at present as it’s being continuously “revised”. If you’re feeling stoic, then read the current thread on the official forums and you’ll see how difficult this matter is to sort out. However, I think the overall problem comes down to a fundamental difference in outlook over the financing of LOTRO, between the players, the publishers and lastly the developers SSG. LOTRO has a mature playerbase. A hardcore of thirty to fifty plus year olds, who all cut their teeth in an era where game monetisation was clear. You bought a game and paid for any additional expansions. In the MMO world, you bought the base game and subscribed. It was a simple “quid pro quo”. You paid money and got content. However, microtransactions, in-game currencies, season passes, paid DLC, lootboxes and “live services” have evolved over the last decade or so and have migrated from the mobile games market, over to console and PC gaming. Younger players who have grown up with mobile games has become “acclimatised” to such business practices. LOTRO players by and large don’t care for them.
And therein lies the rub for SSG or more to the point, their financial backers Daybreak Game Company. I suspect that there are financial targets set for LOTRO each quarter and that these are proving “challenging”. Because of the dedicated nature of many core LOTRO players it would appear that there are significant whales in the community. Yet it is the nature of the current games industry to seek whatever revenue that can possibly be generated and that the fate of a game will often come down to whether or not it yields the financial projections. Hence it become extremely difficult for SSG to find the right balance. Simply removing loot boxes and the LOTRO store from the game is not going to happen. The game is just too heavily dependent upon that business model. Some players have suggested cutting out the “middle man” of loot boxes and keys and just have a store where you buy everything that is offered. Sadly, whatever course of action is taken, it is bound to please one group and offend another. However, gating content or progression in LOTRO behind some kind of pay mechanic could well prove to be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. But I’m sure SSG knows this, so it will be interesting to see what compromise they arrive at by the time Update 23 launches.
