For a while, I’ve been curious why just about every ARG I’ve come across is a one-off experience, never to be revisited. I understand that most are funded by media companies seeking to promote other, revenue-generating content, so they have no desire to maintain the ARG experience past the launch of the core content (game, TV show, movie, etc.).
But I wondered if there was another contributing factor, perhaps something inherent in the design or architecture of ARGs.
So, I’m posing the question to those with far more ARG experience than I: why are ARGs currently relegated to one-and-done status (and can or should they be liberated to serve more than once, either as a self-contained experience or as part of a larger entertainment experience)?
The way I see it, one type of ARG is by nature real-time. There have been experiments and smaller campaigns with replayable ARGs, but I think if an ARG takes on the task of playing out in the real world and incorporating multiple people, modifying and making use of temporal assets, then it is by nature a once-off experience. It’s both a boon and a drawback to the format.
Replayable ARGs tend to be much more self-contained, whether structured around an individual player’s “session”, or a timeline that can be ‘reset’ periodically as the creators re-run the game.
I certainly don’t think that “once off” is an unintended consequence (at least when it’s recognized). It’s part of what makes the genre enticing, and one property of the experience that sets it apart from other ‘games’ and campaigns and such.
If that once-off nature of the ARG is recognized and embraced when creating an experience like this, then it can very much be a Good Thing (and usually far more useful to campaigns that are indeed temporal in nature, like promotional experiences only relevant to a specific date, for example).
In short, I like the play-once effective exclusivity of ARGs – makes it that much more “real”, and opens the door for a whole different variety of gameplay and content. Not a bad thing at all!
There are a small number out there creating ARGs/Transmedia experience that do live on. Conspiracy for Good last year was the pilot season and Kring has said he plans to do more “iterations”.
Another producer, I believe from Brazil?, last year was at the Power to the Pixel market and talked about rolling out his transmedia project from territory to territory: so you had the Russian version…etc.
But I highly suspect, that ARG’s attached to viral marketing are one off’s because the intention is not really to gather so many players/eyeballs to the campaign itself but to gain notoriety in the press. And once they’ve accomplished that, they really don’t care what happens to the storyworld they created.
In addition, I think the reason repeatable experiences have not been created is simply because there is no tradition for them, and then how do you convince investors there will be a ROI on a production that has existed once before.
@Geoff: Excellent points.
I agree that one-and-done experiences have a unique attribute that increases the attractiveness of ARGs (“play now or miss it forever”). Kind of the Woodstock effect, as it were, and there is definitely nothing wrong with that!
And, yes, replayable/repeatable ARGs have their own challenges (though my sense is that there’s interest out there in trying to design just such a model), but that’s not what I’m trying to explore.
My question to the ARG gurus is this: is there a design component to ARGs that make them not work well in the framework of a serial or installment kind of nature (I’m thinking over the course of years, not just a 6-month run)?
For example, if you already have a serial storytelling format as the story foundation (TV show, movie franchise, comic, etc.), and you want to layer onto that experience an ARG component, is there a design consideration that would preclude you from having the ARG be a kind of persistent thread weaving through the “core” story across the series? It’s not replayable in the sense that new players experience the same content as old players. Rather, it’s persistent in the sense that new content is added over time, with the next “installment” of the ARG linking back to and building on the prior ARG installments (as well as the other content components in the entertainment IP).
Or does such an ARG change in nature to the point that’s now something else?
@Carrie: Thanks for the examples (especially Conspiracy for Good – didn’t know Kring had future plans for it)!
I think you may be hitting at the core of my question when you point out that there’s no tradition for this kind of serial/installment ARG. Perhaps I asked the right question at the wrong time. : )
I think Geoff and Carrie both make great points. I would like to add that the expense/work to produce an ongoing ARG might also come into play. I mean if the big properties tie that into a budget, I think the episodic thing could work. But if your an independent production the ARG budget might end up being fairly close to your production budget. Just a thought.
Although how awesome would it be to be able to say that the ARG you’re working on is scheduled to last for 3 years…. O man… job security! :)
Well on the topic of serial ARGs, there was one that I didn’t really participate in called Eldritch Errors, set up by GMD Studios – that would probably be one the best examples I can think of for an independent episodic ARG.
http://www.eldritcherrors.com
http://www.schmeldritch.com (meta site)
@Dave:
Budget is clearly a primary hurdle to serial ARGs. What I want to know from the ARG vets is whether it’s the *only* hurdle. Because, as you say, “O man…job security!” : )
@Geoff:
Ah yes, Eldritch Errors! I should ping Brian about that (looks like it had a handful of “books”). Thanks!
I might also poke at the community concept. A large piece of many ARGs is building the community to share ideas, unlock the puzzles together and bring those pieces of a story to others (especially those that send out only so many items and hope they find their way to the community). How do you capture that sense of building a community again and again? Would it be like tours? Where you bring whole groups together through the experience, thus keeping the community fresh. Not sure I am really vocalizing well what I am trying to tease out.
Wow, boy did you ask an interesting question, Scott. Actually, more than one. The first draft of this post that I did I’m actually going to save (but it was far too long and would have had tons of people, from clients to partners, upset with me.) The next take was so condensed that I don’t think anyone could have parsed it all back out if they didn’t already know what I was talking about. I’m hoping this one cuts the difference between the two.
Budget is not really a barrier at all, Scott, and I think the “form” is a huge pile of unexploited value. The problem you’ve put your finger on is deeper than that, it is about the function instead of the form. All of the examples that come to your mind are driven by marketing as a function, and marketing is just that: a function. Happy to unpack that further if you find it interesting, in terms of all the little ways that leads to disposable experiences, but in general it boils down to that one concept — HOW you produce the results is less important than the results. And this is true if it is a work for hire or branded entertainment or a grant from a not-for-profit for a game for change.
As someone who also creates intellectual property that I own, I can point out a ton more examples of episodic ARGish things (from Jan Libby’s Sammeeeees! to Lance Weiler’s Pandemic to Scholastic’s 39 Clues etc.) When these things are created as part of the actual product or work (instead of as marketing for the product or work), you’re MORE likely than not to do serials — that is in fact part of the reason Hollywood subjects to endless remakes, reboots, adaptations, sequals and formulaic works. Fans are the most valuable thing you can possibly have.
As an IP creator, though, I have to have a business model, a way to turn attention into revenue. Mature art forms, once they’ve found a business model that works, create pathways that everyone can adapt — publishing, broadcasting, etc. An industry cements around the broadly adopted process, eventually becoming so calcified that it serves as a gatekeeper. If you’re outside that gatekeeper, you’re an independent and you have to come up with your version of that business model (or some other kind of business model entirely).
So in this particular niche of creators, we’re all independents: there is no gatekeeper, because there is no widely adopted model. Full stop.
Those business models all face the same challenges — how will I secure funding? how will pay those funders back? is there an audience for this? how do I reach that audience?
So, from my perspective, one of the ways that I can solve that business model is “I’ll take money from someone and deliver them a marketing result that they would have spent that much or more to achieve anyway”. That’s the easiest model in the world and those one-term ARGs you are talking about are all variations of that model.
No one can name a hit that uses a different business model. They can point to indie projects, but not big hits (perhaps with one exception, Blair Witch, but people could debate that.) I believe that almost any other business model will always favor serials, because any creator can explain the value of fans (see the remix, adaptation pile up there again.) I can tell you what I think the failings have been in the business models, and that’s one of those topics of conversations we practitioners have with each other (so I even know a little bit about what most of the other veterans in the space think as well, and it is a fascinating pile of arguments.) Finding these business models is, in fact, what everyone should be thinking about — because there WILL be more than one answer.
So I’ll throw in a bit on Eldritch as a close — that is most definitely a serial, with three “books” that were of traditional ARG length and depth. There was no client, that was me and my partners investing some of the money we had “liberated” by doing that other pile of work, and like Lance Weiler the justification for it was largely R&D (without a client and the function of delivering results, we could try more daring stuff — stuff that we DIDN’T know would work.) Across those three “books” we spent as much money as we would have to make descent feature length indie film, and to date the revenue has been $0.
But I have been spending quite a bit of time on Eldritch again, in part because the challenge for me and my partners is the “to invest further, we have to be R&Ding a business model”. And that’s why people haven’t seen any Eldritch in a couple of years. So none of the work I’m doing now is anything that the audience gets to see: it’s business plans and financial models and audience growth projections — the BUSINESS of the work. The more I’ve fought with it, the more I think I have found solves — multiple solves. Which means you have to poke through those multiple solves to figure out which ones are worth exploring first.
I’m not alone: the fans aren’t seeing it, but there are more and more people who think they have found solves. It is all bubbling in different shops in different places, and the diversity of those solutions are going to revolutionize everything … because we’ll learn even (if not especially) more from near-hits and almost-made-its as we will from whatever proves to be replicable.
But I can’t think of a single one of those experiments that is hanging itself on the word ARG (even Eldritch never used the word ARG, I’d describe it more as an immersive thriller.) But that’s a whole ‘nuther conversation.
@Julie:
Great question! My *guess* is that each “installment” of the experience would be fluid in terms of the community, with each one having its own unique character. Installments would have a large percentage of returning fans, with a smaller percentage of new fans (and, in fact, each installment would give newcomers a chance to jump in at a logical narrative gate without feeling like they are coming too late to the game – but to quote Brian, that’s a whole ‘nuther conversation. : )
@Brian:
Thank you for such an insightful post – you elevated the discussion to a much higher level. I’m still processing it, and I would very much like to unpack many of your points (perhaps in a different forum, though!). Very encouraged by your words, and looking forward to seeing all of that R&D giving way to a viable business model.
I think it’s definitely possible to make a long-running, on-going ARG because it would borrow from the MMO and take the role play out of the virtual world and into the real world. A big part of MMO is also the community aspect.
To make it pay for itself you either need a pervasive experience that some are willing to pay for or items of traditional content (e.g. books, merchandise etc) that some are willing to pay for.
My top four for to make the numbers work for a long, continuous ARG would be:
(a) less reliance on puzzle-solving and more on role-play and social game play
(b) more people playing – which means a lower barrier to entry and an end to saying “it’s not a game” and instead saying “it is a game, it’s fun – come play, here’s the rules etc”
( c) one community but two spaces – one “in game” and one “out of game” with greater ability for community to contribute content, critic the experience & evolve the story
(d ) low operating costs using digital automation to simulate an ongoing, open world, interactive storyworld E.g Conducttr ;)
and i would add to all of the great pts. above… audience is an enormous factor. as a designer/creator and player of ARGs, i’m not sure you can keep the audience’s interest over a long period of time. players dive into these worlds and although its an amazing ride, you begin to feel an audience drift after a certain amount of time. the attention span of players used to be, like 4, 5 or 6 yrs ago, far greater than it is now.. due to soc med and other cool places out there. not to say it can’t ever be done, but the design needs to be specific to this idea of a series, chapters or episodes. and i would probably work on the idea of designing it to slightly different targets per chapter.
“But I have been spending quite a bit of time on Eldritch again,” <– It's statements like that that will get you in trouble Mr. Clark. We of the Outpost have long memories and are still meeting in our secret clubhouse to torture voodoo dolls of you. (Okay, maybe not so secret and maybe there aren't any voodoo dolls, but your name is still usually proceeded by a word I won't repeat here.)
Hijacking aside, I do know that EE isn't the only game that has produced a sequel, as it were. I believe there is one grassroots ARG that has had 3 or 4 games after the initial one ended (not that I can recall the name of it. It wasn't one I played and I'm not even sure I could find it on the UF forums anymore).
I agree with Jan that I think the audience can be a factor in maybe why there aren't as many sequels going on. Not only do you have the drift of people away as the story gets further along – how do you bring in new people for a game that has a 'sequel tag slapped to it? There are quite a few players who don't even want to look at a game that has been going on for more than a few weeks (because oh no! They might have missed something) so imagine how hard it will be to try to get them to play a game where they missed out on so much before. If the original game is spectacular enough, it probably wouldn't be a problem. (Look at how excited people get when even the thought of I Love Bees is returning.) But I think for your average run-of-the-mill ARG, getting a new audience bigger than the original would take quite a bit of effort.
@Robert:
I had not considered a truly persistent experience like an MMO as the model – I was thinking of something that cycled through periods of inactivity (much like a TV show) but which would build on what came before. You’ve got me going down a whole different line of thinking now! And good points, too, as they apply to non-ARG experiences, too.
@Jan:
I was hoping you’d add your views! Wondering if the attention issue could be alleviated with a cycle of “active” and “inactive” periods/products rather than requiring constant engagement…? Or, to pursue your point about shortening spans of engagement, perhaps another approach would be to shorten the duration of each cycle but have more of them?
@ Rowan:
Hijack away – there are clearly many people who would like to see EE revived! : )
And you’re absolutely right about people wanting in on the ground floor (witness the comic book industry’s approach to reboot titles in an effort to give fans a natural and obvious place to jump into new storylines/worlds with familiar characters and not feel left behind). As Jan said, those kinds of considerations would have to be baked in to the design from the beginning (or different tiers of engagement would have be created to support this kind of long-term experience).
Thanks to all of you for your thoughts/ideas!
This probably goes to the issue of “dynamic community formation”.
Even back 5 years ago there was a lot more structure.
For example, there was the lonelygirl15 community that many “games” developed out of. The key to that community was a narrative that held it all together. From that large base it was possible to springboard either a fully independent project or a spin off from the core story line. For example OpAphid was an ARG that began tangentially related to the core story. The Cassieiswatching ARG appeared related but turned out to be mostly independent (and yes we still get together in Second Life every week on Saturday night to work on that final unsolved anagram). Maddison Atkins had the potential to link up with the core story but eventually went its own independent path. The point is that all of these were made possible by the existence of a huge community of people many of whom seemed to thrive on the challenges that ARGs provide.
Maddison Atkins is a good example. Chapter 1 was intense on both sides of the curtain. It was a 24/7 activity that required total dedication from both the PM and the players for most of its 2 week run. This type of activity is hard to sustain by either the PM or players. The PM needs to give up on their “regular life” and you tend to find players who are at a point in their life where they have a LOT of time they can dedicate to a singular project.
Maddison Atkins chapter 2 came with its own set of issues. By dedicating less time to the project the PM produced an experience that felt less fluid to the players. While this was all that was possible it set in motion a multitude of complex community issues which distracted from the game.
With the reboot of Maddison 2.0 the PM chose to delegate a lot of the work to either cast or others on the production team. This does not lighten the work load but rather distributes it. This worked well but it is still hard to sustain for long on either side of the curtain.
In summary this leads to the questions: where is the community, how do you mobilize them quickly around a project and how do we all work together better on both sides of the wall to make this possible?
Whatever the answers they will probably have to stem from the realization that todays World is dynamic and becoming increasingly so. It is hard to build a community overnight but to the degree we can find a path to “self assembly” around a project or projects the more sustainable ARGs will become.
@modelmotion:
Great example of the spinoff nature of lonelygirl15 (including both “authorized” and “independent” versions). Certainly one framework that does support an on-going, evolving ARG experience.
And you bring up the topic of community building and retention – a recurring theme in these comments. When I posted the question, my own hypothesis was that an on-going ARG would work best if it followed the up/down cyclical nature of a TV series. This way players could expect and plan for down time, as well as anticipate and look forward to the resumption of the ARG.
But you highlighted an idea that I’m frankly embarrassed to say I had not considered, which is building a platform that supports outside contributions and experience extensions crafted by the fans themselves. Independent franchising, as it were (though I’m sure I’ll get into hot water with certain people for daring to use the “F” word in this post!).
As you pointed out, that has happened already in the ARG field, though it appears to have done so organically and without conscious planning on the part of the ARG designers. What if the design specifically encourages that kind of participation…?
Thanks for some great observations!
Somehow the idea of the boxed ‘host your own Murder Mystery’ is springing to mind : ) sorry… I will refocus
Hello everyone,
I’m very interested about the replayability of ARGs (well, or the non-replayability of ARGs). Geoff said ARGs should be live and make use of temporal assets which I agree of course. So they cannot be play when off. As we know accessibility is a huge challenge to ARGs designers. As in an MMORP, I bet there is somewhere a way to create rooms or instances into players can evolve at the same pace.
faismoijouer.com will be posting about America 2049 which is a Facebook video-game with a huge ARG side. In France, we have Game Designer Eric Viennot promoting his “Global Fiction” In Memoriam which is basically a video-game with extensions in the real world. It had bigger success than all ARGs altogether in France. So I guess there should be a way to assemble the accessibilty and the focus on a player’s experience with the live aspect of ARGs don’t you think ?
If you guys have any examples of ARG-based video-games such as In Memoriam and America 2049, let me know ! Thanks in advance
http://www.inmemoriam-thegame.com/gb/index.htm
@Julien:
Hmmm. Single-instance v. Replayable v. Persistent v. Collaborative (i.e., open to fan-created spinoffs). The comments here are fleshing out more than one kind of model/framework for ARGs (or *possible* models…*viable* is a different question).
Really intrigued by your idea of MMO instances (self-contained bubbles of experience with both a limited duration and a limited number of players). And thanks for the tip on In Memoriam (and the reminder about America 2049!).
Thanks for your comments!