FREE FOR ALL - Challenging Life Itself!

 “How does free gaming and free filming help reach a change in the world?” The answer is simple.

We have been confined in a world created to suit a system that perhaps we have not all agreed on all the time, struggled with, sometimes perhaps came to question, and even come to confront.

We have been conditioned to see things in certain ways and come to deal with them or believe in them in either the form that “they are like that because they are” or “they are like that because that is how things work.” This conditioning has made us trust and have faith in a model not because we ourselves have dealt to question with it and design it, but because it is the standard, the mean, the prototype and the example that we are just used to and seldom challenge because so far it works. Or at least, it seems to work or has us believing it works.

The majority of the sources that support this model are also those that contribute the greatest in our conception that it works, and they are also at the same time the ones to profit most from it, and coincidentally enough for us, are also the biggest forms of influence in our life. Media!

Whether they be the cinema, television, radio or advertisements (outside those three major medias, from billboards to flyers to posters) that are used by companies, shops, products, and all forms of consumerism. Whatever has a gain in profit has a say in media, whatever isn’t free, needs to be advertised, whatever isn’t free needs to be bought, whatever need to be bought needs a job and jobs need again advertisement or any form of reaching the masses to sell a product. From a service to any other material convenience, it all helps to structure this model and soon enough before we know it we all live to either believe or encourage the notion that “nothing is free”.

Is this entirely true however? In some cases it might be, in some others it might not.

The best we can do is challenge life for what it is and the systems within it, not take them as is for what they are, and if we question things enough perhaps we will find answers to questions that we might not even know we have. If one does not search it is indeed a struggle to find. And what are we generally as a whole searching for mostly in all our lives? The answer should be “making things easier”, perhaps even more fun. And if we do not believe this is so, then we are only kidding ourselves.

The products we buy and consume have that purpose and this is the criteria under which we scale our satisfaction from each product. Does it make our lives easier? Does it work? Does it entertain us? And hence, would we buy it again? That is what it all comes down to.

So, why not entertain ourselves with thoughts of how to make things even easier or more fun? It is only normal to do so.

One form of media, that although follows this model, also has the power and means to go against it and not support it at all, is the internet. And there are many examples of this that most of us are aware of. It has been used this way in the past and is still used as such today.

It’s actually a fact that the internet was first designed as a free place of sharing information, for free. That aside, how can free products in the art industry, such as games films and other forms of digital entertainment, help change the world? The answer is in the way that they already have in the last years. To be clear on this, they don’t change the world, they help change it. That is what we need to keep in mind.

To backtrack to my initial notion on the matter many years ago. I believed that (taking games for our first example) free gaming would be one of the greatest ways to change the way people saw the industry whilst also make a profit for their creators so they too could continue to work as artists, graphic designers, animators, and so on. Taking it first from the aspect of the creators, they are challenged to make something great, something that people would love to experience or enjoy. It will also cut down costs of game development (payment models to creatives would be based on success not on hiring), making the field accessible to more.

Although this may be looked down upon by some companies, or perhaps even consumers (giving the belief to the second of the two that the products will be of less quality since everyone inspired to make something would attempt to do so) it isn’t entirely correct on behalf of the consumers. A great product when supported continues to exist and evolve into a better version of the first or into new products. If it isn’t successful, it simply will stop right there. The problem of poor development will not become an issue, and those companies/groups in the tracks of poor development, no matter what they advertise, will not have an income from profit through a free game model lest it is actually good. To further add to this, companies that are only in it to make money, giving less care to the product they make, simply wont get too many chances to keep this up.

How will they make any money at all one would ask. Through donations was the initial idea mostly. If a game is successful to many customers donations can reward the company with enough profit to keep them going on, whilst smaller costs make large profit goals less required.

Companies would look down on this from their perspective because it does not guarantee a buy for their game with each copy played. Well, is it not time that companies stopped making games for money and started to follow the path of making games for entertainment?

The biggest problem now is exactly that. Games that are worth 1 fifth of their price, if worth anything at all, making money on advertisement. Not to mention some of the larger companies that do this, there are those that make millions from one title alone just because of its franchise name. Not to mention the subscription model that creates revenue for some companies up to 720 million dollars yearly! Is any game worth that money? Really? And is being fed half baked products worth our pay? Or on other occasions, are well made products and games (the so called AAA titles) that somehow end up having less ingredients and a taste that is quickly gone also worth our pay? Perhaps those are, but definitely not deserving of some ridiculous amounts of profit that really do not live up to their name/quality/quantity.

Companies then tend to create a form of control through their success. Publishers follow the same code, and in the end even gaming turned into becoming a battle of monopoly. Not a good result for lesser or smaller companies that are inspired enough to get the same results as the larger companies, sometimes even better.

The free-games model forces companies to get their act straight and back into the game making business and not the money making business. These are products that we are meant to enjoy and entertain us when we have free time, after work, and so on. Deducting all along from our own profit to do so. Developers should take this seriously.

A big problem for companies now days is piracy, forcing many developers to opt for the solution of making games for consoles instead to get their money’s worth of time put in to developing a game. Many also have extreme revenues to pay very large amounts of money for personnel and equipment, and as a result of this truly do need the cash to come in for their funds spent. This entire console movement has brought gaming back for pc’s and in the end, there is still a large amount of piracy going on even for the consoles.

But what did developers truly expect? Making products that are not worth the price tag given to them should simply not be bought. Piracy in one way has opened the eyes to many gamers, creating also a respect to the companies that deserve it.

There are many that do not have the funds to be able to pay for every game out there. Piracy helps the companies with the good games in the end reach the customers that must buy the game. Many gamers actually buy games only after they have pirated them. Whilst the games they pirated and never bought, well, they never played them a second time anyway and deleted them right after download and play. If companies perceive this as stealing, gamers should perceive buying a game they never play again as stealing. Instead of getting their act together as developers, many companies still create products worth one tenth of their price tag. It is only natural that once a gamer has been duped so many times, he/she would now also opt for a different solution into trying a game out.

To add to this, some companies even put the work of creating content that is really good in the beginning, releasing those portions of the game as demos, and again duping customers into buying products that are quickly seen for what they are. Rubbish!

Point being in the end, the industry becomes truly one sided (same thing happens for films that are not worth the ticket for cinema entry).

Back to today. Can a free model truly work just on donations? At last it seems that, I never thought I say this, it can. The free2play model has proved, with micro-transactions mostly, that it can be very successful and not only make enough money but make at times much more money than the purchase and play model. And why is this? Because the game is fun to play. I myself would love to and be more than happy to give my money to a company that shows it cares for its product and the gamer. Lastly I would even blindly give them money for future products just after a small amount of research on what they might be. A small personal example of this, is Skyrim. They had me at hello. And it was more than worth it.

The money can be enough to even make way for AAA titles through this model. Whilst, the best part of all, the game is experienced by all gamers despite their economic condition. It is much more important at times for companies to get their name out there.  Word of mouth from happy gamers creates 2 things.

1) A community for the game (something very important today for multiplayer games as well)

2) New players entering the experience, among which many might have the economic freedom to purchase (in this new model in the form of donations or purchasing exclusive content)

Lastly, making a game accessible to those that were never going to buy it in the first place (either for economic reasons or because they were not convinced) gives chance at least to the second to make purchases if they are finally convinced. The profit lost is, well, nothing. They were never going to make purchase anyway.

How does this help a change in the world? It changes both the consumer’s perspective and the creator’s perspective. Consumers do not feel robbed, handing money over happens with a smile, the variety is much larger and the entertainment accessible. Happier customers make for greater results. Fan bases are created easier, and so on. Nobody wants a miserable customer. Creators try to make products worth their name, (and should get a greater feel of success and joy from it, knowing that their success is worth every bit of their creation. Key word was should, it is clear that some shallow groups that only seek profit would not feel this), and lastly, taking away the game of monopoly, advertising, and how much each competitor has to advertise reduces competition in the ugly form. In the end, if they play their cards well, this can open the door to cooperation as well among developer groups.

The society itself in end is affected by this. It clearly strives for a more positive manner in everything from all ends, a true feeling of freedom gives more courage as well, and laws to avoid piracy and such similar ideals would become un needed, already changing the face of the society itself into something more positive by not being there are at all. Let’s face it, hearing about piracy laws and the law chasing illegal action is not entirely the most positive of a society even if it is considered a 1^st world problem. (Illegal action that to be honest we all know it was called for in the last decade from the underproduction in terms of quality from companies or the economic difficulties experienced by many). They were never going to pay anyway. Companies believing they are losing profit to this are under some kind of delusion it seems. A well made product can form many ways to create revenue if it is worthy of it.

Hosting events to make money (digitally and in any other form) is very possible under these conditions too. Making way for merchandise purchases is also an accessible solution for more profit and even keeping stores in business instead of closing them down. The whole idea is something that could start slow before reaching the point where it is successful and common in our society, but the big picture ahead is really something to look forward to. Art and entertainment is something that will never stop being in demand. People need to be entertained, they need to explore and experience new ideas, see visions form before them all the time from different individuals that wish to share their inspirations. Like food, entertainment is something that enriches life itself, and one way or the other it is one of the largest pieces of consumerism. The idea of paying at will a form of entertainment after experiencing it based on how much it entertained you and how accessible the solution of purchase is to you is an idea that in the end can change the way people see things too, and even encourage a different level of greatfullness.

The way is long, but now it seems it might not be that long after all. This free to play model in gaming has already become very common and very successful, titles such as FireFall, Hawken, League of Legends and many more in the mmo industry as well prove this form to work. Even Facebook games have proved a success in this model. Lastly, with regards to mmo’s, this new form is something that could also take over and prove more successful. The first signs of AAA titles being made to step away from the original routes are titles such as Guild Wars 2. Although not free, the product in its genre offers what other games offer (and to many gamer opinions much more) without a subscription fee. Other successful mmo’s left the purchase to play zone to enter the free to play zone with transactions, and ended up making much more money as well. Perhaps this new model of lifestyle is not as far away as it once seemed. It would be nice to see how this kind of thinking can affect other aspects of society as well.

Time will show.