October 16, 2013

The Art of Game Selection: Part 1 of infinity

Art? It's not a science? No, game selection is not a science. If game selection was a science then I would have to stick exclusively to objective measures, and that would make a very lopsided games list. Here are some examples:

1. The games that raise the most money.

The series that raise the most money are Mario, Zelda, Metroid, and Final Fantasy/Square-Enix RPGs. There are a couple of other games that raise a good amount of money too (such as ID and Valve first-person shooters and Super Meat Boy), but selecting games based on how much they raise would still cut out a lot of variety. You wouldn't see many 8-bit nes games (RIP Sunsoft), any obscure underrated gems and/or cult classics, and you would never see other popular series such as Metal Gear Solid, Sonic, or Pokémon (Pokémon is popular with viewers but generally doesn't raise as much money as the four series I mentioned).

Now there is no denying that the four series I mentioned see lot of representation in the Games Done Quick (GDQ) marathons, but what if they were the only games being represented at the marathons? That would kill a lot of the variety we have in marathons, and would prevent unexpected successes like Mega Mari from happening. I like Final Fantasy games and even I don't want to see more than one per GDQ.

2. The games that have the highest viewer counts.

Mario, Zelda, and Metroid would still be on this list, but you would take out Final Fantasy and put in Pokémon and 3D Grand Theft Auto games instead. This runs into the same problem focusing on the games that raise the most money does, which is lack of variety.

Also, while people love watching Pokémon and 3D Grand Theft Auto games, I think watching more than one would wear on people because the games in the respective series are similar.

This is not to say I don't want games that raise money or get lots of viewers, but if those were my only two metrics for determining games in the GDQs, then that would be a very narrow vision that only includes a few fanbases. Imagine if I denied a game because it had less than 20,000 viewers, ignoring factors such as the day the game was played (generally games later in the marathon get more viewers), and time of day (there's generally a viewer dip during graveyard shifts).

But let's say I use these two metrics and the next AGDQ is a roaring success, it raised way more money than we ever expected, record viewer counts, etc. That's all well and good, right? Actually, there's a new problem, how would I follow up?

I have now cornered myself by only including our biggest titles, and while I can switch around the categories for each run, that only works for so long. Do I repeat all of the successful games that worked before and risk stagnation? Or do I add in something else for variety's sake that might alienate the fanbase?

I personally think if I deviated from the variety currently in Games Done Quick marathons, that would be a big risk. Is Awful Games Done Quick ever going to raise the most money? No, but it's a fun way to kill a graveyard shift and people in the community enjoy it. Do Zelda games raise some of the most money in marathons? Yes, but making it the sole focus would shut out a lot of other games. While I cannot let in every game each speedrunning community wants, if I only focused on a select few series or genres, then I think I would end up alienating the majority of speedrunning communities.

Now you might be wondering, well if game selection is not solely about the most popular and lucrative games, then what is it about? That's what I'm going to discuss in future blog posts.

P.S. By the way, for those curious, here the donation statistics for SGDQ 2013 and AGDQ 2013. In case if you want to see how games fared in terms of donations.

http://www.franklinjen.com/temp/SGDQ2013Stats.xls

http://19hz.info/Shared/AGDQStats.xls

October 10, 2013

The Games Done Quick Mission Statement

It is having fun for a good cause. That's it. If you were expecting something more complicated, sorry, but I like keeping things simple.

Don't get me wrong, part of the mission is, like many people think, about raising money for charity. That is after all, what I'm contracted to do for the Prevent Cancer Foundation with the next Awesome Games Done Quick, and that is definitely a large part of my job. To say otherwise would be lying.

However, there are some people who think it's solely about raising money for the charity, but I think that ignores why people attend the marathon in the first place.

The Why

There are three reasons:

1. It's fun.

No one would come to a Games Done Quick event if it isn't fun. People attend the marathons because they enjoy them. Whether it's being able to play a game on stage, commentate, help out backstage, just hang out with friends and play games together off-camera, or do teh urn dance, almost everyone finds something to do that they either enjoy or feel good contributing to the event. If people really thought the marathons were not fun, then they wouldn't attend.

I've seen a couple of people saying (or at least implying) that when it's about raising money for the charity, it somehow becomes less fun or isn't fun anymore, but I've never seen anyone go, "well shucks, we hit $100,000, better stop having fun." There's nothing that says you can't have fun while raising money for charity, and if anything, hitting goals seems to add more energy to the room. People are pumped up and motivated when goals are hit.

Sure, there are a couple of restrictions, like you can't drop f-bombs, but there's nothing saying you can't have fun while raising money for charity.

2. Community meetup.

The marathon is a great chance for speedrunning communities to meet up in person and either talk about their shared interest in speedrunning or just shoot the shit. Normally we can maybe meet 5 other people in person outside of the marathon if we're lucky, but the marathon brings everyone together.

Not everyone attends a marathon to raise money for charity, or even to play a game, but almost everyone attends to hang out and meet like-minded people or watch great speedruns. I can't think of too many other places where you can mention sequence breaks and people won't be scratching their heads.

3. The money is going to greater causes.

Since the money is going to charity, the event feels more special. It just feels good donating to a good cause such as the Prevent Cancer Foundation (PCF), especially when you get to hear personal stories from donors, and when you know the money goes towards a good charity. For example, PCF helped fund research for the HPV vaccine.

Honestly, if the money we raised was just going to Speed Demos Archive, or an individual, then it wouldn't have quite the same feeling, and it wouldn't feel like we were uniting for a greater cause. 

If no one had fun and wanted to meet together to have a good time and raise money for charity, then the marathons wouldn't happen. It would just be one sad lonely dude on a couch playing a game, instead of the fun, laidback, "dudes on a couch" feel while raising money for a good cause.

P.S. Sorry for the late post, but I was attending Chicagothon last week. Now that I'm back, I should be posting more regularly.