Currently, trust in Facebook is super low and for good reason. Facebook is largely responsible for layoffs that have occurred atmultiplemediasites, whose now-infamous “pivot-to-video” was based on expected ad revenue gained through creating and sharing videos on Facebook’s news feed. However, Facebook decided to feature less videos in order to shift from a “passive experience” to more “meaningful interaction.” Of course their own video feeds, Facebook Watch and Facebook Live, have been unaffected by the change in focus. It soon also became clear that Facebook hadlied about viewershipnumbers.
This of course comes on the heel of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg beinginterviewed by Congressin April 2018 in the wake of the platform’s apparent role for various political means in the 2016 election, most notoriously in theCambridge Analyticascandal. Suffice it to say, Facebook is not a reliable source for the truth. Despite this, it believes it can rope in creators to utilize its massive platform of over a billion worldwide users in order to fund everything from YouTube videos to game development, all for Facebook’s profit.
[pullquote]“Patreon took the same basic idea–a large crowd of every-people donating money for a specific cause or project–and translated it into a longer subscription service."[/pullquote]
Patreon’s progenitor was Kickstarter, the now somewhat infamous crowdfunding platform that turned out games such asWasteland 2,Pillars of Eternity,Mighty No. 9, andthe upcomingShenmue 3. Some of these crowdfunded projects were a middle finger to publishers who were uninterested in doing anything but holding onto long-dormant IPs; it was a way to fund the creation of things that people wanted, but corporations didn’t view as profitable. Patreon took the same basic idea–a large crowd of every-people donating money for a specific cause or project–and translated it into a longer subscription service. This is an elongated way of showing that because of these funding models, worthwhile things were created that wouldn’t have otherwise been funded. Not that there haven’t been many Kickstarter failures or disappointing launches: but it was, and is, a somewhat reliable way to make something that corporations with the necessary money were not interested in.
That’s all just a way of saying that large publishers and developers for video games do not fund titles out of creative fulfillment: it is done to make money. This is why despite what Sony, Microsoft, or even Nintendo executives may say, they view the things created under them as products to be sold to the largest amount of people to bring in the biggest profit.
[pullquote]“Video games are a business, a way to make money, first and foremost."[/pullquote]
It’s easy to see this when a company like Microsoft channeled television back during their reveal event for the original Xbox One. However, it’s harder to say this when the question over whether they would have pursued backwards compatibility or an adaptive controller was viable, had they not needed to improve their image. This form of greed is best shown by the recent example ofActivision/Blizzardattaining a record year of revenue. Yet because they failed to “meet projections,” they laid off 800 workers whose jobs were no longer viewed as necessary, aka profitable.
These are not companies who are funding things out of the goodness of their heart. Video games are a business, a way to make money, first and foremost. This is why everyone is collectively afraid oflosing BioWarein the face ofAnthem’s rocky launch. This is why people love Nintendo for presenting themselves as more interested in creating worthwhile things than profit, whethersuccessfulornot. This is why the call tounionizethe games industrycontinuesyearafteryear.
[pullquote]“Games are art, but frequently it is a byproduct and not the intention."[/pullquote]
The connection between Facebook’s attempt to provide a Patreon model and the video game industry is that these companies view others' creations as a means to make money. Games are not art: they are products to be sold. Major franchises are viewed not as a way to further the medium, but as a way to fill bank accounts. Facebook moving in on Patreon is a sign that large corporations have taken notice of the flow of money from consumers to creators and want a piece of that, even ifmost Patreons make less than $100 a month. Facebook could easily fund a million different indie companies, but why should they do that when they could have consumers pay out of pocket for that while they skim off the top 30% for themselves?
