Merging to a mixed model? Implementation of crowdfunding mechanisms into traditional models

It is interesting to see how quickly innovation gets adoption once it has been proven successful. Planells (2015) stressed the negative influence of traditional publishers for being “creative brakes” and exclude eventual players’ input from the development process. But even though the crowdfunding model was introduced to bypass game publishers, it is the big traditional game companies that can benefit from the successful crowdfunding mechanisms as well. One way is indeed that crowdfunding guarantees an investment that is likely to be profitable if a large amount of backers already showed their interest in the game.

Another aspect of crowdfunding, which is more the voluntary crowd-sourcing aspect to it, is the co-creation of game content. Engaged users are willing to work out all kinds of ideas by mainly the excitement of seeing their own idea being implemented in their favorite game. There is no big risk for the big gaming companies here: they can state that they are willing to adopt the contribution without giving any rights to claim for its ownership. They can also outsource the decision to the wisdom of the crowd whether to adopt the contribution: a poll which measures the ones in favor or against the contribution. For example, Riot Games already has a special part of its forum devoted to Fan Creation* with posts that indicate the upvotes by other active members. I am not sure whether Riot actually considers these suggestions or co-creates with its community by giving feedback or suggestions itself.

This is also what is being referred to by Smith (2015): a game is an ongoing project, also after release. Traditional gaming companies can and probably have to listen to their community, which seems an opportunity that only favors those big gaming companies in the end. As with many things, the possibility exists that distinguishing between traditional and innovative crowdfunded games will become hard since they merge into each other.  It will be the best of both worlds. While big companies have the big money, a solid defense for legal issues and the responsibility of the company, crowdfunding projects have the voice of the crowd and the co-creation that comes with it.  

Smith, A. N. (2015) “The backer–developer connection: Exploring crowdfunding’s influence on video game production”, New Media and Society, Vol 17(2), pp. 198-214. Sage.

Planells, A. J. (2015) “Video games and the crowdfunding ideology: From the gamer-buyer to the prosumer-investor”, Journal of Consumer Culture. Online first. Prepublished October, 18, 2015. DOI: 10.1177/1469540515611200

* = http://forums.euw.leagueoflegends.com/board/