No one said anything about anyone selling out, but exactly what response did you expect to the disdainful “10 people who use [the highly unsophisticated] Moviestorm”? There are now (at least) four teams of professionals working on software targeted specifically to what machinimators want in a software package; it’s what we’ve been waiting for. There is no downside to that fact, and it’s kind of lousy to mock their work because it’s not yet up to the level of the large-budget companies who have been sculpting their tools for decades. Let’s revisit the sophistication topic in 24 months. Hell, let’s revisit it after iClone 3.0 is out.

I know leaving games isn’t for everyone; I’m not trying to be a pied piper when I talk about merits of doing so, but you know as well as I do what ceding ownership to someone who does not share your values and goals can mean, and very little of it has ANYTHING to do with money. We’re talking about a basic level of control over what you make, where it can be shown, etc. Surrendered, to a faceless entity who doesn’t care and doesn’t have to care and has the money to rock your world if you oppose them. That basic reasonable level of control that comes with ownership has tremendous value (as do these still developing rights-free tools) to anyone who sees machinima/anymation as a thing of value in and of itself, and not just a means to some other end i.e. resumé, getting noticed by the film industry, Stuart from Mad TV “look what I can do! [hop]”.

Focus testing is an interesting gambit, and not really in the realm for many machinima artists.

There are plenty of “aeuteurs” who focus test their wares before they run with it, as of course do many companies before moving forward with a concept.

Why? Not to homogenize their message or defeat creativity, but instead to hedge their bets. Is a movie testing low worth investing hundreds of millions of dollars in? Or a weak ad spot not worth production budgets and ad buys?

Machinima however is cheap to produce and usually not worth the research investment. In the case of StrangeCompany, the commodity worth insuring was their time. But I suspect they’re the only ones out their who’s time is/was worth the extra step.

Also, I think Phil you are in a distinct class who can afford to cut the gaming ties. Your work doesn’t rely on an engine or its audience, you write well. It sets your stuff apart. Your writing is value added to whatever engine you choose to roll with, while for most machinima the engine/game is value added to the production.

Those of us who’s time/writing is/was worth little might be smarter to hitch their wagon to a more relevant engine with a following and show off our leet skillz their. An obscure poem read by Niko Belik (sp) will get you in the times before fuzzy avatars three generations old. I’m not suggesting fame/views sets a highbar standard, but it is something that can open doors and put some talented folks to work. Otherwise someone can find themselves stranded in a world of hobbyists when they should be a paid artist. All I’m saying, is owning your early work is not necessarily the right choice for everyone.

A writer doesn’t write because he has to, he writes because he wants to be heard. Before I veer off into Simon and Garfunkel, I better hit submit.

Great article Phil. Make what you love.. Make great movies.. the golden rules of machinima. With quality, will come appreciation. No need to take to heart so much about an audience number, but rather whether they will come back to watch your next project. If they keep coming back, then you are successful.

It’s looking great, can’t wait to see it!

(Which approach produces series like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Battlestar Galactica, hence the reason I did it.)

I came to BloodSpell with one idea - “let’s make a fantasy movie”.

Now, there were upsides and downsides to that approach, but on the whole I’ll probably use it again.

And you are so right about there being less tangible measures than view numbers which are equally - if not more - fulfilling. With YouTube having firmly established a culture where “views” are the standard measure, it’s so easy to get obsessed with them - I fight it all the time (as my post betrays). Thank you for reminding us all of that!

As for Bloodspell, I know you did heavy promotion and some focus grouping (a bit more of the latter than I’d have had patience for), but the Bloodspell idea came before any of that, right? That was my main emphasis there… Using those tools to tweak an existing idea = good, using them as the criteria for coming up with the idea = bad. I fully admit a great deal of idealism on my part with regard to that, but it’s what I think.

I’ll be writing another post on the topics raised from all the discussion later this week or early next, most notably the “Make What You Love” part. (BTW, although it may be a little self-absorbed, I’m interested no-one has mentioned BloodSpell in that regard, as a film which was created using marketing, focus groups, and, yes, some publicity stunts.)

I think you underrate WILAX early on in this article, though. One of the reasons I referenced it in the piece is that I think it’s a top-notch piece of Machinima - I assumed it’d be very, very successful, and was startled when it wasn’t.

I’d note that actually I’m very happy with the response to WWTP on the Machinima.com channel. About 1/3 of the comments were very, very positive - many of them from people who clearly didn’t know the poem beforehand. It polarised people, but I’m not unhappy about that - what I am happy about is that I managed to make a film that successfully introduced a 19th century poet to, shall we say, an number of potentially hostile viewers.

Finally - have I missed numerous blog posts or forum discussions talking about the problem of publcising non-game Machinima? From the reception, I kinda get the impression that I must have missed at least a few major discussions of this topic, but I read Machinifeed every day, and don’t recall any…

Starting over is hard, and it’s scary. No one said it would be otherwise, as far as I know. Not being beholden to people who don’t give a crap about your interests… it’s worth it. Absolutely. The tools will get there. People were saying exactly the same things about machinima (excuse me, Quake movies) 10 years ago. Heck, they were saying it five years ago. A few even say it now.

Old formula for view count.

x(game)+ x(music/soundtrack)= views
x=popular

Quality sometimes relevant.

And though I agree with most of your points above, here is my fundamental problem with these animation tools you are now advocating. They are not as sophisticated as the ones animators are using.

Here is the hard reality for everyone who is forsaking Machinima for animation toolboxes, you are no longer in the top .05 percent of your fellow craftsman. You’re pond is bigger and you have one flipper. You have stepped out of your niche. Your media-edu relevance is diminished because your not producing using videogames you are producing using tools which mimic a videogame aesthetic.

Ownership is important, but is it worth forsaking a chunky audience and whatever success that attention can bring to a filmmaker looking to eventually get a budget to work with? If ownership is worth that sacrifice, well I think to the 10 people who will use moviestorm will find it worth their investment, I mean why learn maya?

sorry for the cynicism, also poetry? I mean poetry… on youtube? I’ll be doing stick figure Beckett next week.