Stop me if you’ve heard this one…

There’s been a lot of buzz on the web about piracy, this time not affiliated with the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Johnny Depp, but… e-books.

Every news article about the potential e-book market is another can of gas on the fire:

• The petition against Google’s e-book scanning
• Apple’s impending i-book store
• The Kindle-killing (and horrifically named) i-Pad

Seems that e-books are the talk of internetville. But doesn’t all this talk sound familiar? Stop me if you’ve heard this one:

Sales are down! Piracy is destroying the industry! Lawsuits! Copyright!! DRM!!!

Oh yes, that’s right. We DID hear all this before. From the music industry. We heard it when the cassette tape format was invented. We heard it again when CD burners became a household item. And we got to hear it again when Napster + broadband internet connections made it possible to download an entire library of audio in minutes. And now that books are on the block, we get to hear it again from the publishing industry.

Yawn.

I’ll direct the publishing industry to read my Open Letter to Gene Simmons (of the band KISS) and the RIAA. Simply replace the word “music” with “e-book” and replace “Recording Industry” with “Publishing Industry”.

Oh, and replace “Pirates” with “Pirates”.

The Problem is Virtual

Until recently, artistic works such as music, video, pictures and stories required a medium to contain the art and transfer it from one person to another. That medium (Tape, DVD, CD, Book, etc…) had a production cost, a fixed physical expense that someone had to pay because that THING had to be manufactured, packaged, shipped, received, warehoused, and stocked.

For decades, we’ve been told how much it costs to make THINGS and to ship THINGS and to stock THINGS. And the cost of the THINGS keeps going up because of [fill in the blank].

But consumers were never buying the THING. People don’t really want a cassette tape. Or a book. Or a computer file for that matter. Consumers want the art that the medium carries. They want the story about Frodo and Sam. They want the song by Jagged Spiral. They want the picture of the pirate flag.

With the internet, the medium is all but removed from the product, leaving an intangible stream of ones and zeros. At long last, the products of art have been un-THING-ified. Virtualized.

One of the reasons consumers never wanted the medium in the first place was that it adds unnecessary cost to the art. Well, now the medium is almost completely gone, but where are the savings? We should be seeing prices dive for the virtual products, but the industries still try to justify the old prices.

This is a problem.

Price Check

Why is an e-book selling for $9 when the hardcover book is $13? Why in the Hells do they both list at $29?

Seriously. Twenty Nine American Dollars is the Publisher’s Suggested Retail Price for an E-Book? Is that supposed to make you think that $9 is a good deal?

I’m not the only one calling the publishing industry out on it’s bullshit. New York Times Bestselling Author Michael Stackpole lists plenty of other reasons publishers can’t justify their e-book pricing.

The industry holds the price up, because they won’t let go of the THING-ness of their product. They see every sale of a virtual product as a direct equivalent of the sale of a physical product. They think that every e-book sold is a physical book not sold.

Reality Check: Virtual products are not Physical products.

Truth is, the publishing industry should be thrilled to death about internet distribution. E-books may have a lower cost, but they have a far higher margin than their physical counterparts. If you don’t know what that means, ask an accountant. If you can’t make your business work with this new math, then hire a fucking accountant, and change your business to become profitable. The last thing you’d want to do is waste money on lawyers to fight the system. Ask the recording industry.

Why is the industry is down? Why aren’t people buying? Its simple. The product is virtualized, but the price is not.

Hey, it’s a free market, and it’s not against the law for businesses or even the entire industry to use business practices leading to their own obsolescence. It also isn’t against the law for them to starve to death because they refuse to adapt to the new technology.

But it looks like instead of taking advantage of the new technology they have available, the publishing industry has decided to try to force a square peg into a round hole. When that doesn’t work, they sulk and stare at the dwindling sales and blame…

Pirates!

Before you break out the flamethrowers, understand that I’m not endorsing piracy.  Piracy is unlawful and unethical. Google is evil for doing it, and so is everyone else who does it.

But I am telling you that it is entirely true that (music/movie/ebook) piracy is NOT “killing” the (recording/motion-picture/publishing)  industry. It wasn’t back when cassette tapes came out. It wasn’t back when the VCR was released to consumers. Author’s careers are not being destroyed because their books are available for free at the library, or borrowed from friends, or sold in used bookstores. Musicians aren’t going broke because their songs are played on terrestrial radio, myspace, and pandora at no cost to consumers.

The publishing industry is down because of many factors, but piracy is the last one to worry about. Wasting time on it is like rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship.  Keelhauling every pirate in the universe won’t fix what’s wrong with the publishing industry, the music industry, or any other industry, because Pirates are not a problem; they are a symptom.

Let’s look at the problem that causes piracy to become popular:

Free as in “E-Books”

Price a product high enough and two things will happen.

• Sales of that product will decrease.
• Customers will find other ways to get the product for less.

The music industry already learned this, but let’s look at how it pertains to the publishing industry, by examining these ‘other ways’ to get the product for less than the listed price:

• You can get every Dean Koontz book ever written for free… at the public library.
• You can get every Stephanie Meyer book for free… by borrowing them from your niece.
• You can buy the latest Stephen King novel for One Dollar…  on Craigslist. (In hardcover.)
• You can buy Scott Sigler’s latest for just a couple bucks… at the used bookstore.
• Ebay.com
• Swaptree.com
• Bookcrossing.com
• And you can get the latest of pretty much any e-book for free… by pirating it via bittorrent.

Care to wager that library usage is way up? Borrowing/lending? But you won’t hear about the publishing industry claiming that libraries are “Destroying the industry” or trying pass laws banning the sharing of books. That would be just as laughable as saying that pirates are destroying the industry.  It’s just one more way customers can get the product if they don’t think it’s worth the list price.

Am I suggesting that publishers are causing an increase in piracy by setting their prices too high? Yes. Just like they are “causing” people to check books out at the library, or borrowing them instead of purchasing them at the bookstore. Just like they are causing consumers to obtain the product through other methods, or pass on the product altogether.

Of course publishers have to fight piracy, or people will think they’re OK with it. But to declare that piracy is destroying the publishing industry is simply not true. Illegal? Yes. On the rise? No doubt. But look at the cause:

Your business plan sucks.

Here’s where you should be focusing. Not on pirates. Solve this problem, and piracy will diminish, along with borrowing/lending and library usage.

But, we doesn’t understand business or teh Interwebs!

I can already hear the publishing industry screaming at me that it can’t make a profit off what people are willing to pay for e-books. Sorry, but that argument does not fly.

You can price your product whereever you like, but products are never worth more than people are willing to pay for them. It doesn’t matter how much they cost to make.  Like I said, price it too high and people won’t buy it or they will find cheaper alternatives. Yes, including piracy.

This is the spot where I’d make a “buggy whip manufacturer” reference, but q.e.d. right?

The Solution

The solution starts by acknowledging the real problem.

The solution starts with letting go of the paradigm of treating ones and zeros on the web as a physical product. Virtual products are not Physical products.

The solution starts when people stop crying that change is bad, fighting against the new tech, and trying to cover up bad business models by blaming pirates.

I suspect the solution requires a generation of post-internet people growing up with virtualized products; people who weren’t born into a system of 100% THINGS and then had to suffer the paradigm shift to the virtual. These people will have a more intimate understanding of this “problem”, and perhaps when they grow up to take over for the current regime, they will arrive at a more elegant solution – one that works to Everyone’s advantage.

Yours Darkly,
Conrad Zero

A Review of Playing Evil in the Video Game “Neverwinter Nights 2″

[Editor's Note: There's a handful of micro-spoilers in here, but nothing that will keep you from enjoying the game.]

I’ve waxed philosophic before about breaking out of my assassin RPG niche. In the video game Oblivion, I played a  hyper-testostrinated human male fighter carrying the largest and longest weapon I could lift. In Jade Empire, I chose a female magic user. Throughout the Original Neverwinter Nights Trilogy (Neverwinter Nights / Shadows of Undrentide / Hordes of the Underdark) my avatar was a tricksy, elvish Shadowdancer.

Neverwinter Nights 2 (NWN2 for short) gave me a new option for avatar diversity.

It was 30 Dec 2007. The game installer chugged away as I read the back of the game box for the upteenth time. Bright letters across the box declared, “Everything you do has a meaning”. Other games have offered options for playing evil characters, but NWN2 seemed to go a step further, almost daring players to test the boundaries of morality. After all, the game designers had taken the time to plot out the repercussions of all your actions in the game. My Inner Philosopher pitched a denim pup-tent as he thought about turning the reins over to my Inner Evil Draconian Overlord.

Evil it is then. For while I’d played a diverse series of characters in the past, I’d always been on the Good side. The obviously-we-have-to-kill-the-shadowlord-because-he-wears-black-and-has-a-deep-voice side. What if I wanted to kill the shadowlord just so I could take his place? What would it be like to be the new evil on the block?

I decided to find out.

And so Pyro Firespawn was born. Don’t laugh. He’s a Chaotic Evil Tiefling. Tieflings are humans tainted with blood of a demonic heritage.  He’s got horns and a tail. He likes to burn things. He’s also a cleric, so he can kill people, raise them from the dead, and then kill them again. (That’s why I told you not to laugh.)

Xtna helped with the aesthetic creation of Pyro. He’s my first avatar to have any resemblance to my physical self. At least, as near as the game engine would allow us to create. Do you want to date my avatar?

The Difficulty of Evil

So I set out on my Evil Epic Adventure. It wasn’t as simple as it sounds. Right away, I discovered difficulties being evil. If I simply slay everyone who got between myself and what I wanted (merchants, for example) I’d have no one to back me up and the game would end with me in prison. That wouldn’t be a long game, and it wouldn’t be a satisfactory ending.

Evil Lesson #1 – Evil requires Power and/or Stealth. Pretty much all the sins require you to be stronger, faster or sneakier than someone else. When you’re a Level One Pissboy, you ain’t pushing anyone around. Therefore, I shied away from being what I called Stupid Evil. I had to keep my eyes on the big prize. Intelligent Evil is far more evil, don’t you think?

Evil Lesson #2 – Evil Looks Good. I often found myself weighing off which side of the fight would help me more in my evil goals. Should I be nice to this person because they might join my party or give me information? Should I kill the dragon and save the townsfolk, if that is the only way to get them to tell me where the uber-important evil magic sword could be found? Signs point to yes.

Evil Lesson #2 “The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend” One thing was always certain. I was literally hell-bent on defeating the King of Shadows, because he was coming to destroy everything.  In fact, some of my companions were happy to stand alongside me in battle although they did not agree with my alignment for the same reason – because the Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend.

I was so Good at Looking Good and being Evil, I could have run for the Republican Party.

Evil Lesson #4 – Evil Loves Company. Did Hitler have any friends? Probably more like “associates” or “companions”, which were another aspect to consider in NWN2. They have alignments too, and if I upset their more…delicate sensibilities, they could leave or worse, turn on me at a crucial moment. There’s no pleasing everyone, and some of my companions did leave me because of my choices. Others flat-out defected to the other team. (…and died some pretty spectacular deaths because of it. Seems their actions had repercussions too.) So, in order to keep the allegiance of my followers, I had to avoid certain evil tasks that I wanted to do. In order to increase their loyalty, I had to help them perform some good tasks I didn’t really want to do. Basically picking my battles and weighing off short term Goodness for Long-Term, Big-Picture Evil.

Halfway through the game, I had worked my evil system perfected. I was truly evil in (seemingly) unimportant interactions and lied and backstabbed when appropriate to further my larger objectives. On the surface I was just a Regular Guy who looked like he was following the rules. In this respect, I became less Chaotic Evil and more Lawful Evil. I was so Good at Looking Good and Being Evil, I could have run for the Republican Party.

Or so I thought.

Fate and/or the game designers were a step ahead here, because it wasn’t long before I was placed on trial for a crime I did not commit. I thought I had little to worry about… until they began to call in Character Witnesses.

Let’s put it this way – it was a long trial.

That aside, my philosophy of Evil-When-It-Matters worked well. I gained a lot of trust and respect with my companions, the Thieves Guild, and with good King Nasher himself. Eventually I was granted my own keep and knighted. I had a party of very powerful followers, some of whom could beat Mother Teresa on the Goodness Meter.

Then the time came, and I took my party of followers deep into the enemy’s domain to confront the Shadow-Lord himself.

Denouement – Evil is Good

Sunday November 15, 2009 I reached the ending of Neverwinter Nights 2. The inner sanctum of the Shadow Lord’s stronghold. Because of my evil affiliation, I was offered the opportunity to leave my companions and join with the Shadow Lord.  I saved the game and played out both possible endings. [Note: You might get the same opportunity for the alternate ending if you play a good character, but since I didn't do this, I can't be sure.]

I have to say, the evil ending was easier and more satisfying, but it was more because of the way the actual endings were written – something which has raised concern with more than one person who played through NWN2. If you’re interested in reading more about the NWN2 endings, check out this review by aeon (warning: spoilers) which does a good job of summing up the disappointing ending for good characters.

Was it Fun Being Evil?

It was certainly a lot more work. Often, I had to try and guess what the game designers meant to be Evil choices in the game. The ambiguous wording of my question-response options made me think, “Is that an evil thing to say?” The Good responses were mostly obvious, so it probably would have been easier to play a Good character.

Some of the evilness was fun. Double-crossing a dragon? Wow. Fun and rewarding. Happily throwing out promises you have no intention to keep was more of a relief than actual ‘fun’. Killing people who thought they could trust you, that was a tough one.

In short, being evil towards evil beings was wicked fun. Being evil towards good people wasn’t easy. Being evil towards helpless people brought me no joy at all.

Beyond Evil

With NWN2 behind me, I’m just in time for the next big thing… Dragon Age: Origins. Apparently, they’ve tried even harder to blur the line between good and evil.

Dragon Age: Originsis on my Christmas list. So expect a review when I finish it…two years from now…

-Z

In part one of this series on Audience Entitlement, we discovered that the author does not work for the audience.

In part two, I pointed out that the audience doesn’t have to take any crap from the author. (That’s what I’m here for. My amazing perception of the obvious.)

Now, let’s put these two parts together and find out, Will It Blend?

The Golden Rule

I listed “Honesty” and “Respect” as two things the audience can reasonably expect from an author. These are fluffy terms, and difficult to measure. In some cases, only the author knows if they are being honest or not. And there’s always some sum-bich who has to push the envelope. Who’s to say that intentionally leaving the third book out of a series couldn’t be Honestly and Respectfully done, if that’s the artist’s intention?

Plenty of gray area for us to all fight over, but the concept boils down to this:

Regarding the Audience/Author relationship, the best rule of thumb is The Golden Rule, which works in both directions. The author should respect the audience, and the audience should respect the author.

The Solution to Incomplete Series Malaise

Taking this discussion back to the original post by Neil Gaiman, the issue of audience entitlement was brought up regarding the phenomenon I titled “Incomplete Series Malaise”.

The problem summarized, is that the audience wants the next book in the series but the author isn’t working on it, or isn’t working on it as quickly as members of the audience would like.

For the author to simply say “I’m not your bitch” and leave it at that is disrespectful. The audience will say, “I’m not your bitch either,” and then see how many curses about you they can fit into a 140-character twitter post. Sadly this is where Mr. Gaiman left the matter hang, when I believe he is only half right.  I say that because the  solution to Incomplete Series Malaise comes in two parts:

If the audience respects the author, they won’t make demands.

When a member of the audience begins reading a series, they should not have any expectation of due dates or even of completion, except for what the author communicates. The audience can be as excited and enthusiastic as they want, and while they have every right to ask when the next book will be done, they have NO RIGHT to demand the next book in a series, or to get pissed off if it isn’t getting done when they’d like.

Audiences, if you can’t handle this, then don’t read a series until it’s complete. The author is not your bitch.

If the author respects his/her audience, he/she will tell them when the next book in the series is expected to be finished.

This is the part that I think Mr. Gaiman missed. True, the author does not work for the audience, but an author who does not at least have some respect for thieir audience doesn’t deserve one.

The wise author would have information about book release dates at a webpage/FAQ/blog post where excited fans can be directed. This is the official “I know, I got it, I already answered that, and you can find the official answer here…”

Authors, if you can’t handle this, then don’t write a series. Its disrespectful to the audience, and they are not your bitch.

And So On…

We can extend this simple solution out to ten-thousand other areas of the author/audience relationship. For example, social media responsiveness, web presence, the author’s right to privacy…

When I boil the whole thing down like this, it seems like the “Can’t we all just get along?” solution. And it is. You’d think we wouldn’t need this bit of common sense pointed out to us, but all it takes is one dickhead with a twitter account or an introverted author [Editor's Note: Aren't they all?] to ruin it for the rest of us.

So, when the inevitable happens, and you see authors/audiences getting into a pissing match, feel free to link them here for a dose of common sense.* And if you have any other applications for this bit of wisdom, feel free to leave a comment…

-Zero

*Except for me, naturally. Point me back to this post and I will totally fuck you up.

Reviewing Oblivion and playing out-of-character

I’m playing Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion now, which is awe-and-some. The level of detail in the character generation is sick, for a game where you switch between first-person view and third-person view, and in neither case can you see your own face. I quickly developed my favorite alter-ego, a thief/assassin, and set out.

Oblivion is open-ended both in plot and in skills. You can go anywhere you like, and while there is an overall plotline, you don’t have to follow it. Your skills increase for whatever you keep doing. For instance, the more locks you pick, the better you get at picking locks. The more you jump around, the more your Acrobatics skill increases. I immediately started working on my sneaking and lockpicking skills, and use of a bow and daggers.

After the game gives you a chance to get used to the controls and interface, you are given an option to pick from a list of character occupations or archetypes (fighter, scout, mage, witchhunter, priest…) the mouse pointer hovered over the word “Assassin”, when my Inner Philosopher woke up.

IP: “What are you doing?”

Me: “I’m picking my character’s occupation.”

IP: “Assassin again, hmm?”

Me: “What?”

IP: “Well, don’t you always pick the Assassin?”

Me: “Sure, because it’s my favorite.”

IP: “Have you ever played anything else?”

Me: “Well, no…”

IP: “Then how do you know if you wouldn’t like something else better?”

Me: “I like the Assassin, and I’m playing the Assassin.”

IP: “Fine, fine, I was just wondering what that might mean about your personality.”

Me: “It means that my mad sneaking-around-skillz allowed me to live through High School, and now I can use those same skillz to unload a Quick Shadowy Death on the virtual residents of Oblivion.”

IP: [yawns] “It could also mean you are a cowardly bastard who just likes to shoot other people in the back.”

Me: “Do you really think I paid $50 for this game in order to develop a new virtual skillset?”

IP: [Deathly Silence]

Me: “Fine. I will pick some other occupation if you will stop that.”

IP: [Normal Silence]

Me: “Thank you.”

So I started over and made a Fighter. A real fighter. I mean a Drinks Petrol and Pisses Nitroglycerin fighter. He is also a lizard who can breathe underwater. I picked a name in the lizard tongue which means, “Eater of Puppy Dogs For Breakfast”. He carries an axe so big it blocks out half the screen (Note To Self: Need bigger monitor.).

And no more sneaking. When I enter a dungeon, I yell, “Woe to all who are here, for I have come to paint the walls of this place with your blood!” This has several advantages:

• The wimpy characters run. They weren’t worth my time anyway.
• The tough guys come out of the woodwork, so I don’t have to go looking for them. (Note to Virtual Self: Need bigger satchel for healing potions, ideally a Bag of Holding.)
• It makes me feel like a tough guy. Even if the dungeon is empty.

This is very strange for me, and not a very easy playing style for me to get used to. Plus, I doubt the skills I’m learning by ‘Stretching Out’ and playing a gregarious, blundering oaf will translate well to the real world:

Troubled CoWorker: “Conrad! I’m so glad you are here, there’s a problem with my computer!”

Me: “Ha! How Dare it trouble you poor, helpless cubicle dweller! I am here to destroy your computer problems!”

Troubled and Disturbed CoWorker: “But don’t you want to know what’s wrong with it first?”

Me: “A waste of time! Look! I have already gutted this machination of evil, and I will hang the entrails around your cube! The next computer you get will think twice about giving you problems!”

Troubled and Really Disturbed CoWorker: “Great…um, thanks. Guess I’ll be leaving early today…”

Blog on,
-CZ

‘Know your enemy,’ right?

Especially when your enemy is getting more popular. Seems that the increasing interest in the occult is not lost on the Catholic Church. For the first time ever, a Vatican university is offering a qualification diploma in Satanism. The classes are offered through the school of theology at Regina Apostolorum.

From the Washington Times Article:

The first series of four-hour lectures, to start next month, will cover the anthropological, theological and liturgical aspects of Satanism, and will include instruction by an exorcist within the Roman Catholic Church.

With over 100 interested students, priests and others signed up for this $250 diploma course, there’s clearly some money to be made as well.

Satanists are “dismayed at the prospect of a Vatican campaign against them” which is kind of funny, if you think about it.

Maybe the Satanists should offer classes on Catholicism? Just a thought.

[Feb 2005 Update - MSNBC article on the same Vatican/Satansim classes.]