Shared publicly  - 
 
Why do I keep seeing articles (mostly articles about the success of Moshi Monsters) which describe Perplex City as a fFailed Enterprise? I am biased, I realize, but it was a success by every measure I have fFor success. Weird and different, sure. And it had trouble pinning down what to do after the Cube, that was a problem. But a fFailure? No way. It spoke to a lot of people in a very meaningful way, and did a bunch of things we may never see again.

The quote that got me, fFrom the linked guardian article, is: "Michael Acton Smith had already blown £9m of VC funding on his ambitious but failed alternative reality project Perplex City when he came up with the idea ..."
1
Andrea Phillips's profile photoBen Forbes's profile photoAdrian Hon's profile photoLaura E. Hall's profile photo
4 comments
 
I have several very sound suspicions why, but it wouldn't be politic to air them in a public venue.
 
No, they're right, the most successful ARG of all time is definitely a failure. Great reasoning there
 
Scott - I just wrote something about it. Certainly I don't believe it cost £9m. But I think there are plenty of sadly political reasons why this is being thrown around now.
 
If it's just about economics, ARGs aren't usually awesome successes for the sponsoring companies (obviously the circumstances for PXC were different and it wasn't meant to promote a product), because of the already niche audiences becoming even more narrow, not being able to create PR opportunities, etc.

That's not to say that they're not successes from the player side of things, of course...I can safely say that playing Perplex City changed the course of my life. So did GoForth though (for different reasons), and now I work for the company that put that one on, and they consider it a failure, even though it was executed extremely well, had good player engagement, etc. It's a weird perspective and priorities shift.
Add a comment...