Sharing is Caring - An Innovation at large

Hello Folks,Mobile gaming has gradually become, and will continually grow as a valuable feature of mobile devices. As I have previously discussed in my first blog, “Mobile Gaming Strikes! Beware Handheld Gaming!”, is the fact that games are increasingly appealing and sold to more mobile users, and the ability for games to be played and downloaded anywhere, at any time, are essentially the dominant selling points. As Polak (2007) states “A phone is already plugged in to a distribution system that makes the delivery of content to the consumer easy for them and profitable for the companies publishing mobile phone games”. As the mobile market grows, more game-development companies emerge to target this casual-gamer market, and by doing so, we are seeing an increasing amount of “wow” innovations of mobile games that we never thought would be possible. As Polak (2007) explains “Mobile phones can now present complex 3D visuals, storing lots of game data and delivering experiences that would have been considered cutting edge a mere five years ago on "proper" games consoles”. One “cutting edge experience” which I believe is an innovation worth discussing, is that anyone can become a mobile game creator and freely distribute their games amongst online communities for others to play, provide important feedback about, and possibly use them to draw their own original and creative ideas from.

It’s true, we can all become game creators for mobile devices and fulfil are long-awaited desires, if given the adequate software and ideas, not to mention being computer savvy. There are various game-designer softwares (some free and some at a price) that provide this opportunity, one being Game Editor, the game design software allows a participant to create a 2D game with ease for a mobile device and share (or sell) it free of charge (Game Editor 2008). If the creator isn’t stingy, he or she will most likely upload the game in a shared-collaborative website based for mobile gaming. Playyoo is one example, it’s a mobile-games global community website that boasts “both mobile game players and creators are able to freely exchange mobile games they created. Everyone are able to upload, download, create, rank, comment, participate in prized contests, create play groups, exchange ideas and socialise with people around the world who share a passion for mobile gaming” (Playyoo 2008). Sony Ericsson however, doesn’t like having their games shared for exploitation. Even though users must pay a fee to download the games, they must abide to a “terms of service” where they allegedly check off that they will not modify, alter or distribute the content throughout the web (Sony Ericsson 2008).

As Flew (2007, 226) states “Copyright law is derived from the principle that neither the creator of a new work nor the general public should be able to appropriate all of the benefits that flow from the creation of a new, original work of authorship”. This basically means that there is a fine balance that copyright law aims to maintain between the access of knowledge and protection of knowledge of intellectual property. The Access of knowledge refers to the population’s rights to use existing knowledge and creativity to create original ideas and works of their own. As knowledge is shared more openly, it essentially benefits society (Bruns 2008). We can identify this concept vividly at Playyoo, the shared-collaborative environment is suitable for others to gain and construct ideas due to free distribution. On the other side of the balance is the protection of knowledge, which basically means that if the owners of knowledge profit of their own work (due to private ownership) they commit further knowledge. As Flew (2007, 232) states “The economic argument for copyright protection has revolved around the rights of content creators to receive remuneration for the expression of their ideas and concepts in so far as they are of appeal in the commercial market, and the need for such returns in order to provide incentives for future developments of ideas”. This concept can be identified in Sony Ericsson’s distribution of their games. The corporation will surely only continue to sell their games, if they are making money due to their exclusive ownership. We can’t ignore the fact that a Sony Ericsson mobile game compared to an amateur’s creation will always succeed in terms of quality and credibility.

There you have it, one community against one corporation, both committed to distributing mobile games to the public. Due to Playyoo’s decision to not strengthen copyright laws of intellectual property, the community is built upon the minds of hundreds of participants all engaging within a shared-collaborative online environment. This means that the community and its knowledge are continually growing at a large rate, which therefore is benefiting society as a whole. Sony Ericsson, on the other hand, are only seeking economic profits and have strengthened copyright laws of their content. Their exclusive ownership of their games allows for capital gain, to which they will use to contribute more good-quality content for their customers.

Playyoo’s ability to benefit society verses Sony Ericsson’s good quality games

The question is which side do you support?





Bruns, A. 2008. Legal Frameworks for the Internet (KCB202). Podcast. http://www.slideshare.net/Snurb/legal-frameworks-for-the-internet-k... (accessed October 23, 2008).

Flew, T. 2008. New Media: An Introduction. 3rd ed. South Melbourne, Vic.: Oxford University PressGame Editor. 2008. Game Editor. http://game-editor.com (accessed October 23, 2008).

Playyoo. 2008. About us. http://www.playyoo.com/about_us.html (accessed October 23, 2008).Polak, S. 2007. The big money in mobile gaming. http://www.smh.com.au/news/biztech/the-big-money-in-mobile-gaming/2... (accessed October 23, 2008).

Sony Ericsson. 2008. Terms and Conditions. http://www.sonyericsson.com/fun/wxhtml/genereltermsandconditions?cc... (accessed October 23, 2008).

Open Source Software: Gaming and Free Alternatives

In my previous blogs I have been discussing the concept of produsage, how it applies to various key domains and the significant benefits and disadvantages. In today’s blog I will open up on open source software, what it is and how it is related to gaming.

While I was sipping my coffee away and listening to Brun’s week 9 podcast on ‘Open Source Software’, I started to ask myself maybe I should be engaging more into open source software rather than having to fork large sums of money for over-priced closed source software such as PhotoShop or Office. So I did some searching around the net and discovered that there are many, many cheaper alternatives to the usual expensive closed source software that most people need. In a blog I read earlier: Free, Open Source Alternatives to Expensive Programs it provides links to download assorted programs that are free alternatives to opposing expensive ‘traditional’ ones. For example, a link in the blog directs you to download a free program called ‘GIMP’. This program to me seems very alike to PhotoShop, of course PhotoShop is going to be better, but the main difference is the fact that I would have to pay around $200 for PhotoShop but now I have downloaded a similar program free of charge. I would also like to address that this site provides links to two gaming open source softwares (because I am a gamer after all), Sauerbraten and Frets on Fire, the free choices compared to halo 2 and guitar hero.

These fine examples of open source software are what Brun’s addresses in Open Source Software Development: Probabilistic Eyeballs, that they are freely useable, edited and can be seen by everyone. That large communities will gather together online, decide what the software should be like and what goals it should have. Apart that open source software is free, it is also frequently updated in today’s changing world.

In Open Source Gaming: The Apricot Interview, the team who created Apricot, an open source 3D game which was built on itself by open source software such as Crystal Space explains why they created it on a open source model. According to Ton of the Apricot team, he states that though the giants of the billion dollar global market of video games may provide high quality products but their accessibility of their systems for developers or students is very limited. This is why they decided to fill the gap to allow for millions of people to access the quality tools and software to be able to make distributable 3D gaming content.

This game exemplifies that open source software attracts people by the many, due to the individual awards that can be gained. That social capital will be increased of distributors with significant content in shared, collaborative environment.