k-lovre's comment:
"... Also, "Community" games lacks a certain marketability that maybe turns people off. I don't want to play a game created by the homeless guy living down the block in my community. ..."

I think he's right.  Wouldn't it sound better as "Indie Games" implying independent developers, rather than "Community Games" implying anyone and everyone (unfortunately) including their dog?

Yeah, I never liked the name.  "Community Games" sounds generic, like it could refer to anything (not this specific service), and "Xbox Live Community Games" is a mouthful.  XBLCG is a long, opaque acronym.  Basically, there's no good way to refer people to the section--I found this out just telling my friends and family about my game.

I would agree that Indie would be better, although again perhaps a little generic.  I could also get onboard with just calling them "XNA Games", although I understand that XNA is supposed to cover the full range of Microsoft game development technologies, so they may not want to appropriate it for our specific section.

In any case, I doubt Microsoft is looking to change the name at this late stage, but I'll throw my hat in the ring and say that yes, it would probably help to do so.

Well, wouldn't that hurt the "real" Indeies if there title is attached to a channel in which "anyone and everyone (unfortunately) including their dog" can release stuff? Or does your name change request implicitly remove the dogs from the list of submitters, transforming it into a XBLA for the cheap place?

Bjoern Graf:

Well, wouldn't that hurt the "real" Indeies if there title is attached to a channel in which "anyone and everyone (unfortunately) including their dog" can release stuff? Or does your name change request implicitly remove the dogs from the list of submitters, transforming it into a XBLA for the cheap place?

The "real" indies?  Come on.  "Indie" is not a brand, and game developers all over the internet call themselves by that label--I would hazard a guess that the majority of them develop no-budget freeware games (check out TIGSource for plenty of examples).  I can see what you're trying to say here, but I honestly don't think it's an issue, or that there is any brand to dilute by using the term.

I think we should call it..

"Super Mega Awesome Fun Games of Fun"

Now THAT would reel in the users!

Let's just agree that it's better than Wii Ware.

Anchorcast:

Bjoern Graf:

Well, wouldn't that hurt the "real" Indeies if there title is attached to a channel in which "anyone and everyone (unfortunately) including their dog" can release stuff? Or does your name change request implicitly remove the dogs from the list of submitters, transforming it into a XBLA for the cheap place?

The "real" indies?  Come on.  "Indie" is not a brand, and game developers all over the internet call themselves by that label--I would hazard a guess that the majority of them develop no-budget freeware games (check out TIGSource for plenty of examples).  I can see what you're trying to say here, but I honestly don't think it's an issue, or that there is any brand to dilute by using the term.

Xbox Indie (XBI)  has a nice ring to it IMO.

Duffman:

Let's just agree that it's better than Wii Ware.

Hmm... Xbox Ware anyone? ;-)

I don't think Community Games is the best name, but I can't really think of anything better. Plus, it is a bit late to be trying to change it - users already have enough trouble trying to find the CG tab; now let's change the names and really confuse them. And then there's all the advertising (mainly in trailers by us) that would have to be changed to reflect it.

[edit]: Personally, if it was called "Cruddy Games That Crash Your Xbox - AVOID!!!!", but was filled with games like Miner Dig Deep, Weapon of Choice, Biology Battle, <insert your favorite fun, polished, great CG>, I wouldn't care what it was called. If we focus on making better games and better content, and not (not directed at anyone) fill it up with no-effort cash ins, I don't think many people will care what it's called and flock to the channel. In short, I don't think it's so much the name but what it currently represents to most people. We could call it as Murudai suggested, "The Best Greatest Uber Awesomey Fun Games Ever Channel", but if it's filled with bad content people will still make fun of it. I don't think we can blame the name for anything, but the content.

Wow, never thought of this.  These are indie games, but we collaborate as a community.  Which do we want to market to the gamers?  If "Community Games" was renamed to "Indie Games", it could not stand alone and would have to be "Xbox LIVE Indie Games" (XBLIG) everytime.  But, I don't think this matters.  Xbox LIVE Indie Games sounds really enticing.

Does it matter? I mean, the odds of Microsoft renaming the whole service mere months into it are slim to none, so why does it matter? What matters is showing people that XBLCG exists and telling them what XBLCG is, to get around the potential negatives of the name. Similarly, referring to it as XBLCG helps unless they ask you to explain the acronym. ;-)

Bjoern Graf:

Well, wouldn't that hurt the "real" Indeies if there title is attached to a channel in which "anyone and everyone (unfortunately) including their dog" can release stuff? Or does your name change request implicitly remove the dogs from the list of submitters, transforming it into a XBLA for the cheap place?

This is about a change in marketing.  It is not about changing what is, but changing how we talk about it.

Nick, there's your "it cannot be done" talk, again!  Can we talk about the idea, first, before deciding what can and cannot be done?  The "XBLCG barrier", I'll coin it as that for now, is something we all have to fight to break down so it does matter when the name does some of work for us.  It matters because it could be better marketing for us.  And don't get me wrong, because talking about an idea doesn't mean that we are not still showing people how cool XBLCG is.  It doesn't mean we are not still trying to make the best game possible.  We are already doing that.  We are already beyond that, so we are thinking about deeper ideas.  No offense, I really don't want to hear about "what cannot be done".  If even one out of a hundred "cannot be done" ideas gets done, and improves XBLCG, then it makes talking about the other 99 worthwhile.

I think the "it cannot be done" replies come from understanding how it works. The XNA team at Microsoft has a vision, they've talked about that vision and every release of XNA and every step forward they take is putting them more towards that vision. Random forum posts and ideas aren't shaping or changing that vision. I have yet to see a thread in three years (I've been around since the beginning with the first beta) that has shaped or changed this vision. There have been good ideas posted, it's just that those good ideas were already a step in that vision.

So I think for those of us that have been around. Those of us that have chatted and talked with the team. These posts just seem kind of pointless. Especially when there's very real and tangible things that the community COULD be doing to improve the system without Microsoft stepping in and doing or changing a dang thing :)


That's the where the "it cannot be done, let's do something productive" replies come from. I'm sure that didn't change your mind about your posts, but hopefully it can give you a better perspective of why we react the way we do. Talk to me in 3 years and we'll see if you still have the same feelings you do now ;)

Matthew Doucette:

Nick, there's your "it cannot be done" talk, again!

You really think you're going to convince a team of Microsoft lawyers and marketing people to change the branding of a service they likely spent years planning after months of operation over the word "community"? When this is, afterall, a community driven platform?

My point is that the name isn't going to change anytime soon, if at all, so having a discussion about changing it and the effects of it is rather silly when there are short term things you can discuss how to resolve such as how to get more people involved with XBLCG, how to spread the word online and in real life, how to make better games, etc. There are just better ways to spend your time if the goal is to improve exposure and sales on XBLCG, in my opinion.

Maybe you could start a new thread to answer, but what should we be doing as a community?  I don't mind if you include the obvious (ie, make good games).  I would love to know if there's something I could do that I am not already doing.

Back on topic, although the platform is community driven, we want to market "community" to the game makers and "indie" to the game buyers.  There's huge confusion already over XNA (the tools to make games) and Community Games (both as a place to make games and a place to buy them).  Microsoft is known for name changes in mid-swing.  Is it really out of the question?

Nick, but that wasn't the point as his message. His point was that you continually focus on the "it cannot be done". Sometimes you just need to let go of the inner moderator and let the free flow of ideas continue. The other moderators didn't see a need to rain on his parade. Reread his points and try again with something more constructive instead of destructive.

Matthew,

I think I agree with your points. Personally I always thought "Community" referenced the developers & although that's a great term if your in that group, it does nothing for me as a consumer. I've seen Microsoft change things midstream too, but would they? Maybe, maybe not. It's only been around for 5 months. There isn't much time invested in it. Personally, I don't like the term Indie either. Something more catchy is needed & it also doesn't need to focus solely as games. I like garage games, but it's already taken & it's all about games too. We need something that is recognizable like Sundance. Maybe inspiration will hit me one day. ;)

Tommy McClain

Matthew Doucette:

  Microsoft is known for name changes in mid-swing.  Is it really out of the question?

It's not out of the question, just not the sort of action that occurs from forum posts. And I'll think about starting a new thread. I'm not sure I believe there's a point in anymore for threads like that. The community part of XBLCG seems to never have happened :)  The people and types of posts changed dramatically once money got involved.

Matthew Doucette:

Back on topic, although the platform is community driven, we want to market "community" to the game makers and "indie" to the game buyers.

Do you think the difference is all that great? Do you think the average consumer cares whether it's "Community Games" or "Indie Games"? Heck, most people don't even know it's there let alone have an opinion on the name. And most of the negative responses I've seen on the web have little to do with the name and more to do with the content, so to me it seems like the name is hardly a problem at all.

AzBat360:

Nick, but that wasn't the point as his message. His point was that you continually focus on the "it cannot be done". Sometimes you just need to let go of the inner moderator and let the free flow of ideas continue. The other moderators didn't see a need to rain on his parade. Reread his points and try again with something more constructive instead of destructive.

I was being constructive. As with the other thread where I started my term as Head Evil MVP, I offered my constructive opinions that it's more valuable to focus on things you can change rather than things you cannot.

People don't always have the best idea from the get-go.  "What-already-is since it's been that way for years" isn't always correct.  Names are a curious thing; once you hear them enough, they lose meaning; long-time users of it lose sight of the perception it gives to newcomers.  Windows was to be called Interface Manager before a marketing genius (Rowland Hanson) fixed it.  I bet people calling it Interface Manager for a while didn't think it was bad, since they stopped thinking about how it sounds.  Sometimes people make mistakes.  I believe the Community Games moniker is a marketing mistake, as there are better names.  I want to know if you guys think this too.

Decade old name brands have changed before.  And they will again.  XBLCG is brand spanking new in comparison.  My thread's topic is whether Community Games is a marketing mistake; I don't care about its viability -- please discuss that in another thread.

P.S. The best way to improve XBLCG is to make better games, so the first response to "Let's improve X" could be "Improve your games first".  However, some of us are doing this, thus all the threads about improvements in other areas become relevant.  Also, consider that Community Games will never have regulations, so its wide open flood gates dictates poor overall quality.  Thus, of all relevant topics to discuss -- avoiding ones that speak about things that cannot change -- talking about making our games better overall is the least relevant.

Nick Gravelyn:

Matthew Doucette:

Back on topic, although the platform is community driven, we want to market "community" to the game makers and "indie" to the game buyers.

Do you think the difference is all that great? Do you think the average consumer cares whether it's "Community Games" or "Indie Games"? Heck, most people don't even know it's there let alone have an opinion on the name. And most of the negative responses I've seen on the web have little to do with the name and more to do with the content, so to me it seems like the name is hardly a problem at all.

I absolutely think branding matters.  Maybe not on a conscious level, to most people, but there's a lot more to marketing games than what hardcore, vocal gamers are saying on the internet.  In fact, I suspect the vast majority of people who buy Community Games don't talk about them on the internet at all.

And even the vocal guys--would their first impression have been better if the name had been more enticing?  Is the name one more brick in the wall between them and the service?  Community Games does give, to me, an impression of shoddiness.  When I think of the word "community" in connection to products and/or services, I think about the dirty jobs nobody else wants to do.  I think community service.  Not exactly a fun escape, as nice as it might be to do for people.

But there are names that roll off the tongue, get you excited, make you want to see more.  Just as an example, I think Etsy is a great bit of branding.  It's memorable, evocative, short, and easy to say.  Compare that with Xbox Live Community Games.  Blah.

Nick Gravelyn:

Do you think the difference is all that great? Do you think the average consumer cares whether it's "Community Games" or "Indie Games"? Heck, most people don't even know it's there let alone have an opinion on the name. And most of the negative responses I've seen on the web have little to do with the name and more to do with the content, so to me it seems like the name is hardly a problem at all.

The fact that most people don't know XBLCG exists is irrelevant to the marketing value of Community Games vs. another name.  Also, what the average consumer is complaining about is also irrelevant: Do you think any consumer would have complained that Windows was called "Interface Manager" (if the name hadn't changed)?  Of course not; they'd still be complaining about the BSOD.  But, you can bet your ass it would have affected sales, since who wants to buy an interface manager?  The focus of this thread is the marketing value of the name, and the difference is huge. If the name can be improved, then we get better marketing for free.

I always felt the community games brand's negative aspects could be flipped to make the channel seem more COOL and CUTTING EDGE.

JasonD:

Thus, of all relevant topics to discuss -- avoiding ones that speak about things that cannot change -- talking about making our games better overall is the least relevant.

And that's where you and I would disagree. Educating the community on making games and making good games is one of the most relevant topics in my opinions. If the guys claiming they're making good games would take the time to release content saying HOW to go about that (i.e. look at all Nick has contributed along those lines). We'd have a TON of resource to point people too and raise the bar for community games in the process. It's one of the reasons I've been releasing tutorials for years, trying to change and educate the newbies I knew would be releasing games on the 360 and up that content quality a bit. Did I make a difference? I'm not sure, I'd like to hope so.

But you're right, I'm derailing the thread now. So in answer to the original question, I would say no, I don't believe the name XBox Live Community Game is poor marketing or hurting the sales of community games in any way. I have no proof, no stats, just a gut feeling.