Video Games are Real

Category: Study (the world/the craft)

  • AI in video games will (not?) destroy the conversation around video games.

    AI in video games will (not?) destroy the conversation around video games.

    Humans can’t live without AI. Our brains won’t let that happen.

    Recently Insomniac revealed that their next game (presumedly Marvel’s Spider-Man 2) will feature “very cool” new dialogue technology. Insomniac didn’t provide any further details, so my brain immediately went in a direction toward generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) because of course anything “new” and “very cool” must be commandeered by our future robot overlords. A few days later, head of Sony’s Independent Developer Initiative Shuhei Yoshida offered a few thoughts to GamesIndustry.biz about generative AI, saying “Those AI tools will be used in the future, not just for creating assets, but for animations, AI behaviour and even doing debug.”

    AI prompt: Shuhei Yoshida as a robot

    To be frank, when I measure the possible good against the probable bad, I tend to fear what generative AI will bring to video games. AI has been part of games for a while, but mostly as a background design tool (texture generation, for example. Though texture generation is technically “procedural generation,” not AI. It’s a sliding scale: “procedural generation doesn’t typically use AI.”). We haven’t yet seen AI as a marquee feature. We don’t yet know how AI will influence the foreground parts of games like character movement, quest generation, or dialog.

    I won’t pretend to know how designers will leverage AI for game design. I’m not that smart. But follow me as I allow my ignorance to breed fear for a moment.

    Beyond the standard fears with AI—the loss of jobs for humans, mostly—I fear the loss of community.

    Right now, in our human-curated gaming world, one of the great side effects of games is that multiple people are able to congregate around a shared experience. But when that experience is fractured into many (hundreds? millions?) of different experiences, how can a group of people gather ‘round the water cooler/campfire to discuss a single experience? Will the live event become the de facto experience? …

    Live streaming will be the only way to share a game experience.

    One possible output of using generative AI for the foreground parts of video games is that Twitch-style game live streaming will become an even greater component of video games than it is already (which is hard to imagine, I know).

    Streaming will no longer be a way to share an experience between the streamer and other viewers but will become the only way to experience, with a group, a particular version of a game. If that streamer gets a side quest or a dialog option that nobody else will ever see, then the only way to become absorbed into the zeitgeist of a game is to be present during the micro-zeitgeist of a Tuesday evening streaming session.

    I’m worried about this future. I’m busy on Tuesday evenings.

    Whoa, Caleb! I think you are forgetting that generative AI isn’t necessarily something game designers will use as a real-time mechanic…

    Generative AI creates the end product; it isn’t the end product.

    Generative AI isn’t necessarily something that would be used during gameplay. In fact, much more likely (to Yoshida’s point), AI would be used during the development phase to create the assets that would then go into the final singular experience.

    AI could be applicable during pre-production to ideate upon concept art. In fact, I’m guilty of using the AI tool MidJourney to help jumpstart my own creative solo brainstorm[1]A small brainstorm…maybe, a brain microburst? when designing the cover of my newest book Suddenly I was a Shark!: My Time with What Remains of Edith Finch (which releases June 12, 2023). Ultimately, I created a cover that was not informed at all by the MidJourney output, but my mind was still opened up to the possibilities of using generative AI to get the brain juices flowing.

    [Best_Wordpress_Gallery id=”12″ gal_title=”MidJourney Cover Inspiration”]
    The final, non-MidJourney cover.

    For anyone who has ever been part of a brainstorming process, you know that kickstarting the process can be hard. Maybe we let AI kickstart it for us.

    Whoa again, Caleb! I think you are also forgetting that most video games never offer a truly universal experience…

    Games have rarely promised a single experience.

    Games have always been procedural engines that rarely output a singular experience. The most well-known procedural generation type is the Roguelike genre which is entirely dependent upon randomly generated scenarios.

    And beyond procedural generation as a genre mechanic, sometimes games—no matter the genre—have random enemy spawns and random enemy pathing that are based on the player character’s behavior which is, of course, subject to the whims of the (relatively randomly motivated) player.

    There’s also a thing called RNG (random number generation) which is a stand-in term for how games randomize everything from loot drops to attack rates. Such things are technically random experiences.[2]Though practically speaking, they still mostly honor the plot points that inform the community conversation that I so cherish. In fact, under a powerful enough microscope, there is no singular experience.

    In a video (featuring a much younger, baby-Caleb) titled “Are You Always Cheating in Video Games?” I argue that any deviation from a game designer’s intended mode is cheating, yet, paradoxically, it’s impossible for a game designer to insist upon a single mode. Therefore: no single experience.

    Regarding the player’s adjustment of a difficulty setting, for example, I said: “…if the argument is that the normal, default mode is the correct, non-cheating mode, then playing either the easy mode or the hard mode is cheating [as either is a deviation from the intended play mode, despite one being more difficult].” Furthermore:

    “By that logic, [players and critics] have a lot to demand from developers in order to agree on what is the default mode. You’ve got to look outside the game—not just difficulty settings, brightness level, effects volume, controller input map—but also how big your tv is, the comfort of your chair, the controller you are using, what food you’ve eaten…”

    It’s impossible to build a critique around a single experience because a truly single experience is impossible. So, fearing a future of bespoke experiences is, maybe, possibly, just a little bit, okay(ish).

    Whoa for the third time, Caleb! I think you just convinced yourself that generative AI has a place in video games that doesn’t need to be met with fear…

    A bright side for those of us who sometimes appreciate a curious human over the human curiosity.

    When I imagine a future in which plot-critical elements of a game are unique per player, then I see a less interesting world where fans of gaming, and fans of gaming conversation, are less served than they are now. The conversation about a game becomes impossible when there is no shared view of what the game is. This possibility is scary. I can’t be convinced otherwise.

    Buuuuut, if I dismiss both the benefits that generative AI could bring to the ideation phase of game development, and the potential for a water-coolerless world, I do still see one more, small, yet highly speculative, benefit.[3]Though possibly just as a curiosity rather than as a practical win. And for what it’s worth, I believe curiosity is a net positive in and of itself. What happens, I wonder, when Death of the Author is fully realized, forcing criticism to abandon authorial intent?

    What happens when a group of humans (gamers, museum-goers, concert audience members, etc) collectively discuss a piece of art, as art, that has no practical human source?

    Let’s imagine generations of distance between the input and the output where the human context has been completely phased out of art’s creation. What happens then?

    Does the audience become hyper-focused on aesthetics to the detriment of the art’s intellectual implications?

    Is a “human seed” necessary to have an intellectual argument or can (must?) non-human art still be coerced into an intellectual argument? I mean, humans are the ones having this imagined argument, and so humans must adapt to any situation per the tools we have available, so what’s left but to accept that a human with a brain will see every nail as a subject to our brain-hammer?

    Technology isn’t scary to those raised by technology.

    I understand that I’m likely being very reductive. Nuance is hard to parse when the event horizon isn’t even visible. On a smaller scale, my paranoia is the same paranoia that drives every aging person ever. To fear the unknown is natural. So, I must constantly remind myself of a conversation I had years ago with author Stephen Graham Jones about the ebook’s (at that time impending) encroachment of paper books. I feared a generation that wouldn’t know the pleasures of physical books, a generation of people not knowing a paper book’s smell, of not knowing the feel of the paper at your fingertips when turning pages, of not looking down to the top of the book to see a bookmark marking your progress. Stephen argued that a new generation of readers will not lose those connections to books. Those connections will simply take on different forms. They will cherish the heat of an e-reader against their palms, the glow of its screen under covers, and the few seconds lag between touching the screen and seeing the next page flash into existence.

    In other words, a future generation of gamers will love generative AI art for reasons we in the current generation cannot fathom.

    The human is an incredibly adaptable creature. Our brains won’t let us live without intellectual and emotional attachments to art. With that in mind, I embrace my curiosity about what generative AI will bring to video games. Yes, despite how likely it might be that AI will drain the office water cooler, I’m curious about how the big-brained human will refill that cooler, because the human cannot exist without a full office cooler.

    Footnotes

    Footnotes
    ↑1 A small brainstorm…maybe, a brain microburst?
    ↑2 Though practically speaking, they still mostly honor the plot points that inform the community conversation that I so cherish.
    ↑3 Though possibly just as a curiosity rather than as a practical win. And for what it’s worth, I believe curiosity is a net positive in and of itself.
  • 3 Things Most Writers Should Stop Doing

    3 Things Most Writers Should Stop Doing

    recite-1m4fwypI’ve been a professional writer for zero years, so please pay attention when I tell you this: you probably need to stop doing the following three things.

    1. Stop listing your job as author or writer in social profiles unless you truly do make a living as an author or writer

    I understand the desire to be perceived as a capital A Author. I also may even understand the fake-it-until-you-become it mentality. There’s a hope of perpetual perceptual motion when you start calling yourself a writer; eventually people around you see you as a writer which may even lead to legitimate writing gigs with legitimate money (not contributor copies).

    But what you may be doing–without even realizing it–is an injustice to young writers who themselves want to be professionals one day. If new writers see you claiming to be a professional, they may interpret your likely paltry output (a novel here, a story there) as sufficient to earn a living wage. Eventually, these young writers will realize the near-impossibility of making a living wage as an author, but why unnecessarily perpetuate this false hope? Be honest. And in keeping with that mantra, know this about my writing life: I’ve made just under $3,000 dollars during my entire publishing history (almost 10 years). That’s about $300/year. It’s a good thing I have a real job to help support my family.

    “But Caleb, I can still claim to be a professional writer even if I don’t get paid for doing it.” No you can’t. That’s not what “professional” means. But, there is something else about the money side of writing that you should probably stop doing…

    2. Stop denouncing the importance of money as a success metric

    I am so incredibly guilty of this.

    While it’s true that money isn’t the sole metric of success (or even the best metric of success) it is the only metric that is reliable, common, and simple. Neither aesthetic nor literary value have a dependable metric associated with it. The fact is, we can’t universally measure the value of a work based on creative/emotional/artistic parameters. I wish we could. I’ve been trying for years. But until then we have sales figures.

    Now, I know what you are thinking. “But marketing budgets often determine how successful–sales-wise–a book will be, so are you saying that we should measure books based on how much marketing they get?” This is a valid retort. So, perhaps more than sales figures we should look at profit to better understand value.

    Profit is what is left after all other expenses, including marketing costs (in addition to the amount of the advance which I will use to account for factors like pre-existing platform and celebrity status; generally the more famous the celebrity the higher the advance). This means that, for example, if a book sells a lot but the marketing budget is also a lot then the profit metric indicates weak value. The ratio is not in the book’s favor. The publisher’s hope with marketing is that once people start reading and discussing a book then it will take on a life of it’s own, therefore diminishing the need for long-term marketing. This life of it’s own is what would, theoretically, increase profits thereby allowing profit to be a valid success metric. This life of it’s own is also indicative of word-of-mouth impact, which I think we can agree does have correlations with a book’s value.

    Unfortunately, book publishers don’t disclose profit-by-book figures. So, we have to rely on general sales figures.

    This is why I am a strong proponent for book award lists (National Book Award, Hugo Awards, Pulitzers,etc). These lists are created based on merit outside of sales figures. If a book makes one of these lists, the publisher basically gets free marketing which means an increase in sales. This puts the aforementioned ratio back in the book’s favor.

    Sales figures don’t always speak to quality, but they sometimes do. It’s important for writers to understand that when your book doesn’t sell well it may mean a lack of marketing, but it just as well could mean that your book sucks.

    3. Stop saying you “absolutely love” a magazine, journal, or publication if you don’t read it to the degree that someone who absolutely loves something would

    If you do not subscribe to and tell all of your friends about a magazine then you do not absolutely love that magazine.

    I’ve been a serial publication editor. I know well the gut-punch feeling of deceit as “readers” claim to love my magazine when I know for certain they don’t (not only can I surmise by the sales figures, but with a small enough publication an editor can verify individual subscribers). I did appreciate the verbal support of course, but that sort of support doesn’t cover a magazine’s overhead.

    Often when I see writers comment about how they “absolutely love” a specific serial publication I assume they are simply trying to win points for eventual consideration of their own work to be published. I know a few writers in particular who absolutely love so many journals that 24 hour/day binge reading would be necessary in order to accurately reflect that love in real life.

    Yes, it’s great to spread the name of a publication. It’s better to actually read the publication.

    Many of my writer friends are guilty of the above. I am guilty as well. So know that my plea to stop doing these things comes only from a place of respect. Let me know if I’m way off here. Do you have other items to add to this list? Are there valid reasons to do any of the things above?

  • A Must Read for Small Press Publishers Looking for Authors

    A Must Read for Small Press Publishers Looking for Authors

    Shortly after posting my “A Must Read for Writers Looking for Publication” article, which insisted that authors manage their expectations when working with small press publishers, Jason Stuart, Editor in Chief of Burnt Bridge, asked “how do we small presses show transparency to the authors, show solidarity with their goals, build trust, and mostly, offer true value?” It’s a fantastic question, to which I rattled off a few things, but have since given the question some additional much deserved thought.

    JasonStuartQuestion

    Small presses, in contrast to large, established publishers, propose a fairly unique offer to authors. “Author,” says the small press, “we are each going to take a huge leap of faith with this relationship. I have little to no funding. Very little manpower. I have a day job that occupies most of my time. You, author, do not have an established fanbase. You are an unknowing in the world of publishing. Knowing these incredible odds against any measure of success, I propose that we commit to working together. What says you, author?”

    “Wow,” says the author. “I’m going to give you years worth of work, in the form of a book, and you’re not going to promise anything other than publication and perhaps some evening hours time in return? I’m not so sure about this.”

    The author is right to be suspicious. The publisher, in this arrangement, has much less to lose than the author. So why should the author agree to this relationship? What should the author require in order to establish a necessary level of comfort?

    Motivation and Confidence

    An author needs two things from a small press publisher: motivation and confidence.

    Motivation (to sell books, to be an evangelist for the press)

    Book sales will keep both the publisher and authors happy. But an author needs motivation to sell books. Large publishers give this by allocating dedicated marketing resources, placing books in brick-and-mortar stores, and the probability of monetary reward in the form of royalties.

    Small publishers often don’t have the luxury of big marketing budgets. Small publishers must be more creative.

    Confidence (that the press will still be around in a year, that the author is an important component in the overall health of the press)

    Again, book sales will keep both the publisher and authors happy. But authors need to be confident that their marketing and writing efforts are going to pay off.

    [divider2]

    Authors in the wild, selling books
    Authors in the wild, selling books

    How can small press publishers ensure both motivation and confidence?

    Small press publishers have a unique flexibility. Established legacy publishers are often so bloated with false self-importance and are blind to their faults that any change in the established processes–from book acquisition to marketing–is an impossible change (remember when eBooks first started gaining market share and legacy publishers dismissed the new medium?). Small press publishers aren’t governed by these same bureaucratic restrictions.

    The ideas below are likely only possible for publishers willing to take chances (ie, small press publishers). If any small presses out there decide to try these things, please contact me and let me know the results, good or bad.

    1. Communication

    If you were a large press and could afford to give me a $10,000 advance on my novel, I’d be okay with not hearing from you for months at a time. The logic being that you wouldn’t spend $10,000 on a book only to forget about it. Small presses, however, cannot give $10,000 advances (or any advance, usually) so constant, personalized communication is extremely important in establishing author confidence.

    How to incorporate communication into the author publisher relationship:

    Monthly emails

    Provide details about the status of the book. What promotional efforts are in place? If there are no promotional efforts to speak of on a monthly basis, then you as a publisher are failing.

    “But we don’t have time to promote books” you say. Then either 1) cut back on the number of book in your catalog or 2) bring on additional resources to help. Marketing responsibilities should be shared by the author, yes, but in a world where authors can easily print and distribute their own books (and keep all the royalties), publishers MUST provide value. From the author’s perspective, why would I forfeit 80% of my potential profits (assuming I get 20% royalties) if the publisher isn’t doing at least 80% of the promotion?

    Video chats

    Video chats (Google+ Hangouts, Skype calls, etc) are a great way to stay involved with your authors. Additionally, video can be a window with which to better understand the personality of your authors which may in turn provide insight into how the author (and the books) can be marketed. If the author is extremely personable, maybe get the author more audio interviews or start a podcast or YouTube channel. Video chats can also be a way to brainstorm solutions to problems such as low sales, writer’s block, etc. Part business meeting, part therapy session.

    Online author dashboard

    This idea of an author dashboard will require more in-depth exploration, which I plan to accomplish with a future blog post. For now, think of an online author dashboard as a means of providing authors with real-time, full-transparency statistics regarding book sales and marketing efforts.

    Also, I understand that a truly functional and actionable dashboard is something that no-budget small press publishers cannot afford, so file this idea in the dream category.

    The dashboard would aggregate the following into a single place:

    • Social data – trending for metrics such as Facebook likes, Twitter followers, YouTube subscribers and views, and more
    • Promotion prompts – recommendations for promotional content based on a variety of factors. For example:
      • A decrease in YouTube subscribers may initiate a prompt for the author to post a new video to keep viewers engaged.
      • A monitored keyword alert (from services such as Replyz, InboxQ, Google Alerts, Mention, or Vocus) may initiate a prompt for the author to write a blog post answering specific user questions relating to the themes contained within the authors’ books.
    • Marketing efforts by the publisher – dates and contacts for press releases, interview requests, and more
    • Near real-time sales data – this may seem impossible, but assuming most small presses distribute via KDP (Kindle Direct Publishing) and CreateSpace, sales data is extremely easy to acquire. KDP and CreateSpace offer monthly exports of sales information in a very manageable .csv or .xlsx format. “But Caleb, CreateSpace has a publish-on-demand stigma that I don’t want to be a part of.” Okay, if you’re avoiding a solution as easy and streamlined as CreateSpace just because you want to adhere to some sense of ‘small press authenticity’ then you probably deserve to fail as a publisher. Why incur overhead when you don’t need to? Besides, CreateSpace can be set up so that most readers have no idea they are reading a book printed via CreateSpace (CreateSpace even has a matte cover finish option now).

    2. Contracts

    Perhaps the biggest area of opportunity for small press publishers is with the acquisition and contract phases of the publisher author relationship.

    Here’s a crazy idea: implement a two-book minimum contract.

    • How this satisfies motivation – When a publisher is expecting a second book from me, I’m motivated to deliver. Simple. Plus, a two-book deal has the added benefit of allowing me to sound really important by saying to my friends “sorry, I can’t go out tonight. I’m working on a deadline for my next novel.”
    • How this satisfies confidence – If I know a publisher is so impressed with my writing that they are willing to contract me for two books, then I am much more willing to invest myself into the publisher and the publisher’s success. A true professional relationship–where both parties have something to gain and lose–is seeded by initial risk.
    • How this helps the publisher – Knowing what’s coming makes planning and promoting much more streamlined. Imagine being able to reply to reviews for book #1 with something like “Glad you liked this book. You should definitely be on the lookout for Author McWriter’s next book, Cool Title, coming in 20xx.” This is also a great way to build a list of “Power Fans,” those readers who will go out of their way to promote future titles. Lastly, if publishers know they have to allocate resources for at least two books, they may be more selective about the books–and the authors–they decide to bring on. This selectivity is important. I know gatekeeping is a dirty concept among those authors who are anti-legacy publishers, but gatekeeping generally works; I shouldn’t have to pay to be a beta reader.

    3. Payment

    So, the author has signed a two-book deal with you. Confidence has been established. The author is motivated to sell. Great. Now, how can you maintain that confidence and motivation? Two words: payment consistency.

    Payment schedule

    No matter how small the royalties may be, monthly payments should be a de-facto practice among small presses. With direct deposits to bank accounts (via PayPal) being so easy and inexpensive there’s no reason not to coordinate monthly payments. Waiting 6+ months between royalty payment distribution is unacceptable.

    • How monthly payments satisfy author motivation – As an author, the more often I see the physical proof of my sales efforts, the more confident I become that what I’m doing is (literally) paying off.
    • How monthly payments satisfy author confidence – When I don’t hear from a publisher, especially one that may only be a few years old, I get nervous. Has the press failed? If so, why wasn’t I notified? Monthly payments are a way to reinforce the validity of the publisher.

    A warning about advances

    Never offer an advance in lieu of royalties. Not many publishers do this, but the ones that do need to realize they are shooting themselves in the foot. An advance is great. Royalties are great. Both are better. But ONLY and advance is a terrible idea. This completely removes the motivation on the part of the author to sell books. “I’ve already been paid,” says the author. “Since I don’t stand a chance of making any additional money, why the hell should I try to sell these books?”

    Contributor copies given 6 months after the book is released [Added 2/9/2014]

    This one is likely a bit more controversial. I argue that rather than give the author his 10 or so contributor copies during the book’s release the copies should instead be given away 6 months to 1 year after the book is released? Why? Often authors, rather than use contributor copies in self-promotion and marketing efforts, give the copies away to friends and family. However, friends and family are the single demographic that authors and publishers can count on to buy the book. Don’t ignore those sales (and the initial Amazon.com algorithm-based promotion that comes along with increases in sales velocity).

    The controversy comes into play when one argues that the publisher is then using friends and family for book sales. “Using” is a harsh word, but essentially, yes, we do want to count on this demographic to purchase books.

    4. Reward/Incentive

    Rewards and other incentives are a proven-effective way to keep people motivated. Small press publishers could do well to adopt a few basic reward structures.

    Bonuses (monetary or otherwise) when certain milestones are met

    • Cash bonus at every x number of sales
    • Book tour organized and paid for (maybe partially; tours are expensive) upon publication of the xth profitable book (3rd or 4th book, perhaps)

    Royalty % increases for each successfully published book

    An example of a reward-based tiered royalty structure:

    • Book 1: 10% of cover
    • Book 2: 15% of cover
    • Book 3: 17% of cover
    • Book 4: 20% of cover
    • Book 5 and on: +2% up to 30%. Once the 30% limit is reached, other rewards kick in (higher sales bonus, more tour stops, etc.–afterall, a publisher can only offer so much in royalties before the press becomes unprofitable)

    Badges

    The badge mentality means that seemingly insignificant rewards can still provide motivation. Untappd is a good example. Untappd is an app that connects a community of beer drinkers. The user receives badges for a variety completed tasks such as drinking a specific number of unique beers, drinking on holidays, and drinking new beers on certain days of the week. It’s ridiculous, I know, but on Thursdays I’ll go out of my way to drink a new beer knowing that doing so will result in a  “New Brew Thursday” badge.

    Badges should be based on short, actionable accomplishments, rather than long-term goals (long-term goals should remain in the Bonuses and Royalty % Increases sections) and should not influence monetary payout. A few badge examples:

    • First audio interview (and incremental tiers such as 5th audio interview, 20th audio interview, etc)
    • First book-related YouTube video uploaded (and incremental tiers such as 5th video upload, 20th video upload, etc)
    • First picture with a fan
    • The Traveler Badge – Participating in a live reading x miles from home

    Readers and authors not part of your press probably won’t care about these badges. I understand that. Badges perhaps should reserved for display on author profile pages (as part of the aforementioned dashboard) allowing all authors in the press’ stable to compare badges, while encouraging a bit of friendly competition as well. Alternately, perhaps badges can be publicly displayed as they would provide an opportunity for the author to blog about the story behind the badges’ acquisitions.

    Here's the story: I drink a lot
    Here’s the story: I drink a lot
    [divider2]

    [quote]“But Caleb, I didn’t start my small press to get rich and quit my dayjob. I’m doing it for the love.”[/quote]

    This is a very, very commendable stance. However, monetary motivations or no, you have to keep in mind two things: 1) your motivations might not necessarily be your authors’ motivations, and 2) without some type of structure set in place to guide your decisions, you’ll burn out (and let down your authors) much more quickly than you would like to.

    1) Your motivations vs. your authors’ motivations. Even though you might not care about making money, your authors might care very much. If you are a true “for the love” publisher, meaning you don’t anticipate generating enough revenue to pay your authors, you need to be VERY EXPLICIT WITH THIS INFORMATION BEFORE AN AUTHOR SIGNS WITH YOU.

    2) You need a decision-making structure. Remember MC Hammer? No. Okay, remember Spencer Pratt and Heidi Montag? No. Well, good. For the sake of my point just know that these three individuals had millions of dollars at one point in time, and now they have zero dollars. Why? Because their decision making processes were not structured very well. When one has millions of dollars of disposable income, making more money generally isn’t a top priority. Therefore, they spend, spend, and spend without a single thought about future proofing their lifestyle. As a small press publisher, if you make decisions based on ensuring a future then you’ll be around a long time. Now, “ensuring a future” is a very nebulous parameter, which is why if you instead say you want to make decisions based on “being profitable,” the decisions become more concrete and easier to justify. This doesn’t mean you MUST be profitable. It simply means that by applying a concrete structure to your decision making, you’ll make yourself, your authors, and your readers much happier in the long run because you’ll be around much longer.

    [divider2]

    Thoughts from small press publishers

    I invite all small press publishers to comment, correct, suggest, change, and generally contribute as willing and able. I’ve been publishing with small presses for about 10 years. Some experiences have been great. Some have been terrible. I feel I have a worthwhile perspective on the topic, but I welcome all feedback.

    More importantly, if you are a small press publisher and you decide to enact any of the ideas above, please let me know! I would love to hear about any successes or failures. Contribute to the comments section below.

    Important takeaways

    • Authors must be motivated to sell books and must be confident that their efforts will pay off
    • Small press publishers should consider, as part of their core publication model, a level of communication, contract flexibility, payment consistency, and transparency that far exceeds what large, legacy publishers offer
    • If authors aren’t confident that they are in the best of hands, the publisher is failing them
    • As a small press publisher you may not care much about money, but perhaps your authors do
  • A must read for writers looking for publication

    A must read for writers looking for publication

    Crawling

    Inspired by Max Booth III’s post dissecting a small press author agreement, which he calls a “bullshit contract,” I’ve put together some information culled during my 10 years as a writer trying to become an author in the small press world. Warning: the following contains hard truths.

    Who is this article for:

    • Writers/authors looking to get a short story published with a small press either online or in print (small press = a publisher that most people haven’t heard of)
    • Writers/authors who think having stories published with small presses will generate a sustainable living

    Who is this article NOT for:

    • Writers/authors who have an agent (the agent should be doing the job of filtering out a publisher’s potential, not you)
    • Writers/authors who are not interested in small press publishing. If you are 100% committed to publishing (novels or story collections) with the traditional publishers (HarperCollins, Penguin, Random House, etc) then you can skip most of this article. Though, the hard truths may help inform how you go about engaging with traditional publishers.

    What is your goal as a writer?

    HandGun

    As a writer looking to become an author with small presses, you MUST set your expectations accordingly. The chances of you sustaining yourself financially from small press publishing are almost non-existent. If you’re looking to make money as an author, small press publishing is not where you should look. Small presses deal almost exclusively in the currency of passion.

    1. Are you wanting to earn a living (novels specifically; short stories alone are NOT viable to earn a living)? Avoid small press publishing. Yes, there are exceptions to this statement, but those exceptions are very, very few. Also, those exceptions often rely on a wealth of unseen support (think of an iceberg, with 90% of the bulk not seen). This unseen support may include extreme prolificacy (Carlton Mellick III releases about 4 books per year and has cultivated a devout following), medium-profile court cases bringing attention to the book (Patrick Wensink adapted a copyrighted Jack Daniels image for his book Broken Piano for President. The resulting Jack Daniels kindness made headlines and, one can assume, book sales), or having an established name before making a jump to small presses (Brian Evenson may be an example of this–Altmann’s Tongue, his first story collection, was published by Knopf. Subsequent books were published by small-medium sized publishers).
    2. Are you wanting to see your name in print? The poachers of the small press world thrive on this goal. As a new(ish) writer, you’re probably thinking “I don’t care if I get paid as long as my name gets out there. I’ll make money later.” Here’s the secret. ANYONE with $0 and a Create Space account can get his/her name in print. Having your name in print is no longer an accomplishment. If this is your only goal, then you can stop reading now.
    3. Are you wanting to get your work read? That’s a noble goal and one that should be a part of every writer’s set of goals. What’s difficult about this goal is that simply having a story or novel published does not guarantee readers. In fact, without adequate promotion (or a ‘hidden iceberg’ support system, as mentioned above) your work will probably not be read by more than a handful of friends and family members. The audience for a small press runs the gamut from non-existent to large. Because of this, new small presses often try to make themselves seem larger and more reputable than they really are. I’ve devoted an entire section of this article to discovering the true audience size of small presses (see “If you want to get your work read, look out for…” below).
    4. Are you wanting all three of the above? Get in line. We all are. And considering the amount of competition involved, you’re likely looking for any advantage (which is why you may have found this article). Dubious publishers know this this and they don’t hesitate to dupe unsuspecting writers into terrible contracts. If you’re wanting money, a byline, and an audience, you’d better be willing to work. And by “work” I mean more than just write your stories and novels. You need to be an entrepreneur.1

    Red Flags that writers should know when working with small publishers

    RedFace

    If you are trying to earn a living, look out for…

    • …pretty much all small presses. By nature (and by definition) small presses are small, meaning they don’t have the resources to grow careers. If you’re looking to earn a living, you must be an entrepreneurial author* with an interest in not only writing, but in growing an audience, fighting for your slice of the promotional pie, and expanding your platform (which Jane Friedman knows much, much more about than I do)
    • …small presses promising money. It’s standard practice to give writers contributor copies of journals in which their work appears and for small press to give contributor copies AND royalties to novelists, but if a small press is promising excessive compensation that ‘feels’ too good to be true, it is. Keep in mind that most small press publications sell very, very few copies. So, taking the example of an issue of a literary journal, priced at $5 per copy that splits 20% of royalties among 14 contributors, you’re looking at $0.07 per copy to you. Let’s estimate that the issue sells 100 copies (which would be extraordinary, by the way) you net $7 for your work. Pretty shitty. The takeaway: you’re not really making any money with a small press short story credit.

    If you want to see your name in print, look out for…

    • Nothing. You have a terrible goal. You deserve to be taken advantage of.

    If you want to get your work read, look out for…

    • …aesthetics that don’t match your own. As a responsible writer you should submit your work only to publications that serve the same audience you’re writing for. Don’t bombard small presses with story submissions obviously don’t fit with what they publish.
    • …promises of exposure. Small presses that have to advertise exposure as a selling point generally do not have much exposure to begin with. It’s up to you to determine the true exposure of a small press. Here are some ways:
      • Social reach – consider the online footprint of the press. Take a look at their latest tweets and Facebook & Google+ statuses. How often are they shared. What does the audience demographic look like (click through to a few of the sharers’ profiles to see how much influence they have). If the online footprint of the press isn’t as strong as your own footprint, then you may have to walk away.
      • Sales – Check the Amazon.com sales rank for the latest issues/novels released by the press. Compare this number to similar titles.
      • Site stats – How many visits does the small press’ website receive? This site can provide insights into traffic, and many other, metrics.
      • Multiple revenue streams – Is the press only a literary journal press? Or, do they also produce and sell novels, chapbooks, and merchandise? Do they organize events (live readings)? Do they participate in conferences (AWP, APSS)? You want to work with a press that integrates itself into many related endeavors.
      • Contributor history – What other authors have been published by this small press? Are they “big names”? Would associating with this author help you meet your goals?

    My history with small presses

    FaceLeaf

    What would an article like this be without some transparency? I’ve listed a few of my small press experiences, both positive and negative, along with hindsight commentary.

    What is my goal as a short story writer? #3. I want to get my work read

    What is my goal as a novelist? #3. I want to get my work read and, if possible, #1. I want to earn a living. I understand that #1 is difficult, so I’ve treated it mostly as a “fingers crossed” act rather than something I cultivate like a responsible entrepreneur.

    Example 1: Vestal Review, “5×6” in a Sturdy Frame” (story)

    • Red flags: The site is ugly
    • Green flags: Contributor copy included. Professional payment (between $0.03 – $0.10 per word), impressive author history including Steve Almond and Aimee Bender
    • Final impressions: I am still very happy with my experience with Vestal Review

    Example 2: The Literary House Review, “The Camp” (story)

    • Red flags: no contributor copy (implying that the publisher makes money by selling copies to the authors), no discounted contributor copies, aesthetic doesn’t fit with my own work
    • Green flags: physical print production (at the time, I was hungry for print publications)
    • Final impressions: I don’t regret my engagement with The Literary House Review, but only because I wasn’t expecting much out of it to begin with. Today, I definitely wouldn’t agree to a contract without at least contributor copies included.

    Example 3: Pear Noir #1, “The Camel of Morocco” (story)

    • Red flags: brand new publication (at the time; they are well-established now)
    • Green flags: professional payment ($10), contributor copy, and lifetime subscription
    • Final impressions: I am still very happy with my engagement with Pear Noir!. Nothing but positive things to say about them.

    Example #4: The Living Dead Press’s Eternal Night: a Vampire Anthology, “Born Again Michael” (story)

    • Red flags: at the time, there weren’t any. Since then, a lot of things have come to light. Check out this entire site dedicated to the the hated publisher and editor, Anthony Giagregorio. Had I known about this site during my initial engagement with the publisher I would have passed.
    • Green flags: I was excited about working with a lot of authors whom I respect. The contributors to this anthology are some of the best writers (and best friends) around.
    • Final impressions: I definitely should have avoided this press. I feel bad about validating this press’s existence by contributing to its bottom line.

    Final thoughts

    Face

    Being a successful author is not about 1) writing, 2) sending to publisher, 3) repeat. Being a successful author is about 1) writing, 2) investigating publishing options, 3) sending to publisher, 4) staying involved with the publisher to ensure promises are met, 5) repeat.

    Only when writers are willing to raise their expectations of small presses will the truly awful small presses die away.

    Your work is worth more than sub-par publishing, right?

    1. Which I am not. Which is why this article doesn’t talk at all about being an entrepreneur. For that, solicit the help of someone much more knowledgeable such as Dan Blank with WeGrowMedia.

    (the images used in this article are by Zdzislaw Beksinski. They don’t really fit with the theme of the article, I know. They are interesting to look at. That is all)

  • Why don’t I use guns in fiction?

    Why don’t I use guns in fiction?

    GetInTheFuckingBoat

    (This post isn’t so much a cohesive argument but more of a textualized exploration. I welcome contributions to the topic)

    I rarely incorporate guns into my fiction. To me, the (sudden) presence of a gun shifts the trajectory of a story much too easily. No matter how a character has been established during the preceding pages, a gun suddenly—and more importantly, unfairly—gives ultimate power to that character. When given a gun, either 1) a lackluster character becomes the fulcrum of a scene (or story) or 2) a well-developed character gets robbed of all the reader investment by artificially becoming the fulcrum of a scene (or story)[1]Of course there are exceptions. If the gun itself is important to the character’s makeup, or if the context of a story supports guns (a war story, for example), or, as in the case of one of my … Continue reading. Either way, a gun generally says to the reader “I’m a lazy author, and I don’t respect your time, reader.”

    LazyAuthorBut I do incorporate what I would consider valid character traits/histories. Some of the more common traits I use being difficult childhoods, physical deformities, and general familial strife.

    However, this morning, I asked myself what’s the difference between a physical deformity and a gun? Aren’t they both, in some way, just crutches used to advance plot. Some perhaps more nuanced than a gun, but still, aren’t they all simply elements designed to steer the plot’s trajectory?

    Is there a universal hierarchy of character traits, ranging perhaps from the most subtle (re: most acceptable and vetted) to the most obnoxious (re: the most potential to artificially steer a plot; re: gun)? Of course the answer is no; nothing is universal and there are plenty of examples of guns in quality fiction. But the question is worth exploring.

    Perhaps a better way to approach this topic is by asking, is it possible for a story to work without containing any narrative crutches at all? When asked this way, the same response, no, means so much more.

    Now that we can accept that a story MUST contain character traits (crutches), especially when we acknowledge that the very purpose of a character trait is to advance (re: steer) plot. The original concern then returns: are guns simply an especially lazy character trait. Yes. Yes they are.
    [references/]

    Footnotes

    Footnotes
    ↑1 Of course there are exceptions. If the gun itself is important to the character’s makeup, or if the context of a story supports guns (a war story, for example), or, as in the case of one of my novels, the very power of something like a gun to quickly change a story’s trajectory is exactly one of the points of the novel.
  • HeavyShelves asks writing questions. You learn something. Everybody wins.

    HeavyShelves asks writing questions. You learn something. Everybody wins.

    Andrew, known as HeavyShelves in BookTube land, was kind enough to invite me to a Google Hangout a few nights ago where he treated me like a rockstar for almost 3 hours. That’s a long time, especially when you consider the time frame was 12am – 3am his time (he’s in the UK).

    I definitely encourage you to take a watch. Or, just listen, as you would a podcast (visually, it’s pretty much just webcam style cuts between his face and mine…except for one truly amazing appearance by Nicholas Cage…see image below).

    Andrew asked some great questions, and we had some great discussions. List for these gems:

    • My publishing history (and the importance of knowing people, starting here)
    • Writers need to know their productivity limitations (more about why I can’t be allowed to write 8 hours/day, starting here)
    • The importance of caring about what you write (the real “write what you know” advice, starting here)
    • What book am I working on now? (Southern Gothic set on an island, starting here)
    • And much, much, much more (starting everywhere)

    Nicholas Cage stops by:

    FerrettCage

     

  • Pixar’s Rules for Storytelling 8: Finish your story, let go even if it’s not perfect. In an ideal world you have both, but move on. Do better next time.

    Pixar’s Rules for Storytelling 8: Finish your story, let go even if it’s not perfect. In an ideal world you have both, but move on. Do better next time.


    Yes, I am going to make a video for each of the Pixar’s 22 Rules for Storytelling (the full list can be found here). Be sure to subscribe to this channel to not miss any of the forthcoming videos. I plan to release one/week.

    Rule #8: Finish your story, let go even if it’s not perfect. In an ideal world you have both, but move on. Do better next time.

    This time, I’m doing something a bit different: one shot, no cuts. I figure what better way to explore the idea of moving on to new projects than to fully embrace the idea of letting go of a current one.