What Minecraft sale will mean for fans

Minecraft is a perfect example of a game that reaches across generations. Joe Raedle/Getty Images/AFP

Minecraft is a perfect example of a game that reaches across generations. Joe Raedle/Getty Images/AFP

Published Sep 22, 2014

Share

Washington - The $2.5-billion Microsoft deal to purchase the makers of Minecraft became official on Monday, but some people — especially non-gamers — are just now starting to discover that the tech giant bought more than just a best-selling indie game with goofy graphics.

Minecraft is also an ecosystem of dedicated fans who play, create and share within and beyond the game's open world.

Although it's not clear whether Microsoft will become more of a conservationist or a developer in this analogy, one thing is certain: Microsoft knows it's getting way more than just a popular game in which users basically mine for materials and build things. It's a game with a fan base that refers to the purchase in the first person.

As evidenced by Amazon's $1-billion purchase of Twitch, the livestreaming service popular with gamers and virtually unheard of outside of that world, big companies are catching on to the value of owning the technology powering gaming communities.

What's still unknown is how those communities will react, in the long run, to suddenly finding themselves in the hands of a major corporation — and what Microsoft will do to try and keep them. For many, the Minecraft-Microsoft deal will become the canary in the redstone mine.

Fan reaction has been mixed so far. Some concentrated on making tributes to Markuss “Notch” Persson, the Minecraft creator who will leave Mojang, the company behind the game, once the purchase is final. Others were outraged at what was widely read as Mojang “selling out” to a big corporation that has a mixed history with its earlier indie acquisitions.

Microsoft's own announcement of the deal indicated that the company knows it has a balancing act to perform. The company made sure to mention that it is keeping a planned Minecraft conference, MINECON, and wrote that “we'll look to create even more ways for the vibrant community of YouTuber's [sic], innovators, bloggers and players to connect with each other — both in person and online.”

But it's complicated. Beyond run-of-the-mill fans and hobbyists, that community includes entertainers, some of whom make videos of Minecraft gameplay (and make money by selling ads on hosting sites like YouTube); modders, who change the game itself in all sorts of ways, including creating entirely new games on top of the original Minecraft; and educators.

That presents a practical problem with the sale for some of those users: The ways in which some of Minecraft's community members use the game appear to conflict with Microsoft's own game content usage policies.

Under certain conditions, Microsoft grants gamers “a personal, non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use and display Game Content and to create derivative works based upon Game Content, strictly for your noncommercial and personal use.” Microsoft's usage rules are progressive in an industry that doesn't always know how to contend with the creative consumption habits of its fans, but they do not currently allow people to use Minecraft in all of the ways it was used before the sale.

There's been a lot of visceral pessimism in the Minecraft community's reactions to the deal, but at least one company has successfully navigated the fallout from Microsoft's acquisition of another popular game: Halo.

The developer Rooster Teeth is behind the well-known, long-running, independent web series called Red Vs. Blue, which uses footage from Halo to tell original stories (the term for this kind of production is “machinima”). Microsoft purchased Halo from its developer, Bungie, in 2003. At the time, many of the game's fans worried about what would happen to “Red vs. Blue,” along with Halo itself and their own content that's based on the game. From the perspective of Rooster Teeth, however, the developer's ability to keep making the series and profiting from it is an example of how Microsoft might not actually mess everything up with Minecraft.

At the time of the purchase, Rooster Teeth co-founder and creative director Burnie Burns said in an interview, Microsoft could have said: “That's very cute. Now stop.” But, Burns said, “that's not what happened. It was Microsoft's decision to look at this and say: 'This is new media. . . . We value innovation, let's see where this goes.'“

The decision to purchase Minecraft shows that the company has noted the value of these new ecosystems, thanks partly to the relationships Microsoft has with some of the most popular groups that create content based on Microsoft gaming products. Rooster Teeth, for example, has a licensing deal with Microsoft and worked with the company to produce its game content usage rules, Burns said. In turn, their work effectively serves as a promotion for their games and the Xbox console.

Based on his experience with the company, Burns said, “I don't think Microsoft is spending $2.5-billion to radically change the thing that makes Minecraft so radically successful. It's hard to deny that the contributions of the community have raised the profile of Minecraft.”

As for Rooster Teeth's own popular Minecraft videos, Burns said the company would wait and see how Microsoft decides to handle those who monetize Minecraft-related content. But Burns didn't seem worried on behalf of his fellow creators. “Online video content creators are very adaptive,” he said. “The success of Minecraft is gonna inspire generations” — no matter what happens to that particular game.

Under Microsoft's current rules, the company is fine with people making YouTube videos of something cool they did in Minecraft — but not if they earn any money from it. “You may post your Item to a page or website that has advertising,” the rules read, “but only if you do not earn any money from that advertising.”

That seems to pose a danger to the business model of, say, Joseph Garrett, who earns a full-time living making kid-friendly Minecraft videos under the handle “stampylonghead.” His revenue, according to the BBC, is largely derived from the ads that display before his YouTube videos.

The rules also say users cannot “reverse engineer our games to access the assets or otherwise do things that the games don't normally permit in order to create your Items.” In other words: modding.

As Re/code noted in a piece on modders' mixed reactions to the sale, it's possible that Microsoft will change its rules for Minecraft, or even officially endorse modifications by releasing an API for the game (something Mojang itself has not done, much to the frustration of many fans). In the meantime, gamers are going to have to wait and see.

A day after the Microsoft deal became official, at least one mod jumped ship and decided to re-create itself as a standalone game, avoiding the question of how Microsoft would handle its content altogether. CivCraft, a huge Minecraft mod, will become Praxis and detach itself from its original Minecraft connection.

The studio behind Praxis mentioned the Microsoft deal in its announcement, noting that going stand-alone would allow the company to “best monetize it prior to the inevitable $2.5b Microsoft buyout.” It's too soon to tell whether other modders and creators will follow suit. Some could simply lose the desire to pour their creative energies into a game that is no longer independent, while others could lose the ability to profit from their work, and therefore the luxury of having the time to do it. Or, Microsoft could end up with a community of dedicated creators who remain mostly intact.

Although Mojang's FAQ on the sale does a lot of work to reassure fans that a lot won't change — including Minecraft's availability on platforms other than Microsoft's Xbox - the fact still remains that soon, it will be up to Microsoft alone to decide how to handle its new community. - Washington Post

Related Topics: