Hun-Speak

Click here for other Hun-Speak columns.

March 26, 2001 -- Gaming Networks: Condition Critical
Part II: Will We Pay to Play?

Things have only gotten worse since I wrote my first commentary on the death throes of the gaming ad networks. Many very popular sites have started begging for donations to keep themselves afloat. I'm not here to debate the ethics of crying for money so that you can be a full-time gaming webmaster (although the phrasing of that sentence should give you a good idea of how I feel about it). I want to discuss whether or not people will actually pay for the content most sites are offering.

Some sites offer benefits like removing banner ads or super-secret newsletters in return for cash. Others offer little extra value. They just hope you'll be happy with the warm fuzzy that comes from saving your favorite website from its demise.

I personally would never pay to use any of the Blue's News clones that are out there. You know the sites I'm talking about. I'm not even sure I would pay for Blue's News, even though it is the best gaming news site out there, hands down. I would have to debate whether or not it was worth getting my news in one place, or scanning the game companies' or various fan sites for the same information. I might--if the price is right.

The only site I pay for right now is ESPN.com, but I'm even considering dropping that because they are offering less and less subscriber-specific content. There are very few other sites that are so undeniably wonderful that my life simply would not be complete without their existence.

As it stands right now, I am no longer visiting several sites that were the first to start begging for money. It's not that I don't want their bills to be paid. It's just that their pleas for money seemed painfully like those of the televangelists. Don't beg me for money just so you don't have to get a real job. Don't beg for money when you are giving the exact same content that a dozen other sites are offering.

Then there's the potential conflict of interest. A couple of gaming news sites have received money from various game developers, not in exchange for advertising, but simply to keep the site afloat. How can you expect such a site to remain objective when they are being partially bankrolled by the companies whose products they review? All the assurances in the world will not remove that concern.

Obviously my concerns are not shared by a good number of people. From what I've seen, several sites that have asked for money have been getting it. More power to them, I guess. If people are willing to pay for it, then let those people be heard. Whether or not this can be sustained over an extended period of time remains to be seen.

Regardless, the whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth. If sites want my money, they had better offer me a lot more than tearful platitudes.

Next time: My vision for the future.