YouTube connection won’t make people use Google+

YouTube announced Tuesday that it will soon require users to log in through Google+ to make comments on videos.

The purposes of this move, according to YouTube, are to increase the quality of comments on the site and to give users the comments they care about by connecting to users’ Google+ Circles. YouTube wants users to be able to see the most relevant comments, rather than the most recent. The changes will be fully implemented later this year.

Comments listed near the top of a video for each user will be from people in that user’s Google+ Circle, popular posters, people participating in discussions about the video, and of course, the video’s creator. Users can set their comments to visible to everyone or just to certain people in their Circles.

A video from Soul Pancake shows what the new comments sections will look like. Image from YouTube Official Blog.
A video from SoulPancake shows what the new comments sections will look like. Image from YouTube Official Blog.

YouTube also promises new tools to help video creators moderate comments.

These features will likely lead YouTube to success in increasing the quality of notoriously poor comments sections. The site’s less savory commenters will not likely be committed enough to register for Google+ for purposes of comparing things to Hitler or spamming their website links.

Furthermore, the new features allow people who are interested in having conversations on YouTube to do so; under the old comments system, it was very hard for people to keep track of one another, as most comments were displayed with the newest first from the top.

As Selena Larson of ReadWrite points out, it is clear that Google also intends to use its new YouTube functions as a means of getting more people to use Google+.

Because Google accounts allow access to all Google tools and websites, Google+ has a very high number of users. In other words, anyone who has a Gmail account automatically has an account for Google+.

For people who already have Google accounts, leaving YouTube comments will be as simple as logging in, even if they are using a different account than before. Some will even create Google+ accounts for commenting on YouTube.

But will these new rules and tools really get more people to use Google+?

Not likely.

Nielsen reported earlier this year that in March, the average visitor to Google+ spent a mere 7 minutes per month on the site. In the same month, the average visitor to Facebook spent 6 hours and 44 minutes.

While these figures do not include activity from mobile apps, the difference is still vast enough to indicate that people do not have much interest in Google+.

Google+ may have a large number of users, but on average, they are not spending much time on the site. Image from The Independent Blogs.
Google+ may have a large number of users, but on average, they are not spending much time on the site. Image from The Independent Blogs.

In a post for ReadWrite earlier this year, Matt Asay said Google had demonstrated only why Google+ is beneficial for Google; not why it is beneficial for users.

“There happens to be a product at and an app. But really it’s a way for Google to get to know our users,” said David Glazer, director of engineering for Google+. “Who they have relationships with. We give them the ability to share. That layer, that spine, that backbone, is intended to help us make search, Maps, YouTube, Gmail, etc. better. That’s the real point of Google+.”

When I read that explanation, I don’t see any reasons users would want Google+.

A further problem with Google+, Forbes contributor Robert Hof points out, is that Google+ has done little to distinguish itself from Facebook. Why, then, would anyone want to use Google+ when they are already involved in Facebook?

The most compelling argument comes from Linda Sherman, consultant and former CEO of Club Med Japan. Sherman told Forbes that people can effectively use Google+ to market themselves and their businesses because the site’s small number of users allows people seeking professional connections to be more visible to influencers than even LinkedIn.

Sherman also noted that early adopters can garner large audiences on a new media platform before the platform becomes huge.

While both of these aspects of Google+ are useful for jobseekers, entrepreneurs and social media enthusiasts, I wonder how applicable they are to wider audiences.

There is definitely a strong interest in using social media, but the tiny amount of time people spend on Google+ compared to Facebook makes me think the demand for multiple Facebook-like platforms is not what Google thinks.

Tumblr, Pinterest and Twitter have their own distinct functions that differentiate them from Facebook. Google+ has some differences, but unlike the aforementioned sites, the fundamental purpose of Google+ is the same as Facebook.

Did Google supply a product without a demand?


5 tips for blogging challenges: A look back at Blog-a-Day Week

Last week was the annual Blog-a-Day Week at WVU Interactive Journalism. The rules are fundamentally simple: students must post on their blogs every day for one week. Beyond the simplicity, however, is quite a difficult task.

Blogging is not easy. It is often thought of something anyone with a computer can do, but it requires a great deal of commitment to write 4,000-5,000 words with proper links and images in a week.

Professional bloggers have this kind of workload (if not more) every week. Based on the 5,000-words-a-week estimate, a professional blogger writes the equivalent of an average-length novel (64,000 words) in 12.8 weeks. Thus, a blogger writing every day writes a little more than four novels in a year.

These books are a visual representation of how much content professional bloggers write in a year. Image uploaded from my iPhone.
The four books at the top of this stack are a visual representation of how much content professional bloggers write in a year. Image uploaded from my iPhone.

Despite the intense workload, I enjoyed Blog-a-Day week and learned some valuable information about blogging. Based on what I learned this week, I would offer five pieces of advice for anyone who wants to participate in a blogging challenge.

1. Work in advance. The hardest part of this week for me (and for many, I suspect) was thinking of a week’s worth of topics to cover. Take some time at the beginning to make a list of things to write about, and use it to write your first few posts. I wrote four of the seven posts the weekend before the challenge started, which helped take the heat off for the rest of the week. It allowed me to always be working on my posts ahead of when they needed to be posted, giving me sufficient time to edit and revise for publication.

2. Google it. And use Twitter. Search engines and Twitter are the best ways to find things to write about. Of my seven posts this week, I found two by Googling phrases related to my blog focus (the NYC Opera and Humble Bundle posts) and three through Twitter accounts I follow (the two Candy Crush Saga posts and the Dredd sequel one). Brainstorming alone only gave me two topics, so Google and Twitter were essential to my blogging challenge.

3. Write about things you’re familiar with as often as you can. I thought writing the posts might get easier as the week progressed, but what I found instead was that the topics that were easiest to write about were those on which I was already knowledgeable. The Soundsupply and Key & Peele posts did not take me too much time to write because, for the most part, I knew what I was going to write about before I started them. The NYC Opera and Humble Bundle posts took the longest because I was not familiar with the histories of those organizations.

4. Keep track of your data. It’s easy to ignore the data your blogging platform provides, especially during a hectic blogging challenge week, but data provides insight into which topics are attracting the most views. The posts on Key & Peele, Candy Crush Saga and real-world branding and Humble Bundle drew the most individual viewers and highest numbers of views, so those would likely be subjects I should revisit in the future. The Humble Bundle is especially noteworthy, as it got those views on a Sunday, and weekends are usually less popular for reading blogs and other online posts. It appears, then, that readers are particularly interested in that topic.

WordPress provides free data for your blog, such as the number of views per day, as seen on this calendar for my Blog-a-Day Week. Image from my WordPress page.
WordPress provides free data for your blog, such as the number of views per day, as seen on this calendar for my Blog-a-Day Week. Image from my WordPress page.

5. Turn one idea into multiple posts. This point means two things to me. First, it means you can get two or more posts out of one subject. In reading about Candy Crush Saga, I found articles talking about branding and Facebook connection, so I could tell there was more than one post in that amount of material. Posts that form a series are helpful because they allow you to delve deeply into a subject without having to overload your blogging process with research.

Second, the idea means you can get multiple posts out of one theme. Think about your previous posts when searching for new topics, and you’ll notice overarching themes between seemingly unrelated topics. I’ve written about DRM-free platforms four times, and two of them were during Blog-a-Day Week. When I wrote about that topic once, it gave me the idea to search for other platforms using similar business models and the issues surrounding these models. Letting your previous posts inform your new ones will help you think of new ideas and create a rich web of connections throughout your blog.

These are just some tips for people doing blogging challenges. What bits of advice would you add to the list?

Charities and game developers benefit from Humble Origin Bundle’s record sales

Popular video game deal Humble Bundle had its highest-selling bundle last month, raising $10.5 million with most of the money going to charity.

Humble Bundle curates bundles of digital media—usually computer games, but occasionally other media like music and e-books—and sells them as pay-what-you-want downloads for two weeks at a time. The site also features weekly bundles.

Users who pay more than the average amount receive extra content. For video games, users get access to the games on the digital distribution platform Steam if they pay more than $1.

"Battlefield 3" was among the games included in the Humble Origin Bundle. Image from PC Gamer.
First-person shooter “Battlefield 3” was among the games included in the Humble Origin Bundle. Image from PC Gamer.

The Humble Origin Bundle was sold from August 14 to August 29, and it included ten games from video game giant Electronic Arts, which could be downloaded through EA’s distribution platform, Origin (most of the games could also be downloaded through Steam). 2.1 million bundles were sold, and the bundle’s sales far surpassed the previous record holder, Humble Indie Bundle V, which raised $5.1 million.

The charities included in the promotion were the American Red Cross, the American Cancer Society, the Human Rights Campaign, the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, and Watsi.

To date, Humble Bundle has made more than $50 million in cumulative revenue, with more than $20 million going to charity.

Bundle buyers can choose how their contributions are divided up among the charities, game developers (most bundles feature multiple developers) and Humble Bundle itself. For the Humble Origin Bundle, though, EA declined to take any money, instead letting all contributions go to the charities or Humble Bundle.

In addition to being a very generous philanthropic move, declining to keep any of the funds raised will help EA’s company image. I don’t mean to sound like I think EA only made the gesture for good PR or a tax writeoff, but it for a company that has had its fair share of controversies, giving back might take some of the heat off, especially when EA has been criticized for requiring that three of the most popular games in the bundle—Battlefield 3, The Sims 3, and Dead Space—be downloaded through its own distribution platform.

While the EA bundle was generally well received, some took issue with Humble Bundle’s occasional departure from its indie-focused origins. The site started out with only games from independent developers that were DRM-free and could run on multiple operating systems.

Game Politics conducted a poll last week asking readers, “What do you think of the Humble Bundle these days?” Though the results were mostly positive, 27 percent said it was “hit or miss” in its adherence to its founding principles, and 10 percent said the site “had lost its way.”

Physics-based puzzle game "World of Goo" was among the games featured in the first Humble Indie Bundle in  2010. Image from CNET.
Physics-based puzzle game “World of Goo” was among the games featured in the first Humble Indie Bundle in 2010. Image from CNET.

In November 2012, the site released its first bundle from a large publisher, THQ.

Unlike previous bundles, the Humble THQ Bundle was exclusive to Windows (most are also available on Apple OSX and Linux) and had a DRM restriction, in that its games had to be downloaded and played through Steam. Some future bundles also had these restrictions.

Addressing the decision to include a major game publisher in a bundle, a Humble Bundle representative told Rock, Paper, Shotgun, “When THQ expressed interest in our pay what you want plus charity model and willingness to let us bundle so many top tier titles, we couldn’t believe it at first. But trying to turn up our noses at this epic chance to make gamers happy and help worthy causes like Child’s Play and the American Red Cross could only have been defined as arrogance.  We had to try and we were extremely curious to see what would happen.”

The charity aspect is most important. Humble Bundle made the right decision in allowing bigger publishers to participate because of the money these publishers could bring in for nonprofits, even at the expense of Humble Bundle’s original goals.

The concern that allowing these companies in will draw attention away from smaller developers is legitimate, but in the ten months since the THQ bundle, only two other big publishers (EA and Koch Entertainment’s Deep Silver) have been featured, so the program still features the independents most often.

Furthermore, the occasional inclusion of a big-name publisher could get bring awareness of the Humble Bundle that would benefit the other developers featured. People could learn about the site or become interested in it because of the EA bundle and then come back to check out future indie bundles.

Everyone needs a point of entry to discovering new things, and judging by the amount of money the Humble Origin Bundle made, many people found it last month, and good causes benefitted as a result.

New York City Opera shows difficulties of nonprofits on Kickstarter

The New York City Opera has launched a Kickstarter campaign to fund the majority of its 2013-14 season.

The campaign has a goal of $1 million and ends September 30. On top of Kickstarter donations, City Opera needs to raise another $6 million by the end of the month to continue its season, and it needs an additional $13 million by the end of the year to produce the shows for its 2014-15 season.

The 2013-14 season’s first production is Anna Nicole, a 2010 opera based on the life of Anna Nicole Smith, which runs from Sept. 17 to Sept. 28. It is planning three more productions for this season.

"Anna Nicole" is currently being performed. "Endimione," "Bluebeard's Castle" and "The Marriage of Figaro" will be performed in 2014 if the Opera raises the funds it needs. Image from New York City Opera.
The New York City Opera is currently performing “Anna Nicole.” The Opera will perform “Endimione,” “Bluebeard’s Castle” and “The Marriage of Figaro” in 2014 if it raises the funds it needs. Image from New York City Opera.

City Opera is nicknamed “the people’s opera,” as it serves as a lower-cost alternative to the larger-scale productions of the New York’s famous Metropolitan Opera. The company has experienced a number financial woes in recent years and had to leave its long-running home, the Lincoln Center, in favor of traveling to different theaters in the city.

At the time of this writing, the Kickstarter campaign has received $90,000 in pledges, likely due to a variety of factors.

$1 million is a big goal by any project standard, though the opera should be applauded for setting its goal at what it really needs and not underestimating to make it easier to gain some funding.

While the campaign’s rewards are appealing to opera fans and reasonable for the amount of money pledged, many are limited to the New York City area, so the higher-dollar rewards have limited appeal to those who would care about supporting the arts but do not live in or around the city.

The campaign might have limited visibility as well. Kickstarter is not well known as a successful platform for nonprofits (all of its “famous” campaigns have been business ventures), so people may not find out about the campaign until after it has started (even media outlets did not report on the campaign until it had been running for a week or more).

Kickstarter’s guidelines prohibit raising money for causes, and while City Opera’s campaign is within the guidelines (it is a project with a final product of three operas), its similarity to a cause might be a hard sell for backers.

A final issue is that the controversy surrounding the opera’s financial instability in recent years could deter patrons from donating to it. The Wall Street Journal columnist Terry Teachout wrote that City Opera has faced “imminent collapse” for most of the last decade and had run its course, as it had become removed from its original identity since leaving the Lincoln Center.

Despite these challenges, Kickstarter is still the best option for nonprofits wanting to use crowdfunding for specific goals on a moderate-to-large scale. It is the biggest crowdfunding platform and has more site traffic than the second-biggest platform, Indiegogo. 44 percent of projects on Kickstarter get fully funded, compared to only 10 percent on Indiegogo.

Indiegogo allows flexible funding, which allows project creators to keep the funds pledged even though a campaign does not meets its goal (with a larger percentage going to Indiegogo), but for an organization as large as City Opera, flexible funding is risky. The opera might upset backers if it got to keep pledges but received too little money to use to fund its productions.

Another benefit of Kickstarter that is not often discussed is the ability to use it for free audience research.

“A broad-based audience has been central to the artistic mission of the company since it was founded,” said George Steel, general manager and artistic director of City Opera. “I think if we can demonstrate that we have broad-based support, it would be attractive to the kind of donors who could save the company.”

Though the research would have certain limitations (for example, there might be a sizable number of people who are interested in an organization but do not know what Kickstarter is), crowdfunding platforms still provide a way to measure interest in a campaign.

If a campaign is successful, creators know they have a sufficient audience for their future works. If a campaign is unsuccessful, creators get an idea of how to work within the size of audience it has. Either way, creators get valuable information that would not be so readily available in traditional means of production.

The “Candy Crush Saga” Saga Part 2: Is there a future in gaming on Facebook?

Facebook integration of Candy Crush Saga is doing wonders for the game now, but the future stability of the game’s social media promotion is uncertain.

Candy Crush Saga on Facebook elicits strong feelings for a game about lining up candies. Many people use Facebook to further their progress in the game. Many people hate receiving notifications from the game. Business Insider even published a how-to guide for blocking the game’s notifications.

Despite the protests of some, these notifications are widely used. Two weeks ago, CNET reported that Candy Crush Saga has 132.45 million monthly Facebook-connected users.

In yesterday’s post, I mentioned that players can connect the game to Facebook to gain more lives or skip the quest stages that slow the process of advancing through the levels. The game automatically gives players one life every half hour (with a maximum of five), so those who run out of lives must stop playing until enough time elapses for them to get another life.

Players can bypass this function by receiving extra lives other players from other players through Facebook (or buying the lives). I see posts on my Facebook feed every day saying one of my friends “gave life” in Candy Crush Saga. How thoughtful.

A few years ago, I saw the same volume of notifications for FarmVille. In July, FarmVille developer Zynga reported its second-quarter financial results, which included a revenue of $213 million and net loss of $15.8 million. In its second quarter of 2012, Zynga reported $332 million. Zynga’s number of daily active users also decreased from 72 million in Q2 2012 to 39 million in Q2 2013.

Zynga pioneered the Facebook-oriented business model that allows players to advance their in-game progress with social interactions and encourages them to compete with Facebook status updates and leaderboards—virtually the same concepts King uses for Candy Crush Saga.

King should be concerned. Zynga’s games are losing 45 percent of their players with a similar business model, which might be a prediction of where Candy Crush Saga is eventually going.

King is preparing to for its hit game’s decline, though.

“All games have a lifespan,” said King’s “game guru” Tommy Palm. “We continue working on other products, and keep working on our recipe to innovate and come up with…concepts that will appeal to the same audience that loves Candy Crush Saga.”

While there is a high likelihood that the gameplay concepts that make Candy Crush Saga so popular can produce another big game (puzzle games are pretty timeless and adaptable to new platforms), the social aspect of Facebook integration might yield diminishing returns.

Reports are conflicting on Facebook’s success this year. In April, The Guardian reported that Facebook was losing users because its market is saturated in the US, the UK and other European countries. In July, on the other hand, Slate reported Facebook’s revenues, clicks and ad prices had increased during its second quarter.

Even if Facebook is not experiencing a lull in its users’ interest, it is still entirely possible for users to simply get bored with certain features of the site, including games.

I joined Facebook in August 2006. For the first couple years I used it, people loved making and joining groups. By now, most groups have been deleted or archived, though the group feature still exists. I remember a time when people liked sending each other virtual gifts and writing “notes.” Those features have since been removed from the site.

What’s keeping Facebook users from getting over games the way they got tired of those features?

The “Candy Crush Saga” Saga Part 1: Can a freemium app thrive without real-world branding?

In the 13 months I have had an iPhone, I have never bought an app. I have never made an in-app purchase, unless placing an eBay bid counts. I know I will do these things at some point, but I have an inclination against them. Even though most are only $1, I still tend to think there are ways I would rather spend the money.

I started thinking about my disinterest in buying apps because The Guardian technology blog reported last week that 70 percent of people on the last level of Candy Crush Saga have not paid for any of the game’s in-app features, such as extra lives and the ability to skip “quests” (special challenges players must complete to unlock levels at certain points in the game).

I can only figure this 70 percent of players are a) the sort of players who adamantly refuse to take any shortcuts because that’s not the way they were raised when it comes to video games (like me), or b) the sort who will gladly connect the game to Facebook (more on that in tomorrow’s post).

One of my Candy Crush Saga quests didn't go too well, but like most players, I wouldn't pay to move past it. Image uploaded from my iPhone.
One of my “Candy Crush Saga” quests didn’t go too well, but like most players, I wouldn’t pay to move past it. Image uploaded from my iPhone.

It appears, however, that the players willing to pay in Candy Crush Saga’s “freemium” model are bringing profits to its developer, King. According to the Guardian, King’s estimated daily revenues range from $623,000 to $823,000.

This revenue stream, in all likelihood, will not last forever. Except for classic games that are ported to new platforms again and again with every new generation (Tetris is the example of all examples), the window of time in which any given video game makes money is fairly small. Candy Crush Saga is probably not innovative enough to be one of those games, so it cannot continually rely on a handful of paying customers to keep up the cash flow.

How, then, does a freemium game manage to extend the life of its moneymaking capabilities?

In a recent article for Grantland, blogger/staff writer Carles pointed out the best way: expanding its brand to sales of physical products.

Carles’s example of successfully creating “real-life” brand value is Angry Birds. On top of having tremendous sales of the games, Angry Birds developer Rovio has licensed the game for clothes, toys and even soft drinks.

The value of merchandising cannot be overstated. I have five of the Angry Birds games for iPhone, all of which I downloaded when they were featured in “free app of the week” promotion. The fact that Rovio did not get $5 from me for the games is not as important as the fact that I bought my brother the first Angry Birds board game, Angry Birds: Knock on Wood, for Christmas.

While Rovio did not get all the money from that sale (as the game was released by Mattel), the sale contributed to the overall success of turning a $1 video game into a $15 board game. Mattel has released several more Angry Birds board games since the 2011 release of Angry Birds: Knock on Wood.

Yahoo! News reported that in May 2013, all the Angry Birds games dropped out of the top-100 highest-grossing iPhone apps chart in the US, marking the first time Rovio did not have a top-100-grossing iPhone app in the US since January 2010. Eventually, the same will happen to Candy Crush Saga, so King needs to develop the brand for its ultra-popular game to stay financially successful.

Nordic beverage company Olvi released "Angry Birds" soda in May. Image from Yahoo! News.
Nordic beverage company Olvi released “Angry Birds” soda in May. Image from Yahoo! News.

This kind of branding will likely be harder for Candy Crush Saga. Its odd-looking characters are not the sort of images I see selling shirts, and they are not part of the gameplay (the characters mostly appear in cutscenes), so toys might be a tough sell. And while the puzzle game subgenre of “match three things in a row” has shown to be popular in video games (as seen in Candy Crush Saga and Bejeweled), board games (a source of merchandising not only for Angry Birds but also for Temple Run and Words With Friends) would probably not be as enticing.

Despite the potential difficulties of marketing toys and clothes, however, the Candy Crush Saga name still has value. Until the next big development in the game happens, it seems the answer to “how does King get the 70 percent to spend some money on the app?” is to transfer their enjoyment of the game into other areas.

Maybe the official Candy Crush Saga candy is closer than we think.

Happening Today: Fan campaign for “Dredd” sequel hits its high point

Image from the "Make a Dredd Sequel" Facebook page.
Image from the “Make a Dredd Sequel” Facebook page.

The Internet is full of fan campaigns and petitions. Many begin and end on a petition website, but a few are well organized enough to attract thousands of fans and grow across multiple platforms. Make a Dredd Sequel decidedly in the latter category.

The fall 2012 film Dredd, based on the long-running British comic book series Judge Dredd from comics magazine 2000 AD, came and went from theaters fairly quickly, despite positive critical reception and a dedicated fanbase. The size of that fanbase increased with the movie’s release on DVD and Blu-Ray.

Dredd is a science fiction/action film about a dystopian society in which police officers called Judges are given full authority in law enforcement, as judge, jury and executioner. Its plot centers on high-ranking Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) and rookie cop Judge Anderson (Olivia Thirlby) as they try to rid an urban housing block of a crime boss (Lena Headey).

If movies were the focus of my blog, I could write at length about all the reasons Dredd warrants a sequel. Judge Dredd was previously adapted into a 1995 film of the same name starring Sylvester Stallone. It is nonessential viewing, to say the least.

In January, a group of Dredd fans started a petition to make a sequel to the film and created a Facebook page to promote it. The campaign gained endorsements from a number of publications, including Entertainment Weekly.

The key endorsement came in July during this year’s San Diego Comic-Con, when Rebellion (publisher of 2000 AD) officially sponsored the campaign and promoted it in 2000 AD magazines and online.

Image from the "Make a Dredd Sequel" campaign website.
Image from the “Make a Dredd Sequel” campaign website.

The culmination of the campaign is its “Day of Action” on September 18 (today). Rebellion and Make a Dredd Sequel released a statement thanking fans for the signing the petition and encouraging them to buy a copy of the DVD or Blu-Ray, watch the movie on Netflix or rent it on iTunes to bring attention to the campaign by keeping the film on the charts.

The Day of Action coincides with the release of a comic book sequel to the movie.

The campaign site is a fine example of how to promote an online campaign. It supports the statement by providing links to its Facebook page, Amazon (to buy the DVD, Blu-Ray or the official campaign t-shirt), iTunes and the 2000 AD website (to buy the comics).

A person who was unfamiliar with the campaign could find the page and know exactly what was going on with the situation (though they probably have to like the movie to want to get involved).

The site is a reflection of the sound strategy of the fans that created the campaign. Companies rarely get involved with online petitions, but Dredd fans appealed successfully appealed to 2000 AD by showing interest in its product.

Judge Dredd, as seen in the comics. Art by Brian Bolland.
Judge Dredd, as seen in the comics. Art by Brian Bolland.

“Obviously, a lot of people in New York [Comic-Con, which was held around the time of the film’s release] had heard about the movie, but they hadn’t seen it. Now, it’s people who have actually seen the movie and are coming to discover the comic,” Rebellion PR coordinator Michael Molcher told Comic Book Resources. “What’s great about the movie is that it’s exactly the same Judge Dredd you see in the comics, Karl absolutely nailed it. So people are realizing that if they want to see more of the Dredd movie, they can find it in the books.

Even if the campaign does not lead to a Dredd sequel, it still helps Rebellion because it could bolster interest in the comics. Mark Kardwell of Robot 6 said in the long run, the campaign is more likely to increase circulation of the comics than to make the movie sequel a reality.

Obviously, Rebellion benefits because it sells the comics. On top of sales, though, Rebellion has let its fans know it cares what they have to say. For a comics company (or any other company primarily supported by a particular fanbase), quality rapport with fans is quite valuable. If I lived in a country where 2000 AD magazines were sold, I’d remember its involvement in Make a Dredd Sequel when perusing the comic store.

If Make a Dredd Sequel doesn’t get a Dredd sequel made now, perhaps the increased interest in the comics will. It’s quite possible there will never be a Dredd sequel. Even then, the campaign should serve as a blueprint for future fan campaigns to get their beloved works of entertainment to continue.