The Weakest Leak
As a busy business and communication student I like to play games in my spare time to chill out. I also like to keep up to date with the latest news and updates on the gaming industry, so I don’t miss a beat. But lately I’ve noticed that a lot of this ‘latest information’ isn’t actually coming from the developers or publishers of the games.
More frequently, information that would be traditionally promoted through game developers is being communicated through online communities, through the discussion of rumours, leaks, or data mining.
So, being the attentive student that I am, I applied a couple theories to test my hypothesis that these leaks and data mines are intentional forms of communication.
The first is a communications theory: spreadability. If you couldn’t guess it, spreadability refers to the distribution and virality of content across social media platforms, where audiences share content for their own purposes. With or without the permission from the rights holder.
The second is a marketing model: AIDA. This is one of my favourite marketing theories because it is so simple. It’s just an acronym that stands for Attention, Interest, Desire, and Action. This is basically how marketing gets consumers to purchase something: get the consumers attention, get them interested, make them want it, and get them to give you their money. Easy as pie, right?
I want to use the example of Spyro: Reignited Trilogy and @AskTarget to put these theories together in the context of promotional communication in the gaming industry.
What happened, was that consumers were able to contact Target and receive information about Spyro when the game hadn’t been officially announced yet (there were only rumours so far). This caused quite the stir in the community.
There was a lot of activity across social media, especially on twitter, with users sharing screenshots of themselves contacting @AskTarget about Spyro. So, it ticks the box for spreadability
This activity on social media, with or without the rights holder’s permission, gathered a lot of attention and interest about the upcoming game. If you remember, that was the first couple steps in the AIDA model.
So, my question is: was this information actually leaked (i.e. the information was released without permission) or was it all just a marketing ploy? More like when Kris Jenner ‘leaked’ Kim’s sex tape on purpose to get attention, which is an example of spreadable content being released under the guise of a leak.
But wait, let’s complicate it a bit more by considering data miners in this equation.
Battlefield V has a big, dedicated fanbase. It seems that these fans are always desperate for more information on the latest updates. I say this because recently a lot of details have been revealed on a reddit post from user temporyal that they have mined from the game data.
Since this reddit post there’s been an abundance of articles and YouTube videos discussing the new information on the awaited game mode. This is an example of spreadability; fans are sharing the information, with or without permission, for their own purposes.
It’s pretty normal for popular games to get data mined by users. Which I conclude means it’s reasonable for game developers to expect their games to be mined. So, are developers aware of the details that could be revealed in a data mine?
It’s not uncommon after all to find Easter eggs in game, developers are often leaving things for the players to find. There’s always a lot in Battlefield and I personally love this one in Apex Legends.
It would seem at first that developers are losing the element of surprise. But, a lot more interest has been generated in these games due to the community communicating over social media. Which is why it is my conclusion that the gaming industry is taking advantage of ‘leaks’ and data miners as a marketing tool to communicate indirectly with their audience.
