Brenda Laurel's Utopian Entrepreneur

I came to know of Brenda Laurel's work, Utopian Entrepreneur, through a reader who replied to Micheal Abbot's posting: OMG, girls in trouble! in his blog (The Brainer Gamer). I did a commentary on that post here.

We are all too familiar with the fact that decisions in the real world are often tied to the bottom-line - dollars and cents, and in the business world, there is no exception to this rule. We find there is a lot of money to be made at the cost of sacrificing what is morally good and the risk of inviting social ill to the society. Discussion generated from Abbot's posting also provides a sense that investors are not willing to put their money to developers who do not subscribe to the idea that games will only make money if they're made for young teenage boys.

In her book, Laurel provides a step-by-step guide how to be that Utopian Entrepreneur from insights drawn from her experience leading a company and its pet project Purple Moon. The company was enormously successful right before the first .com bubble burst. The company, in her own words, consisted of:

" Earnest researchers, nerdy rich guys, lesbian separatist designers, businesswomen with barracuda smiles, strident feminist reporters, Barbie, Rockett, and several million little girls. "

Purple Moon is a game that attempted to create a nuanced virtual world structured around the life of girls during primary education and Rockett (a character in Purple Moon) was very popular with young girls. Laurel explains:

" Purple Moon might have chosen, as fashion and cosmetic companies often do, to take advantage of girls' insecurities in our product designs and marketing approach, and that approach might have turned out to be more lucrative. A product that preys on personal weakness or perpetuates negative values may succeed, just as a product that expresses socially positive values may fail. Purple Moon might just as well have failed following the Barbie model, but ignobly and without honor. "

A reader whom I learn about Laurel's work describes it well what happen to Purple Moon and adds his reflection about developing socially responsible games when he says:

In the end, the company was remarkably successful. Too successful for it's own good: investors pushed Laurel to move into merchandising, because they didn't understand that some brands should best be left to a virtual existence and wouldn't work in a synergistic model that more mainstream and less ethically ambitious products thrive in. She lost her funding, the site had to close down, and Laurel still receives letters from the now-young-women who remember it as one of their formative gaming experiences.

People have used example of Purple Rain's financial meltdown to support the notion that the market won't support games for girls that push the envelope and refuse to feed the hegemonical structuring of young females as people who "like to play dress-up games and shop." This is market manipulation and missed opportunity at it's worst.

Most of the people funding games will only support marketers who subscribe to the idea that games will only make money if they're made for "14-year old boys" (from an interview by my professor Celia Pearce). Games don't have to serve every audience, but they should be transparent about this fact. We can't sit around and wait for other people to decide that it's a good financial move to embrace the pre-teen female market. It's the Utopian entrepreneur's duty to step forward and make socially responsible games for under explored markets.