Playing with social relationships. Their role among actors in the video game industry

So far, most interest has been given to customers, namely gamers as well as their communities (Burger-Helmchen & Cohendet, 2011; Kleer & Kunz, 2022; Parmentier & Mangematin, 2014; Poor, 2013; Tong, 2021). When it comes to gamers, there is emphasized their role in game ideation (Tschang, 2005), game development and improvement (e.g., when launching patches or even fixing bugs and glitches [de Prato et al., 2014]), game promotion (Zackariasson & Wilson, 2010), and fund-raising via crowdfunding actions (Cha, 2017; Wachs & Vedres, 2021). Moreover, gamer communities can function as online innovation communities capable of contributing not only to product development but also to co-creation and strategy processes, constituting an external dynamic capability (Orelj & Torfason, 2022).

The relevant communities of gamers include not only typical gamer or players (note that there is a difference in terms of engagement into gaming [Balland et al., 2013]) but also more engaged ones like moders (gamers able to change the gameplay or technical issues), hackers (Poor, 2013; Münch, 2013), game testers (Gidhagen et al., 2011), amateur developers (Cardoso et al., 2018), and fans of specific technologies/platforms/game genres (Klimas & Czakon, 2022). As shown in previous studies, gaming communities are based on strong SR and well-developed social norms covering a “strong sense of commitment” (Parmentier & Mangematin, 2014, p. 42). They are highly socially embedded in dense networks of SR and often engage in official or unofficial game development and improvements (Burger-Helmchen & Cohendet, 2011).

Additionally, although gaming communities are linked with game developers through loose, social, informal relationships, they are claimed to have a significant impact on a firm’s innovativeness in the long-term perspective (Orelj & Torfason, 2022; Parmentier & Gandia, 2013; Parmentier & Mangematin, 2014). SR among gamers are claimed to appear within gaming communities but are also maintained with game developers. These relationships, based on a level of emotional engagement, feeling a sense of community, identity, and support within communities (Kwon, 2022), can be divided into three categories: membership, partnership, friendship (Boyd et al., 2015). Regarding innovativeness, social communities of gamers share ideas and knowledge, and thus are acknowledged as engaging in innovation processes (Orelj & Torfason, 2022; Parmentier & Mangematin, 2014) at their different stages, including co-discovery, co-development, co-deployment, and/or co-delivery (Klimas & Czakon, 2022).

Regarding establishing and exploiting SR among game developers themselves (Klimas, 2018; Tschang, 2007; Zackariasson & Wilson, 2010), as indicated by de Prato and co-authors (2014), SR are built due to the disintermediation of the value chain, leading to the decline (and even elimination of) publishers and retailers, and later on even distributors. Game developers usually create a highly hermetic business environment based on a specific type of professionals who are simultaneously passionate about what they do (Klimas, 2017) and value highly the creative integrity of game developers (Golding et al., 2022; Styhre & Remneland-Wikhamn, 2019), reflecting a high level of mutual, intra-industry trust and thus a belief in knowledge sharing (including ideas of new products [Klimas & Czakon, 2022]).

When it comes to the intra-industry competition, it is worth adding that the recent studies point at the huge role (if not a success factor) of cooperation of competing game developers (Abanazir, 2022; Klimas & Czakon, 2018; Le Roy et al., 2022). It seems that video game developers can gain from such benefits in a coopetition context, as it is suggested that they share knowledge, ideas for new games, and even complementary technologies among themselves mainly on informal base (Klimas & Czakon, 2018). It seems that informal and interpersonal linkages of coopetitors in VGI (i.e., between game developers) may be important, as it has been proven in other industry contexts (Kallmuenzer et al., 2021).

Alongside the gamers at individual level of consideration, are employees shown as relevant in the context of exploitation of SR. Within the VGI, employees act as “communities of specialists” (Klimas & Czakon, 2018; Trammell, 2022) or “creative specialist” even (Ewing, 2022) comprised mainly of young professionals, usually working as freelancers or part-time, often equipped with a formalized body of knowledge. Thus, such workers create loose forms of “rather informal groups with no hierarchical structures” (Burger-Helmchen & Cohendet, 2011, p. 318). Moreover, it seems that not only their SR play a role, as social identity (in both professional communities and perceptions of potential employers), but it seems to be similarly important (Weststar, 2015). Creative employees of game developers do maintain extensive informal networks of interpersonal and interorganizational linkages with big industry players, including game developers, but also hardware producers, game publishers and distributors, venture, and seed capitalists (Cohendet et al., 2018). Indeed, creative workers employed in the game industry usually work on project contracts; therefore, boundaryless careers are quite typical, and social networks and interpersonal relationships within industry communities have been growing in strength (Weststar, 2015). Thus, from the developers’ perspective, SR can be maintained with internal communities of their own employees, but also with external communities outside the firm (Burger-Helmchen & Cohendet, 2011).

The VGI creates products that require the building of relationships as the development process is implemented through projects. Moreover, games are less and less able to be made independently without technological or artistic support from experts; thus, the projects are run by interdisciplinary teams:

We are not able to build anything on our own, so relationships between people are crucial, in fact for our industry. [D2 – interviewee code number]

(…) Creating games is, a very difficult industry, the most difficult of the, let’s say, entertainment or IT industries, it combines many different types of people and requires different skills. Therefore, if you go through such a project (…) the relationships are completely different than if you just do something different and only communicate with each other. [G12]

Key role of creativity in VGI VGI is one of the creative industries. In our study, it was emphasized that SR are the source of creativity underlying the dominant logic of game developers:

We are in the creative industry, so these relationships are very important. So that people trust each other, have common goals, and achieve them together. I believe that without these relations it is practically impossible. [R1] Because it is also such a specificity of the industry that we are creative, so we try as little as possible to be associated with any laws or hard rules. We only focus on looser cooperation, as if matching our character as well. [D2]

All of the actors in the industry are characterised by specific values, interests, and in particular passions, which are a way of life and at the same time connect people in the form of SR:

People treat this job as a passion, they treat it personally, so the relationships between people at work, in companies and between companies are also often very close. [D2]

It’s very much a part of our industry, at [firm name] we say that the company was built by enthusiasts, and most of the people who work here are passionate about computer games, whether it’s graphics or programming, but the common passion is game development and the games industry in general, and without that it would be difficult [to develop games]. [G7]

VGI when compared to other high-tech industries is small; hence, people in it know each other, which may lead to SR:

Because the industry is incredibly close-knit, we all really know each other. Every company knows practically every other (…). Many of us from different companies are simply friends. [D2]

VGI is characterised by a lack of distance, with the atmosphere in the industry (including inside individual companies) most often loose, and with contacts informal – often using first names at work is based on merit, and it is not formal authority that decides, all of which favors contact based on SR:

[Relations] are always much less distanced, it probably comes from using first names in the first e-mail. This is standard for us. [G8]

Formal things, one’s position in a community can affect informal relations. But it is informal relations that I feel are the content of what I myself understand by relations here. [G1]

Because the product developed in VGI are digital, they are developed in a cyberspace, and a large part of the relations of the project teams takes place in the virtual world, for example, with the use of Skype, Slack, Zoom, Google Meets, Tips, Discord, or Messenger and phone. In virtual communication channels, it is easier to blur the line between project-related and everyday matters. Thus, in the online network that numerous SR are built and developed:

We often have it [non-virtual face-to-face contact] limited to zero, because in the industry we are in, the product is electronic and, frankly speaking, there is no need to see each other in person. [D1]

Research has shown that SR with gamers are crucial. They serve to build a community of gamers around a company and its games, and the existence of such a community was perceived by gamers as a value in itself. The interviewees pointed out also that their relationships with the gamers enabled them to build the credibility of a product/game and the company, for example, through ongoing contact with gamers, especially before a game’s release, in order to assure them that the game will be released on the market. The process of its development is long and risky, and before the game is released, companies keep in touch with gamers to inform them about the progress of the game and assure them the game will be released on the market and when (more details in Table B).

Next, social contacts with gamers are also relevant in the field of game development. Gamers test the games at different stages of development but also can make game corrections and improvements if the code is open (i.e., domain of game modders [Klimas & Czakon, 2022]), thus reducing the risk associated with the release of a game that would not find a sufficient number of fans. This is confirmed by the words of one of the interlocutors talking about how, thanks to the support of gamers who pointed out cultural differences, the problem of game acceptance by the audience was eliminated:

I heard about an example where the game had no chance on the market of Arab countries because one of the characters was a pig, who is super cool and nice, generally fine, we have no negative connotations, but because in that region a pig has a bad association, not as nice just as dirty, you shouldn’t have contact with it at all. So in games it also had no chance at all; it was immediately rejected for social, cultural, and religious reasons. After changing the character, (…) who is the hero of the game, it turned out that the game is great (…). So sympathy in one cultural zone has nothing to do with the other. And such information about the fact that certain things shouldn’t be used, [which] often arise during such interactions, that is, if someone says listen, this is something that shouldn’t be used because… [G4]

The very important role of SR with gamers can be identified also after the game launch. First, they can be intensively exploited in promoting and selling games. These relationships make it possible to reach a wider audience, mainly thanks to the use of the player’s network of contacts:

And of course within these business contacts, well, the individual relationships I mentioned, they help a lot. They help in that a game that is even brilliant and is not promoted is not known, is not described, nobody has seen it, and it has no chance [for success]. [G4]

Second, SR with gamers can be a good source of honest feedback, especially if the game does not satisfy gamers. This problem was signaled by many interlocutors, for example, one of them said:

A very strong example is a company like [name], which recently has been very focused on something called loot boxes, and principally focuses on making their games earn money, not on making it enjoyable for gamers. Many gamers have started to get very angry with them, and very strong attacks on this company have begun. [G12]

Last but not least, SR maintained with gamers can be used to internally strengthen particular game developer. As mentioned, one of our interviewees can be seen as solid external motivation to keep the promises and thus reach the company’s goals.

It’s very important for us to maintain these [gaming] committees as well. We have also a large fan base as well as… the production process takes quite a long time, approximately four years in our case (…) but there are people who really are waiting for it, who react vividly to what we show, who give us such particularly positive feedback, who give us the fuel to go on, and also like the fact that ultimately we’re doing it for them and not just for ourselves, right? [G7]

Moreover, they can also serve to build the image of a company and a product. Some interviewees emphasized that thanks to ongoing contacts with gamers, taking into account their comments, corrections, or suggestions, they create the image of a company that is open to its community and for which gamers’ opinions are very important.

Finally, the interviewees also emphasized that the purpose of their SR with gamers is to stimulate the company’s innovativeness. Often it is the gamers, thanks to their high expectations and creativity, who are the source of the innovation. Moreover, informal meetings with gamers in pubs often allow us to find – among gamers – new employees.

FGI research also allowed us to identify three groups of benefits of SR maintained with competitors, that is, with other game developers. Interestingly, this group of actors has not been identified in our IDIs.

First, the interviewees declared that maintaining SR with competitors is often useful in various, unexpected situations, also for the potential activities in the future; therefore, such relationships are treated as an organization’s resource:

(…) we are trying to maintain relatively good relations. When I can, I praise the competition for being good, if I know who is doing something, because it’s not always known. And it seems to me that this is the method that should be followed, but it will turn out in a few years. [FR5]

Some, as another demonstration of the positive results of SR for business operations, claimed that SR favor knowledge sharing with business rivals. The interlocutors emphasized that the community of players is so large that game developers often do not even perceive themselves as competition, despite the fact they are competitors regarding their activities:

So I think everyone has an interest to share this knowledge, and we compete for billions of players, so I won’t take these two players away from anyone. [FR1]

At the same time, it was emphasized that the smaller the company, the easier it is to share knowledge with the competition, because the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) applies to large companies:

Giant companies most often have such security policies that, in general, even when returning home, he says, “No, no, I was at the construction site for eight hours.” Can’t say anything. Any NDAs look like this, I shouldn’t even say I signed the NDA. And certainly not with whom. [FR5]

The third group of benefits of SR with competitors in the form of mitigating tensions in relations with them was also indicated:

I would risk that these relationships are the most important, actually. It is these interpersonal relationships. Because, as my colleagues mentioned here, there is competition, but then we all see each other at industry events, at various fairs (…) they [social relationships] also influence how this competition actually looks like. [FR2]

The interviewees also strongly emphasized the significance of maintaining SR with employees, interestingly, not only with current employees but also with the former ones. In general SR with both types of employees are used to create a good image of the company but also determine relationships with potential, future employees.

First, developers pointed out that thanks to SR with current employees, it is possible to conduct their business at all, as game development requires informal links with creative workers. They stressed that the gaming industry is specific – if only because of the product that requires constant interaction with others, as well as the creativity and involvement of different employees. Second, the role of SR in building a team and ensuring employment was emphasized thanks to a good working atmosphere that motivates current employees in their work, or thanks to the image of an employee-friendly company, which is intended to motivate future employees (of particular importance taking into account hypercompetition for employees in the industry). This is what one of the interviewees said about it:

The goal of the activity may be the development of the entire team. Also, not only are we aiming to launch this game, but we’re also aiming to release the next game. So at this stage, not only do we want to get to our release goal as soon as possible, but also to do it in such a way that the team remains connected with each other, to keep the relationships that are there, because it is a more long-term investment than just the next project. [G7]

A similar opinion was expressed by another interlocutor:

In an employee’s market, money doesn’t play such a role, because it is good everywhere if you know a lot. So more relational, soft arguments start to play a big role. [G1]

Third, another key role identified regarding to SR with employees – interestingly with both current and former ones – was in the process of recruiting new employees. It was emphasized that this recruitment is easier, cheaper, faster, and more effective when it is not necessary to search for employees through official channels, but through one’s own employees and their social contacts:

We like know each other through a network of friends. There was a situation in which, while looking for a graphic designer for the office, we wondered for some time what the best share price would be for us. Due to the fact that we are a small company, we had some limited resources, but also as we were looking for a place on the market, we decided to play it smarter (…). So … we had a few friends who were graduates of the Łódź Film School, and we just decided to ask them, like they were there in groups of Film School students, to post this announcement for us and like we had all the people with whom so far we had collaborated graphically. It came from these sources, and we were satisfied with all of them, and it was like a relationship where we, like in our private lives, knew certain people who turned out to be graduates of the film school, which a few years later allowed us to germinate a kind of set of talents, which is usually harder for people in our industry to access. [G11]

It was emphasized that a person recommended in this way wants to prove themselves, not only for their own reputation, but also for the reputation of the person who recommended them. This means that often people employed in this way turn out to be good, loyal employees. This form of looking for employees is important, especially when a person with specific predispositions (e.g., with experience, appropriate skills) is needed for the work at hand. It was also pointed out that SR with employees also result in employment of people with values similar to those represented by the company.

One of the interviewees also said that by hiring employees from France, it is easier for him to hire other people representing this community, not only through contacts of current employees, but also because for potential employees, cooperation with people representing a specific community/cultural circle may constitute information that the company is open to this community and knows its needs.

Fourth, an increase in work efficiency can be achieved thanks to SR with current employees. This results mainly from trust in the employees, and therefore, there being no need to check or correct their actions, and the possibility of talking to employees in a free and direct way to communicate goals, explain expectations, and to call an employee’s attention to when they have done something wrong. It was emphasized that these benefits are especially visible in long-term relations.

Fifth, the interviewees also emphasized that communication and teamwork was easier thanks to SR with employees. It was said that it was easier to reprimand such an employee, and even, as one interviewee put it, easier to conduct a conversation about the dismissal of an employee, due to their understanding (although it was emphasized that at the same time, a close relationship with an employee also makes such a conversation difficult).

Sixth, thanks to SR with employees, there is greater transparency, it is easier for employees to monitor what is happening in the company, and employees feel jointly responsible for the company.

Seventh, according to our interviewees, SR with employees make it possible to increase the company’s innovativeness:

It seems to me that social relationships help to develop these organizational innovations. If people are close to each other, trust each other, then they talk to each other, challenge each other, and criticize what is happening in the organization, thanks to which they are able to generate organizational innovation. And propose other, better or worse, solutions. But that’s the only way to make these changes. [R1]

And finally, thanks to SR, employees are encouraged not only to be more creative or innovative but also to perform tedious, time-consuming tasks, which, apart from innovative activities, also have to be carried out in the gaming industry (e.g., programming work).

In the next type of key actor in terms of exploited SR by video game developers, there are business partners, that is, contractors, and various types of cooperating companies, as well as partners, investors, and other external shareholders, so far mostly beyond empirical analysis.

In the context of relationships with external shareholders, one of the interviewees emphasized that it was thanks to SR that some shareholders decided to continue their financial involvement in the company when the sales results of its products were falling:

We do it by talking, openness, honesty, and, for example, if they were looking purely at the results, well, our main shareholders, who lost millions because they invested 20 million at such a price, and now there is a price that out of 20 million, they have about two left over, they should be very angry. And they are definitely not happy. It’s hard to be happy about it, but we still respect each other and talk in a cultural way. This has an impact on us again, because I know that when I have a meeting with them (…), I don’t have to stress about it. It’s not something that my heart beats faster and I feel sick, as I know that the next day, OK it’s hard to talk, but I can tell them honestly what’s going on. They know we’re trying, and that’s also important. [G1]

SR with contractors also make it possible to increase sales volumes:

It seems to me that these informal relationships increase sales volumes and the willingness of the other party to cooperate, so here it pushes the business in the right direction. [R3]

The third aspect that was raised in the context of the importance of game developers’ SR with contractors was also more advantageous offers received from friendly contractors or the possibility to choose products from a wider range.

Additionally, the interviewees indicated numerous forms of providing services either free of charge, in the form of a barter, or also deferred (a favor for a favor at an unspecified date).

SR with business partners in the gaming industry in the field of knowledge transfer play an important role. In this context, it was emphasized above all that this transfer – thanks to interpersonal relationships – is first of all possible, while second, it is often faster and more effective. It was also pointed out that it is often the transfer of tacit knowledge (including private contacts) access to which without SR would be impossible, because it is prohibited by law. One of the interviewees talked about it in a very interesting way:

In the gaming industry, which is particularly independent, there is a concept called a “friend NDA – Non-Disclosure Agreement”. This is a confidentiality agreement that is signed between two entities (…). However, it seems to me that as long as someone doesn’t violate this trust strongly, for example, by spewing out information that shouldn’t be disclosed, for example to journalists, there is a certain high degree of trust. And especially in such situations like, let’s call them casual, social events at conferences, it is not uncommon that, let’s say, by talking to someone we are able to get… I mean learn some things about other companies, or for example some plans, or wide-ranging changes in the industry. Because, people are quite open to sharing knowledge that may be useful to someone. Even if it falls within the scope of things that shouldn’t be talked about, sometimes someone will mention that, for example, this topic is like this, but I can’t tell you why. [G11]

Such knowledge transfer as emphasized above reduces the risk of making the wrong decisions and actions. One of the interviewees also emphasized that thanks to SR, he often gains a new/fresh perspective on certain issues or problems. It was also indicated that thanks to SR it was possible to mentor, lead, or introduce a given company to a specific area of activity in the industry.

Another area that was emphasized was that SR with contractors or other cooperating entities often make it possible to obtain help in crisis, unusual or problem situations:

Or when it is necessary to act outside the box. And having on the other side a person who knows that I know what it is about, who trusts me, who knows that we have a common goal, and we’ve proven it over the years, it’s definitely easier. [FR5]

Meanwhile, contact with contractors is facilitated by SR, which, thanks to these relations, is faster and more direct, and one can, for example, relatively freely present one’s own expectations to the other party:

Researcher: Is it good that you don’t keep your distance from each other in your industry?

Interviewee: I don’t know if it is an advantage or a disadvantage, it is a standard. It is faster, it is more convenient, and thankfully mainly in professional matters we don’t need to look for a reason why we had to say it gently. Sometimes it’s better to say something bluntly that something is not working or that it is very, very bad. It is easier. Thanks to this we know that something is wrong, and we can react faster rather than look for some gentle way of saying it. [G8]

Another issue interviewees mentioned concerning the importance of SR with business partners was the possibility of staying on the market, resulting from, for example, getting new contacts and contracts:

Tightening interpersonal relationships helps to keep business at a similar level during a stagnation period. It doesn’t mean reducing the share of sales, but maintaining a constant level. [R3]

One of the most important roles of SR in contacts with contractors and other cooperating entities also relates to enabling cooperation, facilitating its course, stimulating its development, and as FGI has shown stimulating future cooperation. It was emphasized in particular that SR are conducive to establishing oral cooperation without a formal contract, and that SR increase the chance of choosing a friendly actor as a business partner, and even facilitate the termination of cooperation:

Interviewee: I think it is important. This is where it begins, some kind of contact. As I said before, these business aspects are the most important for us. But it is often the case that if we have two similar partners to choose from, where these business aspects are the same, we will choose the one where we have better social relationships. This makes it much easier in the future (…).

Researcher: Are these social relationships significant for ending or dissolving interorganizational cooperation?

Interviewee: They certainly make it easier to do it, that is end cooperation in a healthy way. On good, remaining on good terms. [R1]

Thanks to trust in a given person, SR enable access to a wider group of proven actors, encourage many of them to cooperate (e.g., when it is to be cooperation in the form of networks/larger groups), offer greater flexibility of action (thanks to the fact that there is no need to have written contracts every time or – if necessary because of the legal regulations – they can be written down during the service provision), and opens the “next doors” to cooperation, reducing operating costs, etc.

The last element to the manifestations of the positive impact of game developers’ SR with business partners on the activities of developers was the creation of a network of contacts that can be very useful for business activities, if not immediately then in the future:

You know, here just like with these interpersonal relationships, it seems to me that this networking is also very important. And even if we meet somewhere on our project and it seems to me that we don’t need this direct cooperation at a given moment, it quickly turns out that all these relations in this industry are very useful. [FR2]

FGIs allowed also to claim that private contacts with universities’ employees allow to search employees. FGI research has also shown that SR with business partners can reduce inappropriate behaviour, which is due to the fact that the industry is small and it is easy to lose a good reputation. It was also emphasized that SR are useful when it is necessary to act outside the box.