Showing posts with label social games. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social games. Show all posts
2018/08/14
2014/04/22
F2p is not a genre
I discuss a lot about the design & business side of f2p. Often enough in these discussions people mix and match games and argue with them only because they are f2p - right?
If both are f2p they should be comparable yes?
Well - no. Let me give an example. I use Assassins Creed Black Flag to show open world game play while you come up with the retail version of Angry Birds to counter my argument. Both are retail games right? You would find that silly wouldn't you. Both are targeting different audiences and are different genres.
So why oh why do you argue with f2p games only because both are f2p? Because both are free and such comparable?
The business model f2p is NOT the games genre. So stop mixing up games in the discussion.
So please stop using Clash of Clans in a f2p MMO RPG discussion. Why do you refer Farmville 2 in a discussion about World of Tanks. Why do you use Candy Crush Saga as a reference when we talk about f2p FPS.
Only because all are f2p? Think again.
Stuff one game does in f2p does not mean it works for your game. Stop copy/pasting things.
Stop saying "But I see game xyz is doing ... so we need to do ...". You don't know if what they do is successful - you don't have their data.
You assume ... and how one of my bosses always says "Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups"
Watch this making of "Triple Town" for some really excellent advice.
If both are f2p they should be comparable yes?
Well - no. Let me give an example. I use Assassins Creed Black Flag to show open world game play while you come up with the retail version of Angry Birds to counter my argument. Both are retail games right? You would find that silly wouldn't you. Both are targeting different audiences and are different genres.
So why oh why do you argue with f2p games only because both are f2p? Because both are free and such comparable?
The business model f2p is NOT the games genre. So stop mixing up games in the discussion.
So please stop using Clash of Clans in a f2p MMO RPG discussion. Why do you refer Farmville 2 in a discussion about World of Tanks. Why do you use Candy Crush Saga as a reference when we talk about f2p FPS.
Only because all are f2p? Think again.
Stuff one game does in f2p does not mean it works for your game. Stop copy/pasting things.
Stop saying "But I see game xyz is doing ... so we need to do ...". You don't know if what they do is successful - you don't have their data.
You assume ... and how one of my bosses always says "Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups"
Watch this making of "Triple Town" for some really excellent advice.
2013/09/01
The f2p audience and you
If you design a f2p game the formula MAU*Conversion *ARPPU will define your designers live. Whats important is that MAU is also a function of your setting & genre.
In other words if you pick a niche setting your reach will suffer, so will your revenue. If your setting is niche then marketing will have a harder time finding users - which raises acquisition costs which lessens your revenue.
So it is important to know how large your audience can be depending on those two factors. Hardly any marketing research has been done, most picks for those are gut feelings of the developers. Is science fiction niche compared to general topics? Or Fantasy?
If you look back into history you will notice that Fantasy on a world wide level was niche until Lord of the Rings hit the Hollywood blockbuster list. Yes, it was apart from one territory, the USA.
Oh no, you will claim, I read Fantasy all my life! It can't be! Well it was as you aren't the large reach audience, you are the niche. If you are large enough then f2p will work easier for you.
That is the difference between Clash of Clans and its "predecessors" Edgeworld (SciFi). Or why Candy Crush has such a large audience. Or why Call of Duty works better than SciFi shooters.
That is also why IP's seems to make it easier as there is already a defined audience. Note I say "seem" as that IP can also be a bane to your growth if said IP isn't popular enough.
So in order to lessen the risk, increasing revenue and lowering costs of user acquisition you should make sure your setting is cool - worldwide.
And I haven't even touched genre yet ...
In other words if you pick a niche setting your reach will suffer, so will your revenue. If your setting is niche then marketing will have a harder time finding users - which raises acquisition costs which lessens your revenue.
So it is important to know how large your audience can be depending on those two factors. Hardly any marketing research has been done, most picks for those are gut feelings of the developers. Is science fiction niche compared to general topics? Or Fantasy?
If you look back into history you will notice that Fantasy on a world wide level was niche until Lord of the Rings hit the Hollywood blockbuster list. Yes, it was apart from one territory, the USA.
Oh no, you will claim, I read Fantasy all my life! It can't be! Well it was as you aren't the large reach audience, you are the niche. If you are large enough then f2p will work easier for you.
That is the difference between Clash of Clans and its "predecessors" Edgeworld (SciFi). Or why Candy Crush has such a large audience. Or why Call of Duty works better than SciFi shooters.
That is also why IP's seems to make it easier as there is already a defined audience. Note I say "seem" as that IP can also be a bane to your growth if said IP isn't popular enough.
So in order to lessen the risk, increasing revenue and lowering costs of user acquisition you should make sure your setting is cool - worldwide.
And I haven't even touched genre yet ...
2013/06/10
Target audience(s) in online games
In the old economy we tended to focus a lot on the target audience. We specifically did things in the game design & marketing to target the player we had in mind. After years of retail experience this is done pretty accurate by the publishers.
However in online games this is different, very different.
First difference: retail games are usually fire and forget products. After they are on the shelf they get their DLC or add on and then its off to new products. Sequels reset the cycle.
So the target audience in retail games are a static entity. They don't change as the time is simply too short. They might change for the sequel due to new data, but that's it.
In online games the audience shifts a lot. We talk about games which lasts for a decade or longer. The audience of such an online game is not static. Players come and leave on a daily basis. You might have a constant number of active users but this still doesn't mean the users are identical to last months users.
This means that your target audience is a moving target. They change over time. As within a decade a lot of things happen:
- a console cycle or two passes by
- your computer is 5x as powerful
- things gets invented like the internet or smartphones
- social networks gets created and have a billion users.
So no wonder that online games need a different approach to user targeting.
Why am I writing this? As I always have to fight the notion of the "old economy" that they speak about "THE" target audience. Also what happens if we have all users targeted, is there something like saturation within an online games user acquisition? No.
Well get this: if your online games live 10 years then all former 10 year olds are 20 and represent a wonderful new audience. You have an endless supply of new users simply because we always produce new ones and even more year by year!
However in online games this is different, very different.
First difference: retail games are usually fire and forget products. After they are on the shelf they get their DLC or add on and then its off to new products. Sequels reset the cycle.
So the target audience in retail games are a static entity. They don't change as the time is simply too short. They might change for the sequel due to new data, but that's it.
In online games the audience shifts a lot. We talk about games which lasts for a decade or longer. The audience of such an online game is not static. Players come and leave on a daily basis. You might have a constant number of active users but this still doesn't mean the users are identical to last months users.
This means that your target audience is a moving target. They change over time. As within a decade a lot of things happen:
- a console cycle or two passes by
- your computer is 5x as powerful
- things gets invented like the internet or smartphones
- social networks gets created and have a billion users.
So no wonder that online games need a different approach to user targeting.
Why am I writing this? As I always have to fight the notion of the "old economy" that they speak about "THE" target audience. Also what happens if we have all users targeted, is there something like saturation within an online games user acquisition? No.
Well get this: if your online games live 10 years then all former 10 year olds are 20 and represent a wonderful new audience. You have an endless supply of new users simply because we always produce new ones and even more year by year!
Image source: Wikipedia.org
2013/05/17
A/B testing for lazies
Every time there is a question hanging in the air people call for A/B tests to find out the right solution. Isn't that a bit lazy? You don't have the time to test out everything with A/B tests, considering they aren't as easy to do as you think.
My answer is always do what best practice is from successful online games. So you simply take a bunch of them and look how they do it. Most of the long running ones have tested the hell out of their systems, so why don't you take their lesson and simply steal their key findings? They have it right there for you, online, in their game.
So there was a question recently if its better to sort your premium currency packages low to high or high to low. The answer is now really obvious if you follow my advice. You don't need to run an A/B test to find out.
You can learn so much by looking at good f2p games and what they do. Some of them even have fan made statistic sites which you can use how successful they are in various countries, popular items or vehicles. Simply look for them.
So open your eyes. All knowledge is right there in front of you, a simple search away.
My answer is always do what best practice is from successful online games. So you simply take a bunch of them and look how they do it. Most of the long running ones have tested the hell out of their systems, so why don't you take their lesson and simply steal their key findings? They have it right there for you, online, in their game.
So there was a question recently if its better to sort your premium currency packages low to high or high to low. The answer is now really obvious if you follow my advice. You don't need to run an A/B test to find out.
You can learn so much by looking at good f2p games and what they do. Some of them even have fan made statistic sites which you can use how successful they are in various countries, popular items or vehicles. Simply look for them.
So open your eyes. All knowledge is right there in front of you, a simple search away.
2013/05/08
Additional signs of change
EA posted its financial earnings and it disappoints. Without their cash of 1.6b in the bank they would be gone by now. "Don't expect growth on the giants EA and Activision" they say. Ok, so why do others grow like hell. And some new mobile companies have a market cap of 9 billion. Wtf.
Those are all signs of disruption. Its happening and quick. The old games market will change dramatically in the next 2-3 years, so don't moan if your favorite FPS is no longer the #1 topic on the web sites.
Then EA announced they bought the Star Wars license. Oh my. Thanks no, I see what you did to Harry Potter. And fail, major fail: the license excludes online, social and mobile platforms. That deal is like an ancient relic. Fire the guy who did it.
But then its all about small 90 men companies doing more money than the old economy.
So when are you joining?
Those are all signs of disruption. Its happening and quick. The old games market will change dramatically in the next 2-3 years, so don't moan if your favorite FPS is no longer the #1 topic on the web sites.
Then EA announced they bought the Star Wars license. Oh my. Thanks no, I see what you did to Harry Potter. And fail, major fail: the license excludes online, social and mobile platforms. That deal is like an ancient relic. Fire the guy who did it.
But then its all about small 90 men companies doing more money than the old economy.
So when are you joining?
2013/04/23
This is important
Times change fast, faster than ever before. I couldn't have made a better presentation than these guys: READ all slides to the end. World changing.
2012/12/21
2012/12/16
About Numbers, missreads, marketing
In the times of online games you will encounter various numbers from press releases, shareholder or financial reports or interviews. The problem with these numbers is that teams can be easily irritated by them as per se it is very hard to compare them.
Lets use the most famous example: Users. How many users does an online game has? Lets check one of those misleading news:
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-11-22-warface-has-5m-russian-users
Only by reading the small print you will notice they mean registrations, not users. This number is useless as it means either their marketing did a good job or the game is out for a long time and collected millions of registrations. This number does not tell us how many users are actually playing, i.e. how good the game really is.
Takeaway: be careful with "Users". Most press releases mean registrations, rarely you get active users.
Active users is a problem in itself as the definition isn't standardized either. And usually it doesn't show whether you mean daily or monthly. Monthly of course is higher as it simply states how many users have been playing in the past 30 days and therefore is being used by marketing quite often.
ARPPU usually means average revenue of paying users. You take your revenue of a specified time and divide it by the paying users during that time frame. See, I mention time frame. Again, any ARPPU is misleading as it doesn't give you the time frame measured. As ARPPU tends to go up with the lifetime of users or the game you must have a reference time. Usually you should ask for monthly ARPPU.
As by definition ARPPU should give you the number of spending's on average of your paying users per months.
Usually when you see ARPPU numbers they try to take the highest number they have, which might be life time value. Useless.
CCU or PCU is misleading too. CCU means concurrent users or how many users are online at any given time. As you can see "time" is a variable which the word CCU doesn't define. So what does it mean, average CCU or peak concurrent users? Oh wait, that's PCU. And what kind of skill is it when CCU is very high? That your software architecture can hold it and your hardware is scalable?
And if World of Tanks claim a PCU record of 400.000 "on one server" is this really the case considering the maximum number of players in one game can be only16 30?
Of course the 400.000 users were logged in and can exchange data in the lobby, but "online" as PCU is a number which doesn't tell you anything, does it?
The one thing 400,000 PCU tells you is the scale of operations and the number of active users. Usually 25% of your active users are online during peak times, so you can judge from 400.000 PCU that they have 2.5 million active users minimum in Russia (note the 400.000 was Russia only).
It also means that Russia is their key territory as other areas does not seem to have these high PCU's.
Want a good, real CCU? Check this out:
It shows the average CCU load on Eve Online since 2006. And in that game all are online in one world (but not on one hardware of course). I just logged in to find52.000 53000 pilots online = PCU (16th of December 2012 as Sunday evenings usually are busiest).
Conversion rate: usually a percentage of your active users who pay. On Facebook 1-3% is considered normal, on all other f2p games 5-15% is considered the norm. But % of what? Active users? If you read all the way down here you already know that there is enough room for manipulation on that number alone.
The easiest way to manipulate that number is to take lifetime payers vs. current actives, which raises the conversion rate. Or you only take your active users but delete the "tourists", i.e. the users who register, login and leave as they don't like what they are seeing. Just this makes the conversion look really good in most games.
This small excursion into the world of metrics just should give you a key learning: do not believe the hype, think about what you read. Compare. Ask.
Merry Christmas if we don't post beforehand!
Lets use the most famous example: Users. How many users does an online game has? Lets check one of those misleading news:
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-11-22-warface-has-5m-russian-users
Only by reading the small print you will notice they mean registrations, not users. This number is useless as it means either their marketing did a good job or the game is out for a long time and collected millions of registrations. This number does not tell us how many users are actually playing, i.e. how good the game really is.
Takeaway: be careful with "Users". Most press releases mean registrations, rarely you get active users.
Active users is a problem in itself as the definition isn't standardized either. And usually it doesn't show whether you mean daily or monthly. Monthly of course is higher as it simply states how many users have been playing in the past 30 days and therefore is being used by marketing quite often.
ARPPU usually means average revenue of paying users. You take your revenue of a specified time and divide it by the paying users during that time frame. See, I mention time frame. Again, any ARPPU is misleading as it doesn't give you the time frame measured. As ARPPU tends to go up with the lifetime of users or the game you must have a reference time. Usually you should ask for monthly ARPPU.
As by definition ARPPU should give you the number of spending's on average of your paying users per months.
Usually when you see ARPPU numbers they try to take the highest number they have, which might be life time value. Useless.
CCU or PCU is misleading too. CCU means concurrent users or how many users are online at any given time. As you can see "time" is a variable which the word CCU doesn't define. So what does it mean, average CCU or peak concurrent users? Oh wait, that's PCU. And what kind of skill is it when CCU is very high? That your software architecture can hold it and your hardware is scalable?
And if World of Tanks claim a PCU record of 400.000 "on one server" is this really the case considering the maximum number of players in one game can be only
Of course the 400.000 users were logged in and can exchange data in the lobby, but "online" as PCU is a number which doesn't tell you anything, does it?
The one thing 400,000 PCU tells you is the scale of operations and the number of active users. Usually 25% of your active users are online during peak times, so you can judge from 400.000 PCU that they have 2.5 million active users minimum in Russia (note the 400.000 was Russia only).
It also means that Russia is their key territory as other areas does not seem to have these high PCU's.
Want a good, real CCU? Check this out:
It shows the average CCU load on Eve Online since 2006. And in that game all are online in one world (but not on one hardware of course). I just logged in to find
Conversion rate: usually a percentage of your active users who pay. On Facebook 1-3% is considered normal, on all other f2p games 5-15% is considered the norm. But % of what? Active users? If you read all the way down here you already know that there is enough room for manipulation on that number alone.
The easiest way to manipulate that number is to take lifetime payers vs. current actives, which raises the conversion rate. Or you only take your active users but delete the "tourists", i.e. the users who register, login and leave as they don't like what they are seeing. Just this makes the conversion look really good in most games.
This small excursion into the world of metrics just should give you a key learning: do not believe the hype, think about what you read. Compare. Ask.
Merry Christmas if we don't post beforehand!
2012/10/25
Brain Lag
Sometimes you need a break. Even from Blogging. Wait and see.
Meanwhile google "transition years" or my "The cycle of the game industry" talk to understand whats going on these days.
Cheers.
Meanwhile google "transition years" or my "The cycle of the game industry" talk to understand whats going on these days.
Cheers.
2012/08/28
Gamebriefers
So some industry experts will answer oen questions every couple of weeks to be posted on gamesbrief.com.
Read the first one here:
http://www.gamesbrief.com/2012/08/should-pitfall-have-launched-for-free-the-gamesbriefers/
Cheers Teut
Read the first one here:
http://www.gamesbrief.com/2012/08/should-pitfall-have-launched-for-free-the-gamesbriefers/
Cheers Teut
2012/08/04
Facebook - Wild Zone
We are all aware that cloning games, monetization ideas or even whole game mechanics is daily business on Facebook. Now EA didn't like that Zynga did clone their beloved "The Sims Social". It seems Zynga this time stole one of the favourite toys of a publisher and they are not amused.
What is amusing though is the level of detail at which Zynga cloned Sims Social. They even copied textures down to the exact RPG color value.
This doc reads: http://www.scribd.com/doc/101954002/EA-v-Zynga-Complaint-Final
The question is what comes out of this trial. Can they force Zynga to remove the game? And the key question is: does this change how EA's own Playfish "clones" games?
Update: History of Zynga cloning lab
What is amusing though is the level of detail at which Zynga cloned Sims Social. They even copied textures down to the exact RPG color value.
This doc reads: http://www.scribd.com/doc/101954002/EA-v-Zynga-Complaint-Final
The question is what comes out of this trial. Can they force Zynga to remove the game? And the key question is: does this change how EA's own Playfish "clones" games?
Update: History of Zynga cloning lab
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)