作者：Torsten Reil

Tracy Erickson最近发表的关于免费增值游戏的观点性文章《Freemium is more hype than hope》误解了潜藏在这种运营模式下的机制和技术，并在结论中错误地将其评述为仅仅是手机游戏未来的失败者。

外界确实过分宣传了免费增值游戏，设想未来数月之内公众的期望值会改变也在情理之中。

但是，目前有丰富的证据表明相对其他现在正采用的游戏运营模式，免费增值游戏更擅于产生庞大、可继续增长和风险可管理的收益。

freemium games

主要例证

Zynga在Facebook上的表现给免费增值游戏的效能提供了最明显的例证。据传Zynga在2011年可能产生18亿美元的收入，成为目前成长最快的公司。Zynga也是最具盈利能力的公司，2011年预计将盈利6.3亿美元。

许多公司成功在iOS上实行免费增值系统，包括PocketGems、Storm8/TeamLava、TinyCo、Capcom和Glu Mobile。

正如Tracy所指出的那样，这些公司许多游戏正占据着总收入排行榜前列。（游戏邦注：截止本文撰稿，iOS游戏榜单前10名中有6款是免费游戏。）

盈利方式

免费增值如何发挥作用？为何这种模式能够如此有效地产生盈利呢？与Tracy的意见相比，原因不在于免费诱惑消费者去玩质量不高的游戏。

其首要关注的是开拓更多机会，让游戏接触到更庞大的用户群。该模式的用意在于：分析用户数据实时改善游戏可玩性；快速并有效地找到那些愿意付费的用户（游戏邦注：比例约占总用户的2%）并让他们的付费区域灵活；积极开拓病毒式反馈循环来吸引更多用户；通过跨游戏推广在同个网络的游戏间带来用户流量。

很显然，只有当用户经常玩游戏以及向他们的朋友推荐游戏的时候，上述做法才能够发挥作用。因而低质量游戏不宜采用这种方式，因为玩家会轻易转向其他游戏。

所以，如果执行得当，手机上免费增值游戏的盈利潜力明显比传统付费游戏要大。不管是短期还是长期，情况都是如此。这进而使得付费增值游戏公司发展更快，他们不再需要在App Store上发布100多款游戏来产生2亿美元的年营收，运转良好的付费增值公司可能只需要20款或更少。

目前的瓶颈

那么如果付费增值这么棒，注意点在何处呢？

我认为Tracy对市场饱和和玩家疲劳提出警告是正确的。但这事实上与免费增值模式无关，因为多数免费增值游戏的类别是2D资源管理游戏。

原因在于网页的局限性，Facebook上的Flash无法实现3D效果，重新加载2D游戏也比3D游戏更快更廉价。资源管理主题（游戏邦注：如农场类游戏）游戏的目的在于鼓励玩家第二天重返游戏，使得日活跃用户最大化。

充满希望的新世界

无论出于何种原因，我怀疑游戏间的相似性可能成为Facebook上的问题。但是，得益于强大的硬件和3D开发人才，我预计免费增值手机游戏会开始分化出不同体裁。近期我们已经在Glu Mobile的游戏中看到这种体裁，也会在2011年间看到更多此类游戏。

我所就职的公司NaturalMotion在免费游戏上投入大量精力，尽管付费模式已经给我们带来了相当大的成功（超过650万次的下载）。

因而，免费增值游戏会继续在手机上存在下去，也很可能像它们在Facebook上的表现那样成为手机上的主流形式。无论你喜不喜欢，免费游戏很难被打败。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

NaturalMotion’s Torsten Reil says freemium is potentially much more profitable than premium

Torsten Reil

Tracy Erickson’s recent opinion articles about freemium games – Freemium is more hype than hope – misunderstands the mechanisms and techniques underlying this business model, and as a result incorrectly writes it off as a mere ‘also ran’ in the future of mobile games.

It’s true that there is a lot of hype around freemium games, and it’s fair to assume there will be some recalibration of expectations in the next few months.

However, there is abundant evidence that freemium games are better at generating large, scalable and risk-managed revenues than pretty much any other current games business model.

Prime example

The most obvious indicator that freemium games work is the performance of Zynga on Facebook. Rumoured to generate $1.8 billion revenues in 2011, Zynga is one of the fastest-growing companies ever. It is also one of the most profitable, with $630 million forecast for 2011.

And there are plenty of other companies who have successfully deployed the freemium system on iOS, including PocketGems, Storm8/TeamLava, TinyCo, Capcom and Glu Mobile.

As Tracy points out, many of their games now occupy the top grossing charts. In fact, at the time of writing, six out of the top 10 grossing games are free to play.

Turning the wheels

So how does freemium work, and why is it so effective at generating revenues? Contrary to Tracy’s assertion, it is not about luring consumers into playing a bad game whereas premium games can afford to charge outright.

Instead, it is first and foremost about exploiting specific opportunities arising from access to very large user numbers: the ability to Analyse usage data to improve game play in real-time; Fast and effectively find those users (about 2 percent) who are prepared to pay, and let them spend flexibly (i.e. a little or a lot); Exploit positive viral feedback loops to attract more users, and Drive user traffic across games in the same network via cross-promotion.

Naturally, all of this only works if users play often, and if they recommend the game to their friends. There is therefore no room for low-quality games; players would simply go elsewhere.

Hence, if executed well, a freemium game has significantly more revenue potential than a traditional premium game on mobile. This is true both for peak revenues, as well as for the long tail. This in turn makes a freemium games company more scalable: instead of requiring 100+ titles on the App Store to create $200 million annual revenues, a well-performing freemium company may need 20 or fewer.

Current restrictions

So if freemium is so great, where’s the catch?

I think Tracy is right to warn of saturation and player fatigue. However, this is nothing to do with the freemium model per se – it’s because most freemium titles are of a very specific kind: 2D isometric resource management games.

The reason for this is their web legacy: Flash on Facebook can’t do 3D, and 2D games are quicker and cheaper to iterate than 3D games, and resource management themes (such as farming) lend themselves to encouraging players to return the next day, thereby maximising daily active users.

Bright new world

Whatever the reasons, I suspect this similarity of games may become a problem on Facebook (which is stuck with 2D Flash until the launch of Adobe’s Molehill, and whose developers are steeped in a 2D background). However, I expect that mobile freemium games will start to differentiate into different genres, thanks to powerful hardware and access to 3D development talent. We are already seeing this in recent titles from Glu Mobile, and we’ll see more through 2011.

For what it’s worth, my own company NaturalMotion is heavily investing in free-to-play titles, despite having considerable success with the premium model (with over 6.5 million downloads).

So, freemium games are here to stay and will likely become as dominant on mobile as they already are on Facebook. Like it or not, free is hard to beat. (Source: Pocket Gamer)