游戏邦在:
杂志专栏:
gamerboom.com订阅到鲜果订阅到抓虾google reader订阅到有道订阅到QQ邮箱订阅到帮看

硬核游戏获取商业成功的关键

发布时间:2015-04-08 15:47:45 Tags:,,,,

作者:Nick Gibson

当硬核游戏主导着主机,PC,手机平台的销售排行榜时,我们很容易联想到硬核游戏玩家是一些分布于不同平台上的同类用户。然而事实上却并非如此。

最近关于目标用户的研究显示,在今天,同时作为手机和PC/主机平台上的游戏玩家数量非常有限。GameVision最近发现,在最近12个月内,只有不到1/3的欧洲PC和主机玩家在玩手机游戏。

换句话说,2/3的玩家来自传统硬核游戏平台的玩家并不愿意在手机平台上花钱。为什么会出现这种情况呢?这里是否存在可被开发的全新机遇?

你可以假设每个新游戏市场将适应“年龄较大”的主机和硬核PC市场基本的动态需求。这些很大程度上迎合了具有较高眼光的玩家的市场将花费大量时间和金钱去获取具有吸引力且拥有较长回合的游戏体验。结果便拉高了游戏玩法的门槛,在这里获取商业成功的关键便取决于高质量且有趣的游戏玩法。

但是像浏览器MMOG和Facebook等较新的市场已经在不同道路上取得了发展。因为Flash技术的限制以及对于更强大的易用性的需求,硬核游戏设计逐渐倾向于一些更简单且更具重复性的游戏玩法。

作为致力于免费模式的开发者,他们会快速意识到自己的设计决策对于收益的重要影响,所以游戏将快速发展去专注于吸引人的体验—-这通常是以深入的游戏乐趣为代价。

clash of clans(from develop-online)

clash of clans(from develop-online)

手机游戏的本源

现在许多最畅销的手机游戏直接回到了浏览器MMOG和Facebook游戏时代。多层创造统计的游戏玩法以及复杂的收集游戏系统经常与带有较少玩家代理的简单行动游戏玩法结合在一起。

例如带有自动解决的战斗的团队战斗游戏,通过点击“完成任务”按键而完成的RPG任务,以及带有玩家能够部署但却不能控制的单位的策略游戏。尽管被标记为策略,RPG和体育游戏,许多PC和主机游戏玩家却未真正将其识别出来。

这些游戏并不糟糕;它们通常都拥有许多5颗星评级以及较大的下载量。然而它们同时也吸引了不同的硬核用户到PC和主机游戏上花钱。那么到底是什么在阻止它们呢?

我想应该是手机的商业模式,因为免费和微交易模式非常适合PC也越来越适合主机—-尽管出现了一些抱怨,但幸好只是来自少部分人。我同时也不认为这是关于技术问题(游戏邦注:现在的手机和平板电脑技术提供了巨大的游戏处理能力)。

我认为主要是游戏玩法吸引力分割了这些硬核玩家基础。如果是这样的话,这也暗示了一个非常有趣的机遇,即将高盈利策略与能够有效吸引硬核手机玩家市场的更传统游戏体验相结合。我们可以找到能够支持这一观点的研究。

硬核吸引力

EEDAR发现手机游戏消费与拥有更大消费者的主机之间具有直接的联系。所以尽管只有少量活跃于其它平台的硬核玩家在手机游戏上花钱,但是这些人却是最有价值的。从理论上来讲,任何能够打开硬核玩家这个较大且尚未开发的市场的人都能够接近最有价值的玩家基础。

手机游戏有时候可能不能支持具有PC和主机上那样复杂性和深度的硬核游戏,但是我发现这两个硬核市场间的缝隙变得越来越小了。

在具有如此多复制品的市场上,一旦有家巨头公司走上了这条道路,其他人便会快速跟上来。我们也许就能够意识到商业上的成功不只取决于吸引人的游戏设计,同时也是基于真正有趣的内容。

本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译,拒绝任何不保留版权的转发,如需转载请联系:游戏邦

Drilling down to the core

By Nick Gibson

With core games genres dominating the sales charts for console, PC and mobile platforms, it’s easy to think that core gamers themselves are a single, homogenous audience shared across different platforms. Not so.

Recent demographic studies have shown that crossover of gamers between mobile and PC/console has been comparatively limited to date. GameVision recently found that less than a third of western European PC and console gamers have spent anything on or in mobile games in the previous 12 months.

In other words, two thirds of gamers on what are traditionally core game platforms do not see mobile as a worthwhile place to spend their gaming money. Why is this and is there a new opportunity to exploit?

We’ve learned you can’t assume that every new game market will conform to the basic demand dynamics of the long-established console and core PC markets. These venerable markets have largely catered to highly discerning gamers willing to spend large amounts of time and money for deeply engaging, long-session gameplay experiences. As a result, the gameplay bar has naturally been set relatively high and the key to commercial success largely lies in high quality, fun gameplay.

But newer markets such as browser MMOGs and Facebook have evolved along different paths. Constrained by Flash technology’s limitations and the demand for greater accessibility, core game design was distilled down to much simpler and more repetitive gameplay.

As developers got to grips with freemium models, they quickly realised the impact their key design decisions had on revenues and so games evolved rapidly to focus on compelling experiences – often at the expense of being deeply engaging or, in some cases, fun.

The origins of mobile game tropes

Mobile developers took this ball and ran with it. Many of the current top grossing mobile games trace their lineage directly back to the browser MMOG and Facebook gaming era. Multi-layered stat-building gameplay and complex collective play systems – like clans – are often coupled with highly simplistic action gameplay with little player agency.

Examples include team battle games where the battles are auto-resolved, RPG missions that are completed by clicking a ‘Complete Mission’ button, and strategy games where units can only be deployed by the player but never controlled. Despite being labelled strategy, RPG and sports games, many PC and console gamers would barely recognise them as such.

These games aren’t necessarily bad; they clearly have huge appeal as the mass of five-star reviews and huge download numbers demonstrate. However, they also clearly attract a different core audience to that found spending big on PC and console games. So what’s putting them off?

I doubt it’s mobile’s commercial models, because freemium and microtransaction models work well on PC and, increasingly, on console – despite the complaints of a tiny but disproportionately loud minority. I also don’t believe it is a significant technology issue either: current mobile and tablet technology offer huge games processing power.

I believe that it is primarily gameplay appeal that divides these core player bases. If so, this hints at a very interesting opportunity to combine high yield monetisation strategies with more traditional gameplay experiences that might appeal to this potentially significant, untapped core mobile gamer market. And there’s research to support this view.

Core appeal

EEDAR found that there is a direct correlation between spending in mobile games and console usage with the largest spenders more likely to be console gamers. So while only a minority of core gamers active on other platforms spend money on mobile games, those that do are amongst the most valuable. Theoretically, anyone able to unlock the large, untapped market of core gamers yet to embrace mobile games would potentially access the highest value playerbase.

Mobile gaming may not support core games of the complexity and depth of those found on PC and console for some time – if ever – but I can see the gap between these two core markets being steadily narrowed.

In such a clone-heavy market, once one leading player steps in this direction, a mass of others will quickly follow. We might even get to a point where commercial success will be dependent on not just compelling game designs, but also genuinely fun ones.(source:develop-online)

 


上一篇:

下一篇: