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

如今的手机游戏产业已不是你所认识的那个产业

发布时间:2015-11-30 17:17:49 Tags:,,,,

作者:Ken Wong

不久前,BugByte Ltd的首席执行官Aksel Junkilla在Polygon发表了一篇名为“因为你们,手机游戏市场变得一团糟”的文章。

Screen_Shot(from polygon)

Screen_Shot(from polygon)

那篇文章描述了Bugbyte最近发行的手机游戏《Battlestation Harbinger》如何在拥有不错的评价并获得苹果和谷歌应用商店的推荐下还遭遇商业的失败。Junkilla将这一结果归因于两大问题:错误的消费者价值,即他们愿意将购买一杯昂贵的咖啡当成一笔公平交易,但却拒绝以同样价格购买一款手机游戏,还有就是开发者之间过于激烈的竞争。

我想说的是,Akesel,我也和你感同身受!在我职业生涯的前10年,我发行了4款游戏,包括主机游戏,PC游戏和手机游戏,但是在我看来它们都是不赚钱的。当你和团队辛苦了好几年并投入满腔热情和心血去创造一款游戏,但最终却未能获得应有的收益时,你们一定会非常受挫。但是这并不能怪玩家,也不能怪其他游戏开发者。如果你真的想要获得成功,你就必须学会掌控自己的命运,而不是将任何失败归因于其他人。了解你的工作场地便是一个很好的开始。

手机是一个很棒的创意平台

我非常认可Junkilla对于手机游戏市场的评价。很大一部分用户都在玩基于广告和“鲸鱼”玩家的免费游戏,并且正是这些市场力量推动着大众市场娱乐的发展。创新实验和个人表达变得非常危险,与此同时投入更多钱去获取用户变得更加迫切。对于我们这些“老派”玩家来说,这样的市场非常陌生,而对于那些小型的独立创造者来说,这样的市场又极具中毒性。

然而,App Store中还是充斥着许多来自小型独立工作室的创新,古怪与具有实验性的游戏。例如像《Eliss》,《Space Team》和《Ridiculous》等类型鲜明的游戏便和《破碎大陆》,《胶囊太空站》等重塑类型的游戏平起平坐。《沙漠高尔夫》和《Mountain》探索着游戏设计中的极简主义,而《剑与巫术》,《字母变形记》和《致命框架》则不断推翻着风格与故事叙述的界限。

手机游戏是关于饲养翻车鱼,获取来自变装皇后的建议,狼人与商人间的战斗,披萨与骨架之间的对抗。Square Enix迎接挑战将《杀手》变成一款桌面游戏,育碧也调整了《雷曼》并将其变成史上最出色的无尽奔跑游戏。在最近几年,苹果越来越重视这些高质量游戏,并且它们通常更倾向于付费游戏。

所以尽管精心设计且受电子表格驱动的免费游戏仍然主导着畅销游戏榜单,但是手机平台上却不断冒出具有创造性的内容。像Nitrome,Simogo,Noodlecake,Greg Wohlwend,Zach Gage,Crescent Moon,Hipster Whale等等创造者都不断向我们证实着,不断创造出这样的游戏是可行的—-尽管并非每一款游戏都能够确保创造者的财政自由。

可恶的不幸

如果这样的成功在手机上是可能的,那《Battlestation :Harbinger》的失败到底是为什么?让我们着眼于两个可能性。

也许那些狂热的褒评和来自评估与谷歌的推荐都不是帮助它获得成功的秘方。《Battlestation:Harbinger》结合了许多常见的空间比喻与较高的复杂性,并将自己描述为“一款结合了rogue,回合制星图策略与实时太空战斗相结合的科幻太空探索游戏。”

也许这听起来很难在侧重休闲玩家和简单机制的平台上出售,并且手机上的太空战斗和探索游戏市场已经非常拥挤了。所以尽管拥有不错的评价以及苹果和谷歌的推荐,《Battlestation:Harbinger》还是很难突显自己并向玩家证实这4美元的价值。

除了竞争外,《Harbinger》的截图和预告片也很普通且缺乏生气。游戏自身的描述便不带任何吸引人且突出的功能。甚至连游戏的名字也会影响销量—-“Battlestation”太普遍,而“Harbinger”又是一个陌生的单词,既难记住也很难发音。所以我认为《Battlestation》的市场定位和品牌其实可以做得更好。

而如果《Battlestation》拥有华丽的外观以及吸引人的题目,它便更有可能吸引用户的注意。但第二种可能性是,即使你所有的一切都做得很好,你也不一定能够以独立游戏开发者的身份谋生。

简单地说,供应已经大大超过了需求。现在,创造游戏所需要的工具,学习材料和分销方式都非常普及且异常廉价。从来没有什么时候比现在创造并发行一款电子游戏更简单了。每一周都会有数百款游戏诞生,但却只有少数游戏能够获得推荐或成功进行病毒性扩展。Rami Ismail所说的“你没有机会的”便是在提醒我们面前的经济现实。

然而如果你是将游戏开发作为一种兴趣的话结果可能会好些。我们见证过艺术形式的民主化。随着游戏创造准入门槛的降低,越来越多人能够成为游戏开发者。我们也将创造出更多不同的故事以及一些全新体验。我们正在挖掘一些全新的用户并将更多游戏讨论带向公众。

只通过商业可行性去判断一种艺术形式是错误的。通过写诗,画画,演奏双簧管或玩滑板谋生只适合少数人。这只能推动那些最出色的人努力攀升到更高的高度,而剩下的人如果不能从作品中获得盈利便只能玩玩实验了。

多样化并不意味着一切都是为了你

Aksel Junkilla的看法中有一点是对的,为了让游戏继续向前发展,文化转变是必要的。这种转变是关于老派的硬核玩家能够接受游戏设计和游戏消费习惯的多样化。

看不起那些自己不认同的游戏设计和玩家选择会阻碍游戏的发展。让玩家直接基于产业固定价格购买一款游戏并在一个指定的昂贵硬件上玩几个小时的游戏的老派系统便是一大约束条件。现在的我们更喜欢以多种方式去玩,投资,编写并销售游戏。游戏设计和消费中的多样性也意味着更多人能够找到适合自己的游戏。

人人喜欢的游戏《Candy Crush》便提供给了无数人价值。基于优秀的视觉与听觉设计以及精心创造的游戏进程,这款游戏能够带给玩家乐趣。它能够帮助玩家们缓解无聊,并且游戏还是免费的。玩家不会因为缺少技能而不开心。对于无数人来说,《Candy Crush》比《最后生还者,《洞穴探险》或《纪念碑谷》拥有更有趣且更有价值的体验。

比起过去,现在的产业更喜欢基于多样性的成功,而这也是我们应该接受的事实。

而这对于想要维持下去的《Battlestation:Harbinger》创造者来说意味着什么?你的唯一机会便是在不妥协创意目标的同时更好地营销并定位你的产品。

Junkilla表示因为读者可能会认为完成一款游戏就会让开发者成为名人,他们将开香槟庆祝这一盛举并获得应有的收益。读者并没错。因为真正充满热情的游戏开发者是因为喜欢游戏才开始创造游戏,他们并不在乎商业上的成功。这也给了我们从失败中恢复过来的决心,并推动着我们不断重组,改变策略,并不断提高竞争力。

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

Mobile isn’t the games industry you recognize, and that’s great

by Ken Wong

Last week, BugByte Ltd CEO Aksel Junkilla posted an opinion piece on Polygon titled “The mobile games market is an absolute mess, thanks to you.”

The article describes how Bugbyte’s recent mobile release, Battlestation Harbinger, failed to become a commercial success despite positive reviews and being featured in both Apple and Google’s app stores. Junkilla traces this disappointment to two problems: consumer values that perceive expensive coffee as a fair deal while rejecting mobile games that cost the same price and developers “competing too fiercely against each other.”

Aksel, I feel your pain, man! In the first ten years of my career I shipped four games, from console to PC to mobile, and to my knowledge none of them were profitable. It’s really frustrating when you and your team toil for years with passion and dedication, and you’re not rewarded with revenue. It truly sucks that any of us should have to go through that. But don’t blame the players, and don’t blame other game developers. If you truly want to be successful, you must take control of your fate, rather than leaving it up to others. A good place to start is to understand the playing field.

MOBILE IS A GREAT SPACE FOR CREATIVITY

I agree with much of Junkilla’s assessment of the mobile games market. A large proportion of the audience are playing free-to-play games subsidized by advertising and “whale” players, and these market forces encourage mass-market entertainment. Creative experimentation and personal expression become unfeasibly risky, while pouring huge sums of money into user acquisition becomes essential. This marketplace feels incredibly foreign and ugly to us “old school gamers” and looks toxic for small, independently funded creators.

And yet, somehow the App Store is overflowing with innovative, weird, experimental games by individuals and small studios. Genre-defiers like Eliss, Space Team and Ridiculous Fishing sit next to genre reinventions like Badland and rymdkapsel. Desert Golfing and Mountain explore minimalism in game design while Sword & Sworcery, Metamorphabet and Framed push at the boundaries of style and storytelling.

Mobile games about raising sunfish, relationship advice from a drag queen, werewolves fighting businessmen, and pizzas versus skeletons somehow exist. Mobile challenged Square Enix to make Hitman into a board game and Ubisoft to adapt Rayman into one of the best ever endless runners. In recent years Apple has been helpfully highlighting quality titles like these in lists, which often favor paid games.

So despite the dominance of conservatively designed, spreadsheet-driven free-to-play games on the top-grossing chart, creative gems continue to get made on mobile. The continuing work of creators like Nitrome, Simogo, Noodlecake, Greg Wohlwend, Zach Gage, Crescent Moon, Hipster Whale and others show it’s rare but possible to make such games sustainably, though not not every hit results in financial freedom.

OUTRAGEOUS MISFORTUNE

If such success is possible on mobile, where did Battlestation: Harbinger go wrong? Let’s look at two possibilities.

Perhaps rave reviews and store featuring from Apple and Google isn’t the secret formula it appears to be. Battlestation: Harbinger combines many common space tropes with a high level of complexity, describing itself as “A sci-fi space exploration game blending roguelike, turn-based star map strategy and real-time space battles.”

This might sound like a tough sell on a platform renowned for casual players and simple mechanics, but the market for mobile space combat and exploration games is actually incredibly crowded. Perhaps, despite great reviews and promotion, Battlestation: Harbinger just didn’t distinguish itself enough to justify the $4 price of admission.

Next to the competition, some of which are free to try, and one of which is the incredible FTL, Harbinger’s screenshots and trailer look a little drab and basic. The game’s own description lacks any hook or distinguishing feature. Even the game’s name might have impacted sales — “Battlestation” is too generic, while “Harbinger” is an unfamiliar word, hard to remember and pronounce. I think it’s fair to say Battlestation’s market positioning and branding could have been better.

It’s nice to think if Battlestation had just looked a little flashier, with a catchier title, it could have caught on. But the second possibility is that you can do absolutely everything “right” and it’s still just really, really unlikely that you’ll make a living as indie game developer.

Put simply, supply has outstripped demand. The tools, learning materials and distribution required to make games have never been so abundant and cheap. It’s never been easier to make and publish a video game. Of all the hundreds of games that come out every week, only a few can possibly be promoted or go viral. Rami Ismail’s “You don’t stand a chance” is a crushing reminder of economic reality of what we do.

However, game development as a hobby accessible to everyone is way better than a sure profit for the privileged few. We are witnessing the democratization of an artform. As the barrier of entry for making games lowers, an ever wider range of people are becoming game developers. We’re telling more diverse stories and inventing entirely new experiences. We’re discovering untapped audiences and raising games literacy and discussion in the public.

It’s a mistake to assume that an artform is only validated by its commercial viability, or that being able to create something somehow entitles one to income. Making a living by writing poetry, drawing comics, playing the oboe or skateboarding is only possible for a few. This only forces the best to strive for ever greater heights, while the rest can enjoy expression and experimentation without the distraction of monetizing their work.

DIVERSITY MEANS NOT EVERYTHING IS FOR YOU

Aksel Junkilla is right about one thing — there is a cultural shift that needs to happen in order for games to move forward. That shift is for old school, hardcore gamers to allow for a diversity of game designs and game consumption habits.

Turning up our noses at game design and player choices with which we don’t agree prevents games from evolving and maturing. The old system of asking players to buy a game outright for an industry-fixed price to play for hours on expensive dedicated hardware is an oppressive set of constraints. But we now enjoy more ways of playing, funding, composing and distributing games than ever before. Diversity in game design and consumption means more people than ever can find a game that suits them.

Everyone’s favorite game to hate, Candy Crush, actually provides value to millions of people. Through great visual and audio design and a carefully constructed meta-game of progression, it makes players happy. It relieves them of boredom, anywhere, any time, and the entry price is free. Players aren’t made to feel bad for not being skilled enough, or dedicated enough. To millions of people, Candy Crush is a more enjoyable, more valuable experience than The Last of Us, or Spelunky or Monument Valley.

Be OK with people making that choice. The industry is now enjoying a wider diversity of successes than has ever been seen, and that’s something that should be embraced.

What does this mean for the creators of Battlestation: Harbinger, struggling to stay afloat? Your only chance is to get better at marketing and positioning your product without compromising your creative goals. The knowledge is out there.

Junkilla expressed dismay that readers might think completing work on a game would be cause for celebration, breaking out the Champagne and taking some well-earned rest. The readers are right. Truly passionate game developers make games because they love it, with or without the critical and commercial success. This gives us the resolve to survive our failures, regroup, restrategize and return to fray stronger and wiser.(source:polygon

 


上一篇:

下一篇: