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

免费模式并不等同于共享软件的概念

发布时间:2012-08-22 16:24:39 Tags:,,

作者:Tadhg Kelly

今天早上我阅读了有关《Gasketball》的情况。这是一款非凡的益智游戏,玩家需要朝墙或其它对象扔篮球使其弹起而射进框中。与许多同类型iOS游戏一样,这是一款非常有趣且吸引人的游戏。

Gasketball(from ipadmashup.com)

Gasketball(from ipadmashup.com)

尽管它获得了20多万次下载量,其开发者最终还是落入不得不借债才能生存下去的境地。他们是免费发行游戏,并使用苹果IAP模式让玩家以2.99美元的价格一次性购买升级版的完整游戏。但是到目前为止他们只获得了0.67%的转化率(游戏邦注:只卖出1340份游戏)。而他们选择一次性购买模式便是出于道德原因。

与许多开发者一样,他们并不看好免费商业模式。他们希望基于一次性付费模式而使用相同的系统。换句话说,他们混淆了免费模式与共享软件的概念。并且很不幸的是,没人告诉他们一开始便使用共享软件理念去运营游戏并不是一种很好的选择。

总是站在玩家立场去考虑问题的开发者认为,如果他能让10个玩家中的1个为游戏付钱,他便能够取得不错的成绩。但是这便是《Gasketball》开发者所犯的错误。事实便是他们只能获得非常低的免费/付费转化率,最多也只有1%或2%。

在共享软件盛行的时代里情况也是如此。开发者会选择免费网站去发行游戏或应用,并希望能够借此取得更好的成绩并获得更高的转化率。共享软件开发者总是希望他们能够获得较高的转化率,但是事实却总是相反。即使软件的免费试用期已满,其实际转化率也仍然保持在较低的水平上。

事实上许多非常优秀的游戏也出现了较低的尝试/付费转化率。很少人愿意为你的辛苦工作掏腰包,但是如果他们越过了这个门槛,他们便愿意继续为游戏而花钱。

回头客便是免费商业模式发展的最佳推动力。为了向更多人展示你的游戏并将他们转变成你的用户,你便应该选择免费模式,并在之后陆续向他们出售某些内容。一旦他们购买了一个虚拟道具,他们便会购买第二个。一旦他们获得了一套虚拟货币,他们便会想要获得第二套。

就像早前的街机游戏那样,有些玩家希望在游戏中花钱并以此维持自己所获得的分数。而有些人只是因为喜欢你的游戏而愿意为其掏腰包,但是如果你未能实现他们的这种想法,你便只是在白白流失赚钱的机会。就像在升级版游戏中,为什么明明能够要价19.99美元你却只提出2.99美元的售价?为什么你不提供给玩家一个灵活的定价范围,让他们能够根据自己的意愿去购买升级版?

如果你也面临着相同的道德问题,我只能给予一个很简单的建议:克服它。不管是经营餐厅还是赌场,重复销售都是一种最基本的商业模式。问题并不在于你是否该接受这种前提,而是你究竟该高尚还是卑鄙地使用这种方法。

向那些喜欢你的玩家多次销售道具并不代表你是邪恶的。(本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译,拒绝任何不保留版权的转载,如需转载请联系:游戏邦

Opinion: Freemium is not shareware

by Tadhg Kelly

This morning I read the sorry story of Gasketball. The game is an above-average puzzler in which you bounce a basketball off walls and other objects to shoot hoops. Like many such iOS games it’s charming, pretty good fun (though not amazing I would say).

However, despite achieving 200,000 downloads, its developers have ended up homeless and borrowing money to survive. They released the game for free and using Apple’s in-app purchasing model to allow the player to upgrade to the full game for a one-off price of $2.99. So far they’ve had 0.67% conversion (or 1,340 sales). Their reasons for only having one purchase are moral.

Like many developers, they believe that freemium business models are abusive. Their idea was to use the same system, but only have one payment. In other words they confused freemium with what we used to call shareware. Unfortunately it seems that nobody told them that shareware was never that great to begin with.

A developer with a noble idea of the player in mind thinks that if he can just get 1 in 10 users to cough up, then he’ll do well. It sounds like this is the mistake that the Gasketball developers made. The reality is that free/paid conversions are usually much lower, on the order of 1 or 2% at best.

In the days of shareware software it was much the same, if not lower. Free download sites would distribute your game or application, with the idea that it would travel far and convert some. Shareware developers often hoped that they would see high conversion rates, but commonly would not. Even if software expired after 30 days etc, the number of actual converts was always on the very low side.

The reality of low try/pay conversion applies to even the greatest games. Far less people than you probably think will actually reach into their wallets in order to pay you for your work, but if they do cross that threshold then they are much more likely to do so again.

Repeat business is what makes freemium business models work. You go free to play in order to expose the core of the game to lots people in the hope of turning some of them into customers, and then you sell them something. And then something else. And something else. Once they buy one virtual item, they may buy two. Once they score one set of virtual currency, they will not think it bad to have another.

Not unlike the old arcades, some players spend lots of money and some endlessly eke out the value of one credit. Some even actually want to give you their money just because they like you, but if you haven’t set up a way for them to do that then that money is just lost. Why charge $2.99 for an upgrade when you could charge $19.99, for example? Why, if it bothers you that much, not have a flexible pricing scale where they can buy the upgrade at whatever level they desire?

If you are struggling with the same moral question, then my advice is simple: Get over it. Repeat sales is a basic business model, used from fine restaurants to lowly casinos. The question should not be whether to accept or reject that premise (and so get hoisted on your own petard like the Gasketball guys), but how to approach it nobly or ignobly.

You don’t have to be evil to sell multiple items to a customer who likes you.(source:GAMASUTRA)


上一篇:

下一篇: