作者：Derek C. Tillotson

《愤怒的小鸟》已经成为了手机游戏的代名词。面对着各种游戏，一些续集以及无数授权商品，我们很容易看到游戏系列到底有多大的影响力。但是《愤怒的小鸟》真的能说得上是一个优秀的品牌吗？我们可以通过许多方法去回答这一问题，但EA前首席执行官John Riccitiello认为手机游戏的品牌威力仍与其它娱乐和游戏品牌具有较大的差别。

在上周于旧金山举办的Gaming Insiders Summit上发表的讲话中，为了回答是否存在任何优秀的手机游戏品牌这一问题，Riccitiello着眼于各种类型的品牌并将其与手机游戏进行了比较。Riccitiello从品牌的定义开始展开自己的演讲。他将其归结为三大内容：每个新产品中的持续价值；消费者的质疑；作为同类型作品中的优先选择。这些要点最终都是为了创造消费者与公司间的信任线，即达到双赢局面。

Angry Birds（from gamezebo）

（如今《愤怒的小鸟》品牌已经成为手机游戏的代名词，但是它是否具有足够的创造性能够经受住时间的考验？）

Riccitiello解释了自己经常会听到各种有关优秀的娱乐品牌并不可能存在的言论。参考《星球大战》和HBO（游戏邦注：一个美国的付费有线和卫星联播网），他很快便否决了该说法。他将范围缩小到游戏领域，并将一款电子游戏最近的成功与两个娱乐巨头进行了比较。《侠盗猎车手5》在发行的第一天便挣得8亿美元的收益。Riccitiello将这一成果与《哈利波特》最后一步电影进行了比较，后者的收益是前者的一半。同时他还将其与美国橄榄球超级杯大赛做了比较，他表示这一大赛在今年的收益还不到8亿美元（包含广告收益，门票和一些当地业务）。

在明确了游戏与其它娱乐媒体一样是种出色的品牌后，Riccitiello停顿了下，并指出了传统主机游戏和PC游戏可以从不断发展的手机市场中学到些什么。他的关键点在于这都是一种服务。他说道：“一些巨大的品牌因为缺少测试（对于在线服务）而衰败。”像《侠盗猎车手5》和《模拟城市》便是非常典型的例子。他同样也提到了大多数新发行内容标明的60美元的价格标签，并表示它们并不需要设定这么高的价格。Riccitiello也指出尽管定价为0，但《Clash of Clan》却拥有巨大安装基础和巨大的收益流。

Riccitiello着眼于像《侠盗猎车手》，《FIFA》和《使命的召唤》。所有的这三个品牌都满足了优秀品牌的定义，并证实了它们是能经得住时间的考验。然后他着眼于《愤怒的小鸟》并声明它不足以变成一个“真正持久的品牌”。在演讲过后，他回答了一个有关《愤怒的小鸟》的市场营销的问题。他认为Rovio将玩具和商品看得比创造性还重要，像《愤怒的小鸟：星球大战》虽然拥有很棒的授权机遇，但这却不是创建品牌的有效方式。他认为因为不具有强大的品牌威力，在未来5至10年间《愤怒的小鸟》将不复存在。

grand theft auto V（from gamezebo）

（《侠盗猎车手5》在发行的第一天便创造了8亿美元的收益，这是《哈利波特》最后一步电影所挣得的收益的2倍。）

这便引出了一个问题，即关于手机游戏公司可以从已经创建起来的游戏品牌中学到什么。Riccitiello认为手机公司需要利用3大领域。第一个便是创新。手机游戏中存在某些程度的创新，但开发者需要做更多事。着眼于当前的手机品牌阵列，Riccitiello希望能够看到彻底的改变与更大的尝试，并提出一家公司是否“在未具有任何创新的前提下值得用户投入10至20年的时间”？他对那些始终带着同样产品的公司发出了警告，并声称别人将轻易地赶超他们。

Riccitiello认为手机游戏落后于其它娱乐方式的第二大领域便是执行。一家“精实创业公司”在App Store或Google Play上发行自己的游戏非常简单。对于公司的首次发行，这通常都是一次可接受的实践。发行是伴随着可辨识的品牌，并且开发者在发行游戏的同时也承诺在之后将推出更多功能，即这次的发行并不是结束。他着重指出在面向全球发行游戏前才开始测试已发行的游戏这一常见做法的不可取性。已建立的公司应该专注于优化自己的最终产品而不是尽快发行某些内容。

clash of clans（from gamezebo）

（尽管价格为0，但是《Clash of Clans》仍具有巨大的安装基础和巨大的收益流。）

最后，Riccitiello再次重申“将游戏玩法排在技术之前”这一观点的重要性。他告诫开发者们不要变成技术的奴隶。站在技术前缘自是好事，但前提是这不会阻碍到游戏玩法的完善与发展。他指出当前手机游戏的趋势是3D图像，但是有许多3D游戏却因此忽略了游戏玩法的创新。

Riccitiello对手机游戏品牌的未来还抱有一丝希望。他认为比起口头宣传和登上销售排行榜顶端，传统的市场营销才是关键。与手机游戏维系在一起的社交媒体也很重要，但同时他也警示开发者们不应该将其看的太重，特别是像Reddit这样的服务很容易被高估了真正的价值。随着越来越多公司和品牌进入手机领域，我们可以期待它们将如何遵循Riccitiello所列出的方向。

（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）

Former Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello speaks on mobile game brands

By Derek C. Tillotson

Angry Birds has become synonymous with mobile gaming. With numerous games, a few spinoffs, and a countless number of licensed merchandise, it’s easy to see how big and influential the series has become. But is Angry Birds a great brand? There are many ways to try to answer that question, but former Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello argues that the brand power of mobile games is still a far cry from other entertainment and gaming brands.

Speaking at last week’s Gaming Insiders Summit in San Francisco, Riccitiello took a look at all sorts of brands and compared them to mobile gaming in order to answer a simple question: Do any great mobile game brands exist, and can they? Riccitiello kicked off his presentation by giving a definition of a brand. It boiled down to three things: consistent values among each new product; benefit of the doubt from the consumer; and being the preferred choice among similar products.  These points ultimately boil down to creating a line of trust between the consumer and company, a win-win situation for all involved.

The Angry Birds brand has become synonymous with mobile gaming today, but does it have enough innovation to stand the test of time?

Riccitiello had explained how he’s been frequently told that great entertainment brands can’t exist. Referencing both Star Wars and HBO, he quickly shot down that idea. Instead, he narrowed in on gaming and compared one of video game’s recent successes to two of entertainment’s powerhouses. Grand Theft Auto V earned about $800 million in its first day. Riccitiello compared that to the final Harry Potter movie, which raked in about half that. He also compared it to the Super Bowl, which he said—in terms of ad revenue, ticket sales, and local business—earned less than $800 million this year.

After establishing that games are just as much of a brand as other entertainment mediums, Riccitiello made a stop to point out what traditional console and PC games could learn from the ever-growing mobile market. His key point is that it’s all about a service. “Some of the biggest brands fall over for lack of testing [their online service],” he stated. Games like Grand Theft Auto V and SimCity were the easy examples. He also took aim at the sixty dollar price tag most new releases receive, expressing how it doesn’t need to be nearly that high. Riccitiello pointed out Clash of Clans’ giant install base and huge revenue stream, despite having a zero price tag.

Riccitiello looked at gaming brands like Grand Theft Auto, FIFA, and Call of Duty. All three brands have managed to meet the definition of a great brand and have proven they can stand the test of time. He then looked at Angry Birds and stated that it hasn’t done enough to build itself into a “truly durable brand.” After the presentation, he answered a question about Angry Birds’ marketing. He feels that Rovio is putting toys and merchandise before innovation, and that games like Angry Birds Star Wars are nice licensing opportunities but not a strong way to build a brand. He believes Angry Birds may not exist in the next five to ten years because of weak brand power.

Grand Theft Auto V made $800 million in its first day alone, doubling what the final Harry Potter movie earned

This lead to the question of what mobile game companies can learn from established gaming brands. Riccitiello feels there are three areas that mobile companies need to utilize. The first one is innovation. There have been some levels of innovation in mobile gaming, but there’s a lot more that needs to be done. Looking at the current array of mobile brands, Riccitiello wants to see extreme changes and big risks, asking if a company “deserves an audience in ten to twenty years without innovation?” He left a warning for those companies that ride the same product consistently, stating that someone else will figure it out and get there first.

Execution was Riccitiello’s next area where mobile gaming is lagging behind the rest. A “lean startup” releasing their game to the App Store or Google Play is easy. For a company’s first release, this is usually an acceptable practice. The issue comes in with recognizable brands and developers releasing a title that’s constantly promising more features in the future and is otherwise not finished. He made note of the common practice to test release games in Canada before a global launch, stating that it’s an unhealthy method, as well. Established companies should be focusing heavily on polishing their final product instead of releasing something as soon as possible.

Clash of Clans has a giant install base and huge revenue stream, despite having a zero price tag

Finally, Riccitiello repeated a cry that’s heard frequently, “Put gameplay before technology.” He warned developers to not become a slave to technology. Being on the leading edge of technology is a good thing, but it should never get in the way of accessible and polished gameplay. He pointed out the current trend of many mobile games leaning toward 3D graphics, despite many of these titles offering little innovation in gameplay.

Riccitiello showed a glimmer of hope in the future of mobile gaming brands. He feels that traditional marketing will be key, instead of just word of mouth and high rankings on the sales charts. The social media connection with mobile games is an important one, but he also warned to not favor it too heavily, specifically calling out Reddit as a service that can be too easy to overvalue. As more companies and brands break into mobile, it’ll be interesting to see how well they follow the path Riccitiello has laid out.(source:gamezebo)