March 30, 2010
Had a long chat about Facebook “social” games on Shut Up We’re Talking. Figured I’d write up my thoughts here for posterity. John has a nice summary as well, and Darren has the usual link to You Tube hilarity.
First of all, I do think that Facebook games are games. I don’t think they’re good games, but they are games. (Sorry Darren!) And while they tend to get dismissed as just a “pile of clicks,” there are various degrees of social interaction in Facebook games.
I’ve talked to some friends who have played (more than I have) and when I press them, the things they describe in a game like Mafia Wars actually do look a teenie bit like the social mechanics of MMOs. People create Facebook accounts with attractive, yet dubious, names and photos, and use them to sweet talk items from other Mafia Wars players, to be sold for real money. (shims and 3rd party RMT!) There are people who create multiple Facebook accounts, play each account till it’s reached its limit, and time it so that when the last account is peaked, the first one is ready to play again. (twinks/rested exp anyone?) A lot of the social stuff isn’t built into the game, but people are finding a way to be social – not unlike Everquest in 1999, when guilds existed way before there were even guild tags. Mafia Wars organizations do have leaders, and while their role is more limited than the typical MMO leaders, they do provide tips and game information to help their members optimize their playtime. And players have been booted from Mafia organizations if they spam members for help with what are considered waste of time jobs.
Three things that stand out for me though, and this is why I don’t like Facebook games. One is the lack of “real time” social interaction in Facebook games. I click stuff, I announce it to people, they click stuff, they announce it to people. It feels more like an IM session more than an engaging game. The other is the lack of “process.” All actions are clicks. You don’t actually see yourself fighting someone in Mafia Wars – you just click and read the final result. You dont’ actually quest in Castle Age, you click a button and read the “great job on that quest!” message. (Not complaining about that one actually!) And the last issue I have is that their design is shaped entirely around the metric mindset. The “social” in this game serves a purpose, which is that the player becomes the unsuspecting marketer, and the goal of the games themselves is centered around the accumulation of “stuff” for the greater purpose of generating revenue for the game company. When I play Facebook games, I feel like I’m participating in a fancied up behavioral experiment. I don’t particularly like feeling as if the designers are playing mind games with me.
And perhaps that’s the biggest reason why I don’t like Facebook games, and why I am not worried about the future of MMOs amid the rise of these “social” games. The games are limited, the parameters are fixed, and everything that players are allowed to do is quantifiable and measurable. I don’t want to be in the control group, thank you very much. Because it’s so metric, it’s easier to figure out the patterns. And once we’ve figured them out, and mastered them, well, we all know what that means.
Above: Farmville
Bottom line is that it’s the social network, and not the games themselves, that MMO companies should stand up and pay attention to. If Farmville wasn’t meshed into Facebook, we would not be talking about it at all. Proof? Go to WebKinz and set up a little garden in your pet’s backyard. That’s Farmville, and over there, it’s not even a game – it’s a mini game.
Above: Webkinz
So take heart, core gamers. (that’s what you’re called if you A) like MMO’s and B) don’t like Farmville). MMOs are not dinosaurs. What’s driving the success of Facebook social games is Facebook, not the games themselves. MMOs, when done right, make the players the content – and yes, that can apply to PvP and PvE games. So all that’s needed is more integration of MMO’s into Facebook. I can see Facebook being the place where people go to get their games, rather than to an official game site. That priceless “go to application” button could direct you to a download of your favorite MMO. Facebook could benefit, ask for a usage fee, whatever, and the game companies definitely benefit by being able to tap into the “guild on steroids.” Users could customize their Facebook page to add game handles, toon names, etc, to allow users to share certain information with real life friends and family, and other information with in game friends. As a guild leader, I would relish the ability to use Facebook as a way to open yet more communication channels with my guildmates. In a nutshell, users would be able to share the same sort of stuff you find on steam, crossfire, or gamer dna. The games themselves will stay the same, they’re just adding in a huge chunk of communication and networking that has been lacking in MMO’s for a long time.
Now about those levels in MMOs….
Posted by jayernh under Uncategorized | Comments (4)
March 18, 2010
Adam and I had a delightful time talking to Kiara, the Community Manager for Everquest 2, for our latest episode of A View From the Top.
Here are the show notes:
- Who is this Kiara person? Her kitties don’t seem to know! What has everyone been playing and who isn’t 90 yet! Did someone say Facebook games?
- How does going from a player to a member of a development shop feel? What are some of the things that really made it difficult and how does it change your outlook? Do you smite guilty developers?
- Are all females gravity challenged? Adam suggests that maybe they are and gets the cold shoulder. Facts be darned, don’t diss the ladies! Ladies send hate mail to Ferrel[at]epicslant.com. Also, if you’d like a date…. same email!
- Healer shop talk! We discuss Templars, Inquisitors, Shamans and other things that make you not die! Don’t nerf Adam’s cleric plate! We wear the same plate as warriors darn it!
- EverQuest II does amazing work with trade skills but Karen and Adam just don’t participate. They’re the anti-tradeskillers! Mindlessly kill things? Oh yes!
- How did Christy become Kiara? Would she do it again? Find out here!
- Dealing with the forum. What are some tips in handling a hostile community?
- Listening to the EQ2 community. Your voice is heard!
- Halas will be coming soon and you really don’t want to miss it.
- Beastlords will be joining the EQ2 class list soon! (Just kidding… or am I?)
- How do you get into a raiding guild and make yourself stand out?
- Karen and Adam are failing at Twitter! Follow us… because we want a bigger number! FerrelES and JayeRNH
Acknowledgments
We would like to throw out a huge amount of thanks to Christy for joining us on the show. We had a lot of fun hanging out and discussing our favorite MMO with her and I enjoyed the abuse. Karen and I are stoked to have her back again sometime soon for a sequel!
Karen would like to shout out to Troy from EQual Perspectives and Emerald Tablet. She’d also like to shout out to Randolph from Grinding to Valhalla.
Christy wanted to shout out to us (hurray!) and the EQ2 community. She really thinks we’re the best community and wants to see us all at Fan Faire. She’s buying drinks too!
Adam also wanted to shout out to RC! Congratulations to Syp and Beau for their new positions with Massively. Finally, a huge shout out to Fippy. Pro Gnoll!
Ladies and gentlemen, please submit some questions! If you don’t, Kiara will nerf you!
(Listen to the very end for a secret!)
Posted by jayernh under Uncategorized | Comments (0)
March 13, 2010
- Mental note to self – bring business cards!
- Odd moment – standing on the floor of the expo, looking up at a sign with a logo for “Complex Games” and watching a demo of a giant animated beaver chasing down a bunch of Canadian mounties on the video screen below it. /headtilt
- Cool moment – enjoying the chat with Dan Brainerd of Dejobaan Games, about their base-jumping game AaaaaAAaaaAAAaaAAAAaAAAAA!!!. Watching Darren get many hugs and kisses from finishing the level was great. Fun game, and it’s out on Steam, so I plan to snag it when I get home.
- What’s with the kilts? Like, seriously! I’m lobbying for Darren and Brent to sport some next year, because, you know, when in Rome…
- It was awesome to finally put a face to the voices/names I’ve followed for so long.
- Equally awesome was spotting many icons of the industry. I had so many “kid in a baseball park” moments.
- Flourless chocolate cake at Le Colonial. The cake is not a lie, and that restaurant is effing amazing.
- I find Enviro-Bear to be oddly compelling. Yes, I know that doesn’t even look like a bear, I still can’t turn away from it.
- I think it’s really cool how all these companies can demo all these mind blowing graphics and special effects, but seriously, the thrill of seeing an axe going through an orc’s head (but look how real it looks!) lasts about 5 seconds (30 for guys), and then that’s it. Gimme something more in my games please!
- I believe in the metric mindset in principal, but I’m hoping it’s not overused. If it were, for example, the developer team from EQ might have drawn the conclusion that their playerbase loves to be /afk bazaar bots, standing glassy eyed in one spot for weeks on end. Because, you know, if players repeat it, it’s fun.
Posted by jayernh under Uncategorized | Comments (1)
March 12, 2010
More thoughts and my takeaways from some of the sessions at GDC yesterday:
“The Art of War: Effective Ways to Address the RMT Issue,” by Eyjolfur Gudmundsson and Einar Sigurdur Hreidarson from CCP
This was a great talk to kick off my second day at GDC. RMT has always been an issue in games, going way back to that first time I saw someone sell a White Dragonscale Cloak in EQ for hundreds of dollars, and yet it’s something that MMO companies have really struggled to stop. Some have chosen to go to war, and eliminate botters, farmers, and RMTrs. Some have chosen to seize back that money and added in their own versions of cash shops and microtransactions. What Eve decided to do was a little of both, but in a way that doesn’t disrupt their gameplay or cause an imbalance to the in game economy.
They explained how they took a two pronged attack against the RMTrs. One was to create PLEX, which were basically timecards that could be purchased with isk, the in game currency. What’s interesting is that PLEX can also be sold and traded through the in game market, player to player. So veteran players with lots of isk can choose to buy PLEX and basically earn free playtime. But new players also benefit, because they can buy up PLEX with real money, sell them in game, and get a quick injection of isk to their wallets, which makes their first experiences in Eve that much easier (and probably more fun).
The second part of the attack was called “Operation Unholy Rage,” and it was a sophisticated anti RMT crackdown that took place on June 23rd. This plan began back in 2008, and was first tested in March 10, 2009. They banned 3k accounts that day, reviewed the data, revised their strat, and launched the big crackdown on the 22nd, when they banned 6200 accounts.
What was the impact? First off, and this was something that surprised them, they only banned 2% of their total accounts, but it led to a 30% drop in CPU resources per user. So performance for everyone greatly improved. Second, previously clogged systems were now more open for play. Ingunn, for example, went from 160 players (mostly botters) down to 10.
They also studied the effects on the economy, and what they found was that some items were affected, but over time, and with some adjustments on CCPs part to certain supplies, the markets corrected themselves.
They reminded the audience that once you take action, you need to keep the pressure on. They also mentioned that while they have made large inroads towards closing the RMT loophole, they now have seen a spike in hacking attempts. So while they may have won the battle, it’s a never ending war.
“Creating Successful Social Games: Understanding Player Behavior,” by Mark Skaggs of Zynga
I’m just not into Facebook at all, but I still have to see this talk, mainly because I wanted to see if there was any common ground between how traditional MMO designers and how Facebook game designers approached game development.
The message was clear – having a metric mindset is key. Essentially, if it’s important, measure it and track it, and move away from relying on old fashioned criteria like forum posts, blogs (hey!), ads, etc. He explained the idea of the web funnel, which is the same thing as Gordon Walton’s bucket analogy from my earlier entry. What he stressed is that it’s important to look at why you are losing players at certain stages of their gameplay, and try to design changes to reduce that occurrence. In addition he pointed out that even after launch, data should drive your post-launch changes.
He then moved on to talk about fun, and his description was, if a player is repeats something, it’s fun. This statement made me wish I had attended Chris Hecker’s talk, titled, “Achievements considered Harmful?” But I digress.
Skaggs then went on to talk about how a metric mindset can apply even to hardcore games like Command and Conquer. By tracking player behavior over a long time, you can look for patterns, and then connect them with player feedback, to pinpoint what patterns reflect “fun,” and which reveal “boring” gameplay.
Some of this parallels what I heard from earlier presentations, and I do think that the increased role of data in design decisions is a good thing. But when it runs directly into some of the core ideals of your game, what happens? And what kind of game are you really making as a result?
“Making a Standard (and trying to stick to it!): Blizzard Design Philosophy,” by Rob Pardo of Blizzard.
This is less of a summary of the talk (it’s been done a ton already) and more of a mental list of what I found interesting:
- Regarding gameplay, Pardo said you have to concentrate on fun, and not necessarily push the technology. In other words, the art, design, and programming should support the goal of what the game’s about. Interesting comment, given the sea of booths displaying high tech graphics, stunningly realistic environments, and cool looking outfits that model human movement. And then there was that giant sphere….
- Blizzard believes in the idea of easy to learn, and almost impossible to master. He contrasted the fairly simple leveling mechanics with the highly sophisticated raid encounters of WoW. And you say WoW is easymode!
- He raised such questions as, what is fantasy, what is the expectation, and where is the fun – the rush of emotion? (Hi, R.A. Salvatore!)
- Epic is good! He said make everything overpowered, and used the story of how he took a dragon and made it 8 times larger – the WoW version of taking it to 11.
- Put in lots of concentrated coolness, but don’t overdo. (WoW’s vehicle system)
- Play, don’t tell. Amen! Players should play as much of the story as possible, not click through piles of text.
- The path of least resistance should be the most fun way to play. Amen again! Can’t help but think of the gorgeous zone of New Tunaria in EQ2, contrasted with the hideously boring solo shard quest from the TSO era. I cry knowing that the latter is content that is used much more by players.
- Control is king. Pardo pointed out that players generally won’t complain about this unless it’s really bad, so be meticulous when testing it. What comes to mind is Vanguard’s combat, and how the mob and player deaths didn’t properly sync with the combat. But seeing that amazing demo at the Sony booth of a person’s hands controlling a sword on the video screen was an incredible example accurate controls bringing the potential for amazingly fun gameplay opportunities.
- Lastly, he mentioned Blizzard’s use of strike teams, and the importance of using people who are not connected with the project to give solid feedback during the design stages. Polish should not wait until the end, it should be an ongoing activity.
Posted by jayernh under Uncategorized | Comments (2)
March 12, 2010
I saw four more presentations yesterday – Eve’s battle with RMT’s, Zynga and player behavoir, Blizzard’s design philosophies, and R.A. Salvatore’s talk about building a world that people can immerse themselves in.
I’m going to skip to the last speech, because out of all the talks I’ve seen, Salvatore’s speech resonated the most with me, and yet it also raised more questions than the others. I’ll add more notes about the others later today in another entry.
“From Fantasy to Franchise: How to Build a Universe Worthy of Devotion,” by R.A. Salvatore of 38 Studios.
First off, Salvatore proved his immense talent as a storyteller during the presentation, by recounting his adventures in Everquest. I found myself nodding and laughing often at his stories, because I did the exact same things, and he’s absolutely right about how amazing it felt to be in the world of Norrath. We really were the heroes in EQ, and yes, we really were the goats as well, and it was refreshing to have a game that allowed you to do both. I got excited at the thought that what he was striving for with Copernicus was a world with that same pull, that same ability to create genuine emotions out of simple gameplay.
But I’m also skeptical, because I’ve found myself often questioning my sanity in the years that have followed from my time in Everquest. Why did I play a game that had me spend weeks, sitting in one spot in Solusek B, staring at a point, waiting for a mob to spawn. Why did I put up with corpse recoveries in Fear that would sometimes take days, only to lead to failure and a poofed corpse. Even more importantly, when I started in EQ, I was by myself. Today, I’d be playing with an established network of gaming friends that goes back 10 years. Would we really want to start the game fractured and scattered all over the world, unable to talk to or reach each other? And I keep insisting to myself that a game like Everquest could never survive today, because players now have other MMOs to turn to in their moments of hair-ripping frustration, so it’s easier to just say “screw it,” and cancel.
So I’m extremely curious to see what happens with Copernicus. Salvatore made it very clear that his personal preferences for gameplay did not reflect at all upon what they were doing. He did, however, share some insight into how his storytelling approach factored into the upcoming project.
Salvatore talked about his principles in creating a world, and how that is reflected as well in his online gaming experiences. The point he stressed was that when you create a world, you’re asking people to suspend their disbelief. But if you create a world that makes sense, and reduces the need to make assumptions, the more a person will feel immersed in the world. As a side note, he added that music and art play a large role in creating a world worthy of devotion. The idea of “idealized reality” came to mind – it’s an art style that the 38 Studios team has discussed before, which describes their notion of artwork that has a familiar fantasy feel, but will be unique to Copernicus. WoW’s artwork, or even the classic Disney art style, are good examples of that.
He then explained how he composed a 10,000 year history of the world of project Copernicus. The idea was that there would always be consistency in their world, no matter who was working on the development team and when they joined. And he pointed to Big Huge Games as an example. When 38 Studios purchased them, they decided to have Big Huge Games work on a single player game, set in the same world as Copernicus. Right away, they could send over the 10k timeline, get the team up to speed, and have them painting on the same canvas. As a result, project Mercury was born, and they will launch their single player game first, which should help attract interest in the MMO to follow.
As a taste of what they have planned at 38 Studios with Copernicus, Salvatore gave us a bit of information about part of the death mechanic in the game. MMO players are accustomed to dying and reviving, but Salvatore felt that the whole concept of returning to life should make sense and fit in the larger scope of the world. So he created the idea of a “well of souls,” which, if you die, brings you back to life if you meet the conditions to be able to use them. What’s interesting is that he added that these wells are controlled by one race in the world, which raises the question of what are the implications of that mechanic in the world. How does that affect the power structure (kings, religions, territorial struggles among the races). He compared it to the Cold War – what if these wells were in the U.S. and in the USSR, and what if a 3rd party had complete control over them? How would that affect aggressions between the two sides? It’s an interesting concept, and I am eager to see how it translates to actual gameplay once Copernicus goes live.
His enthusiasm in the project, and his passion for games, really struck a cord with me. But after hearing lecture after lecture discuss the need for data-driven design decisions, I can’t help but ask myself, which is right? Does 38 Studios have a Blizzard version of a “strike team,” made up of people who are not connected with the design process, and can give impartial gameplay feedback? Are they weighing design decisions around any logging and data they have started collecting (Azeroth Advisor comes to mind here). We’ve seen so many MMO’s lately, with lots creative talent and a “vision” that end up coming up far short of the mark. We blog and post about how they’re simply “not finished,” or “too buggy,” but what if people left them simply because it just wasn’t their cup of tea. What happens when the design ideals you hold so dearly do not fit the data? Which should drive your decisions? If you abandon your ideals, what are you making? What are you left with?
In an age of numbers, it’s a big diceroll to emphasize artistic talent (storytelling, artwork, music). 38 Studios has definitely set the bar high – this is a game that is taking itself seriously. As a result, I think success will depend a lot more on whether the players share the same taste in gaming with those who created it. If it works, it will destroy the current trend of mmo development. Can’t wait to see what happens, but I’m definitely rooting for Copernicus.
Posted by jayernh under Uncategorized | Comments (1)
March 11, 2010
More brief notes and takeaways from GDC:\
“How to Keep and Online World Up and Running after Launch,” by Laralyn McWilliams of SoE.
This was the first of 4 talks that I have seen which emphasize the importance of data. And as McWilliams pointed out, tracking and logging data is crucial from day one of launching any game. She pointed out that what players say, what they do, and what they say they do are very different things. Using data helps to accurately determine where to implement game changes, and then follow their effect after they’re put into the game. She used the example of the “Speedy Kick boots” to illustrate the role of data in assessing changes. The speedy kick boots were a quest reward that they deemed too fast, too soon in the game’s age. So they nerfed the boots. Interestingly enough, the data revealed that only 2% of the player population had actually completed the quest and received the boots, yet it happened to be the most active (and vocal) segment of the playerbase. Not surprisingly, the official game forum went nuts and a 558 post thread ensued. By understanding the actual percentage of players who had the amped-up boots, they were able to comfortably reach a middle ground – they restored the old stats to those that had done the quest, and put in a new, less speedy, version for future questers.
McWilliams also talked about communicating change to the players, and coming up with ways to add in “bitter pill” changes as painlessly as possible. Lumping in a controversial change, like their announcement that all jobs would be free from levels 1-4, and then members’ only from 5-20, with popular and highly anticipated changes, like new pets and housing, can reduce the amount of unhappy posts and disgruntled players. She mentioned having a “player advocate,” someone on the dev team that could be the voice of the players. She also explained when it’s appropriate to discuss changes in depth, and when it’s best to be succinct. No matter what, though, she emphasized how important it is for developers to remember that whether a player’s complaint is accurate or not, you still have to recognize their feelings as genuine.
As important as data is in helping to make design changes after launch, I think the big takeaway is learning how to interpret the data and make the right design choices. Free Realms has always seemed to have a steady hand and a confident approach to steering the ship, which no doubt came from years of learning from past SoE MMOs, as well as a solid grasp of the data they’re currently collecting.
“MMO Retention – Learning from the First 25 Years,” by Scott Hartsman of Trion, and Gordon Walton of BioWare.
Listening to Hartsman and Walton present was like sitting at a bar listening to two industry icons swap fascinating game tales. But a close listen reveals some priceless lessons in retaining players.
Hartsman echoed some of what McWilliams had previously discussed – store and record data, tie it all together, use it to help make design decisions, and then make sure to study how it affects other things once it goes live.
They compared games to buckets with a hole in the bottom: no matter what, you’re going to lose players. But having the right retention strategies can make those holes a lot smaller. I found some of the underrated psychological factors to retention that they listed to be noteworthy, particularly the concept of providing horizon’s of experience (content not yet seen), and masking the grind (offer achievements and rewards to encourage replayability).
Hartsman pointed to two examples from EQ to show that tough changes can drastically help player retention – hell levels and spell levels. Hell levels in Everquest were levels that required 10 times the normal amount of experience to get through. Spell levels were special levels that provided new spells. What they found out from the data was that players were (not surprisingly) quitting during hell levels, and during non-spell levels. Making changes to even out hell level experience, or spread out the spells awarded through all levels, were two potentially controversial decisions, which could backfire and anger the playerbase. Turns out though, that the players didn’t mind at all, and both changes helped retention, with the spell level changes actually leading to the highest subscription level in EQ ever.
Walton discussed aspirational experiences, and pointed out that they didn’t necessarily have to be day to day, they could be things that people aim for over the long term. In Ultima Online, for example, the data showed that people who had houses stayed longer than people who didn’t, so making changes to offer housing to more players became important.
They both included examples of retention failures as well. Walton mentioned Ultima Online’s decision to improve the user interface, in an attempt to increase acquisition. Not only did it fail in that regard, but it frustrated current players who were comfortable with the old UI, and retention went down.
Hartsman used examples from Everquest 2′s early days, pointing to the features that they put in place to make the game challenging to their target core playerbase. So they added in “locked combat,” which removed the ability for others to help you defeat a mob you were engaged with. Downside of course is that there was no opportunity for players to connect – players couldn’t heal another player, couldn’t help attack a mob, and couldn’t share buffs unless grouped. Of course, the downside is that, at launch, people grouped had to share experience debt from death. In the past, he added, the idea of “intended” meant right way vs. exploits, and now intended means having fun. The presentations I’ve seen so far have really reflected that idea, and it’s something that was highlighted by Mark Skaggs of Zynga today. (notes coming soon!)
Posted by jayernh under Uncategorized | Comments (0)
March 11, 2010
Wow what a day! For me, walking around the Moscone Center and spotting so many talented, veteran developers is the equivalent of going to a baseball game and seeing your favorite sports heroes. And in one instance, it was a little of both. Without a doubt, my high of the day was seeing Curt Schilling, sitting in the front row and attending a couple of the same sessions that I attended. I even worked up the nerve to catch up with him as he left, and he was nice enough to give me his autograph. Picture Codex from “The Guild” meeting Curt Schilling, and that pretty much describes the scene. I think I shook his hand, but I’m not positive. What’s really cool, though, is that I just happened to be taking notes that day with my Red Sox pen. Yup.
Besides my moment of incoherency to Curt, I took in 4 sessions, and all were really interesting. Here are some quick notes and what I took away from each. I’ll break these up into two entries, so here are the first two:
- “Kids and Parents Playing Together Online: The Next Frontier of Casual Gaming,” by Jesse Schell of Schell Games.
Schell gave a nice summary of important points that should be considered when designing a game that appeals to both parents and kids. He mentioned looking for themes that both will connect with, and he mentioned nostalgia in particular as an important theme. He also stressed the concept of shared experiences and shared accomplishments. Parents don’t want to walk away from a play session feeling like it was a waste of their children’s time. He talked about designing a game to allow parents to teach, and children to learn, because those moments are important to a family. Roles and gender issues are also important. Designing a game that parallels typical familial roles can make a game easy for families to enter, although he did mention that reversing the roles can be a delight as well. What I would have liked to have seen more of was a discussion about safety, which he said was the most important point to consider when designing a family game. I suppose that’s a topic that could be a session all by itself though. Interesting points overall though – nice look at how to connect game design with understanding family dynamics, and making it work.
“The Future of MMO Monetization: How Turbine Supercharged DDO by Adopting a Hybrid Business Model,” by Fernando Paiz of Turbine.
What a Cinderella story this game is! Paiz gave a great background about the positives and the shortcomings of DDO, and about their reasoning for choosing a hybrid model for the game. People often look at the notion of combining subscription and a cash shop and they resent it because they feel like it’s double dipping. In fact, as Paiz notes, retaining the subscription model was important, because for their current playerbase, it worked well, and why risk losing current players who were happy with the status quo. The subscription model fell short, however, in the sense that it excluded players who didn’t want to pay upfront, but also, it limits those willing to pay more (i.e. the hardcores). Adding a microtransaction system generates revenues from both camps, if done wisely.
When they devised the cash shop, Paiz stressed that they did not sell game changing armor or weapons. Instead, they focused on things like content, consumables, and features (like premium classes). What I found remarkable was that cosmetics weren’t heavily featured in their initial cash shop. Apparently they’re planning to include more of that soon though.
The result? Not only did they retain their core playerbase, but they regained 20% of the former players who had cancelled, and they gained 1 million new players overall since 2009. Even more noteworthy was that their monthy revenues increased 5 times.
A side benefit of the new hybrid model is that it leads to a “democratization” of the design process, where players have more freedom to “vote with their dollar,” and designers can more effectively target what players use the most and find most valuable.
I’m glad that DDO has thrived under a revamped revenue plan, but as Darren pointed out last night, what probably makes it work so well is that it’s not a game that’s reliant on an “overland” virtual world. Purchasing chunks of content in DDO fits their design well, but would it work out for a game with a persistant world? I think the point Paiz makes, about making sure the revenue model fits the game, really is the key.
Posted by jayernh under Uncategorized | Comments (1)