SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.
Successfully reported this slideshow.
Activate your 14 day free trial to unlock unlimited reading.
Game Design as Marketing: Business/Game Developer's Dilemma
Juho Hamari – M. Sc.
(Econ) Researcher @ HIIT Information System Science / eBusiness Scope: Business models related to selling virtual goods
<ul><li>Our game is </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>not big
enough to be sold in a box </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>too big to be sold in a box </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>What then is our business model? </li></ul>15cm 10cm
Differences in main b.models Degree
of integration between game and biz design Revenue model Service design emphasis Marketing emphasis Pricing Customer relationship emphasis Retail Large amount of initial content Advertising Single price Acquisition Subscription Long-term engagement of users Time-based Retention “ free-to-play” / Virtual good sales Monetisation through incentivising service design Creating demand via game mechanics Microtransactions - emphasis on meeting the willingness-to-spend by price discriminating Acquisition, retention, monetisation
You are locked in, literally
<ul><li>Lock-in: You are too deep into the game </li></ul><ul><li>Loss aversion: You don’t want to loose your hard earned stuff </li></ul><ul><li>You don’t want to be left behind… </li></ul><ul><li>… you pay up. </li></ul>
Dilemma #1: How to balance
between: <ul><li>Aggressive marketing VS Fun </li></ul><ul><li>Monetization VS Retention </li></ul><ul><li>Selling stuff VS balancing the in-game (virtual) economy </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No silverbullet – monitor, adjust, iterate to maximise both </li></ul></ul>
Faucet -> Sink <ul><li>Sink stuff
out </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Decay </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consumables </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Repair costs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Etc </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not fun either? </li></ul></ul>
Dilemma #2: How to balance
between: <ul><li>Paying customers still wanting to get their money’s worth </li></ul><ul><li>Non-paying customers still wanting to fare in the game </li></ul>
Evening out the playfield between
paying and non-paying customers <ul><li>Separated games for spenders and non-spender </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Matchmaking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Separated servers (ZT Online) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Get things a lot easier, only a bit later (monetising early adaptors and novelty value) </li></ul><ul><li>Make it easier for losers (No one cares if noobs get a bit helped) </li></ul><ul><li>Enabling trade between earned and bought content </li></ul>
<ul><li>Abstracting functions of items (KartRider)
</li></ul><ul><li>Not selling performance related items </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Selling functionality (convenience) – makes the gamplay easier and less time consuming </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Selling only aesthetic items </li></ul></ul>