Jump to content

What Type Of Gamer Is Pgi Depending On?


6 replies to this topic

#1 TLBFestus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,519 posts

Posted 01 March 2016 - 12:57 PM

Just for discussion purposes, read the following article, in particular "rentention and Monetization" portion and see what you think. The article deals a lot with mobile games but is applicable to others.

This is the link for those who care to read the whole thing, but I will Copy and paste the pertinent section below:

http://blog.apptopia...er-should-know/



Quote

Retention & Monetization

This chart shows the need for different marketing and monetization strategies tailored to game type. It shows, loosely, that women are more committed and men are more fickle with their game play. Based on this graph, we separate games into four categories. The categories are based on an analogy between game involvement and a relationship status. The categories range from ‘Playing’ to ‘Committed’ to show the time commitment and loyalty of their users.

“Playing”: These users try a lot of different games and play them for a short period of time. Most often, these players gravitate towards highly competitive games, such as player-v-player racing, card-battle, or shooter games. While these players do not commit to a game for very long, they tend to have a high willingness to pay in order to progress further in a game or increase their ability to compete at a high level versus other players.

Real Racing 3, a multiplayer car racing game, is an extremely successful example of an app targeted at the ‘Playing’ demographic. With millions of users, RR3 leverages in-app purchases consistently with in-game currency that is necessary to repair, upgrade and purchase cars. In order to beat their peers, players can spend actual money to purchase in-game currency, and get faster cars


These games need to be highly polished at launch with updates ready to go, as gamers will discard games quickly and move on. Publishers should offer immediate opportunities for users to advance by purchasing upgrades and boosts


“Going Steady”: These users are found in the lower right quadrant of the chart. Usage is less frequent, but the retention rate is very high. These games are not played as often as some, but their users are loyal and will eventually return to the app. These apps tend to be easy to learn[color=#008000][/color]as well as easy to return to, even after a lapse in playing. They include Brain/Quiz games, Arcade, and Endless/Runner games. These games can be play briefly, while in a “wait state,” (in line, on the bus, etc.). “Going Steady” games are not particularly immersive or competitive, and therefore are less suited to in-app purchases. However, games like Temple Run can generate significant impression over time, and can be designed to show banner or interstitial ads without being overly disruptive to the experience.

“Committed”: Committed users play games for the long haul. Games should be designed with deep content, and should not sell too hard early on. Commitment-oriented games have great potential for in-app purchases since users of these games are likely to value such purchases and build demand for them over long periods of gameplay. Makers of games like social turn-based games should leverage the staying power of their app to best monetize their user base. Pro Footballer is a simulator that lets you play in the live of a professional soccer player, on and off the pitch. Pro Footballer is a good example of a simulator app that leverages user commitment to gradually sell in-app purchases, while building up impressions for ad revenue. Pro Footballer iscurrently listed on Apptopia


“Infatuated”: Infatuated users binge on their game, and grow tired of it quickly. During the initial window of heavy usage, the developer needs to work hard to extract as much revenue as possible. That means providing lots of up-front content to the users. Slot machine and strategy games fall into this category. Matching monetization to game type, the competitive nature of strategy games and slots users’ incessant desire for in-game currency means that in-app purchase strategy is key. Sales, events, and purchase opportunities timed with key moments of emotional investment can drive significant profits for publishers. Plants vs. Zombies is one of the all-time most popular tower-defense strategy games, because it hooks users quickly, and drives them to make purchases early in game-play, before they can tire of the game


In order for app developers, marketers, and publishers to be successful on the marketplace, it is necessary to keep a careful eye on user behavior. When developing an app, it is often helpful to look at the most successful games in your intended category, and analyze how they monetize. More often than not, you can learn from their example. For more information on the state of the app marketplace, Apptopia can help. Take a second to read this review of our App Market Research services by our friends at RareWire!





"Going Steady" is the most representative of MWO's audience IMHO. The High retention of existing players seems to be the theme, but they don't have a good "hook" to draw in and keep new players.

So many options for new player retention have been suggested before, free first mech being my favorite, I can't help but puzzle as to why they insist on not making changes to improve new player retention.

What they lack is "Rolling Retention", which is the percentage of users that return to the game 30 days after first use, or any day after that.

Edited by TLBFestus, 01 March 2016 - 01:00 PM.


#2 Lugh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 3,910 posts

Posted 01 March 2016 - 01:11 PM

View PostTLBFestus, on 01 March 2016 - 12:57 PM, said:

Just for discussion purposes, read the following article, in particular "rentention and Monetization" portion and see what you think. The article deals a lot with mobile games but is applicable to others.

This is the link for those who care to read the whole thing, but I will Copy and paste the pertinent section below:

http://blog.apptopia...er-should-know/



[b]




"Going Steady" is the most representative of MWO's audience IMHO. The High retention of existing players seems to be the theme, but they don't have a good "hook" to draw in and keep new players.

So many options for new player retention have been suggested before, free first mech being my favorite, I can't help but puzzle as to why they insist on not making changes to improve new player retention.

What they lack is "Rolling Retention", which is the percentage of users that return to the game 30 days after first use, or any day after that.

Getting people to return requires 2 things.

1) Adding whatever it was that the user thought was lacking in to the game or the development cycle of the game.

2) Advertisement that whatever 1 is, IT'S IN THERE! Now.

For me, I left near the end of the pop tart apocalypse. Disappointed that the heavy nerfs were coming that were going to ruin my favorite mech (The Highlander) and that Paul and Co still seemed to be doing the heavy handed knee jerk reactionary, badly thought out 'fixes' to things that were 'problems'
---Aside the pop tarts were never a problem. My unit Blackburns Raiders or [BBR] (I was a member not an officer)(?) mostly left at the same time for the same reasons. We were able to fight the pop tarts with a variety of brawling builds when we felt like brawling and pop tarted with the best of them. Since we didn't think it was a problem as we could play any way we'd like, and they were taking away OUR FUN, we left.

PGI reeled me back in when they FINALLY emailed me an announcement about CW, Tukkayid event caught my interest, which I watched here. In returning, I found they'd also done clans and found a good unit that was Clan heavy in their implementation [CWI] I've been there since.

I am now waiting with bated breath for CW3 to give it more depth. The incoming improved game modes Russ Announced also give me hope.

#3 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 01 March 2016 - 01:39 PM

"Whales"

That is all.

The problem is that retention for new players is porous due to the poor NPE, but also that there isn't really a long term "goal" that functions the way it should (aka CW). So, inevitably if you survived the initial wave of being bad AND gotten a hold of what you needed (more mechs)... then you'd get put off because these things are not really used (or effectively used) for some ultimate purpose (other than say comp play).

So, it is what it is.

#4 CycKath

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 2,578 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationSE QLD, Australia

Posted 01 March 2016 - 02:06 PM

Whales. PGI do not have the time or resources required for the massive re-working of either the game or their production flow to support anything other than 'Mech Pack as a monetization.

#5 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 01 March 2016 - 02:07 PM

Posted Image

#6 GRiPSViGiL

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 1,904 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationHillsboro, OR

Posted 01 March 2016 - 02:16 PM

They rely on shills that will buy every early access mech they can pop out of sarna.

Yes, I have a gold mech. Yes, it was purchased because I wanted to support the CW vision. Yes, I was fooled by PGI.

My monetary support ended upon release of CW since it was terrible and pointless. I will never buy anything again unless CW is developed as it should be.

#7 DeadEye COTP

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 116 posts

Posted 01 March 2016 - 02:21 PM

Who knows, their marketing dpt. really doesn't have their head wrapped around the basics of creating a F2P game with the intention of retaining players so I disagree with the "Going Steady" part. The NPE is atrocious for several reasons, and they could be easily remedied if PGI would just take a few minutes to think about what players want, and what people have time for.

The whole module/consumables and them being linked to 'upgrade' modules is a huge hit for a new player. They will see systems like this and immediately think that they could be just a little better if they didn't have to invest so much to be on the level of other players. They need to be drastically reduced in price, especially considering PGI can't even give us a button to quick swap equipment.

The way trial 'mechs are run is just silly, rarely does it relate to how an actual mech will be built. The armor is one thing, but the terrible loadouts are just a kick in the cockpit for 90% of these 'mechs. The easiest solution would be to scratch them altogether and allow 'renting' of 'mechs with or without free equipment for the time of said rental, or have the trial 'mechs be a blank chassis with the same idea around it - allowing the player to CUSTOMIZE the 'mech and have a realistic idea of how it will perform. The current 'investment' system you have to slog through as a new player will leave a bad taste in the mouth of many people. It takes countless hours just to build a CW deck, especially when you have to Elite them and have modules to compliment the weapons or the 'mech itself.

The single biggest question and complaint I see from new players, especially the Steam crowd would be "what's a good mech to start with" , otherwise it's "I made a bad choice, so I have to make a new account for the free starting cbills". They are sticking themselves in a niche, when the gameplay and the visuals alone could absolutely carry this game much further than the pigeon hole PGI has created for themselves.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users