Jimquisition: Monetizing Whales For The Retention Of Virality

[geier]

Completly disagree with you there Jim.
Using terms/jargon in a business talk has nothing to do with dehumanisation, nothing. You are overreacting and i think you now this. Getting pissed off because of someone using a term like whale is like getting pissed off because someone used the therm FPS for Fallout 3, because FO3 is not a FPS but a roleplaying game with a new way of combining gunplay and turn based combat in wich you are able to choose between first and third person view.

There are not enough hours in the day to hold a business talk without certain terms and or jargon. What would you recomend for a substitute for whale? Bigspenders? Idiots with to much money in their wallets?

And if you haven't realised yet, the game industry is just that: An industry. And in every industry you need some white collar/business types who are responsible for the money/marketing.

And by the way: Complaining about the industry making money is more then a little hypocritically from you. Where do you get your money from? Not directly from the publisher/developer i know, but from the industry. You are, if you like it or not, a part from this industry. Just like the sleezy suit and the hungry underpaid indy studio.

Also: What is so bad with a panel to tell developers how to reduce backlash? Do you remember Mass effect 3 and the reaction of the gamers to the ending? Not all reactions from the customers are justified. You yourself brought up the question of customer/gamer entitlement.

No doubt, there are many companys who's business practices are shady at best, but dismissing the whole idea of bringing some professionalism into game development is just wrong and a bit juvenile.

I'm sorry for my bad english, as you maybe guessed it is not my primary language. So i could not argue and express myself as good and refined as i wanted.

And yes my dear jim + forum users, i myself have a background in businessmanagement.

 

[srpilha]

As sad as it makes us feel about the world, I feel we have to side with senordesol here. It's a business, and businesses have a tendency to kill artistic integrity and quality very very quickly.

That's not even recent news, that's the case since at least the late 18th century. It just gets quicker and more dramatic lately.

As a musicologist and a composer, I face very similar problems regarding research and concert funding. In my case, there are a few grants and competitions... But I wouldn't pay my bills if I hadn't the EXTREME luck to be employed as a university teacher to do what I do. In the end, that's the state (ergo, taxes) paying my salary. I'm very glad for it, and I do think it would be great if this coulod be the case for every other art too.

But oh boy, try and vote that.

 

[Olas]

Jim completely missed the boat on reducing backlash. No matter how generous a business, there will always be backlash. Give people a free doughnut and they will complain that they can't take two. Games are a business and I do not envy developers and publishers trying to make a buck in an era where many teens think everything should be free - hence the rise of F2P games where you have to make your money on the back end.

I think it's common sense that the amount of backlash one gets will always be proportional to the degree in which you do things that piss off consumers. It may be true that some backlash will always exist due to misunderstandings and not being able to please everyone at once, but I don't think it's 'free donut' backlash that inspired a whole panel at GDC.

I believe if a company does things to foster good will and admiration from customers it will eventually be rewarded for it in the form of a loyal fan-base who will happily buy your products and defend you from the inevitable whiners.

When one has to be on the defense about their own products so often that it becomes a valuable skill to have in the industry, it's a sign that something is gone wrong.

 

[SnowWookie]

Sorry, but this video fucked me off. Big time.

Let me spell it out for you... remember that bit in the video where you said developers are there to make great games?

NO, THEY'RE FUCKING NOT. Developers want to get PAID. So they can eat, pay the mortgage, etc. They don't exist in some pure aesthete form just to make a perfect game. They work fucking hard and are in general vastly underpaid compared to what they could be getting doing a comparable job in a non game industry.

While I agree, there are some terrible, awful monetization models in the industry.... you can't just tar the whole industry with such a broad brush.

 

[Demonchaser27]

I... I... just don't know what to say. I'm normally as calm and collective about issues as can be but no. Not this time. This is ****ing despicable. THIS right here is exactly what I hate about modern capitalism. People are numbers, cows, ****ing whales...?

This is GD freaking C. Last time I checked this was supposed to be about GAMING. "GAME" Developer's Conference. My god this system disgusts me. I know humanity hasn't always been perfect, but you can now actively speak in public about monetizing teens/kids/whales and are somehow looked at as an upstanding, deserving of any wealth or recognition person. I mean holy shit. Thank you for talking about this Jim even if it sank my heart down to my feet.

 

[Karadalis]

PGI/IGP of mechwarrior online should have visited that panel on backlash reducement tactics...

They really need it what with their constant marketing fuckups...

500 dollar "golden" mechs for a game that has not delivered anything but a "minimal viable product" (Devs own words btw)

Sorry, but this video fucked me off. Big time.

Let me spell it out for you... remember that bit in the video where you said developers are there to make great games?

NO, THEY'RE FUCKING NOT. Developers want to get PAID. So they can eat, pay the mortgage, etc. They don't exist in some pure aesthete form just to make a perfect game. They work fucking hard and are in general vastly underpaid compared to what they could be getting doing a comparable job in a non game industry.

While I agree, there are some terrible, awful monetization models in the industry.... you can't just tar the whole industry with such a broad brush.

Yeah... all those forced labor camps and Shanghai recruitments of poor innocent developers really leaves them no choice then to fall back to scummy sales tactics.

Look if they dont like the condition of their working enviroment they should look for a new job.

Sounds familiar?

Same argument as the often lauded "Dont like it? Dont play it.. no one forces you to"

No other industry in the world gets away with the amount of bullshit the games industry gets away with, including seeing every single one of their customers as criminals, trying their hardest to prevent or circumvent basic customer rights in the name of THEIR profit... yeah...

So cry me a river about how bad the developers have it. If they are only interested in their own wellbeing.. guess what? I as a customer wont give a shit about them either.

Isnt it nice how this goes both ways?

Treat me like a human and not a wallet on legs and ill respect and continue doing business with your company.. otherwise you can say goodbye to any of MY money going your way.

That all being said it is most often not in the Developers hands who are most often just wage slaves to the big publishers who make the real decisions. Its not like the guys who made Dead space 3 really thought having microtransactions in a single player game was a great idea. No one but businesspeople can be that stupid.

 

[Demonchaser27]

Great video, Jim, but one thing that I'm surprised wasn't brought up, by you or the other posters here:

The term "whale" comes from Las Vegas, and is another word for "high roller" -- i.e. somebody, often very wealthy, who drops huge amounts of money, often in the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, at the slots and the tables. Casinos love whales, and offer them lavish packages (called "comps") to draw them in, filled with private jets, limos, the best suites, and free lines of credit so they can keep gambling.

The fact that F2P developers have proudly adopted the term "whale" to describe the biggest junkies (sorry, players) illustrates perfectly how the F2P racket is pretty much only one step above casinos in terms of ethics. Maybe not even, because casinos are at least honest about the fact that they sucker people.

Well after that GDC I'm pretty sure the game industry just admitted its as bad as the casinos and isn't afraid to admit it. Jesus...

 

[MCerberus]

This whole situation is why I ask "What happens if I don't give them money" when playing f2p stuff. If I don't like the answer I move on.

The biggest part of my playlist has done thusly:
"Well you already gave us money. Enjoy the hats and free content."
"You won't progress as quickly to the big iconic tanks, but whatever."
"Then you'll just have to play the game to unlock more characters."
"We've been giving you free currency since you've been around since before f2p. You'll have an xp penalty though. Oh, and have all these free xp boosters."

Meanwhile I avoid:
"You're only renting the guns. Also you can't have these guns that are better than yours."
"You're done playing, see you in 12 hours where it turns out no progress was made but log in anyway or you'll get penalized."
"The first two zones are free. Have fun grinding trash mobs to be able to afford what's next. Also no being part of the economy. Can't have that."

And finally, the "can do things that can't be described on the forums with a rusy spoon" tier consists of the double dippers:

"You payed for the game, enjoy the cash shop."
"We realize that having a new character on our subscription game means a lot of leveling, give us $60."


A cookie per game you identify from the lists.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

I get the feeling that if Jim had actually gone, he would have been flipping tables left and right. I mean seriously, a panel about "Avoiding Backlash"? Make a fucking good game and don't force your players out of the experience they paid for in an attempt to get more money out of them!

I hope attendance for those panels were low.

 

[Demonchaser27]

That panel at the GDC sounds like someone failed to take even a basic course on marketing. Talk about the worst case of marketing Myopia I've ever had the displeasure of reading about. Games are about satisfying peoples wants and desire for play at a fair price: Not exploiting peoples behavior for maximum profit.

Well... at least it used to be right? For quite a time it's been going the other way.

 

[PuckFuppet]

It is worth noting that a lot of developers these days have no concept of what the consumer wants/expects beyond the meaningless drivel that highly biased and actively manipulated focus tests say. You or I wouldn't consider it a difficult topic to research because surely you can just pop online a take a look? What, take a look a bunch of talentless fuckwits criticise something you've worked on (whether or not it was good) with absolutely no actual useful input? Have your work graded against an imaginary ideal of what is "good" and what is "bad" based on just as much meaningless drivel as you find in your focus tests? How about "No.".

I don't think I can even properly iterate how genuinely amusing both sides of this debate are, mostly because neither can actually take a second to communicate in anything except dangerously formula "personal messages" via tweets or w/e other horseshit the kids are doped up on or, in this case, via a forum where heaven forbid anyone actually disagree with them.

I know most people mean well but if you consistently bring nothing of value to a discussion and then expect something to happen as a result of that... no one can help you. The level of self-delusion required for most people to genuinely believe that their opinion is either something new or something useful actually falls outside what I can reasonably imagine.

Are the corporate rags who came up with those panels a problem? Yes.
Are the self-righteous twats that desperately need to justify themselves by expressing their opinion as fact a problem? Yes.

The answer to the question "Am I a hypocrite?" is the same as above.

 

[Cecilthedarkknight_234]

I'm going to laugh hard when the game industry comes crashing down, because of bull shite practices like this. Bravo Jim for speaking the truth, just fuc*** bravo.

 

[Kraakdoos]

Nice one Jim.

Although it makes me sick to the stomach that these things exist, it's good to know there are people who feel the same way.

Maybe we should make a game where you are working at GDC and your role is to assassinate and shut down these seminars. You could have a big magnum.

 

[vxicepickxv]

Jim, that panel you did was the most beautiful one I've ever witnessed.

 

[Demonchaser27]

Can... Can I... can I get one of those flashdrives? For... a friend

There is a very malignant attitude towards free to play games. You shouldn't design a game around the notion of "Whales." Its unsustainable business. That "Whale" is going to sing somewhere else eventually.

You should design your game in a way that's fair. Free To Play games like League of Legends do this well. You're never required, or coerced into buying something. In fact, the only reason that store is in (atleast, in the beginning) was to keep the business afloat. League was a labor of love that Riot wanted to give out for free. They felt that having a paywall blocks potential players from enjoying their pet project. The paying features are only cosmetic or a boost that really doesn't change the dynamics of the game. Buying every champion in the game, or one of their skins, doesn't give you an advantage over someone who just players the rotated champions. It gives them more options, but not more power.

That's the free to play model I have faith in. The kind that puts the game before the money - not the money before the game. That is sustainable - League's not going to die out any time soon. A year from now, who's gonna remember Dungeon Keeper?

No, Dota was a labor of love that was given out for free. League of Legends places restrictions on the players over what heroes they can use unless they pay. It absolutely contains walls that lower player enjoyment. League of Legend is better than others but NOT a good example of a good free to play game.

Actually, there aren't really any examples of good free to play games. TF2 is another one often thrown about but TF2 was not made as a free to play game.

Yeah I actually agree with you Thanatos. Like that name. It reminds me of Secret of Mana.
I've never been pleased with F2P in any of it's current forms. There's always a catch... always.

 

[Thanatos2k]

Sorry, but this video fucked me off. Big time.

Let me spell it out for you... remember that bit in the video where you said developers are there to make great games?

NO, THEY'RE FUCKING NOT. Developers want to get PAID. So they can eat, pay the mortgage, etc. They don't exist in some pure aesthete form just to make a perfect game. They work fucking hard and are in general vastly underpaid compared to what they could be getting doing a comparable job in a non game industry.

While I agree, there are some terrible, awful monetization models in the industry.... you can't just tar the whole industry with such a broad brush.

It used to be that you made money by creating a good game people wanted to play.

Now it's how many of the small number of stupid people who spend a lot of money can you trick into playing your game, and how long you can keep them playing before they realize your game sucks, or they are distracted by a nearby butterfly.

Yeah I actually agree with you Thanatos. Like that name. It reminds me of Secret of Mana.
I've never been pleased with F2P in any of it's current forms. There's always a catch... always.

Yeah, I really need to upload my avatar to here. Gimme a sec....

 

[Demonchaser27]

Seems everyone here is in agreement, so allow me to play semi-devil's advocate for a moment (note this will all be specific to mobile gaming):

How much of this problem is a result of consumers complaining when an app costs more then a couple of dollars? Would we still have all this monetization talk if it was acceptable for games in an app store to sell for $10 or more? How would, say, Plants vs Zombies 2 or Simpsons Tapped Out be different if instead of F2P monetization tricks they were able to just charge an upfront dollar amount that is more in line with what the game is actually worth? Plenty of people have spoken before about how consumers have artificially driven down the prices of apps, and how even a quality app will suffer a BACKLASH in ratings if it isn't sold for dirt-cheap.

Now, I'm not saying that some of the F2P monetization practices are okay. Far from it in fact. However, we as consumers need to take a long look in the mirror because we are not blameless either.

Well like you said the practices aren't okay. They should have seen that a long time ago. Instead of going down this road they could have just tried a different model that was ethical. You don't need to wait for people to get pissed about being manipulated to know manipulation is wrong. Psychology does exist and has for well over 100 years. Long before video games existed.

 

[Vivi22]

To be fair Jim.. backlash can come from actually trying to improve a game. Like say rebalancing your heroes in a MOBA.. dear god. So it is possible to create backlash in your work to improve your own product.

The key is that if that sort of backlash is happening or you expect it, you need to ask if it really is worth pissing off a few people to genuinely make the game better.

But what he's really referring to isn't doing things like rebalancing to improve the game. He's talking about business models, always online, etc. which do not serve an actual useful purpose that makes the end users experience better, and which there should be no question at this point that they will just piss people off.

 

[Demonchaser27]

Your panel on how to reduce backlash was way too long, this is my panel: Don?t be a greedy twat and make good games.

Even your panel is redundant. "Make good games" should cover it. The money will come. Maybe not as much as soon, but it will have a long-term positive effect.

'Not as much as soon' sounds a lot like a 'day late and a dollar short' to a lot of people (particularly bill collectors). It'd be super nice if we lived in a just world where titles with artistic integrity were the chart toppers, unfortunately for those of us who've got rent to pay; that's not always the case.

See that's the problem with this industry and most for that matter though. "Chart Toppers" isn't necessary to "pay the bills" as you say. Everybody wants to be number 1. Jesus. **** number 1. When did people stop caring about doing things for the art and love of it. Musicians don't make millions always and they get by happy and fine mostly. Artists certainly aren't "chart toppers" as most of their work doesn't sell for millions until their dead.

Videogames devs want to be artist but don't treat it as such. What did they expect?

 

[Demonchaser27]

To be fair Jim.. backlash can come from actually trying to improve a game. Like say rebalancing your heroes in a MOBA.. dear god. So it is possible to create backlash in your work to improve your own product.

The key is that if that sort of backlash is happening or you expect it, you need to ask if it really is worth pissing off a few people to genuinely make the game better.

But what he's really referring to isn't doing things like rebalancing to improve the game. He's talking about business models, always online, etc. which do not serve an actual useful purpose that makes the end users experience better, and which there should be no question at this point that they will just piss people off.

Thanks for this man. This is correct.