Apple, cross-promotion, Discovery Engineering, eCPA, Electronic Arts, Europe, Facebook, Fantasy Sports, guano, iPhone, potato, sheep, South America, SPI, whales, wolves

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 10

After doubling European farming output with the potato, there was a further tripling of value from another South American import: the bird droppings known as guano. Let’s apply the fertilizer metaphor to how we can make games better with a new technical discipline that I’ll call Discovery Engineering. In short, how do we start with the same game but add engineering and technology that brings in much more new daily traffic as well as more frequent return visits?

Our gaming guano starts with my very old concept that great games must be Simple, Hot and Deep. I’ve been saying this since I founded Electronic Arts in 1982 and it remains true nearly 30 years later. Consider the ocean, which is simple enough in concept and access that everyone likes to go to the beach. The babies are playing in the sand and puddles while the kids that can walk are getting wet and letting the lapping waves chase them. It’s hot and the graphics and sound are fantastic; everyone is enthralled by the spectacle and can’t get enough. And no matter how far you go it just keeps getting deeper until you need a surfboard or scuba gear and have to worry about sharks. The analogy I used earlier was how the depth satisfies the whales, also known as wolves, who generate your revenue. The wolves need to conquer the sheep that are represented by the casual players. Hence the game must appeal to everyone like the ocean. You cannot even begin to make this work if the game is not Simple, Hot and Deep.

There are additional things that can now be embodied in the game itself that will drive more traffic and return visits. Game mechanics that are very satisfying to play by yourself are of less value than mechanics that engage you in competition and contact with other players, which provokes both viral spread and higher return rates. Repeatable game mechanics that are driven more by algebra and stats, like Fantasy Sports, are not only more efficient to build than a content treadmill, but they provoke endless competitive comparisons leading to higher return rates and more spending.

Independent of the game, additional technology layers can be wrapped around it to generate more free traffic. The APIs of an SNS like Facebook are one great example. Apple makes it easy to send an email invitation but any of these ideas is going to be more effective if the game is not limited to one platform. Everyone that is looking at email or Facebook is but one click away from the browser, regardless of his or her preferred game platform. If your game runs in the browser without requiring any plug-ins, installs or memberships you have a better chance of getting the recipient of an invitation to try it right now. If they like a short trial session, they may later become a Facebook member or buy an iPhone but even if they don’t they can play your game in any case.

My favorite example of Discovery Engineering is how we do cross-promotion. Many people dislike this idea because they don’t understand it and are clinging to the past. Old School thinking says that customers go to destinations and that you would be crazy to distract them or let them exit prematurely once you have gone to all the trouble to bring them to your game. But if your game is in the browser, the player only invested in one simple click to get to you. Not only was the “investment” nothing, he’s busy right now, possibly at work or at school, and he’s going to be leaving your website within seconds regardless of how you treat him.

The principle of cross-promotion is to get something of value when, inevitably, he leaves. Hence we show a display ad banner offering a few other games to try. If the current game is no longer holding his attention, he’s a goner anyway. But if he clicks on a game in the banner, he goes to a competitor’s game for a free trial, and that competitor now owes our company a return click from one of their customers that we don’t already have. If your product is lousy this will only make you fail faster. But if you make a superior game you will double your customers this way, because your game is good enough that your departing player will remember to come back to your game again. And your competitor is giving you a new customer who will also like your game, so you’ll have two good customers instead of just one. Voila, your eCPA just dropped in half, which dramatically increases the chance that the game’s lifetime value will be profitable.

It is for the same reason that auto dealerships cluster together on the same street. But many game developers are too paranoid and distrusting to do this kind of cross-promotion. They’re afraid to help a competitor or they’re insecure or overly protective about their game. But we know this works for us; it’s the best guano we’ve got.

YOUR HEART IS FREE, HAVE THE COURAGE TO FOLLOW IT

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 15

I’ve made the argument that game developers should build tools that allow them to support all platforms and screens from the same R&D thrust.  Among these platforms the open browser is the most critical because it is the one that is not controlled by a giant corporation with a profit motive.

It is always tempting to align with the titans because they are big, powerful, influential and know how to market themselves and their business propositions.  But historically, closed platforms don’t work any better for game developers than the Berlin Wall.  Prior to Nintendo there were many open media platforms including print, painting, photography, film, video, music.  While Philips invented the CD player they widely licensed their patents and charged a mere 6 cents per disc, and allowed complete freedom of operations and expression.  More recently, the World Wide Web was a gift to the public and we’ve seen again how a free, open, competitive platform can flourish.  But Nintendo ushered in a new generation of closed platforms with unappealing license terms for third-parties.  It has always been great for Nintendo, but there isn’t a single great game software company today that was built on the back of Nintendo.  In general, these licenses in the console industry drove up costs, crippled innovation and despite industry growth more than 90% of publishers that bore these costs were wiped out.

Rather than operating like the web or CD, Nintendo has been the reference point for many new closed platforms.  Digital licenses have gotten even worse because the licensors all reserve the right to constantly make unilateral changes, thereby creating a slippery slope for third-party game developers who are at the end of the whip.  Hot new digital platforms with high growth have been as alluring as the Pied Piper, promising developers liberation from publishers and retailers and a chance to be first-movers.  Thousands of developers followed because it seemed reasonable at the time.  Apple, for example seemed generous initially to be raking only 30% of the pot, because Western mobile carriers had been taking 50-75%.  But not enough science or even study of history went into the choice of 30% that has become a de facto standard.  The mobile carriers had failed, so that was not a good reference point.  DoCoMo succeeded by charging only 9%.  Other huge platform successes like the CD and the web were essentially free.  Where is the analysis or evidence that a 30% fee is viable for a third-party industry?  There isn’t any.  Instead we have many examples to the contrary.

Consider that for games, it will cost up to 30% of revenue for the cost of acquisition (also known as advertising, even after averaging this cost down to eCPA as a result of other free traffic sources).  Sales or VAT tax can be another 10% or more.  Server overhead to operate free client-server games can also be 10% or more.  If there is a 30% platform fee a game developer is now looking at variable costs eating up 80% or more of revenue, and they still have to cover product development and overhead costs.  From what I can tell from published industry stats, on many platforms these other costs are 50% or more of revenue so now we’re at 130% for a median performing app.  Given a bell curve distribution and 200,000 apps you’ll still have outliers like Angry Birds and Millionaire City but overall this is not a healthy economic picture for game developers.

Many other companies have simply copied the 30% rate from Apple, justifying it on the simple argument that Apple had set the standard.  Well, I guarantee you that Steve Jobs did not envision the cost structure and business model of today’s games and arrive at the 30% number based on a clear understanding of a win-win scenario that would create a healthy value system for game developers.  Steve Jobs may have been a genius but he never liked the game industry and he never understood it, nor did he care about the needs of game developers.  While we’re currently stuck with the number he made up, there are signs of increasing platform competition as Windows 8 will charge a reduced rate of 20% and Google+ launched at only a 5% fee.  But history has shown that as developers invest and help platform owners become strong, the rates go up.

Game developers need to wake up now and realize that they have too often been willing serfs in feudal kingdoms where they don’t own the soil that they till.  The open browser is the next big game platform.  But even if it wasn’t, it is the one, only and best place for a developer to plant their flag and invest in their future.  Because it is open and free!  Being strong in the browser will create even more synergy if you are also extending your reach with Facebook, Apple, Android and other platforms that you can branch to from the browser.  We can even tolerate their 30% tariffs if our technology leverages product investments to reach all screens and to provide more sources of free traffic.  But freedom for game developers must come first.  If we are free, we can consider a flanking move on a closed platform from a position of strength and we can negotiate with some bargaining power, perhaps even with a collective viewpoint.

There have been other freedom fights in game industry history and we’ve had our William Wallaces.  Activision’s founders were sued by their former bosses at Atari but their bid for independence survived.  Tengen challenged Nintendo but suffered a fatal loss.  I founded Electronic Arts to create a better business model for game developers.  The most important single thing I did at EA was to push my team to reverse-engineer the Sega Genesis so that EA could be liberated from the draconian license agreements that were offered in those days.  I founded 3DO as a bold attempt to help developers and improve the value chain, but 3DO was outflanked by Sony’s deeper pockets.  3DO reduced industry standard console license fees by 70% but Sony put them right back where they had been.  More than 900 companies signed 3DO licenses but they fled to Sony when Sony proved willing to take big losses to build their hardware installed base.  Sony executives did tell me later that they copied many business practices and licensing philosophies from 3DO, which made things better for developers.  With Steampowered.com, Valve pioneered digital distribution at a time when none of the PC game publishers would touch it.  Bigpoint and GameForge pioneered browser games when the mainstream didn’t care.  In every one of these cases, game developers took risks and ventured into unknown territory for the betterment of game developers and the public.  The courage of a few did help grow an industry that can now support a vastly larger number of global game developers.  Today, the open browser gives all game developers a chance to be courageous and help the industry reach for a new age that could be truly golden for game developers, not just for Apple, Facebook and Zynga.

The browser is worth fighting for.  We need to be free.  We are all William Wallaces.  Let’s follow our hearts.

Tiger Woods PGA Tour 12: The Masters

Tiger Woods 12 is essentially a differently packaged version of Tiger Woods Online. All this game does is add the core modes of Masters play where you strive to take a shot at the coveted green jacket at The Masters and play through historic moments with or without Tiger at the legendary Augusta tourney. In some ways, it's more of an expansion pack for the Net version of Tiger than it is any kind of stand-alone game. Some vital gameplay options from the console release are not included here. The Caddy Experience feature where you access assistance from an onscreen caddy is not available, even though it was advertised as being part of the PC version of the game. Creating a pro for the Masters career mode has been knocked back so that you can only select from a handful of faces that cannot be edited. Multiplayer has been scaled back; instead of the usual suite of online matches, tournaments, and the like, you get three free months of online support before you have to pay a monthly subscription fee for Tiger Woods Online. Otherwise, you're stuck with a solo-only game after you hit the 90-day mark.

Gameplay is also not what you would expect. Control options have been dialled back to a simple--if effective and easy-to-use--three-click meter. There's also the TrueSwing option where you take cuts by sliding the mouse, but there is no gamepad support. Both options are easy to handle, especially the three-click meter because the needle moves so slowly that you can hammer balls dead straight down the fairway with pretty much every single swing that you take. Much of the game is also inextricably tied to online play. You have to be online and logged in earn the cash and experience needed to level up your golfer. Everything here is geared to getting you online and keeping you online. Of course, then you're constantly exposed to the lure of buying new accoutrements like clubs, balls, and other gear through micropayments in the online store (points needed to buy this stuff are accumulated slowly through regular gameplay). And, of course, you have to pay a monthly fee for the simple privilege of being online in the game after three months.

Online performance is far from perfect, too. Connections are dropped at times; you can be right in the middle of a match and get the message that the game has lost its connection to the servers. At that point, you're given the choice of continuing with lost access to all of the features noted above or bailing out to the menu and logging an error with EA. Neither option is particularly attractive.


Get used to paying real money for clubs and goodies here, as the cash and points roll in awfully slowly.
As with its online-only cousin, this game has stripped-down visuals with dated player models, along with nearly nonexistent sound. Gallery crowds have been excised, player faces look like something from five or six years ago, and there is no commentary in the game at all. Only the gallery crowd deletion might be seen by some as a positive because the zombielike clap-in-unison spectators from the console Tiger Woods 12 were creepy. But the total absence of people by greens in pro tournaments, as well as the lack of Jim Nantz and David Fetherly cutting up your putts, screams that this is a low-end production. With all that said, it isn't an ugly game. It supports some higher resolutions, background muzak is relaxing, and course graphics aren't hard on the eyes with the bells and whistles cranked to the "super" setting, although even then, the game's frame rate tends to chug when confronted with heavily treed areas. But when you pay $40 for a game like this bearing a well-regarded name, you expect more from the presentation.

In short, Tiger Woods PGA Tour 12: The Masters for the PC has been marketed under dubious pretenses as something that it clearly is not. This is more of a Masters-oriented expansion to Tiger Woods PGA Tour Online than any sort of independent golf game. Although it is not an awful golf sim, it is a very limited one when compared to the console games sold under the same name. It has also been crippled to the extent that it all but forces buyers to subscribe to Tiger Woods Online. It's a nice gesture that EA is offering refunds to dissatisfied customers, but it's hard to believe that anyone gave the OK for the release of this game in the first place.

Need for Speed: The Run

Image via CrunchBase

The Need For Speed series has varied over the years, between exciting arcade action (Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit), a closer approach to simulation (Need For Speed: Shift) or an underground racing romp (Need For Speed: Underground and its sequels).  But Electronic Arts will once again be shifting (mind the pun) gears in a new direction later this year when it releases Need For Speed: The Run, the latest from long-time series developer Black Box.  Rather than go with just your typical street racing event, it instead turns to a nationwide tournament, one with dire consequences if you just so happen to place anything other than first.

The game focuses on a guy named Jack.  He’s a down-and-out guy who’s fallen in with the wrong crowds, with both crooks and the cops tailing after him.  He vows to get himself out of trouble, but the only thing he has to his credit is his driving skills, which are more than enough to escape his pursuers – until the next time, at least.  Then, Jack heard about a nationwide tournament called The Run, a “Cannonball Run”-esque contest of sorts (without Burt Reynolds and Dom DeLuise, obviously), where racers go from San Francisco to New York in one straight shot, going as fast as possible.  The first one across the finish line scores a $25 million payday, which would be more than enough to give Jack a new start.

Codemasters confirms multiplayer-enabling one-time-use VIP Pass comes with new copies of off-road racer, used games require $10 code

he Online Pass initiative spearheaded by Electronic Arts has gained a new follower. First reported by Eurogamer, Codemasters has confirmed for GameSpot that it would be including a one-time-use download code with new copies of its upcoming off-road rally racer Dirt 3 that activates the game's online modes.

In addition to unlocking Dirt 3's multiplayer offerings, the code--known as a VIP Pass--also delivers access to five bonus vehicles. These extra rides include the McRae M4, the Ford Sierra Cosworth RS500, and the Hummer H3.

Dirt 3's online modes won't be part of the used-game purchase.

Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 gamers who pick up a second-hand version of the Dirt 3 can purchase a VIP Pass for $10 (800 Microsoft points). The pay wall is similar to that erected by a number of publishers beyond EA, including THQ and Sony. Ubisoft has expressed interest in the scheme.

For more on Dirt 3 in advance of its launch on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and PC this week, check outGameSpot's previous coverage.