The Business Side of Video (Space) Games EXCLUSIVELY ON IDLE THUMBS

[Spenny]

I'll tell you something, at least half of Rovio's income is from their merchandising. 

[tegan]

I seriously can't believe there's shit like an Angry Birds TV show and comic series. That is the weakest possible premise and set of characters you could base a variety of stories on.

[Merus]

The trick with mobile is that the audience is relatively unsophisticated as consumers or as an audience; every game is basically on the ground floor. Rovio became an Angry Birds company after they had that big hit, so they've got a solid brand.

 

Although talking with my parents, who love Candy Crush Saga, made me calm down about it - it's Bejeweled, but with a sense of progress and evolution that Bejeweled doesn't have, and it seems like most people take the microtransactions as a challenge to not use them. There's a huge risk for them in going to the store and paying money for a game that might not be enjoyable and the only way they have to find out whether they'd like something is basically me. A free game at the top of the app store leaderboards is much less risk, and it's fun enough.

[Henroid]

I seriously can't believe there's shit like an Angry Birds TV show and comic series. That is the weakest possible premise and set of characters you could base a variety of stories on.

Meanwhile there's a sci-fi Tetris movie in the works.

[Dewar]

My only real problem with Candy Crush is that in certain areas the way candy drops are random, which hurts my brain since I'm used to playing three moves ahead due to Puzzle Quest.

[Justin Leego]

I'll tell you something, at least half of Rovio's income is from their merchandising.

Yep. Everything from plushies and schoolbags to movies and theme park plans.

[SecretAsianMan]

I seriously can't believe there's shit like an Angry Birds TV show and comic series. That is the weakest possible premise and set of characters you could base a variety of stories on.

 

Meanwhile there's a sci-fi Tetris movie in the works.

 

Don't forget the Angry Birds movie which now includes voice talents such as Peter Dinklage, Jason Sudeikis, Maya Rudolph, Bill Hader, and Danny McBride.

[SecretAsianMan]

In the last day or so, both Steam and Twitch are making movements towards being more explicit about sponsorship in its user base.  Steam will require curators who have received compensation for a review or recommendation to say so in their recommends.  Twitch will label streams that have a deal between a sponsor, broadcaster, and Twitch itself.  That rule only applies if Twitch is involved.  If the deal is just between a sponsor and broadcaster, they can still sell it however they want.

[SuperBiasedMan]

Rami Ismail tweeted this article earlier and it's terrifying and sickening.

[Henroid]

Rami Ismail tweeted this article earlier and it's terrifying and sickening.

I mean, the concept of "doing everything we can to brainwash people into liking it" sounds like a goal rather than "yes we do that." But it's still fucked up to propose. Luckily he doesn't really get into specifics. Though if he did, maybe people would see he's full of shit; the marketing just runs broad like summer blockbuster film marketing does.

 

All that said though.

 

Him leaping from video games to "hey maybe the government should try this shit" is stupid as fuck. I guess that's why his writing job is for the Call of Duty series.

 

Edit - I mean it's clearly him going, "Hey our marketing is SO GOOD that" - but the shit he says to make it sound awesome is super poor taste.

[Nachimir]

"I look at the US military and government, ironically, as having some of the very same problems as what the Call of Duty franchise has," Anthony continued. "We are both on top of our game. We are both the best in the world at what we do. We both have enemies who are trying to take us down at any possible opportunity. But the difference is, we know how to react to that."

 

Paraphrasing a tweet I saw earlier: "Idiot thinks he's invented propaganda; assumes US military, administration, establishment not already familiar with it".

[Henroid]

So PewDiePie. I'm not a fan of his content. BUT!

 

Apparently, he's going to start up his own company. In a recent interview he spoke about his troubles when working with Machinima (mostly in that they didn't contact him ever, nor did they even realize he was one of their folks) (a problem I'd heard from other friends partnered with them), and how he's leaving his current partnership with Maker Studios (now owned by Disney). I dunno if this business is going to be just for himself or if he's gonna have it available for other video game streamers to come up in. I honestly hope for the latter, because if he does things right, it could add much needed stability to that, er, profession?

 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/227034/Popular_YouTuber_PewDiePie_is_looking_to_strike_out_on_his_own.php

[Henroid]

So business news surrounding video games. Like, actual business.

 

http://gamasutra.com/blogs/PatrickFoot/20141003/226987/Is_2014_the_year_that_investors_finally_take_video_games_seriously.php

 

2014 kinda turned perceptions of the video game industry on its head, when it comes to investors / the stock market. Essentially what's going on is that this year saw mobile app developers seeing losses in stock value. Meanwhile, companies like Amazon, Microsoft, and Activision are all seeing rising stock value due to the Twitch acquisition, Mojang acquisition, and Destiny's launch. Even Facebook's acquisition of Oculus has resulted in a permanent boost to their stock value (and also it's kind of a support for traditional PC gaming).

 

So basically anyone that said mobiles games would be the end of 'traditional' games is full of shit. It's not that mobiles aren't allowed or are going away. It's that everything will exist and take turns at thriving over the other.

[shindigs]

http://kotaku.com/the-messy-story-behind-youtubers-taking-money-for-game-1644092214

 

Good read from Kotaku that explores a recent 'controversy' from Shadow of Mordor in which the marketing team would give YouTubers early access + money to cover it but on terms that they focus on the nemesis system and don't say anything overtly negative.

 

With all the gaming journalism hoo-ha, I'm surprised (or really not surprised) that this didn't get more attention.  It's honestly fascinating as the article does a great job of showing that these offers are really tempting for some YouTubers as a) money is really tight in that scene some view it's OK as long as they disclose it c) some don't consider themselves reviewers so yolo $$$

 

The politics and economics of independent video content is super interesting

[brkl]

No women though so who cares.

[Henroid]

YouTube channel operators have been present for a while, but it seems like 2014 is the year where people are paying attention to them. Not as audience members though - it's a new facet to the video game industry as a business (or rather, a new means to an already existing sub-business; promotion) and deserves to be under a watchful eye for shenanigans. Such as what's going on above.

 

Edit - A friend just pointed out that the game is getting positive press on its own merits anyway. So in a sense I feel like that means the publisher is getting punished, because they unnecessarily flushed money in the form of bribes down the toilet. They would've gotten free positive press. Which you tend to get when you make a great game.

 

But the YouTubers still get to eat their cake and have it, etc. I mean it's not like they're necessarily -wrong- about praising what they praise, but they probably would've done so without money being waved in their faces.

 

That said, do we know which YTers took the bribe?

[Dewar]

Comments in various articles seem to indicate a lot of folks renegotiated the contract to get some of the most horrible stuff removed, which I guess means we'll never know who exactly signed what.

[SuperBiasedMan]

Don't underestimate the value of increasing the number of people talking about your game while intending to make them all say good things. Even if people would like the game regardless, that doesn't always translate to free positive press. By ensuring it, they made SoM a widespread Internet topic that they otherwise couldn't have counted on. (or at least they presumably didn't think they could count on it).

[Justin Leego]

Sounds a lot like the co-ordinated release of positive reviews for WB's Batman: Arkham Asylum, except that was in the established press.

[tegan]

I think that there's a certain overestimation of the value of good press over bad press. People like TotalBiscuit should probably be asking why they're being paid by publishers to talk about their games when they can't control what they'll say.

 

Hint: it's because what you say doesn't actually matter, so long as it includes the title of the game. I'm sure every marketing executive at every game studio in the world has seen things like this...

 

 

Aliens: Colonial Marines debuted at number one on the UK all formats chart despite the negative reception, similar to the 2010 game Aliens vs. Predator.[76] According to GfK Chart-Track it was the biggest release of the year in the UK ahead of Dead Space 3, and held the second highest first week sales for an Alien game since Aliens vs. Predator.[77][78] The game was number one on both the respective Xbox 360 and PS3 individual charts.[79]

 

...or looked at how Flappy Bird trended on Google...

 

 

...and noticed that the game didn't really take off until right after PewDiePie made a video about it, titled "DON'T PLAY THIS GAME."

 

 

...Or noticed just how little gamers actually care about the criticisms that they think or say that they care about.

 

 

 

 

 

What I'm getting at is: all that shit about there being no such thing as bad press is true, and tools like TB are just that: tools for marketing. Every once in a while a publisher will straight-up ask for positive coverage, but bad press is often just as valuable as good press.

[Twig]

 

I think that there's a certain overestimation of the value of good press over bad press. People like TotalBiscuit should probably be asking why they're being paid by publishers to talk about their games when they can't control what they'll say.

 

Hint: it's because what you say doesn't actually matter, so long as it includes the title of the game. I'm sure every marketing executive at every game studio in the world has seen things like this...

 

 

 

...or looked at how Flappy Bird trended on Google...

 

 

...and noticed that the game didn't really take off until right after PewDiePie made a video about it, titled "DON'T PLAY THIS GAME."

 

 

...Or noticed just how little gamers actually care about the criticisms that they think or say that they care about.

 

 

 

 

 

What I'm getting at is: all that shit about there being no such thing as bad press is true, and tools like TB are just that: tools for marketing. Every once in a while a publisher will straight-up ask for positive coverage, but bad press is often just as valuable as good press.

I agree with you but people using that MW2 boycott group image always prods my eyeballs because it's 17 pages long and everyone after that point is offline (at least I'm pretty sure Steam groups order their users by online playing games -> online not playing games -> online). Either way, one page out of seventeen!

 

Then again the boycott group was fucking dumb in the first place.

[tegan]

The first user on the list and "dafox" are both offline, so I assume it's grouped by something else.

[Merus]

I think that there's a certain overestimation of the value of good press over bad press. People like TotalBiscuit should probably be asking why they're being paid by publishers to talk about their games when they can't control what they'll say.

 

Hint: it's because what you say doesn't actually matter, so long as it includes the title of the game. I'm sure every marketing executive at every game studio in the world has seen things like this...

 

...or looked at how Flappy Bird trended on Google...

 

...and noticed that the game didn't really take off until right after PewDiePie made a video about it, titled "DON'T PLAY THIS GAME."

 

...Or noticed just how little gamers actually care about the criticisms that they think or say that they care about.

 

 

What I'm getting at is: all that shit about there being no such thing as bad press is true, and tools like TB are just that: tools for marketing. Every once in a while a publisher will straight-up ask for positive coverage, but bad press is often just as valuable as good press.

 

See, I'm thinking about this, and wondering what this says about the marketplace of ideas and the conviction that the truth will prevail if given the opportunity.

 

Because apparently I'm feeling foolish today, wanting to talk about free speech on the internet.

[Bjorn]

Because apparently I'm feeling foolish today, wanting to talk about free speech on the internet.

 

Woooo! 

 

Actually though, I went down a bit of a white supremacist rabbit hole today (which is something I haven't looked at in a long time), and at least for the moment, my usual unwavering support of free speech is not just wavering, but flat wobbly. 

[Merus]

You know, now that I think about the marketplace of ideas, I think that's my problem more than free speech. I think you can be very much in favour of free speech, which is a human right, while simultaneously believing that the 'marketplace of ideas' is full of shit.