[casual_games] Clones in casual (was RE: Gameplay patents)

[Hal Barwood]

I sympathize with the desire to rid our business of clones, but in my 
imagination the liklihood is right up there with successful defenses of 
gameplay patents.  I think, if you want to outdistance the clones, it's 
like the aliens told Woody Allen in _Stardust Memories_:  "Tell funnier 
jokes."

Tom Hubina wrote:

> OK - damaging the industry wasn't quite right. It's damaging to developers

> in the industry.

> 

> It is marginalizing developers and turning games into a commodity that has

> no value other than drawing in advertising - and where unlimited shelf space

> means that 10 mediocre games are just as good as one quality title. The

> "industry" will still make lots of money, but that money is going to be

> increasingly thinned out amongst more developers who will barely be able to

> make enough of a return on their investment to cover costs.

> 

> If you dump a few billion tons of gold on the market, gold prices drop

> everywhere and no one makes any money on gold (except the traders who take a

> piece of every transaction regardless) and people who have invested money in

> gold expecting to sell it at a certain price are suddenly losing money. You

> can either continue putting more gold into the system to try to get some

> cash out of the rapidly diminishing rates and make things worse or you can

> cut back on gold mining and get things to stabilize at a practical price

> before the whole thing collapses.

> 

> Right now in casual/web there's a seemingly limitless supply of games (gold)

> and everyone is producing as much as they can. The portals (traders) don't

> care if they put up 10 games or 100 .. They still sell X number of ads and Y

> downloads and make their money on the volume of transactions. While the

> market is growing with new users each year, that growth isn't keeping pace

> with the increase in the amount of content. The net result is that

> developers get a smaller portion of the pie. The factors are compounded by

> other things as well, but those other factors (more people in the value

> chain) are caused by overhead in the quantity of games.

> 

> I'm basing this on a few trends I've observed through (admittedly) anecdotal

> evidence over the past several years. You can judge for yourself if they

> match your understanding.

> 

> 1. Conversion rates for the average new game have gone down over the past

> several years, from 3% to 1%.

> 2. Percentage of revenue for developers has reduced as a combination of more

> people in the value chain, and rates are reduced at major portals.

> 3. Cost to create a title has increased.

> 4. Number of new titles released each year has exploded (from a handful per

> month to as many as 1 a day)

> 5. Number of portals has increased, each with their own trials (allowing

> users to play the same game for 10+ hours without paying for it)

> 6. Bundling/subscription deals reduce the unit cost of items and spread

> revenues out over multiple developers.

> 

> The key point here is that developers make less money when more games are

> being created and ... assuming ad prices hold ... portals make more money by

> releasing more games. The net result is that they're happy as pie to take

> everything we throw at them since it's better for them. They don't care that

> it's worse for us.

> 

> This says nothing of the increased difficulty in getting your title

> recognized. It used to be that a title would be in the "What's new" category

> with high visibility for a month. Now it's more like a week. As the quantity

> of content increases, that number could go down to a day.

> 

> There's a lot more to all of this and our ability to do anything about it is

> extremely limited, but that's why discussing it over a drink at GDC is more

> fun.

> 

> Tom

> 

>> -----Original Message-----

>> From: casual_games-bounces at igda.org 

>> [mailto:casual_games-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Alex Amsel

>> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 12:04 PM

>> To: IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List

>> Subject: Re: [casual_games] Gameplay patents

>>

>> You see, I don't think it is. This is all in the minds of 

>> developers IMHO. The audience buys what they want. It'll buy 

>> a good clone but not a bad one.

>>

>> Where retail has the nightmare of licenses/clones controlling 

>> everything, we have try before you buy. And it's wonderful.

>>

>> You could argue that portals need to be more willing to 

>> promote original games, but they ones that interest their 

>> audiences still float to the top.

>>

>> Tom Hubina wrote:

>>> Heh - fair enough.

>>>

>>> I'm casting about to try to find ways of getting rid of the "bad 

>>> clones" and the deluge of un-original content in casual because I 

>>> believe that it's causing (has caused) irreparable damage to an 

>>> industry that had a great deal of potential.

>>>

>>> Tom

>> -- 

>>

>> Alex Amsel

>> Tuna Technologies Ltd (Sheffield, UK)

>> Cross Platform Game Development

>> Tel: +44 (0)114 266 2211  Mob: +44(0)7771 524 632

>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> Casual_Games mailing list

>> Casual_Games at igda.org

>> http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

>> Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

>> Archive Search: 

>> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

>> List FAQ: 

>> http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Gam

>> es_List_FAQ

>>

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Casual_Games mailing list

> Casual_Games at igda.org

> http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive Search: http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

> List FAQ: http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Games_List_FAQ

>