[casual_games] Clones in casual (was RE: Gameplay patents)
tomh at mofactor.com
Wed Feb 14 18:46:52 EST 2007
I do think that the portals ensure that each title they put up is of
reasonable quality - sorry if I wasn't clear about that.
As for creating something that cannot be easily cloned - I haven't yet seen
an example. The only thing that I've seen suggested that would limit cloning
is inherently higher production costs. While certain folks can do that, it's
far from an industry wide solution and one that I don't think is
sustainable. Puzzle Pirates can be cloned - but the costs and perceived
revenues prevent it. If Puzzle Pirates had made 15m instead 3m as of May
2006, I suspect we'd see one or two clones by now ;)
(I just read the link and I couldn't agree with you more in your assessment
- and I will attempt to do a better job of distinguishing downloadable vs
casual games. It's easy to fall into the trap.)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: casual_games-bounces at igda.org
> [mailto:casual_games-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Daniel James
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 2:04 PM
> To: IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [casual_games] Clones in casual (was RE:
> Gameplay patents)
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Tom Hubina wrote:
> > 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.
> I don't think that this is true. Portals make more money by
> delivering a satisfying experience to their users -- one that
> gets them to play games, view ads, transact and *come back for more*.
> Now, given how some of the major players have been 'tithed'
> their traffic by virtue of corporate parent portals, and the
> somewhat remarkable lack of investment made in
> differentiation and innovation, you might be forgiven for
> thinking that portal managers are the kind of fools who will
> just throw up any old crap. They're not. The portals all
> manage their flow of new games carefully and I believe that
> some of them are quite good at optimising (to which of the
> above metrics is an interesting question).
> If the portals are pushing a particular PuzzLoop derivation
> it's because that derivation is better at giving them what
> they're looking for from their audience. They won't
> arbitrarily throw up lots of crappy clones for giggles -- of
> course lots of crappy clones may be what the audience
> wants... and the way to change that is by making something
> better and perhaps less amenable to simple cloning.
> Now, getting 'something better' distributed is another
> question, and seems to require a different kind of fool...
> - Daniel, grinding his axe, just a little. More;
> Casual_Games mailing list
> Casual_Games at igda.org
> Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe
> Archive Search:
> List FAQ:
More information about the Casual_Games