Get Industry News In Your Inbox…
Sign Up Today
Ahead of the free Monetisation Design Masterclass webinar hosted by Fundamentally Games CEO Oscar Clark, which takes place on Wednesday, July 24th, we’ve republished this article on designing games with long-term revenue in mind.
Check out our upcoming Masterclass webinars and workshops to learn more about monetisation and more right here.
A recent Sensor Tower report revealed that 78% of revenues in games are coming from service-based experiences, and yet we still find a lot of confusion over how to approach design and monetisation for keeping the interest of players in the long term. This even applies to games we, at Fundamentally Games, have pitched to us that we feel have great potential to become living games.
In this article, Oscar Clark, CEO at Fundamentally Games and author of “Games As A Service” will explore some of the design thinking behind longer-term sustainable revenue models. Along the way, he hopes to show that the model can be plausible for smaller teams, without falling into the content treadmill, and how to focus on player value.
Why Do We Buy?
In 1960 R. Bauer wrote about ‘The role of risk in consumer behaviour’ which I think remains a great starting point to help understand why anyone buys anything; and just as importantly ‘why’ when they don’t! To heavily summarise the paper sets out to show that for any purchase we all need to mollify our own concerns that would otherwise prevent us from buying.
Basically, there are four core motivations that we need to engage before we will be willing to take the plunge and buy any item:
- Anticipation: Unless I trust that the purchase will fulfill some desire, or value for me, I will not buy.
- Opportunity Cost: If I don’t understand the cost of missing out by failing to act, I will not buy.
- Social Capital: If I don’t see how this purchase contributes to my ‘social identity’ I will not buy.
- Abnegation: If I have outside pressures or responsibilities which override my needs, I will not buy.
The last item ‘Abnegation’ is the one which causes the most consternation. As an example, I know I should be doing the washing up, but I “set aside my responsibilities” to play Fortnite and buy the battle pass because of the anticipation of the delight of playing the game and showing off the skins I’ve unlocked.
We need to take a step back and find smarter ways to make more sustainable experiences, and still retain the fun/joy of the game.
As designers of living games, we are looking to not just sell commodities but also to create engaging playing experiences, if we apply the same motivation principles to the core mechanics as we do when selling In-App Purchases. We can even go further to create contextual motivations that will sustain audiences over weeks, months, and years of play.
As players we instinctively understand the price in our time and effort that is driven by the anticipation or “Fear of Missing Out” that motivates us to play through the grind and unlock the next achievement or boss level. However, there is a real risk that this way of thinking will drive us into a content treadmill of endlessly making costly art assets that inevitably deteriorate in value for players.
Instead, we need to take a step back and find smarter ways to make more sustainable experiences, and still retain the fun/joy of the game.
Putting Player Value First
My first step is to look at the game through the player’s eyes and in general I think you can break this down into the following types of utility (meaning that thing which satisfies players “wants”):
Subsistence: What do players need and without which the game cannot progress, e.g. fuel, health, energy (even owning the game for a pay-upfront game).
…
