This article has come up in a bunch of threads about monetisation recently. I figured it would be interesting to discuss the article on concept on its own.
The basic premise is new to mid level developers should not monetise at all, an instead focus on building their craft.
I’m inclined to agree. My first release grossed less then a dollar through my attempts to restrict the game to monetised platforms. Another couple of hundred plays and the associated feedback would have been far more useful then 62 cents that will never be paid out because it doesn’t meet the payment threshold. I’m interested with others experiences, especially around first games.
Here is a copy of the article if you haven’t read it yet.
I definitely agree with the article’s premise. From the standpoint of income my first game has also generated a negligible amount of income (around 100 dollars).
The only benefit I can see is each new aspect of games you try for the first time (networking, controls, and even monetization) take a few tries to get right. You might not want to wait all the way until you think your ready to try it for the first time or things like only using one ad source might sneak up and bite you on a title that would matter (not your first).
I actually saw the original post (1-2 months ago on FB) from the poster, those guys can say that monetizing is bad but even without monetization their numbers are still bad. I mean, you can talk all you want but less than 10k downloads won’t make your opinion become an expert one.
I think the premise is sound, he is basically saying until your work is worthy of payment don’t try to charge for it, you only waste your time instead of honing your craft. Once you make something decent, then monetize it, which is likely to be after your first X complete games. He is speaking to hobbyists not game studios.
I think that’s the whole point, until you can get numbers there is no value in monetising. The post is not saying monetisation is bad. Its saying focusing on monetisation before you have numbers is bad. Or more precisely focusing on monetisation before you have the skills and reputation to get the numbers is bad.
Another serious point you have to consider is competing for attention, and the audience limits imposed when reaching for your wallet.
In this day and age, competing for people’s attention is often times more important than competing for their money. And the time that people have to spend on any given activity is shrinking every year. There’s simply so much to do and be entertained by these days that the average consumer is drowning in content. And a lot of that content is now being monetized using methods that don’t require an up-front purchase.
When you are making a game that you want other people to play, you aren’t just competing with other video games. You’re competing with Netflix, YouTube, books, movies, cable television, board games, AND other video games.
In this kind of environment, establishing a brand, and a reputation, are often as important as getting paid. (sometimes more so) A few smaller freebie games that you crank out to get some eyes on your work may indeed be a good idea. Releasing a free product is one of the best ways to lower the barrier of entry and get as many hands on your title without a reputation to back you up.
So if I make a game with x amount of quality/appeal, are they saying this corresponds to me not yet having the ability to make a game with higher quality/appeal, and therefore I should refrain from trying to make money until I don’t suck as much? And instead, build my brand… how do you build a brand when you suck? Isn’t it more chicken/egg… you can’t build brand until you don’t suck any more and can produce popular games, and if you can produce popular games they’re good enough to be monetized? I see the benefit of the idea if you suck and want to get better/experienced.
I don’t agree with it at all.
If that’s the mindset you have, you’ll never achieve anything in life not just games.
If all you care is have fun developing game then it’s perfectly fine and respectable, but if your goal is to make it a job then your are doing it all wrong.
You should plan the monetization aspect of the game as early as the game and if it fail you should ask yourself what went wrong and improve, but if you go ahead expecting nothing you’ll get, guess what : NOTHING.
If you want to make yourself a name and still get lots of download, there is a thing you can do called freemium, this way you can get feedback and LEARN to make money.
You can learn develop cooler games by giving them away for free but you will never learn how to make any money that way.
Actually I think there is some merit to offering free stuff… I mean… IF you are not likely getting a lot of sales, it can give you a tonne more downloads, and more feedback that’s useful, maybe more ratings and reviews than you ever would have got, etc. There is usefulness to that. Once you have some ‘reputation’ that way then it should help support your later games.
I like the article. I wish more people would take the advice. Too many people are focusing on monetizing their first game before they have even downloaded Unity. This forum gets a few posts every week from newcomers with very limited skills that clearly have their priorities out of order. Newcomers need to focus first on building a fun game. Money will come later, after many learning experiences.
It felt like the article isn’t suggesting that people shouldn’t market their games, but rather that they shouldn’t try to market the games they used to learn game development in the first place. These would typically be Pong, Tetris, Flappy Bird, etc.
I only did a quick read through the article though so I might have missed the point.
I feel like the article is focusing on the wrong thing. Everyone developing games (myself included) would love to produce something that’s wildly successful, goes viral, gets millions of plays, rakes in tons of ad revenue, sells tons of IAPs, or whatever, which is exactly why everyone asks him how he plans to monetize the game.
However, the reason why this doesn’t happen to 99.99999% of us has nothing to do with putting too much focus on monetization. The fact is that the markets we’re entering into are insanely saturated, and getting noticed requires more than just a little bit more polish, or a little bit more marketing effort, or making it free. Instead, it requires an insane level of polish, and an equally insane amount of good marketing, which very few people do, or are capable of, and even then it can fail.
Well if you’re doing it for money and each game takes a while, then you’re going to be a few years without money. If you stick to simple games you won’t be spending a few years without money.
That’s not how I interpreted the article. My interpretation was “While you’re learning how to make games, focus on learning how to make games. When you’re confident in that area and are confidently completing titles then start working out how to make money from them.”
Thinking about monetisation when you’re making your first Pong clone or whatever is putting the cart before the horse.