Ten reasons why players quit by Joakim Achrén

1. A bug that wipes critical progress

When you have a game live and you are regularly doing updates to the game, there is always the danger of creating a bug that actually wipes away player progression. This can happen at any time when you make updates, but there are several ways to prevent this from happening.

One major step to improving the stability of your game is creating a proper quality assurance process inside your game development process. You can specify a person to take care of bug hunting when you are doing updates. Or you and your teammates could all play the development version of the game for a week or so, and try to catch all the possible places where bugs can happen.

2. Too much complexity to keep up with

Some developers just don’t want to apply the advice of keeping things simple. Their game might throw too many things at the player right from the tutorial. Then the player can’t comprehend all of the lessons and they forget what the point of the game was. If they do get the idea of the game, problems might arise once they start to see that the game has lots of things to keep up with, like too many resources to manage.

Try to keep things simple, and introduce more features to the players once they have progressed a bit more into the game. If you are seeing about 5 sessions per day in your game, try to pace it that way that it will be at least 5 sessions before you introduce something new to the player.

3. Paywalls

If you provide your game for free, but you force players to pay early on to access more content, you are likely going to loose half of your audience. People are nowadays getting used to being able to play a game for free forever, and if a sudden paywall comes in front of them, they will feel like they would want to quit right there.

You can do subtle paywalls, but you need keep the players in your game for enough time so that they have invested into their beloved game so much time that they will convert to paying players, even if it seems that they are forced to do so.

4. Friends have stopped playing

If the game has been out for a long time, which in the free to play market would be over a year, perhaps the game starts to lose some of its long time players. At that point, the players who have had friends in the game will start noticing that their friends aren’t updating their farm/restaurant/city anymore with the newest and coolest content that has recently come out.

One friend still has the Christmas decorations in their virtual home although it’s already June. People notice this and they start to contemplate if they are still willing to return to the game. Perhaps they ask the friends who have quit playing what they are playing nowadays and follow them there.
You can prevent this by giving value to the player on their friends, even if they have quitted the game. You might even want players to “cash out” on players who have quitted, exchange the friend with someone who is active and playing the game. Create social ties between players who are interested in the game, as the real world ties don’t always reflect our interest in the games we want to play.

5. New and more interesting game has come out

There will always be new games coming out and driving your audience away. If a massive game studio puts out a new game on your platform that is in the same genre, you will likely suffer from this as players go ahead and switch their playing time to the new game.

It’s difficult to avoid the players moving to try out the new game, but you can work hard and succeed in re-engagning those quitters once the initial hype of the competitor’s game has gone away. Add cool new features to the game, features that enhance the end-game experience. Giving players too many goodies and freebies if they want to come back can seem like you are desperate. Show them that you have a great game that is evolving to the better.

6. Content has been consumed

Your players have reached the end game and there’s nothing new to unlock or new upgrades for player buildings or other virtual goods. They start feeling that the game has now been played and they start coming back less and less, until they quit. Even people who have been spending money in your game will see that there is nothing else to do there, so they will think to themselves that even though they paid a lot to play, it is time to move on and start playing something new.

We don’t want that to happen. The players who have reached the end game, the top level, and have unlocked everything, can still be hungry for more. Try out different kinds of additions to the end game, because the content you are putting out should be different for the end game players. They’ve already seen your tricks, so surprise them. Provide them with more harder challenges and give them new ways to make interesting decisions.

Look at how big studios like Zynga are dealing with their end game, by either playing their games to the end or by reading their player forums to figure out what happens in the end game. Then apply the findings to your game.

7. Burnout of repetitive tasks

If you require a player to do the same activity that they started playing the game with over and over again for each play session, they will eventually get bored of it. As an example from social simulation games, you execute a task which has an appointment to be completed in two minutes.

In my previous games, for example Disco Empire, the game had you produce beer which was completed in 2 minutes. Later in the game, you’d still need to do the same beer producing which took 2 minutes. People just get bored of the same reparative task which isn’t getting any funnier or interesting.

The player is progressing in the game and having fun. You should look into possibilities of removing repetitive tasks. Sure, you can have the player do the same tasks for the first week or two and also provide more things to do. But try to fade out the chores at some point, at least introduce some new elements to the tasks or give a possibility for the player to automate the task. A robot that helps the player out perhaps.

8. Right game, wrong platform

I play games primarily on the mobile phone and a tablet. Several of my friends play games on Facebook and on consoles and computers. All these are really different kinds of platforms, with the biggest difference being the way we pick up and play games there.

Let’s take a few examples on what can be an interesting game, but totally on the wrong platform, mainly because of the way that games are played on that platform.

You are playing a multiplayer memory card game on your mobile phone. You have ten games going on at the same time and you need to memorize each card that gets flipped but wasn’t a match. You suddenly realize that this is impossible and the enjoyiment has gone, and you quit.

Another example is doing a synchronous gameplay on a primarily asynchronous platform. You do a team based shooter game for Facebook where you do missions with other players in realtime. As Facebook is primaly an asynchronous platform, you have a hard time getting people to stay and play for long periods of time.

When designing your game, think about how the game is played and decide on an optimal length for your game sessions on your target platform and for your target player. This will save you from lots of trouble later on.

9. Same game with different skin

This is an easy trap to fall into if you had great success with your first game and you are planning on making a new game. It is tempting to just copy the core gameplay, controls ans monetization mechanics to the new game. I don’t blame you, it’s hard to re-invent the wheel and make even more than your previous hit.

The player will always notice the ‘same game, different skin’ strategy, so it’s impossible to trick them. You risk getting hated by your core audience, who sees that you actually aren’t actually a source of great new content. This will also hurt your earlier games which won’t selli as well as they used to do.

I you want to do a similar game, try to follow these tips so you won’t look like s copycat:
Change the game so that it requires the player to learn something new
Change the monetization mechanics, by giving the player more or less free stuff
Switch from the regular 2D game to an amazing 3D game

10. Loading is too slow

You can have a great game and all, but if your loading times are high, you’ll lose part of your audience. This is a major problem in moblie games when the player is playing over a bad connection, as the loading might stall or just take forever to complete.

You might think that players are willing to wait, and some probably will, but at this stage, their investment into the game isn’t that high for them to stay. They’ve installed the game and are willing to give it a try, but that’s all they’ve invested and it isn’t a lot.

To improve this, you could move some of the in-game loading to a later stage, by splitting the loading into several steps, and putting some actual game content in between the steps. Your developers might not realize the loading issues before the end of development, so it’s important to design the game in advance with split-loading in mind.

source (game analytic)

Video Game-Themed Spandex Leggings by Justin Page

Super Mario Leggings

The street fashion website ROMWE has released a collection of video game-themed spandex leggings (Super Mario Bros., Angry Birds and Pac-Man). They are all available to purchase online.

Pac-Man Leggings

Angry Birds Leggings

source (laughingsquid)

Guest Post: The death of in-game interaction by Dean Poisso

This article has been brought to you by Seed, the Aol guest writer program that brings your words to WoW.com.

WoW's evolution has changed the course of both MMO game design and the landscape of the MMO player base in dramatic ways. By exploring the road most traveled, WoW has led the way from the roots of tabletop pen-and-paper RPGs and early MMO tabletop simulations into MMOs as virtual RPG themeparks. 

Despite WoW's fantastic success on many fronts, in its evolution toward catering to the most common, casual style of play, it's removed much of the human interaction that made early MMO experiences special. Today's WoW is slick, seamless and streamlined. There is nothing one player can achieve that another player cannot also relatively easily achieve. Yet while players in today's WoW maintain that this thinly clad, egalitarian experience is "best," in reality, what we see is a continuous striving for distinction free from the confines of the game design itself. The ever-present GearScore sniff test has streamlined the need for player interaction to the point that interaction is barely needed at all. 

In fact, it might be this very streamlining that has caused this MMO behemoth to slide away from the real magic of the early MMOs, to become a sanitized gaming experience that only barely acknowledges its need for virtual face-to-face gameplay. I miss the real interaction with my fellow players that speaks to the oldest traditions of what spawned MMOs: tabletop RPGs. I want player interactions to drive the game experience, from raiding to crafting to questing. The biggest villains and heroes of an MMO should be players, not pre-scripted heroes and playerless cut scenes. The next big MMO, I hope, can make this happen.

Player skill interactions

A class- and skill-driven economy One of the things I miss in an MMO is the face-to-face sale of class-specific skills and buffs. It's a level of interaction that fosters community. 

Deep crafting While having raiding instances drop the latest and greatest items (as justly they should) is fun, making your own items should be equally rewarding. While I wouldn't remove epix purple dropz entirely, keeping epics truly rare makes them special. A deeper crafting experience would be fostered by rare and dangerous spawn locations. Why can't there be more significant seasonal crafting materials available only during certain times of the calendar cycle? Why can't skilled player services carry equal or greater importance than those of mere NPCs? Why can't players form crafting guilds with factions and intrigues of their own? 

Dynamic guild content: Meta-factions

Players: a vital game resource Again, players and player guilds should serve vital functions for the game itself. Meta-guilds in major social hubs (for example, a thieves guild, a mage guild, a blacksmithing guild) provide a framework for faction-specific services and rewards, driven by players and player guilds. A player guild might be associated directly with any of these meta-guild factions, with suitable responsibilities, internal requirements and commensurate rewards. Solo players could participate as individuals. The game developers could control meta-guild relationships within certain parameters: PvE- and PvP-oriented quests, in-game directives, faction-ranked responsibilities for specific players ... (Guild war between the thieves guild and the guild of mages, anyone?) This would allow guild leveling and player factioning to be driven by the players, for the players. Guided by the game developers, this system can generate nearly endless content and offer something that has never been handled well in MMOs: intrigue. 

Taking faction deeper with PvP Players become involved in PvP not only by something as simple as flagging for combat but through choices such as which faction they will ally with. It is possible to be a casual adventurer -- but this decision also means opting out of the skullduggery and intrigues some factions might require. (Choose your friends wisely.) 

Player-created cities Player-generated, self-sustaining content breathes life into MMO cities. Allowing players to create their own cities tied into the player meta-guild system loosely described above could provide another source of near-limitless content. Players should be able to replicate much of the design content found in the game for their own uses. These areas should be pre-planned in the design of the MMO, and these regions could be instanced. 

PvP/PvE interactivity Why must PvE and PvP be completely separate pursuits? I would love to see traditional WoW-style PvE instances that can spark a PvP event in which groups can queue to go head-to-head for better rewards, faction goals and greater experience. 

Risk equals reward

Death and taxes Death is meaningless in WoW. Why not bring back that meaning? Make game death its own experience in some cases. Or bring back experience loss or some other meaningful consequence, so that players will strive to avoid death. Death should have gravitas.

Incarceration! As part of the faction system, players who run afoul of their meta-guilds or enemy factions might be placed in a prison instance with other player inmates. Create interactive content in prison. Jailbreaks! Pit-fights! Gambling! Quests -- PvP, PvE and faction-related content! Where are rogues from the guild of thieves supposed to go after getting busted? Perhaps there are rare crafting mats found only in certain prisons (or deep in the pockets of certain prisoners). Perhaps there are rare skills and knowledges that can only be learned from the scurrilous scum who've learned to make prison a lucrative business. Prison is a dire but sometimes rewarding place ... And yeah. There's more death. 

Everything counts

Virtual life in Azeroth has become too institutionalized, favoring automated systems over player interaction. As a gaming nerd with a handful of dice and a pencil, I realize now thatWoW (which ultimately attempts to simulate pen-and-paper RPGs) has possibly removed the very essence of the multiplayer experience. It's done many things fabulously well, but what I'd like to explore is the interaction between my fellow players within the context of the game. Every mundane activity should be be an opportunity for some sort of interactive experience.

Instead of interactions akin to chatting with the people in line at the next theme ride instance, the next MMO will rely on the human element to keep the possibilities dangerously unknown. I want my next MMO to make me gape in fear and wonder what's behind that door. I want my guildmates to pull my ass out of the fire at the last moment, not save the day by reminding me to stay out of the goo on the floor during phase two. I want to smell the whiff of danger at the entrance of that mineshaft yawning before me. I don't want to find myself yawning at that same mineshaft as I run past ... ever.

source (joystiq)

Top 5 things we learned at Unite 2013 in Vancouver by Keith Andrew

It's very easy to get lost in the city when you're in Vancouver.

I don't mean physically lost – landmark buildings aplenty make it quite easy to make your away around unaided – but, rather, lost in the wonder of what is truly a city of contrasts.

Though highly urbanised (and, thanks to some striking architecture, stunningly so too) Vancouver is also a city of nature. Stanley Park – the city's 220 year old urban park – feels more like a nature reserve than it does a splash of green for executives to each their lunchtime sandwiches on.

Just as well, then, that Unity chose to base its annual Unite conference in Vancouver's Convention Centre.

Almost built into the city's sea wall itself, this stunning new development appears to have quickly become a Mecca for the ton of tourists that swamp into the city each day – many, in fact, departing the numerous cruise ships that slip in to dock next to the Convention Centre itself.

Chances are, even if you were walking around Vancouver aimlessly, you'd stumble upon the Convention Centre at some point.

The view below Vancouver's Convention Centre

Yet, despite the draw of the urban environment that surrounded Unite 2013 last week, PocketGamer.biz was still in prompt attendance each day, sitting in on a bevy of talks and mingling with the great and the good banqueting in the Centre's sumptuous dining hall, overlooking the northern reaches of the city on the other side of the harbour.

It's hard to imagine many games conferences around the world can rival Unite 2013 in Vancouver in terms of visual splendor.

And, perhaps that sense of spectacle was intended. Unity's continued 3D push (and support for next-gen consoles) means sharp visuals are increasingly becoming part and parcel of the engine's arsenal. What better place is there to host a conference in a city so striking, it scarcely seems real.

But, aside from making this writer feel particularly at home (Canadians spell 'colour' and 'centre' correctly, and their $20 bill has a picture of the Queen on it) what else did PocketGamer.biz take away from this year's Unite conference? Well...

Developers don't love the platform, they love the player

You can probably count on one hand the number of mobile developers you know who don't work on iOS.

Apple's OS has become (and remains) the premier platform for mobile gaming and, as a result, is the first port of call for both Unity's new features and the third party APIs that plug into it.

But there's an important distinction to be made here. If the questions asked by those in attendance of many of the talks are anything to go by, developers love the fact that iOS gamers download games in their millions and – even more importantly – are seemingly happy to spend money in them, but plenty of developers seem to have fallen out of love with iOS itself.

As we'll discuss later, both BlackBerry and Microsoft had a big presence at Unite 2013 – both were event sponsors and featured prominent stands and, in Microsoft's case, game porting booths in an effort to endear more and more Unity developers to their respective platforms – and that undoubtedly ensured that the conference wasn't as iOS and Android focused as it has been in the past.

But, nonetheless, an increasing number of questions from the crowd focused on whether said new feature or plugin was "just for iOS" or whether it would also work on other, smaller platforms.

In Unity's marketing talk, one developer even stood up to ask whether he "had to" lead with iOS any more – whether rival platforms had enough of audience now that he could work on them first and, with Unity's help, target Apple's OS later.

In short, developers are as committed to iOS now as they have been any time since the launch of the App Store, but the gloss and allure the platform previously had has long gone in the eyes of many.

Developers have realised that the streets of iOS aren't actually paved with gold.

Unity's move into publishing isn't a punt in the dark

Unity's move into iOS and Android publishing – announced at Unite 2013 – didn't come out of the blue. The firm's Union venture, in CEO David Helgason's own words, was in itself publishing blank.

Nonetheless, the key question that sprung to mind when the move was revealed was 'why now?'

Unity's developer base continues to grow and there are still many more studios currently not using the engine that the company is no doubt hoping to tap up in the years ahead, but could the decision to make a move on publishing be a somewhat artificial way of making the company appear to be one that's still growing, rather than one that's peaked?

A 20 minute chat with CEO David Helgason was enough to suggest not. In his view – given in a convincing manner – Unity Games is a logical extension of what the company has always tried to do: help developers.

Just like Unity Cloud – launched in response to calls from studios for such a service to be provided – Helgason believes Unity can add value to the games it picked up in a way that many existing publishers can't.

What's more, the Unity name is now a big draw in its own right. Developers genuinely love Unity – they don't just use it out of necessity, but they actively act as cheerleaders, helping spread take up amongst the wider community. It's not hard to imagine that Unity Games will – at launch at least – be blessed with a similar halo.

As an aside, it'll also give Unity a consumer presence. I'm personally not convinced that this is something the company actively needs, but it's hard for firms of any kind, trade or otherwise, to resist seeking recognition from consumers.

There will already be some gamers acutely aware of the Unity – there could be a whole lot more who are similar educated in the years ahead.

BlackBerry and Microsoft are brothers in arms

You know that 'race for third place' thing? Yeah, large portions of the industry aren't buying it. What's more, neither are BlackBerry or Microsoft.

You'll find plenty of commentators and analysts eager to declare a winner – or, at least, project which of the two is likely to come out on top in the months and years ahead, and they're not wrong to do so.

But both BlackBerry and Microsoft, who were both at Unite 2013 in force, are more interesting in legitimising their platforms in the eyes of the developer than they are doing each other down.

When I questioned BlackBerry's Sean Paul Taylor about where he saw the platform sitting in comparison to the other operating systems and whether the Canadian giant had Microsoft's Windows Phone in its sights, he avoiding going for the jugular.

Instead, he presented the two companies as something of brothers in arms.

"Where is Apple? Where is Google? Neither of them are here at Unite, but we are," he pointed out, presenting both his firm and even Microsoft as the ones actually listening to the developer base rather than dictating to them.

"And there's only going to be more competition. We heard in David's keynote, we've got other new platforms to come as well as us and Windows Phone. There's Tizen, there are others too."

In short, while the market is obsessed with narrowing the field, in reality the number of players is actually widening. Even if BlackBerry or Windows Phone manages to bleed the other one out of existence, the race wouldn't be over.

Such is the allure of the mobile market that there's always a new challenger set to appear.

Developers are starting to understand the rules of the game

Coupled with the news of Unity's move into publishing was a talk designed to educate developers as to the importance of getting their marketing and PR strategies right.

It was almost something of a do-it-yourself talk for developers determined to go it alone, but – combined with the aforementioned 'logical' launch of Unity's publishing venture – there was a genuine sense at Unity that developers previously just content with making a good game now understand that being independent means more than just developing and distributing content.

It also means effectively promoting them, too. And that's a whole new minefield for developers to get their collective heads around.

It's not a case of merely pushing your game out on Twitter and securing the odd review – as Unity PR manager Dan Adams and developer relations specialist Tracy Erickson pointed out, it's about knowing what you want to say about your game and working from there.

"You get people who will email a journalist and say 'my game has 15 different types of weapon," said Adams.

"Who cares about that? A lot of public relations is about building a message at the core and tying it in with everything you talk about – social media and the press."

Turns out this publishing lark isnt so easy after all. In fact, for those who do it well, publishing is almost like a business in its own right. Who knew?

Build it in Vancouver and they will come

Unity never chooses a bad venue for a conference and, as a result, it's never short of attendees.

Even more so than 2012's equally successful bash in Amsterdam, Vancouver's Convention Centre was flooded with developers from the surrounding area.

"I don't even use Unity yet, but I saw the conference was coming into town and signed up for it," remarked one developer at lunch on the first day. "It seems really active. Is it like this every year?"

Vancouver from Stanley Park

The truth is, every conference needs a location that itself is already something of a hub.

One of the sad things about this year's GDC Europe in Cologne – which run just days before Unite – was the fact that it seems to have very little connection to what is, at best, an emerging development scene in the area.

GDC Europe rolls into Cologne because it's attached to Gamescom, and there's a ridiculously big venue able to hold both of them quite comfortably. It has little connection to the city that hosts it, however.

Unite 2013 – as with Amsterdam the previous year – drew in what is an especially active development scene, attracting studios that (as a couple of conversations I had at lunch suggested) goes beyond the reach of Unity itself.

The upside for Unity is, of course, those developers who weren't fully on board with the engine when they first stepped into the convention centre on the Wednesday morning will likely have been willing converts when they left early Friday evening.

source (pocketgamer)

A Game Designer's Manifesto: The 7 Virtues of a Desamurai by GDT

I believe that games should entertain players, while inspiring new perspectives and insights about the world around them. Game design should be the way to deliberately create game-play experiences, but to do this a designer must be fluent in his or her design practice. The purpose of this manifesto is to explore a set of standards that would shape the conduct or attitude of a designer’s practice.

In her post, Respecting Design, Claire Blackshaw[1] describes something I recognized myself when I first entered the industry and continue to recognize in many anecdotes from students that are novice game designers. In her blog post the essential question is, “Why is it so hard to earn respect as a game designer?” In fact this issue seems to bother many game designers. Not too long after I started to write this manifesto, I noticed this article had been posted on lostgarden.com ‘The Declaration of Game Designer Independence ‘. [2] While the declaration hits upon many vital points, my interpretation of the underlining message was a call for respect. Yet, “In most respected professions a vast amount of research, basis of knowledge, or method of thinking is required to advance in professional grade problems.”[1] [3] To gain respect, designers need to be able to demonstrate their abilities clearly and convincingly. In other words, if they want their independence they will need to revolutionize their practices in order to earn independence.

My general approach to this issue has been to use and collect game design methods, but beneath this approach is a doctrine that makes them work for me. In a tribute to the 7 virtues of Bushido (The Way of the Samurai) the following seven topics of this manifesto has become my Way of the Desamurai.

The heart of development is game design

Game design is fundamental to game development, not only because it affects the resulting game-play experience, but because of its influence on the most crucial aspects of game development. In my opinion these are time, cost and synergy (synergy meaning the development team’s moral, enthusiasm, energy and trust). A game designer should be able fit the design to the available time, resources and synergy. Therefore the ability to estimate this is essential. As such, a designer cannot use the lack of resources to explain a poor game-play experience. In the end it’s about achieving the most with what is available.

Refine over redefine

All game design and development should be iterative. A designer’s job is to iterate as many times as needed to nail the aims of game design (game mechanics, play mechanics and game-ply experience). Iterative design is not a continuous experimentation until the designer stumbles upon the ultimate game through trial-and-error. Iterations should be about refining while avoiding a lot of redefining, if too much redefining occurs then pitfalls like feature creep occur. Instead the designer should strive to reach the desired game-play experience in shortest number of iterations.

Knowing the design

Knowing the design is the most fundamental task of the game designer, which means knowing how the core- and progressive- mechanics work, how the play mechanics should feel and having a sense for the game-play experience. Lacking intimate knowledge of the design can lead to a loss of team synergy and generally making excuses as to why it’s not fun. If you want to have respect as a game designer you should know the design inside out, after all if you don’t know the game, who does?

The Trans-medial game designer

A game designer should be able to design all sorts of games not just video games. [4] Games are trans-medial, meaning they transcend any one medium. [5] They exist as video games, board games, card games, physical sports, social games, and ubiquitous systems. A designer should avoid be only a ‘fan boy’ designer who only designs games for his/her favorite genre or media. Once a game designer embraces the fact that games are trans-medial, it will open your eyes to a wider application of your game design skills.

Have you ever been experienced

Ideally, game design should be an occupation that inspires lifelong learning. Any designer that maintains this attitude soon finds that they become a jack-of-all-trades, as they collect experiences and knowledge about design and the media in which the design was developed. A game designer shouldabove all else play all sorts of games, not just his/her favorite, and be able to critique these games beyond terms such as ‘fun’ and ‘good game-play’. My belief is that good game design comes from being able to portray a game-play experience, therefore even if a game is a sequel or a clone, a designer should treat the design as unique and with respect. In these cases just adding new features and mechanics to an existing game without understanding why the game worked worked in the first place is a recipe for poor design. Furthermore, genre categorization is terminology best reserved for sales and players, as a game designer should be able to understand games in terms of game mechanics and systems. By understanding the mechanics the designer always starts from scratch and applies mechanics as needed and not because of genre conventions.

Design vs. Game

A game designer should always remember that the game design is not the game and the game is the design. I know this sounds weird but game designers tend to confuse what is designed and what is built, and then believe these should be the same. The goal of all design activities should be aimed at making a game with the best possible game-play experience. Therefore a designer needs to realize that much of his work is expendable. That is because most of our work is only foot work, and in the end there is a good chance of it being scraped, changed or not being implemented.

Listen, Explain, Inspire

The ability to communicate is critical. Good communication begins with listening to others, and as a designer this means listening to your players, development team, publisher, etc. The next aspect of communication is knowing how to provide the proper explanations that will help others implement the design, while providing clear argumentation for your design choices. The final aspect of communication is about inspiring others which means promoting the design to the development team, producers, players, etc.

source (gamedesigntools)

Disney Interactive executive discusses the fine line between hardcore and family-friendly by Sebastian Haley

Disney Interactive recently invited GamesBeat to a screening of Disney Planes followed by a reception with hands-on time for the video game adaptation. However, this was more an opportunity to poke the game division’s vice president of product development, Bill Roper, with a stick and see what came out.

Roper previously held positions at Blizzard Entertainment, Flagship Studios where he launched ambitious-but-ill-fated massively multiplayer online game Hellgate: London, and Cryptic Studios as design director for Champions Online. The following interview touches upon everything from the broad appeal of Disney Infinity, the resounding effects of Epic Mickey’s failure, and the possible return of racing game franchise Split/Second,

GamesBeat: What was behind the decision to make the Planes games exclusive to Nintendo platforms?

Roper (on the right, obviously)

Bill Roper: For us it’s really matching up the intellectual properties (IPs) with what we want to make as games and with the right partners to do that with. Nintendo’s been a great lifelong partner with us. They have very traditionally owned that sweet spot with kids and families. With Planes, as we looked at the product in association with the film and what was happening with that, it was obvious. It had the game mechanics written all over it. This was going to be an awesome flying game.

As the ideas for the game evolved, we looked at where would be the right place to put this. Everything formed around what a great partnership we could have with Nintendo to put this out. They were the right place to do it.

GamesBeat: The casual focus is not really anything new for Disney Interactive, and this is a casual, kids-and-family-targeted movie. But even over the past few years, you’ve shuttered some of the more core studios and products and focused more on those casual games. Do you think we could ever see more core Disney IPs come back to Interactive?

Roper: I think we will. I think what we’ve moved away from is relying exclusively on internal teams to do that. We’re finding the right partners to work with the IPs. It’s the challenge I think everyone faces in the gaming industry in terms of where you put your talent. We always try to keep great people inside the company. But a great example of that, although it’s still a little fresh to us a little weird to think of, is that Star Wars is now a property that we look after with the amazing team up at Lucas. We’re going to be back in the core demographic with Star Wars and EA.

GamesBeat: With Battlefront? (E3 reveal trailer)

Roper: Yeah, with Battlefront. That’s awesome. And I think there’s going to be some stuff coming down the pipe — that we’re obviously not talking about yet – that’s going to have people nodding their heads and saying, “Yeah, that’s cool.” It’s also just the focus on where we see players going to line up with—Again, in my mind, it’s always the right characters and stories, the right IPs, on the right platforms.

We’re seeing a lot of younger kids moving to mobile, which is why there’s been such an emphasis on mobile inside the company. As another great example, Kingdom Hearts 3 got announced at E3. That, I think, is something that’s always skewed a little more towards the core gamer. Square Enix has been an amazing partner with us for a lot of years. That’ll be on all the big ones. And to be honest, I think that even though we see a huge excitement around Infinity with kids and everything, the thing I feel encouraged by is all the gamer moms and dads I know. “Awesome, a game I can play with my kid.” Especially the building elements and the toybox. I think there will always be, to some degree, a mixture of the right properties and the right platforms.

But I do feel like – I’ll use Infinity as an example — when you go into it, even though you may be going through Monsters University – okay, it’s Monsters, it skews a little young – but when you actually go through and play it and you’re a more mature gamer, you see where the gameplay mechanics come from. “Wow, this feels kind of like Crackdown. But for kids.” Right? That’s one of the things we tried to make a nod to with the E3 “For Your Consideration” trailer we put out. We’ve got a lot of stuff in there that’s going to—I just think it’s going to blow kids’ minds. They haven’t played those kinds of game mechanics before.

GamesBeat: Because they weren’t allowed to.

Roper: Right, they weren’t allowed to. But now they can. For gamers like you and me, we’re like, “Yeah, this is great! This is just like—“ To be honest, The Lone Ranger is kind of like Red Dead Redemption. I’ve got horses and I’m riding around on adventures. I’m opening new areas. It’s an open world. We’ve built these family-friendly open world games. But at the same time—This isn’t just because I’m working on it. I play the heck out of it. I have a couple of buddies of mine that are in their 30s, and they’re like, “Hey, can we come over and screw around in the toybox?”

We see guys making side-scrollers and top-down racing games with all the logic toys and everything. That’s the interesting element to it, where we’re touching those core game mechanics and making stuff that core gamers will actually like. Not that we’re trying to sell it as a core game, obviously. But I think you saw that a lot with games like the first Epic Mickey. Core gamers were saying, “Hey, this is actually pretty cool.” So hopefully we’re going to hit the right notes with that.

GamesBeat: Going back Epic Mickey, did the failure of the series have a kind of butterfly effect on Disney Interactive’s feelings about venturing out and doing those types of games?

Roper: I don’t know if it did. That’s an interesting way of putting it. I hadn’t thought of it that way, the butterfly effect. I think, really, in that perspective—Warren was the guy who got me into Disney. Warren initially actually sent me a message on Facebook and said, “Hey, Alex Seropian” – who was the head over core at the time – “is looking for someone to come in and shepherd the Marvel stuff that we’re doing here. Would you be interested?” I said, “Well, I love Marvel. Yeah, I’d love to come in and interview.” And I started working there. So I have nothing but absolute respect for Warren.

But I think where we got to is, after Mickey 2 came out, we were looking out there and thinking about where we’re shifting the focus of the division. We have a massive platform that’s being done out of Avalanche with Infinity, which is probably going to eat up the vast majority of our focus on console as far as internal development. So it was just that—I think it was less of a butterfly effect in that way. It was more like that had finished. It had come to its conclusion at the end of Epic Mickey 2.

Now people were going in different directions. It almost sounds a little—I don’t know, I might be sounding a little romantic. There’s a much heavier focus now, obviously, on what we’re doing in the mobile space and what we’re doing with digital distribution – building our network, being able to have a lot of titles coming out in the mobile area, having a focus on taking some of the properties that make sense to work with other developers on and doing that. Infinity has always been in the hands of the guys at Avalanche in Salt Lake [Note: Not to be confused with Swedish developer Avalanche Studios, the team behind Just Cause and the upcoming Mad Max]. So that was just more of a, “Where is the company going moving forward?” that drove that decision.

GamesBeat: Do you feel like these Skylanders or Disney Infinity toys are a way to slow the industry’s transition to all-digital?

Roper: I don’t know if it’s to keep them from going all digital. I think that one of the things we’ve found is that there is an intrinsic value, if you will, to that physical element. You can show it off to your friends. It’s cool to pick up stuff and put it down, swapping this thing out. One of the things that we love doing, and that we found actually resonated super well when we started testing it, was the power discs, for example. “I’m putting this in! Here’s my toy!” Just like that—It’s some weird combination of pogs and playing in the yard with your GI Joes and your Transformers, all those classic things. There’s something to clapping stuff down and doing things with it, that physical element.

For me – I literally just thought of this – I used to play this game called Statis Pro Baseball, which was a card-based baseball simulation game. I was in a league. I was a super baseball geek. At one point, the guys were like, “Oh, the record-keeping is so difficult. We should do a better digital version.” It was a different game, but you got to put all your stats in and the whole thing. I played one game of it and I was like, “Yeah, I’m out.” Because for me, there was something about the tactile nature of flipping cards and writing down the score and moving my players in and out, there was some element that I could put my hands on. I think that’s kind of part of the magic to what we’re doing.

I love the all-digital stuff. I have a pretty long history in the industry working on MMOs and digitally delivered products. I definitely don’t come from a standpoint where I don’t like the all-digital stuff. It’s very cool. That’s one of the things that I think is a great place for people to expand into with Infinity. How do take that and make it so I can play on the go? I can always have a touch point into it from a digital standpoint. I think there is something to the physicality of it.

And to be honest, I think it’s a challenge for a lot of companies to find—Kids don’t have the same access to wallets that parents do, right? Or that adults do. So DLC traditionally has not done very well for kids. But if there’s a cool toy you can play with, a character, I’ve got it, I put it down and everything, and the discs to go with it, that resonates more.

GamesBeat: Do you think that if Disney Infinity is as successful as Skylanders, Disney would then pursue other physical/digital hybrid experiences?

Roper: I think that would be great. I think that’s the interesting thing. Right now, if you look at Infinity, you keep expanding your experience when you buy more of the characters or buy the playsets. You unlock more and more of the game that you’re playing. You could definitely imagine it being super cool to be able to say, “Here’s something I have, this physical thing, that changes and updates and grows because of something I do digitally.” I think there’s a lot of directions you could go with that kind of stuff. It’s exciting for me to be in a company where they have a long history of, “Hey, let’s dream up something cool and figure out how to make it happen.”

GamesBeat: As much as I enjoy Kingdom Hearts and am looking forward to Disney Infinity, my favorite Disney Interactive game of all time is actually Split/Second.

Roper: That is an awesome game.

GamesBeat: So I was pretty crushed when the developer got closed down. Now that the dust has settled, is there even the slightest possibility that Split/Second could eventually live on somehow?

Roper: It’s a great question. Those guys were before my time with the company, but I played Split/Second, and I thought, “Wow, this is such an awesome game. It’s so fun.”

GamesBeat: I describe it as if Michael Bay directed a Burnout game.

Roper: Yeah, yeah, it is. I always look at that idea, and – not to try to be coy – anything’s possible. It’s just trying to see if there’s a way that it makes sense that we do that. We’re also seeing a lot of changes in platforms and where that goes. The fun thing about a great game is that it can do one of two things. It can either evolve and live on in a new direction, or you find different ways to bring it back.

Looking at what we’ve been doing with DuckTales and Castle of Illusion and those things, that’s the same game under the hood, but it has new life breathed into it. We’re working with these great companies to give a completely new look to the game and everything. DuckTales was crazy. We just put out that trailer with the song, and it got an incredible number of hits on YouTube. People remember that game – “Oh, I loved that.” There definitely could be some fun stuff for us to try to figure out with Split Second, because I loved that game too.

source (gamesbeat)

7 lessons I wish I learned before starting my first game internship by Ethan Levy

It is rapidly approaching 11 years between my entry into the games business interning at Pandemic Studios and founding an indie studio to develop Enhanced Wars. Although it is still early days in my career, I think I have at least gained a modicum of insight worth sharing. When one of my mentors asked me to speak at the college course I credit for turning me into me into a game designer, I saw an opportunity to reflect on my time in the game industry and codify the lessons I wish I could go back in time to teach my youthfully arrogant college self. It is not like I am not still making missteps regularly; I hope that 40 year old me is telepathically beaming back his list through time to send some wisdom my way. But it feels like a good time to share the top 7 lessons I wish I knew on my first day as an intern:

1) It's a small world after all

The game industry is small. Remarkably small. The sort of small that only becomes apparent when you have been developing games for a while. In the past year and change that I have worked as a consultant to help fund Enhanced Wars, I have been recommended for gigs by people I worked with 9 years ago I did not expect to work alongside again. I have been able to pay my rent thanks to jobs I was referred to by people at EA that I am certain I aggravated at one point or another. I have walked into meetings to instantly regret the actions a younger, more abrasive self thought were completely justified at the time. 

Every person that you meet in your early career, you are guaranteed to meet again. Every professional relationship you have is a long term investment. Every person you see as an obstacle to your success today will invariably be someone you are too embarrassed to ask for a favor 5, 10, 20 years down the line. It is nearly impossible to take the long view when you are young, but the sooner you realize just how tiny the game industry is the better off you will be.

2) Don't go for a big splash

When I reflect on my career, the clearest facepalm moments come from the first few weeks on a new job. The times when I really wanted to prove myself. The times when I was trying to convince the people around me that I was a rockstar. 

Every time I tried to make a big splash at a new job, I made a belly flop. I was young, I was excited, I was trying to instantly make my mark. The hard smack of soft belly against the surface of the pool was a clear reminder that I had no idea what I was doing.

When starting new jobs, my instinct was to be Impressive. What I wish I had done was try to be Invisible. Only by taking the time to learn how an office works can you truly see the opportunities to make a meaningful difference. When you come into a job you are entering a mature organism with layers of depth. 

When I reflect on the past, I more or less wish I had stayed silent for the first month of every new job. If I had kept my head down and my eyes open, I would have spotted the real opportunities to make a difference.

3) Fixers not moaners

When you are low down the game development totem pole, it is easy to look at the actions of the people above you and scoff. If you were in charge, you would do things differently. How could they make such obvious mistakes?

But then 8 or 10 years go by, and you start to occupy the shoes of someone whose every decision is questioned. You think about the past and you understand why your team leads made the decisions they made. Things were not nearly as clear cut as they seemed.

When you're working on a game development team, it feels good to moan about the people in charge. After a tough week, it is satisfying to blow off some steam with your co-workers. During lunch breaks or late night team dinners, it is easy to complain about what is happening. You feel closer to your colleagues and better about yourself.

But if you really want to prove yourself, then moaning and groaning is a complete waste of your time. If you are an intern, you will see things big and small go wrong around you. The easy route to take is to tell your co-workers what an idiot person X, Y or Z is. The far harder thing is to identify the problems you are capable of solving completely on your own and fixing them.

If you go to your boss and you say "the build process is broken," all you have accomplished is accusing a person who is already overloaded with work that she's doing something wrong. But if you go to your boss and say "the build process was inefficient so I did X and now programmers have 10 extra minutes to code each day," you will shine.

The best way to distinguish yourself in your internship is to be someone who fixes problems without being told. Small problems. If you fix small problems and make a difference, you will be asked to fix bigger problems. 

4) Cultivate mentorship

The value of having a mentor cannot be overstated. When times are tough, when you are facing a problem you do not know how to solve, when you are so burnt out you cannot see straight, you need someone to talk to. Someone with a perspective that will help you see your problem different. Someone to buy you a burrito, listen to your problems and offer advice. And not just one person, but several.

It can be difficult to spot a mentor. If someone is going out of her way to help you avoid mistakes or is willing to go out to lunch with you and answer your questions, these are signs of a relationship you will want to keep up. Try and set up a regular lunch or coffee break every other week and prepare for that meeting so you can get as much value of it as possible. Arrive with a few questions you want to ask written down. Thank your mentor for her time and encouragement. Be appreciative. If your internship ends or your mentor moves on from the company, keep in contact with her over email and instant messenger.

5) Don't watch TV during working hours

This is the simplest mistake to avoid. The top mistake I have seen from interns and new grads is to have their work on one monitor and streaming TV on the other. And I cannot pretend that I've never put TV on while working on more tedious tuning tasks on Enhanced Wars. You may never be told to stop, but people will notice. 

Watching TV while you work is a bad habit. You may think you are capable of working at 100% efficiency but you are not. Even if you finish all the tasks you are assigned while enjoying The Daily Show, if you cut out the distractions you would finish your work quicker and have more time to show initiative by solving the small problems that will make you stand out.

Watching TV while you work is very visible. Your manager may never tell you to cut it out, but when the writing up your intern report or deciding which interns have the potential to go full time it will rear its head. These decisions are generally made by several layers of people, and decision makers who never really had a chance to interact with you at work may only know that you spent an awful lot of time streaming Marvel Vs Capcom 3 matches from EVO.

6) Open yourself to opportunity

Tied into my first point about the smallness of the industry is the idea that you have to open yourself up to the opportunities around you. If you are taking classes in game development, if you are going to mixers in your city or industry events, if guest lecturers come talk at your school, you are undoubtedly letting opportunities pass you by left and right. I am very happy with my career today but there are still plenty of moments where I wish had written down an email address or connected with someone on LinkedIn. You will never know what smash success someone will enjoy 5 years down the line, or what game you will wish you were working on as your personal tastes change or you are exposed to new things.

For instance, Ratchet & Clank is one of my top videogame series of all time. But I didn't learn that its mixture of appealing graphics and run & gun action put me in my happy place until at least a year after Insomniac boss Ted Price gave a guest lecture to my game production class. I did not get his card or write down his email address. I do not think I even introduced myself after the class was over. All things I wish I had done. I am also fairly certain that Infinity Ward co-founder Vince Zampella spoke to one of our classes shortly after Call of Duty II was released. But I cannot be certain who from the Infinity Ward team spoke because I did not introduce myself. I did not get his card or write down his email. I am pretty sure I wore my Pandemic Studios t-shirt to class that night and if I stood out, it was for asking a cocky question.

These are just two of the higher profile examples, but trust me, there are many more opportunities in my past that I was blind to.

7) There's more to life than videogames

If you made it this far into the post, it is safe to assume that working in videogames has been a lifelong passion for you. That when you land that internship or first job, it will be one of the great triumphs of your life. That you will gladly sacrifice nights, weekends and friendships for a chance to make videogames. I know I did.

There is more to life than making videogames. Being a young person is an incredible opportunity in itself, one you will never get a second shot at. So do not put your game developer dreams above everything else in your life. 

When I am up late at night balancing units or making maps for Enhanced Wars, I am not thinking "it's a really good thing I skipped out on spring break my junior year so that I could pick up team dinners and burn discs." Recognize that you are an intern and that (unless your boss disagrees) the game team will go on without you. Live your life. Be young. Enjoy yourself. 

I may have devoted my life to the pursuit, but in the end even I realize that it is only videogames.

source (gamasutra)

Game Design: it’s the winning, not the taking part by Michael O'Connell-Davidson

 

Game design isn’t something that many people understand, even within the industry, and that’s a real problem. Now we’re approaching a new console generation, this is a good time to start talking about what game design actually entails and how it informs both players and developers. This might get a little bit heavy, because in trying to understand games, you need to try to understand the economic and mathematical definitions of what a game “is.” OK, so I can hear you tabbing out from here, but please bear with me – I’ll do my best to keep things interesting.

In essence, a game is a situation in which multiple actors compete to achieve certain goals; actors are defined as individuals who are both rational and intelligent. An actor’s goal can be anything from the satisfaction that comes with winning or some sort of reward (virtual or otherwise.) Immediately, this should raise a couple of flags in your mind if you’ve given computer games much consideration, especially with regards to artificial intelligence. The reason playing games online is so satisfying is because human beings enjoy lording their victories over one another, but also because the behaviour of a human being is typically more interesting than that of an AI routine. Computers are certainly rational – often more rational than their human counterparts – but creating a digital intelligence is impossible for us right now.

An example analysis of a “game” as defined by game theory is the ”prisoner’s dilemma,” which is as follows:

Two members of a criminal gang are arrested and imprisoned. Each prisoner is in solitary confinement with no means of speaking to or exchanging messages with the other. The police admit they don’t have enough evidence to convict the pair on the principal charge. They plan to sentence both to a year in prison on a lesser charge. Simultaneously, the police offer each prisoner a Faustian bargain. Here’s how it goes:

1. If A and B both confess the crime, each of them serves 2 years in prison
2. If A confesses but B denies the crime, A will be set free whereas B will serve 3 years in prison (and vice versa)
3. If A and B both deny the crime, both of them will only serve 1 year in prison

Our old friend Wikipedia notes that in purely individualistic terms, the most rational thing to do in the game is to betray your partner; as the betraying actors have no chance of receiving the three year sentence, it typically yields better results, despite cooperation being ultimately more rewarding. The game breaks down in real life as people tend to be biased towards working together, but video games aren’t real life – and that’s where things get interesting.

Assuming that you are both rational and intelligent, when you begin playing a video game, you always have a number of choices available to you. These differ depending on the game, and encompass what level to select, what character to play as, and so on and so forth. More importantly, though, a meta-level choice available to the player is whether to continue playing or to switch the console off; unlike within the situation described by the prisoner’s dilemma, you have no obligation to keep playing. We’re assuming that you’re playing video games for the purposes of entertainment, not because you’re the victim of a particularly eccentric prison sentence, so when a video game stops being fun, the rational thing to do is to stop playing.

There are a number of reasons games stop being fun, but one of the biggest is when a player feels that have no chance of winning. If all of your actions lead to failure (even if you have the capacity to delay the inevitable), then why keep playing? No effort is rational, which means ragequitting in multiplayer games is actually somewhat understandable. Of course, unless the game in question suffers from a glitch in which victory is literally impossible, games always tend to offer some chance of victory – but if this chance is too low (and the amount of effort you need to expend to progress further outweighs the perceived enjoyment that might result from doing so), then the rational thing is to switch off. This is why people quit games when they “get stuck,” because trying harder isn’t rational.

So: good game design dictates that loss should not be a foregone conclusion, and that victory should never be clear until the game itself has ended. Civilization V had a problem prior to its most recent expansion where the gap between players would typically widen to the point where winners and losers would be decided too early in the game, thus the late game phase was criminally dull. MMORPGs don’t appeal to a large number of people because they’re effectively designed to be unwinnable; this doesn’t mean that MMORPGs are typically poorly designed, or that the genre is a wash, but they’re designed like treadmills to keep you playing because this is what the MMORPG business typically relies upon. Because it’s so blatant, the terms of the game are visible from the outset, meaning that many people aren’t willing to get involved.

The reason games like Pac-man and Street Fighter have endured for so long isn’t because of misplaced nostalgia. It’s because as far as games go, they are very well designed in terms of when loss and victory become clear. While in real life sometimes taking part is all that counts (and society would be a much worse place without such activities), video games are designed to be entertaining, so victory should always be attainable at all stages in the game and for all players. Of course, some games resort to bizarre methods of making sure fortunes can be reversed, which also isn’t the answer; Mario Kart games typically contain weapons designed to punish players in first place, which incentivises staying in second place for as long as possible and makes the game very frustrating for players of high skill.

Bearing what I’ve said in mind, then, the golden rule of game design should be to create games where victory is always attainable for all players, but skill is still adequately rewarded. If you want players to get better at the game, you have to incentivise doing so, either by offering them better in game items, with leaderboards, or by matching them with players of approximate skill online. As a developer, you need to lull players into a state of flow; while this is much more complex in a multiplayer environment, with good matchmaking protocols it’s totally possible. In offline games, AI can – and should – adapt to players who are having difficulty with the game or who are simply finding it too easy, although this is easier said than done because true artificial intelligence is a very long way off. Also, I think many people would be infuriated if they were under the impression a video game intelligence was letting them win out of pity (a 100% rational AI would want to remain operational for as long as possible, so letting somebody win just enough to keep them playing would effectively be the best way for it to achieve that end.)

This is obviously very challenging, but it has been done. Street Fighter (and fighting games in general) are designed so that the health bars are largely arbitrary, because it is almost always possible to avoid damage and secure a flawless victory at any point in a match. Pac-man, Tetris and so on are designed in such a way that losing never takes too long, and that the rewards for playing well were ample enough that people could have fun. Even Call of Duty is enjoyable because player death is short and quick, and shooting at opponents feels poppy and responsive.

The trouble is that developers often seem more caught up in making games incredibly complex to make up for their own lack of ideas about how their game should play out. “Triple-A” titles – the video game equivalent of a Hollywood blockbuster – focus less on the player’s potential to win and lose and more on the game’s visual and auditory nuances. While we’re building better consoles to improve on the latter, it seems somewhat absurd that video game developers tend to frequently put the “game” part second to the abstraction of the game itself. Complexity is not just graphical; complexity in terms of rules is equally as problematic, meaning that players sometimes get lost in a labyrinth of rules and can no longer properly discern whether or not they’re winning or losing or getting closer to either outcome. Again, there’s no point fighting through a bureaucracy if it isn’t enjoyable, and lord knows anybody who’s tried to deal with a government body will be able to tell you that bureaucracy is the furthest thing from fun.

There’s nothing wrong with Triple-A titles, of course, but releasing big budget games gets riskier and riskier with every console generation. We’re at the point now where it only takes one bad game to force a studio into shutting its doors, and I think marketing executives are confused why games with lavish budgets and long development cycles aren’t doing particularly well in today’s market. I’d hazard it was because large studios are no longer producing games, but packages of set pieces; effectively, many modern games are designed upside down, in that what makes them games is deemed less important than the tropes from other media that make them marketable in the first place. I mean, really, take a look at Medal of Honor: Warfighter – the game was a clear attempt at the Call of Duty money, leaning hard into the same tropes, but what made it a game was unremarkable at best. Do games companies genuinely believe that the public is so easily fooled? Sure, you need to market products to the public, but don’t kid yourselves – if playing a game isn’t enjoyable, there’s basically nothing stopping consumers from switching them off.

source (venturebeat)

Create Games for Kids: How to find and test content, monetize and market your game by Ruth Wilson

‘The bigger the smile, the better the game’ measurement model

Keeping it in the family is key when it comes to game development, according to Michael Contento, of CoRa Games. “They’re my testers!” he says. And the measurement system is proudly qualitative: “We operate on a ‘the bigger the smile, the better the game’ model. I don’t have time or the budget to do huge A/B testings with hundreds of users.”

As he’s developing for a young smartphone audience, this is not surprising. 100% Indie, the initiative that’s helping Michael and other developers bring their games to market, is increasingly seeing children’s games being submitted for consideration by developers from all over the world.

A recent study by Kids Industries found that while only nine percent of pre-school children in different countries can tie their shoes, about 20 percent can play an app on a smartphone; and that across the UK and the US, parents download around 27 apps per year on average for their children.

Developers might therefore see children’s games as easy pickings, but you have to think carefully about your content and your commercial approach, Michael advises.

Real life versus smartphone

Michael uses real life games such as ‘spot the difference’, ‘join the dots’ and jigsaws as inspiration, but while some transfer to the digital space, it’s not a given. “I can be inspired in a toy store but in real life, a game can sometimes require haptic feedback (ie you need to feel the structure of something) and the simple rotation in a 3D space,” he says. “Both things are either impossible or really hard to translate to the swipe/touch input of mobile devices. But it's genius how fast even small children can adapt the "grab and move" handling of things in the real world to the "touch, hold and move" gesture on mobile devices.” 

And they don’t have to be ‘educational’ games. As Michael asserts, all games are, in their own unique way, educational. “Angry Birds as an example. You need to understand the slingshot and the basic principle of tension. Fruit Ninja? Gravity, timing and projection of things flying up with gravity rules applied,” he says, and argues that this is the reason there doesn’t need to be a minimum age for children’s games. “Why should there be one? As long as children are capable of understanding the game, and it has appropriate content, it’s a fun and productive activity for them.”

Appealing to two markets

“It’s not just the children, but also the adults that you need to consider,” says Michael. “Most children enjoy games even with the music disabled. But they do like to keep the sounds activated and so it’s important to have music or sounds that aren’t too obtrusive and annoying. Most music loops can be really nice for the first few iterations but become totally annoying for other people after a few more minutes.”

Characters must also be considered, he says. “It’s important to add one or two recognizable and cute mascots if you can, to establish a better connection between the player and the game. I’ve been looking at some games with this simple element; it really aids recognition and loyalty.”

Marketing and monetization

A specific approach needs to be adopted for monetization and marketing in children’s games, especially as an independent developer.

Monetization for CoRa Games is currently provided via ads (“placed very, very, VERY carefully, and they get few impressions per user”) and through an in-app purchase to upgrade to the pro version. “In the free version, some levels are locked and the in-app purchase unlocks them and removes all ads forever,” says Michael. “So the parents can test the game, let their little ones try the free levels and then, if they both like it, simply upgrade with one click. After the upgrade, the parents can give the game to their kids without having to worry about ads or additional in-app purchases, because there are none. In my opinion that's a good model for both sides. The parents can test and decide if the game is worth a few bucks for free, while I get some payment.”

Michael admits he finds the publishing and marketing process complicated and exhausting. “It’s time consuming, expensive and very hard for an indie developer. There are thousands of new games per day and huge companies with huge budgets to compete with. But it's not impossible to get a (very, very small) part of the cake and I simply do my best. Conduits like 100% Indie are great for helping to drive traffic. They promote games on their site, at shows and through their social media, which is great for driving awareness. Spending my own money on posting to review sites, ad campaigns, and "app of the day"s have come with a price tag attached or have, for various reasons, no effect for me at all.

“Because of the monetization and marketing factors, it boils down to three main ingredients to make a children’s game a success: a great icon, impressive screenshots and a simply awesome game.“

Remember the audience

That ‘awesome game’ is all for the best thing about designing games for children - the audience. Says Michael, “Besides the economic and organizational arguments (my games usually don't require overly complex graphics, story telling or game mechanics), the best thing about selling children’s games is the audience. It’s an incredible pleasure to see little boys and girls tapping around the screen, trying to solve the riddle, and see them enjoying the graphics, the sounds and the reward when they get it right. It’s almost unbelievable that I can build small games, ship them to every corner of the world and receive positive feedback from literally everywhere! 

“I'm not the greatest artist but I've created hours of entertainment for thousand of kids around the globe. What stunning times we live in.”

source (gamasutra)

Why stickiness isn’t enough: Creating a game with enduring popularity by Raf Keustermans

I try to avoid the term “sticky.” In today’s competitive era of gaming, it seems antiquated and simplistic, and creating a game with enduring popularity is about much more than that. Instead it’s about providing gamers with an experience that keeps them interested long-term and generates real engagement.

Driving and then maintaining that engagement is what will make your game popular. My experience is in social casino and casual games in general, but this advice applies to just about any apps. There’s no one magic formula to achieve success, especially since it varies significantly between different games categories. But there are a few guidelines that always good to keep in mind.

Start with a solid core

The basic proposition of your game will always remain the most important factor. Within social casino for instance, one of the most fundamental aspects tends to also be the least visible, at least to users — that’s the math model sitting behind the scenes. You could have the best graphics and most visually engaging slots game. But if your math isn’t optimal, you’ll struggle to keep your users engaged or to generate any significant revenue. Although they don’t see it, users actually feel it and can easily tell a good slots experience from a bad one.

Obviously, this isn’t enough in itself, but it’s worth calling out because it’s too easy to start focusing on the smaller details and to forget to check back on the initial premise of the game.

2. Get into your player’s head

This sounds like an obvious one, but knowing in advance how you want the player to feel — in reaction to particular events or features — will be of great help in making the correct product decisions. Of course, the scientific and data-driven approach will take over with time, once you know exactly how your players are behaving. But that first “soft” approach of putting yourself in your players’ shoes is very important.

It’s easy when you, as a developer, are your own audience. It’s somewhat harder when you’re not. For example, social slots and casino games predominantly have an audience of middle-aged women. It’s hard for a 24 year-old male developer or designer to understand her mindset. But there are still a lot of things you can safely assume about players. For instance, within slots, as important as the frequency of winning is the frequency of near-wins. The emotion you create in the player when they almost win is one of the things that keeps them spinning, and ultimately, coming back. This psychological approach is crucial to creating a good game.

Make it scientific but customized

Once your assumptions about your players’ behaviors are set, start testing to confirm or inform them with solid data. This also sounds like another obvious one. But the point I’m trying to make here isn’t only that you should rely on data, but rather that the range of your users’ behavior is going to be very wide. Finding the right balance in the user experience between your casual and your hardcore gamers is going to be crucial. And ideally what ends up happening is a very granular personalization of the experience depending on each user’s engagement level — the natural extension of which becomes the customization of the “prompt to pay” experience through which you’ll be able to maximize revenue.

Lastly, I’d say: Don’t overlook even the smallest of details. Things that may seem inconsequential sometimes have a major impact. For example, with slots games, any producer will tell you that the quality of the audio and the special sound effects surrounding a win or a near-win are almost as important as the event itself. To keep users engaged, the full sensorial experience is a must. It’s definitely worth spending a good amount of time and money on ensuring you get these details right from the beginning.

source (gamesbeat)