Free to Play is not Free to Build (2012)

Free to Play is not Free to Build

Mark DeLoura – Game Technology ConsultantApril 6, 2012 – Videogame Economics Forum, Angoulême, France

Hello

Mark DeLoura Videogame Economics Forum, April 2012

My background:

Free to play games


Social, mobile, MMO, Free-to-play console

Free to play: Core


COST OUTLINE


Core game staffing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 -

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

QAAudioProductionDesignEngineeringArt


• Calibrate against AAA

• Roughly 1/3 engineering, 1/3 art, 1/3 other

• Initial small pre-production team

• Grows to maximum size during production

• Tails off at end of project

Core game staffing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 -

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0



• Lack of initial tech (internal engine or external middleware) requires more engineering staff at beginning of project

Core game staffing

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 -

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0



• For DLC, typically consider approximately 1/3 of maximum staff size

Core F2P differences

Smaller scope Reduced art and design requirements

Rapid launch Move quickly to production with

minimally viable product

Ongoing iteration DLC plan is replaced with ongoing live

updatesMark DeLoura Videogame Economics Forum, April 2012

Game as a service: Technology

Vast amount of technology required Scalable server infrastructure E-Commerce system for virtual goods Analytics Launcher/Patcher CRM, Account system Community management Customer service


Popular F2P technologies Game framework

Adobe Flash: 58% social Unity: 53% mobile

Social network Facebook: 72% mobile

Service technology Scalable server infrastructure

▪ Amazon Web Services: 55% E-Commerce system for virtual goods

▪ Facebook, Apple for front-end▪ Back-end?

Analytics▪ Kontagent 25% social▪ Flurry 29% mobile


Revenue curves

Core games spike on day one

Core F2P games require care and feeding


COST PRESSURES


Cost growth: Social


Increasing fidelity, team size and project length…

Cost growth: Mobile


Increasing fidelity, team size and project length – device tech improving

Cost growth: MMO


Increasing fidelity, team size and project length…

Cost growth: Core

PlayStation generation: $2M - $6M PlayStation 2 generation: $5M - $12M PlayStation 3 generation: $10M - $25M

Pressure to reduce game development costMark DeLoura Videogame Economics Forum, April 2012

Cost reduction strategies: Core

Aggregated distribution and marketing

Shared technologies

Outsourced art

Aggregated development


Cost reduction strategies: F2P

The rise of publishers/distributors

Use of open source and services

Other levers: Technology level Game depth Minimum viable product


Cost-related opportunities Cooperation: Rise of publishers/distributors

who can provide services For example, Kerosene Games

Reuse: Rise of middleware and re-use categories Unity, Amazon Web Services, Raveld

Alternate funding: Funding for content, not platform


Where are we heading?

“Convergence”, to a server-based experience

Game ships as a universe, with each platform accessing it differently

Varying fidelity and gameplay

Each device is a portholeMark DeLoura Videogame Economics Forum, April 2012

Thanks!

Contact Mark DeLoura [email protected] @markdeloura


mailto:[email protected]