GAME JOBS
Contents
Social Killer: How DeNA Leads Japan's Market
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Sony Computer Entertainment America - Santa Monica
Sr Game Designer
 
Trendy Entertainment
Gameplay Producer
 
Sony Computer Entertainment America - Santa Monica
Senior Staff Programmer
 
Trendy Entertainment
Technical Producer
 
Telltale Games
Lead Environment Artist
 
Sledgehammer Games / Activision
Level Designer (Temporary)
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Tenets of Videodreams, Part 3: Musicality
 
Post Mortem: Minecraft Oakland
 
Free to Play: A Call for Games Lacking Challenge [1]
 
Cracking the Touchscreen Code [4]
 
10 Business Law and Tax Law Steps to Improve the Chance of Crowdfunding Success
spacer
About
spacer Editor-In-Chief:
Kris Graft
Blog Director:
Christian Nutt
Senior Contributing Editor:
Brandon Sheffield
News Editors:
Mike Rose, Kris Ligman
Editors-At-Large:
Leigh Alexander, Chris Morris
Advertising:
Jennifer Sulik
Recruitment:
Gina Gross
Education:
Gillian Crowley
 
Contact Gamasutra
 
Report a Problem
 
Submit News
 
Comment Guidelines
 
Blogging Guidelines
Sponsor
Features
  Social Killer: How DeNA Leads Japan's Market
by Christian Nutt [Business/Marketing, Interview, Social/Online]
2 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
October 28, 2011 Article Start Previous Page 3 of 3
 

According to your figures you get $12 average revenue per user. Compared to Zynga, that's very high. Why is that?

KK: It's a very different scene, and I think that Zynga has not really researched monetization. I think that people who don't know much about the Japanese market just dismiss those users as crazy, but that's not the case. You really need to research thoroughly at what time monetization becomes the most fun for your users.



With Zynga, monetization often comes in the form of energy refills, or area expansions, or item unlocks, or decorative stuff. If you ask whether there's any reason to buy all of that, there really isn't. So I think the biggest difference between us and Zynga is in the number of payments made by users.

I would bet that the ARPPU [average revenue per paying user] between the two companies isn't that different. I read in article that the ARPPU across all Facebook apps is something like $20 a month, which is up there with the best of Japan's game scene.

However, the ratio of paying users is only three percent-ish, I think. That's one of the big differences, and I think that's most people don't see enough reason to start purchasing things; that or the purchases just aren't that exciting. They don't expand on the fun. Their sales approach is "if you want to buy these, go ahead." The commodity is right in the retail store, in other words.

The same games on Mobage and Mixi, the Japanese web-based social network, have very different ARPUs, however.

KK: Well, the KPIs and other metrics are all recorded on the Mobage platform, but one reason is that Mixi is a virtual social network like Facebook. Kaito is a game where users battle against each other. There's a ton of activity, and as a result, you get all these notifications along the lines of "A is fighting B," "C is fighting D," and so forth. It completely fills up your wall if you let it.

On Mixi, you see people's real names, like "Akiyama or Kobayashi is fighting," and you start to wonder who the heck these people are. There are games, of course, where it's fun to play with real identities, but I think there are also a lot of fun games where you can't see that.

If you were playing Call of Duty or Battlefield or whatever and all the players' real face portraits were used on the soldiers, wouldn't that make you hesitate a bit? Also, a lot of users access social games three or five times a day, and that shows up on Mixi too -- "Kobayashi logged into Kaito Royale at 11:55," then the same notice at 3:05, then the same notice at 6:15. You look at that and wonder "Are you doing any work?" I think the same thing happens on Facebook, too, and I don't think everyone wants to have that be visible.

I heard about DeNA's "interest graph" earlier -- could you describe that?

KK: It's very close to that virtual social network idea. Basically, it's a community you make with people you share interests with, which I think is the most interesting thing -- especially in terms of games.

The same genres.

KK: Yes. It gets livelier when you're in a group you share interests with. In Japan, there are anonymous forums like 2ch, and when people with like interests come together, they get excited about pretty hardcore topics. Personally I don't find it all that interesting to talk about Final Fantasy XI with other people, but when you have people who like it come together, they start talking about all the great times they had on this or that server.

Is there a forum for user communication for DeNA games outside of the games themselves?

KK: There is, within Mobage itself. You can create social groups for games, and they get pretty lively when the games grow popular. For example, there's a popular iPhone social game in Japan called Kaibutsu Chronicle. All of the activity of this game is in the comments section of the iTunes review page. There aren't any reviews there; they use it as a forum. There isn't any other sort of forum for it, so they made one for themselves there instead.

Ninja Royale has launched in the U.S. How has user feedback been?

KK: Well, it's still in beta with a limited number of users, so there hasn't really been enough feedback to get a full picture yet. We're at the point where we'll see how the game iterates in the future. As a result, to be honest, we can't really say whether it's been good or bad yet.

Lately in the U.S. there's the impression that Japanese games outside of Nintendo aren't popular. What sort of interest do you think the Japan-developed DeNA games hold for U.S. users?

KK: One of the things behind what makes a game a hit is the backdrop -- war, dark fantasy. Another is the style of graphics -- pop, realistic, and so on. The externals, in other words. Then there's the game system -- FPS, RPG, and so on.

I think that in terms of game system, a lot about Japanese games can be applied to the whole world universally. Without a change in graphics, though, you have a lot of Japanese games not appealing to the West and vice versa. I think Ngmoco's sense will play a big role here, and I think a lot of the gameplay systems we've developed here can come into use.

Nintendo and Japanese companies can make globally-appealing games. Is that what you're shooting for, to make game systems that work universally?

KK: One thing I feel, and in particular that I felt at E3, is that the winning genres in the West tend to involve FPSes or action or sports games, and they involve war and zombies and whatnot, and the big winners in those fields -- the Call of Dutys and Battlefields and Gears of Wars -- are all massive, multi-million-dollar projects. You need that to win in those genres. If we made something in those genres with a smaller budget, we would have no chance of winning.

That's the situation over there, but it's very different with social games on smartphones. You can still challenge the market with new ideas, and new types of gameplay are always coming out. I think Japanese outfits have a lot of room to innovate and thrive in that market. There are, of course, parts of Japanese culture that hit it big in the West, too, so working with those provides opportunity as well.

 
Article Start Previous Page 3 of 3
 
Top Stories

image
Microsoft's official stance on used games for Xbox One
image
How Kinect's brute force strategy could make Xbox One a success
image
Keeping the simulation dream alive
image
Gearbox's Randy Pitchford on games and gun violence
Comments

E McNeill
profile image
"What we sell instead is the opportunity to make treasure gathering easier. For example, have you played mahjong? This may work with poker, too. If you're one card away from a royal flush, you only get one chance to draw that card. Well, what if you paid 100 yen [$1.31] and get three chances instead? (laughs) Which do you think is more interesting to the user: very difficult odds, or a chance at easier odds?

...

That in itself is interesting. Paying out has to be interesting in itself, I think. We're selling chances, and it results in some interesting reactions from the users."



This reminds me of a blog post from David Sirlin some time ago:



"Some company makes literally hundreds of millions of dollars off this: the treasure box. The Chinese government was upset at the effect this was having on people, which also blew my mind. So a country with flagrant human rights violations found this GAME MECHANIC so objectionable that they stepped in? Anyway, here's what it is. You pay money (or virtual money? what's the difference) to open your 'treasure box.' When you do, a slot machine thing spins, showing all the very rare and valuable virtual items you might get. Then it settles on a not so valuable virtual item, and you get that one (well you know, most of the time. I'm not implying it's cheating you, other than entire concept itself being a cheat). The Evil Genius part is that they also give an award to the top X people who open the most treasure chests that day(!!!). Those people automatically win the most valuable prizes.



This egregious, unethical practice is the kind of thing he should have prevented as extremely dangerous. If you are 'playing to win' in business, yeah you'd do that. But doing so is damaging to the lives of our own customers."

Robert Carter
profile image
How do you figure this is unethical? The odds of winning items is known. The fact that you might not get what you want is know. How much the random prize is is known. The player can make an informed decision, and that decision may very well be not to buy the box or not to play the game at all. But I see nothing unethical with selling a mystery box.



Do you think Wizards of the Coast is unethical for selling booster packs of Magic cards? They are all random, same as your mystery item. Wizards does not sell singles. Period. All singles are second market sales, much like you can do with these games (TF2 hats, for example, are bought and sold on eBay). So it is exactly the same thing.



If the company lies about odds, or lies about what you can get in the box, or misleads in some other way, then that is unethical. But offering the player the full information of what they are buying, including the odds of what the treasure box may have, is not unethical at all. Neither are incentives to reward players who spend the most and encouraging them to continue. It is not damaging to the lives of the customers AT ALL. They have the choice not to buy, the choice not to play, or the choice to play a competitors game. Thats how the free market works.



Players decide what games are successful. Look at Eve. Look at netflix. When customers feel betrayed, they let the company know. Nothing this company is doing is unethical.


none
 
Comment:
 




UBM Tech