Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
July 31, 2014
arrowPress Releases
July 31, 2014
PR Newswire
View All





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


Free-to-play studio Machine Zone projecting big revenues this year
Free-to-play studio Machine Zone projecting big revenues this year
July 17, 2014 | By Mike Rose

July 17, 2014 | By Mike Rose
Comments
    4 comments
More:



Newsbrief: Machine Zone, a mobile game studio whose CEO previously said all video games will eventually be free-to-play, has been valued at more than $3 billion according to a media report.

The Wall Street Journal's tech blog Digits says that according to "people familiar with the negotiations," Machine Zone is currently in talks to raise advanced funding for its upcoming mobile titles.

And the company is said to be projecting revenue of $600 million this year, thanks to virtual currency sales in its Game of War franchise. Game of War: Fire Age is regularly featured in the App Store top grossing charts.


Related Jobs

Raven Software / Activision
Raven Software / Activision — Madison, Wisconsin, United States
[07.31.14]

Senior UI Engineer
Treyarch / Activision
Treyarch / Activision — Santa Monica, California, United States
[07.31.14]

Senior Gameplay Engineer - Treyarch
Treyarch / Activision
Treyarch / Activision — Santa Monica, California, United States
[07.31.14]

Level Designer - Treyarch
Vicarious Visions / Activision
Vicarious Visions / Activision — Albany, New York, United States
[07.31.14]

Human Resources Manager










Comments


Mikhail Mukin
profile image
I played Game of War for a while - I think it is a very good game for it's type, I wish developers all the success they deserve.

However, at some point (as with all similar games) I realized I either have to pay "very close attention" (frequent log ins - including at times that are not convenient for me due to "real life" schedule) and/or just keep spending money. So I quit (all such games) as I think it is not healthy to be "hooked" into anything so much and just do "pay to win".

So $3 billion eval and $600 mil/year... Is it really correct and sustainable? Any signs of market fatigue? I feel like those games need some kind of radical "next step" in their design.

If I play mobile games like that again - I will be looking for 2 things:

1. Absolutely no gameplay related improvements you can buy for money. Yep, alas it means the game will have to be not "f2p". But I want to compete using my skills, not my credit card.

2. No "requirements" to log in frequently (and in response to random events) to make a decent progress. I'm ok to log in once a day (at a time of my choosing) and play, say, for 20 min or so (maybe couple of log ins on weekends etc). This probably means some kind of powerful "queues" for actions you want your AI to take, some "delayed" battles or something. Probably some bigger clans or some other (more dynamic/free form?) organization so that when you log in, you still have other clan members to coordinate with (?). To be honest, I don't know if it is possible to solve this within the "2D map of bases" type of game.

Jane Castle
profile image
Can someone explain why they need to get more funding. I see these companies with massive revenue numbers and they are always looking for "additional" funding. Is it because despite the numbers they are not profitable?

Why can't they just self fund their next mobile titles and cut out the middle men (the VCs)? Is there some catch that someone would care to explain?

Wes Jurica
profile image
I've wondered this too. I am not business savvy in the least. Could it be that the more VC funding they get, the more enticing they look to those looking to acquire them?

Raf Keustermans
profile image
1. external validation of valuation
2. 'war chest' for possible acquisition, international expansion (e.g. office in Asia), more aggressive marketing
3. cheap money -> raising $200M at $3B will only dilute founders with 7%, i.e if a founder has 25% equity now, they can raise $200M cash and still own 23.30%
4. possible (partial) cash out for founders, early employees, investors


none
 
Comment: