📄 shoestring.html
字号:
then designed a game specifically for this audience. It also
designed the game so that it could reach the broadest possible
audience within the identified niche. This meant that it did not
seek to incorporate at the heart of the game any new Web technology
that was not necessarily available to those who were on the Web.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>For example, Inventure chose to present the game in a simple
client-server cgi interface. It also provided the option of a
java-based front end interface that people who had java enable
browsers found quite attractive and useful. But had Inventure chosen
to provide CyberSkipper only in that particular platform, it would
have eliminated perhaps two-thirds of its potential audience. The
truth is that strategy game designers have not even begun to utilize
effectively the most standard of available tools in html programming
in order to present a compelling game interface on the Web, and they
should focus on mastering these wonderful tools before leaping to
each new platform -- where the game may be cooler, but will also
certainly be more lonely. </P>
<P> </P>
<P> Dependable Traffic</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Inventure designed CyberSkipper so that anyone who became
interested would be likely to play on a regular basis, returning to
the site again and again. There are three main reason for this, two
of which we discussed above: </P>
<P> 1) the dynamic data event input; and </P>
<P> </P>
<P> 2) the incredibly detailed results reported by an agile and
robust database engine. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>The third, and apparently the least important (judging from
Inventure's experience), incentive that drives people to return is
the offer of prizes and recognition on the Web. With respect to
CyberSkipper, Inventure built enormous traffic and player loyalty
long before any prizes were announced.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> <I>Honestly I have had such a great time playing all teams in
Cyberskipper that I have not even paid attention to what I win or
how to receive whatever it is that I win. If you could let me know I
would really appreciate it. "The Dees Family" Mon, 30 Sep
1997</I></P>
<P> </P>
<P>Inventure isn't the only firm that calculates that it is the fun,
not the prize, that drives the traffic. ESPN offered a nation of
avid college basketball fans only one trip and 64 pizzas in its
Web-based contest that asked players to forecast the outcome of the
NCAA basketball tournament.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> Low Cost Production</P>
<P> </P>
<P>One of the principal considerations for Inventure at the outset
was that it had to keep its costs down. At the starting point, it
was not in a position to approach venture capitalists and ask for
large sums of money to fund its efforts. Inventure simply had an
idea for a game. It had virtually no proof of concept, no proof of a
revenue stream. In light of this, the option of significant funding
up front really wasn't even there. Instead, if Inventure wanted to go
forward, it had to resolve that it could afford to work on "spec" for
an extended period of time and that it could devote its intellectual
capital and a limited amount of financial capital to the enterprise.
In addition, Inventure had to find individuals who were willing to
begin working on the project under approximately the same terms. The
company was very fortunate to have available, from the start, a
brilliant programmer who was capable of realizing the vision for the
game, and was willing to "roll the dice" with the other principals,
at least in part. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>In order to be able to construct this kind of enterprise,
Inventure had to be a "virtual" corporation, which meant that
although it was turning out a professional product and presenting a
unified corporate front, it actually was composed of a series of
independent individuals or entities that had joined in a strategic
alliance to produce CyberSkipper. This provided great efficiencies,
as production capabilities could expand to meet demand, and contract
during slow periods.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> Ready, Fire, Aim</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Inventure's decision to keep costs down, and to bootstrap
production, would have been futile had it not been for the company's
successful pursuit of relationships with the major brand holders.
This eliminated from the CyberSkipper budget the need for marketing
and promotion costs, and permitted Inventure to present its product
to a large number of perfectly targeted players the minute that it
was ready -- at virtually no incremental cost. This was perhaps the
most important and successful business decision in the CyberSkipper
story, but production began before even one of these relationships
was in place. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>The dice were being rolled, and a second message from the
CyberSkipper story is that it is all right, sometimes, to move
forward with actions before the target is fully within sight.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Without question, Inventure operated under a plan when it
commenced CyberSkipper. But it did not draft a formal business plan
document. The underlying game design principles discussed above were
carefully followed, but Inventure's efforts were focused centrally
at first on producing the product, so that the company could have
something concrete to present and from which it could build. Thus,
rather than spending an extended period of time and effort developing
business plans and perfecting a corporate presentation in order to
obtain funding from outside the corporation, the CyberSkipper team
just went to work on CyberSkipper. Had Inventure chosen to focus on
fund-raising at the start, we might still be talking about a
interesting idea, rather than an exciting reality.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>The bottom line is that if you want to build a Web game it is
possible to do so if you have a nucleus of talented, dedicated people
who are willing to devote their time to the project. This is your
"intellectual capital." I like this term better than "sweat
equity," but in truth I am describing the same thing. If you have
this form of capital, then you are going to be able to begin your
project, no matter what. The success of your project, on the other
hand, will depend on your talent -- and on the care with which you
have selected your subject matter and your audience. </P>
<P> </P>
<P> Building on Main Street </P>
<P> </P>
<P>The selection of your audience -- and of your possible
brand-holding partners -- will in large part answer the question of
whether you will be building your product out in the Web wilderness,
or will be presenting it on a Web "main street." And, believe me,
you want to build on the main streets. The key difference for
Inventure was that, at no incremental cost, it was able to construct
CyberSkipper (and later CYBERCOACH) on central thoroughfares through
which its audience was bound to pass. This was because Inventure
designed a game that was of interest to the Major League Baseball
teams. Because they own the key brands, these baseball teams are the
"main street" as far as baseball games are concerned. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>So, what kind of deal should you consider with the potential
branded partners that you might have? Of course, you can approach it
as if the branded partner should pay you large sums of money up front
for the privilege of having your terrific game on their Web site.
But I can tell you that is an approach that is unlikely to work -- at
least before you are established, and probably never. Instead, you
are much more likely to have success with an approach that presents
the brand holder with a business opportunity that looks so attractive
that it it is almost impossible to say no. What this means is that
the deal has to involve little or no up-front, out-of-pocket cost to
the brand holder. But low cost -- and low risk to the brand holder
-- is not nearly enough. The deal has to provide attractive
positive incentives. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>The incentive that makes the deal happen can be the addition of a
powerful interactive element to an otherwise unattractive or
uninspired Web site, but it also should be potential monetary profit.
If you look at the transaction from the perspective of the brand
holder, you want them to be thinking: </P>
<P> "Why should I say no? I'd be turning away interactive content
that I can have for no cost and that might one day earn me a
profit. If I say yes, I will add this powerful new element to my Web
site without adding any cost to my budget, and these guys might make
me a hero on the bottom line as well." </P>
<P>If you cannot afford to place the brand holder in this mind set,
you are unlikely to be able to make the first deal. If you can, you
will probably have a deal. But when you make such a deal, make sure
that you are only leasing your game through a license, and not
selling it outright -- but that is the subject of another paper
altogether, as is the following discussion of the revenue models,
which we will address briefly in order to whet your appetite.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> Revenue Models</P>
<P> </P>
<P>When you are discussing the possibility of profit for your game on
the web with potential licensees -- the brand holders -- there are
three different models that you should consider. These are the
advertising model, the tiered services subscription model, and the
straight pay-to-play model. Inventure has chosen the advertising
model at this stage in the growth of CyberSkipper and the growth of
the Web.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>When you build a dynamic, fun, attractive, and free game that
creates the incentive for people to come back repeatedly, you build
Web traffic. And when you build Web traffic, you build the
opportunity to sell advertising, allowing others to use your game
interface to market their goods and services to the people who are
coming to play your game. This advertising can be sold at prices
that range from $10 to $100 per thousand page views. You can do the
math, but let's pursue one example:</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Let's assume that you can attract 1000 people to come and play
your game every day. If that group returns every day, and if each
member of the group on average views three separate Web pages in
order to play your game, you will generate 3000 daily page views. At
the rate of $30 per thousand page views -- a fair average rate -- you
would be generating $90 per day from your game, even if you only put
one ad on each page. This total may not sound like much -- and it
certainly wouldn't be in the traditional game business -- but on the
Web, your production costs are very low, and your potential for
scaling up is quite high. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>For example, CyberSkipper grew to a player base of 7,000 in only a
few months time. Only half of these people played on a regular
basis, but Inventure generated over 3000 daily page views on both the
Atlanta and the Baltimore games. This meant that Inventure had page
views that were worth in the range of $100 per day in each of these
games. Even if the use does not increase -- which is unlikely -- and
Inventure scales out to provide games for all 28 Major League teams,
it can move from a situation where it is generating page views worth
$100 per day, to where it is generating page views worth $2800 each
day.</P>
<P>Of course, this example discusses page views that CAN be sold, not
page views that HAVE been sold. The problem with the advertising
model is that advertising on the Web is still in its infancy -- and
it is the largest actors in the marketplace who have thus far
controlled the vast majority of the advertising. This is why
Inventure has turned to partnerships with major media companies --
interactive newspapers -- in each of the baseball markets in order to
earn the commitment of a partner that can and will sell the page
views effectively through the use of existing staff. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>Inventure is planning to introduce a CyberSkipper PRO game in
mid-summer that will represent an application of the classic "tiered
services" model. In the Fall, CYBERCOACH is likely to be be
presented purely as pay-to-play. Come back next year for the next
installment of the CyberSkipper story.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> Conclusion</P>
<P> </P>
<P>It is possible to create and to successfully market a
well-designed game on the Web today on a shoestring. But this is
only so if you plan a wise strategy that enables you to earn the
partnership of major brand holders, and only if you are willing to
make the compromises necessary to close such deals. Good luck.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>© 1997 Inventure. Inc.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P></P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码
Ctrl + C
搜索代码
Ctrl + F
全屏模式
F11
切换主题
Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键
?
增大字号
Ctrl + =
减小字号
Ctrl + -