Monetizing Free-to-Play Models: Intuition and Analytics

Earlier today, October 29th, a panel at GamesBeat 2013 discussed the how intuition and analytics influence the free-to-play game market.  Intuition being the “gut feeling” or the hypothesis of how a game will do, and analytics being the “hard evidence” about how many players are engaged with that particular game. 

The panel featured Mark Robinson, COO of GameAnalytics and Greg Richardson, CEO of Rumble Entertainment and was moderated by Margeret Wallace, CEO of Playmatic.  Richardson and Robinson quickly agreed that the debate was less about intuition versus analytics, but was more about intuition AND analytics.  Both processes are needed to develop a great free-to-play game and both need to be considered when making business decisions about a new game. 

The main goal of free-to-play games is to entice players to play your game and enjoy playing it enough that they return to the game later on.  That is the way that the game company can begin to monetize the game because you might be willing to pay to continue playing the game.  This is where the argument for intuition versus analytics comes into play.

Analytics or data collection is good for showing game companies how many players they are attracting to their game, and how many players are coming back to play the game again at some later time.  The number of return players gives the game company a good idea of how their game is doing, and this is where analytics can come into play. 

Richardson used an analogy comparing developing a free-to-play game to the game of softball, and it helps to differentiate intuition from analytics.

“The inspiration of the actual sport and what makes that fun, that’s creative [intuition],” said Richardson. “The piece that builds up the elements of the design that keeps people coming back and playing for years; a lot of that comes out of what you’ve learned about how players play your game [analytics].”

– Greg Richardson, CEO of Rumble Entertainment

The idea being that the game is developed by the creative thinkers or the intuitive thinkers; while the game is strengthened by the analytical data as it helps build your game’s player-base.

Robinson made a good point about intuition and analytics towards the beginning of the stream, and it sets the tone for how well these two different fields need to work together.

“Analytics will get you, not necessarily, on the right hill; that’s for the creative guys.  But if you’re 70 percent of the way up the hill, analytics can get you to the top.”

– Mark Robinson, COO of GameAnalytics

Which is an interesting point in that the data might not give you the right idea for the game, but it can help you to make the game the best it can be.  So finding the right balance between the “gut feeling” and the “hard evidence” can make or break a game.

The stream was fairly interesting and lasted for approximately 30 minutes.  The intuition versus analytics discussion starts at around the 2 hour and 32 minute mark for any that wish to watch the debate for themselves.