In terms of making games, as I mentioned before our design philosophy focuses on casual gameplay with emergent depth. How has that affected the way you make games and the way you launch them? It's certainly true that survivability in this market has required developers to execute efficiently along more vectors than just game development. During the lifespan of the App Store, the balance has arguably shifted from making great games to making great games and being very smart about marketing and monetisation. This has been incredibly important in helping us optimise user acquisition and direct spend to the most efficient channels. Dragon Skies Historically, it could take several days to determine this but with the recent build out of our internal analytics and user acquisition platform we can now assess performance of a channel in near real time, maybe 6 to 12 hours after starting a campaign. Mostly our objective is achieving positive return on interest, so we test multiple channels simultaneously and rank them based on performance. Once a title is live, we pursue a very methodical approach to user acquisition. I think this approach informs better design and feature decisions and ultimately delivers games with the potential for much deeper engagement. So, we spend equivalent time proving out more subjective and intangible game design objectives around fun factor, content depth and aspirational clarity as we do with, say, monetisation objectives. Casual gamers will engage with complex loops if delivered appropriately. Our philosophy for delivering fun and differentiated games hinges on the notion that the casual market is actually underserved when it comes to games that offer more immersive experiences. I know that sounds cliché, but solving discoverability really only matters after you have a compelling game that supports investment in user acquisition. As a small - if well funded - developer, how do you deal with discoverability? It's a multi-dimensional issue that really starts with making a great game. Making games for a more casual market can deliver a larger audience, but it can also mean you face the most intense competition. Secondly, we learned the value of smaller, nimble teams that can iterate quickly and evolve features and engagement loops throughout the development process. How has your previous experience in companies such as Idle and EA influenced the way you operate? Probably too much to say here, but I think a couple of the most important things we learned were, firstly, the important of taking the time to polish a product and how adding smaller elements of personality can really make the experience more memorable and different. Our studio has 45 incredibly talented and passionate team members that have joined us from a diverse set of companies both within and outside of gaming. We're based in downtown San Francisco and financially backed by Sega and Azure Capital Partners. Breaktime was founded in March 2011 with the mission of developing immersive casual games for smartphone and tablet devices. Pocket Gamer: Can you give us some quick background about Breaktime Studios, when and where you set up and what sort of games you make? Todd Heringer: Sure. So what should other studios operating in the sector be doing? We caught up with Heringer for the inside track on the Breaktime way. Indeed, Heringer suggests much of Breaktime's success could be because casual gamers are "underserved" by quality, complex releases. Interesting, then, that Todd Heringer VP of studios at casual king Breaktime should call on developers not to hold back when designing games for the casual market. There's no point denying it: as successful as many casual games may be, there's a portion of the industry that on a creative level, at least looks down upon many of the sector's flagbearers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |