Do you want to take your investment?

2013 and 2014 These two years, more capital into the game industry, especially the hand tour, so the birth of a lot of hand tour entrepreneurial team, probably from the beginning of the hundreds of rapid development to tens of thousands of homes. In 2015 years, it should be a harvest, but from the results, whether the success rate or the rate of return, it seems not as good as expected. So investment began to become cautious. But what is prudent, how to achieve caution, then each family has the performance of each family.

The capital to travel is more cautious, but the success rate is not rising.

Some of the basic research and development, such as switching to the distribution and channels;

Some of the assessment of research and development standards have been improved, such as in the Angel stage requires a very complete team and a very complete demo;

Some of the game types do not vote, such as card type, knife Tower legend class certainly do not vote;

• There is also a reduction in the valuation of the team under the same conditions, for example, from prior to letting the group control become a requirement for management holding.

Investment becomes cautious I think that's a good thing. And, think back to the question: Is there a chance for a hand tour? I believe this should be a consensus: there must be. So the purpose of prudence is to improve the success rate. Is the above cautious approach really effective in improving the success rate and the rate of return? Individual from the perspective of research and development, may not be able to have a significant effect, and even if the effect, such a start-up team and the big team, there seems to be no significant advantage.

When deciding whether to start an early investment, the founder, team, and product direction are often seen. Founder and team, through friends Introduction, industry Word-of-mouth, experience investigation and other methods, there are basic problems will be lost, so there will be no big problem; product direction If there are demo can see play prototype, art level, technical strength and so on better. When there are no problems in these areas, it is often decided to vote. But there is a very strange phenomenon in the development of the game, the reliable person, the dependable team, the reliable direction, may not be able to make the reliable game. A real example of this is the time of the page tour, as early as 2011, we all know that the legendary category is a reliable direction, there was no fire God, there is no flame, and there are very reliable people, very reliable team to do this kind of game, but the result is not very good, the numerator will not increase with the denominator and so on.

What do investors look at? idea, execution or team

So what are the factors that really determine the success rate of a game in the early days? Personally feel that when the individual, team, direction is no problem, this factor is the idea, especially the specific ideas. But there is a saying in the industry that "ideas are worthless, the key is implementation", can not be said to be wrong, can only say that in most cases, the importance of the idea is not a chance to highlight. As an inappropriate example, the effect of relativity can be ignored when the speed is low.

Investors are often reluctant to discuss the details of ideas too much, because it will make you look unprofessional, it is difficult to form you to me to this good atmosphere of conversation, coupled with the "idea is not important, the key is to vote for people" similar awareness of the fuel, so it is not very in-depth attention. Of course, this is very normal, because even if the producer, both of them are doing MMO, may turn system and ARPG can not really talk about the key points, it is more difficult to judge the idea of the bottom by the unreliable, the success rate is how much. Moreover, this is not only the problem of investors, often most producers, in the early search for investment, there is only a general direction and feeling, there is no concrete ideas, let alone complete, reliable, enforceable ideas. Personally, this project is highly risky.

So what exactly does an executable idea mean? Refers to the specific scheme, the real solution to a certain type of game problem, or to find and meet the category of players in the new needs of the group. Any type of game is a chance, card, ARPG, round, ACT, SLG, management and so on, do not need to be demanding what type is not good, the key is to understand the player group of the problem is what the new requirements are what, and then the specific executable program is what.

Examples explain how to improve the success of the game to impress investors

If the island of the world is a world-class game has not been developed, then when a research and development with this program to talk about investment, the scenario is often this:

• Investment Q: What kind of game do you want to play?

• Research and development answer: The game is like tribal war.

• Investment Q: (brain complement all kinds of COC team failure, brain complement already have coclike game such as the Mo Hegemony, Castle hegemony, really swallow heaven and earth, imagine a year after the opportunity is not big and so on) so what's the difference between you and COC?

• Research and development answer: changed to the class, removed the wall and hero, the class reduced, spell redo, strengthen the PVE part, increased the exploratory, matching rules changed.

• Investment Q: (hear here, product level basic brain complete) feel very different oh.

Yes, it sounds completely like a coclike, and then is to see a person watching the team experience, etc., the final decision to vote, the product level may not be added. But deep play down, these two games to bring players feel is completely different, tribal war heavy Strategy light operation, the island is heavy operation light strategy, heavy operation is the player's new demand (different from many domestic games meaningless operation), and this demand is precisely through the above to remove the wall, the reduction of the class, Spell Redo and other details. However, if you do not want to understand the new needs, to understand the specific means of implementation, alone with a coclike to talk, certainly do not feel.

Give a more operable example. If at this stage, a research and development ready to do a MMOARPG hand tour, then the first thing to consider is: the existing game of the same type of problem? Personally, it is possible to list the following three points:

1, the operation experience of the joystick is too bad

2, every day play down to make the player very tired

3, community and social basic did not do

In recognition of the above problems under the premise of at least to really solve two points, can effectively improve the success rate. I believe that there should be a lot of research and development of similar problems, but there should be few effective solutions at an early stage. If people are reliable, team, the final decision to invest, the team is also likely in the process of research and development because of various problems, these should be resolved to cover up the problem (no time to think about, other masterpiece how to set up how to copy it, plainly is not solve), then the game developed, In front of the player can not form a long-term attraction, in front of the big manufacturers will not have what competitiveness.

Let's take a look at the following article. The 1th operation question, concrete plan is what. For example, if the development can be mentioned to remove the rocker, the left hand control two skills, the right hand control two skills, in the copy of the player only decide whether to go forward, the AI take over the move and the angle of view, encounter blame automatic general attack, players just put good skills on it. Without moving the sword, without moving the World of Warcraft, this is a logic that sounds at least logically feasible, if you can have more specific executable solution, there is hope to solve the first problem.

What is the specific plan for the 2nd? There are references, such as sword Lingqian in the middle of the period before the full level, the player is very fair and easy, the core rules and settings to a large extent contributed to the 1.5 million online, can be slightly changed to use. The argument that the detail rule can be really achieved is not too tiring every day. "How do some players want to stay online?" "is a follow-up question, whether should introduce life skills at this time, how to introduce, specific plans and rules are what, need to understand."

3rd, if you really want to solve the problem, the plan will have a very many, very complex, it is not easy to understand. But if the research and development said will solve, while doing and think, it is basically not reliable. Moreover, the cost of thinking is very low, why not first use a two months time to think about it?

A game type lists a few big questions, can really solve more than two points, feel the game's success rate will be significantly improved. But the real idea of a complete and reliable solution, in the hands of a new field, even for an experienced producer is also a very difficult thing, the value of ideas reflected. Manufacturers and small teams, in this regard is relatively fair, and manufacturers are subject to inertia thinking and institutional processes, such as constraints, often more difficult to fully develop the power of ideas, so small teams have the opportunity to do not rely on distribution and channel to complete the reverse attack. Of course, there is a need for investment and research and development to reach consensus.