The Waterloo of "Plant vs. Zombies 2": the conflict between operation and profit

Intermediary transaction SEO diagnosis Taobao guest Cloud host technology Hall

This thick-rolled mobile phone game before the collection of thousands of love and look forward to, but in this continued to encounter an unprecedented Waterloo. The official microblog has gained more than 80% of the blame for the news that China's version of the game is on the line, which has nothing to do with the nature of the game, but more because of the conflict between its operations and its profitability.

NetEase Technology columnist

On the first day of August 2013, "Plant vs. Zombie 2: A fascinating journey to space and time" was finally listed in the App Store China area,

This thick-rolled mobile phone game before the collection of thousands of love and look forward to, but in this continued to encounter an unprecedented Waterloo.

The official microblog has gained more than 80% of the blame for announcing the Chinese version of the game, while the number of stars in the App Store has surpassed the number of five-star people within a week.

However, these infamy are actually irrelevant to the nature of the game, as the PopCap four years of the inheritance of a sword, "Plant vs Zombie 2" in the game to make a great breakthrough, the plot, scene, play, fun and other innovative experience are quite commendable place.

The problem is in some kind of design that is considered in terms of operation and profitability. In contrast to the overseas version, some netizens found the Chinese version of the Plant vs Zombies 2: The Marvelous Journey of time and space has been deliberately raised several times in difficulty--whether it be the unlocking of plants or the acquisition of gain items, Chinese users will have to pay more time or money than overseas users to get the same content. The difference between China and foreign countries quickly transformed the mood of Chinese netizens from surprise to anger, adding a lot of extra emotion to the anger that mingled with the new era of "The Chinese and the dog cannot enter" style of humiliation.

However, PopCap and Shanghai Bao Kai, is it really wrong?

One of the paradox of game: the balance between experience and profit

Weibo has circulated a story about online games and hand swims: Online games are driving you to spend money and then giving you more fun and privileges than others, while hand-swimming is a way of not driving your limits and forcing you to spend money to improve your gaming experience.

This is basically the hand tour in the profit model of the real dilemma encountered: The hand swims because the adaptation is the fragmentation scene, therefore the leisure type should be its true colors, but more leisure, the Netizen treats the game the attitude to be more not earnest, but is not earnest, then is very difficult to arouse their paying desire, So many hand tour in the design to come up with a set of completely do not meet the "leisure" nature of the difficulty, by making users frustrated to drive them to pay to overcome this difficulty, "a mouthful of evil."

"Plants vs Zombies" was a toll game, users only need to buy at the time of downloading, you can experience the game without difference. But just like dot-card games are becoming scarce, free (internal purchase) online games occupy the same market trend, "Plant vs Zombies 2: Wonderful time travel" also chose to download free, through the purchase of the project to achieve payment model, in this regard, China and overseas operations are consistent. But, perhaps, given the "Paranormal" of Chinese users in their study of skill and endurance, PopCap improved the difficulty of the game for Chinese users and eventually led to a failure of the Chinese version of the game to experience.

As you can imagine, popcap in assessing the risk of such changes, the profit pressure is greater than the insistence on the experience, and this consideration is also a certain scientific-in the online game market, because of the factors of comparison, so can give full play to the "28 principle" potential, attract a small handful of "tyrants players", Feed game companies, and then let the majority of the "poor players" who are destined not to spend money with "tyrants players", and then satisfy the latter's superiority. However, mobile games do not have too high a factor of comparison, stimulating users to pay the most important way is to allow users to spend money to "save Time", "reduce the difficulty", but the Chinese users is precisely--in the time efficiency of the group.

The operations team, which has been the first online user in China to be the number one, has told me they also designed a number of guide users to buy the project, such as many tasks require a large number of copies of material, and in the game Mall, you can pay to buy material drop rate doubled props, So that users can save their time by spending money. But in the first place, this design instead makes many users spontaneously produce a kind of behavior far beyond the game's imagination: they will play the role of five game, and then through a number of secondary roles to "raise" a main role, every day to spend 四、五倍 time, with a minor role to brush the task material, It is then transferred to the main role to achieve the same task as the paid player without spending money.

This is the Chinese market to bring popcap profit pressure, overseas players may because of the hope that "save time, improve efficiency" and the purchase behavior, in Chinese players may be completely unable to apply, so "Plant vs Zombies 2: Wonderful journey of Time and space" at "Kill 1000, 800" The destruction of their own proud game experience, in turn, the pressure on Chinese players on the bottom line of the game fluency: most of the new plants can not be unlocked through the regular process, but--or kill the snowman zombie to get debris, accumulate debris unlock, or save gold coins, by consuming large amounts of gold to unlock-but, Every time you kill a snowman zombie you need to pay 5000 gold coins (except for the first time) this leads directly to the accumulation of gold coins to unlock the direction of the plant is visible and not, this paradox embodies the "Plant vs Zombies 2: Wonderful time travel" many other designs, the ultimate guide to the goal is to persuade users: simply recharge the diamond directly unlock it, Don't bother with that effort.

Paradox of Game Two: Is there discrimination or respect between Chinese and foreign?

When we talk about the failure of many overseas enterprises to enter the Chinese market, we often encounter a word called "localization", which means that these arrogant overseas enterprises do not respect the particularity of the Chinese market, and they should copy the overseas experience and finally deserve Shing.

To say PopCap don't value the Chinese market, it is unlikely that--popcap had set up the Asia-Pacific game development and operations team in Shanghai as early as 2008, but the "Plant vs. Zombies", which came out in 2009, was 2011 years late in the Chinese region-yes, It is indeed 2011, before this play "Plant vs Zombies" you are playing piracy.

PopCap headquarters was "deeply shocked", when their game by the Chinese pirated household names, and even the emergence of a large number of categories of huge peripheral products (dolls, stickers, etc.), PopCap unexpectedly can not get a half a dime of the income, which let PopCap and Shanghai Bao Open can not accept.

"Plant vs. Zombies: Great Wall Edition" is PopCap's first experiment in China, and it is also a textbook case for PopCap to lay the business thinking of Chinese market.

2012, as the "Plant vs Zombies" proprietary version of China, PopCap and Tencent launched the "Plant War Zombie: The Great Wall Edition", which is full of Chinese characteristics of a typical product-free download, add value in the purchase, with more than the original number of times the difficulty. The product became the first "quality" of the PopCap history of the lower the game: the overall reduction of the "Plant vs Zombies: The Great Wall version" of the picture quality and sound, the game capacity from 72M to 8M ...

The result of the experiment is "Plant vs. Zombies: Great Wall Version" in the first month after the launch of the download is more than 3 million, and the monthly income also exceeded millions, and within three months became the EA (PopCap's parent) the world's highest revenue Android game! (To know this is 2012 years, "Plants vs Zombies" has long been not at the peak of the life cycle!)

At the 2013 GDC (Global Game Developers Conference), PopCap, the Director of strategic Development, said proudly, "when we joined the GDC 5 years ago, who thought we could succeed in China?" "Plant vs. Zombies: Great Wall Edition" in a remarkable commercial success, let him bring the "valuable experience" in the Chinese market to the United States, to teach his colleagues the mystery, in his speech, he repeatedly stressed that PopCap and Shanghai Bao opened the team "reference to the Chinese game market almost all the success of the model", The free collocation model is the only common denominator, free (and cut-game quality) is designed to reduce the download threshold for Chinese users, while internal purchases need to be embodied in the sale of key props-such as "game-friendly, or the resurrection of the afterlife," as the core.

For a commercial company, it's hard for you to ask for it to continue the dime pattern of "Plant vs. Zombies" swept through China by 2011, and in 2012, PopCap in China launched a high quality, paid download without the purchase of "Plants vs Zombies" (Classic version) and low quality, free download and the " Plant vs. Zombies: Great Wall Edition, the result is the latter to win the former, which gives the PopCap how to point, self-evident.

So the Chinese version of "Plant vs. Zombies 2" is also a complete succession, PopCap hopes to be able to "plant war zombies: The Great Wall version" of the successful experience to copy to continue, this is based on their deep lessons on the Chinese market.

The paradox of game three: reputation and income which is more important

Matthew Lee Johnston, producer of the Zombies series, once shared the idea of PopCap's game design: "The entire gaming experience is a long, familiar linear tutorial that teaches players how to deal with zombies in a variety of plants." This is a coherent and balanced experience. According to the standards of many publishers, the game could have been released a year ahead of the time we actually finished, but in that year we were constantly improving and rewarding, and ultimately the game was successful--my three-year-old child and my grandmother would play.

PopCap attaches great importance to the word "trust", which is seen as a link between the product and the user, and in terms of how to make a free game profitable enough, Matthew Lee Johnston Representative PopCap's answer is: "We can not destroy the game experience, But we also have to make sure that we have a mutually beneficial relationship with the players ... One metaphor I often use is to imagine that game design is a face-to-face conversation--if you mention money in a conversation, I can either kindly ask the player to exchange value for money, or you can smile and cheat out of the player's pocket. The trading point may be the most important part of the conversation, and it is the most critical and sensitive place for people. We have to be very respectful about this-it has to be a positive ingredient in this relationship. I think people will trust PopCap ...

But since 2011, when EA, a famous American gaming firm, spent 1.3 billion dollars on PopCap, "trust" has become less frequent in popcap dictionaries. PopCap in Vancouver, Berlin, Seattle was subjected to layoffs, and one of its founders, George Fan, was also dismissed by EA, "Plant vs Zombies 2: Wonderful journey of time and space" has also carried a "more than enough to play, the freshness of the lack of" public opinion, bundled users of the way the charges are provoked controversy.

When the plant vs. Zombie 2: A fascinating journey of time and Space, the "3-year-old child and the old grandmother" and even the young group of nimble fingers are playing crazy, using "Don't give money to block zombie" type of blackmail dialogue with users to build "trust" will only give PopCap brand damage, there are many worried that this is " Destructive exploitation of PopCap's most precious wealth. "

But...... Perhaps in the view of game makers, brand reputation may be less important than business income.

The game industry has a saying, is to talk about the brand reputation of the game manufacturers will withstand a greater pressure than competitors, brand "too good" game manufacturers under the double-edged sword but will be timid.

Rely on the results of the market economy is so cruel, you can not side regret the demise of the reality bookstore, while cheerfully downloading the Internet ebook. Moreover, the mobile game is a heavy product and light brand industry, product cycle short, iterative block, more competition, which makes the user's attention only enough to stay in the game itself, for the game behind the brand and even its reputation, the user's attention may not be as high as expected.

However, too much negative voice may "deter" new users, which is not a good signal for PopCap. At present, the "Plant vs. Zombies 2: Wonderful Time and Space journey" is still one of the most popular games in the App Store, but its rating has slipped from near-five stars on the first line to about two, becoming the lowest-rated game for free and top 30.

Coupled with media exposure and amplification, PopCap must face the final game on the work dividend and the user's bad comments--according to the Chinese saying, "stuffy sound to make a lot of money" is the best business model, too much controversy, is always not a safe road.

(An aperture for netease science and Technology, reprint, please specify the source.) The article only stands for personal opinion. )

Writer Profile: The former public relations company strategy director, Digital Marketing Senior experts, column direction for TMT (technology, media and communications) industry analysis and comment, but ask the truth, do not asked the position.