2015-04-30
Capture the moment
Vídeo mostra a incrível beleza do voo de um pavão. É simplesmente espetacular! Assistam.www.jornalciencia.com
Posted by JornalCiencia on Tuesday, May 27, 2014
2015-03-14
Make revenue on flash games
Introduction
Making money off a web game is quite doable if you put your mind to it. With a Flash game, there are clear, established ways to make money, and for certain kinds of games, you can generate more revenue than going through a mobile App Store.
Besides creating games to make money whether it be for a living or for profit, it forces you to put more effort into what you’re doing.Creating a finished product and shipping it - the “last 10%” is something that can only be taught by doing it.
You’ll learn how to market your game, how to roll it out to testers, how to think from the user’s perspective, how to negotiate and get that sense of independence from knowing what you’re doing, which opens the doors to bigger and better opportunities.
Ads
Ads are a default way to make money, but unless your game is wildly popular or has already been sponsored, you aren’t going to see very much.
The amount you get from your game can be measured either in CPM (how much you get for every 1000 views of the ad) or in CPC (how much you get from a clickthrough). CPM varies depending on the quality of the ad, which in turn is dictated by the quality and size of the audience. It's more common for games than CPC.
Roughly speaking, ads fall into 2 categories.
- In-Game Ads
- Portals (Revenue Share)
Mochi and CPMStar are the major players in the world of in-game advertising. Mochi tends to have lower CPMs than CPMStar, but Mochi's biggest asset is it's distribution network. They blast out new games to thousands of portals to aid in your distribution. CPMStar is an invite only network.
With Portals, your best bet is Kongregate, which shares between 25 - 50% of revenue (through banner ads and pre-game ads) depending how integrated your game is with their API and exclusivity to them. Their CPMs are decent because of the relatively high quality of the games on the site and the focused, gamer-centric audience.
Bottom Line: All in all, ads are at best, a supplementary form of revenue that can tack on a little extra to a game that’s popular or sponsored, but they are rarely a primary source.
Sponsorships
Sponsorships are in general, the best way to make money with Flash games.
Sponsors are game portals who purchase exclusive rights to market and distribute your game on their site and other portals. How do they make it back? Through attracting players back to their portal, which drives in ad revenue for them.
Sponsorships vary widely in payment styles and terms. Generally speaking, they fall into one of 3 categories.
- Lump Sum
- Performance-Based
- Hybrid of Both
Lump Sum
In lump sum arrangement, the sponsor pays you a fixed amount to buy exclusivity to the game indefinitely or for an agreed upon period of time, before the game “unlocks” and can be distributed on other portals.
What’s the range? From as low as $100 all the way up into the $10,000+ range. The median is somewhere around $500 for the average sponsor. For higher end sponsors such as Armor Games, it's still possible to receive a couple thousand.
This all depends on your ability to negotiate, your prior portfolio, the terms, the sponsor, and of course, the quality and potential of the game.
Performance-Based
In a performance-based arrangement, you are paid per click back to the sponsor’s site or per plays on their site.
Hybrid
Put the two together, and you get a model where you get some upfront payment and payment upon reaching certain milestones. For example, Armor Games could offer you $3,000 base but $150 for every 100k plays on their site and $200 for hitting the front pages of Kongregate and Newgrounds - all milestones that our best games regularly hit.
In the very best circumstances, a well-performing game may receive an offer to port the game over to iOS. ArmorGames did this for Kingdom Rush, and it’s opened up a new frontier in the world of sponsored games.
How do you find a sponsorship in the first place?
Two ways.
- FlashGameLicense
- Contacts / Your Network
FlashGameLicense (FGL)
FGL is essentially an eBay for sponsored games. For a 10% cut, they practically guarantee that a decent game (by their definition - they rate you from 1 - 10, with 8 being the magic number) will receive bids from sponsors. Some developers have voiced concerns with FGL, but for most developers, it’s still a great way to get noticed for the first time.
My advice is this: do your research and make sure you’re not getting screwed by the sponsor. Don’t automatically accept the highest offer. Think it through and go with your gut instinct.
Networking
The second way to snag a sponsorship is through contacts and people you know. I can’t coach much on this because it’s a natural cycle - if you know good game developers or have prior contact with the owners of sites, it’s relatively easy to snag a sponsorship that way. Building a reputation for making great, well-performing games will land you in this spot over time.
Non-Exclusive Licensing
Not all sponsors allow for non-exclusive licensing, but the better ones do. The idea behind non-exclusive licensing is that you can sell a version of your game to a specific website, such as AddictingGames.com, and you re-brand the game for their website so that it shows AddictingGames’ logos instead of your primary sponsor's logos.
Check out Pyro II on Kongregate...
http://www.kongregate.com/games/damijin/pyro-ii
http://www.kongregate.com/games/damijin/pyro-ii
Versus the one for AddictingGames...
http://www.addictinggames.com/pyroii.html
http://www.addictinggames.com/pyroii.html
Damijin's primary sponsor was Kongregate, and they paid him for his game, so why would they let him do this with a direct competitor like AddictingGames? Here's what he had to say.
"The reason is that some portals (like AddictingGames in particular) will NEVER under any circumstances show your game on their site UNLESS it is branded with their logos. That means AddictingGames will either have your game wearing their logos, or they will just not show it at all.
Kongregate knows this, and they know that they will not benefit from AddictingGames in any way because of that policy. But they also know I'm a starving developer, so they allow me to do a deal with AddictingGames where I got paid $750 to basically just change my logos and add a little site-lock code.
Non-exclusive licenses have been my second largest form on income behind sponsorships. Most tend to be around the $500 range for me, but I've done them for as low as $150, and as high as $1100. They tend to make up around 25% of the revenue for most of my games."
Kongregate knows this, and they know that they will not benefit from AddictingGames in any way because of that policy. But they also know I'm a starving developer, so they allow me to do a deal with AddictingGames where I got paid $750 to basically just change my logos and add a little site-lock code.
Non-exclusive licenses have been my second largest form on income behind sponsorships. Most tend to be around the $500 range for me, but I've done them for as low as $150, and as high as $1100. They tend to make up around 25% of the revenue for most of my games."
Virtual Currency
Some API providers such as Mochi have created virtual currency platforms for providing microtransactions to end users. Although there are plenty of stories of runaway successes with this model, you should be realistic about your chances because those successes came about from particular kinds of games which differ a lot from the games that most Stencylers will be making.
It sounds enticing to be able to sell “level packs” for your game, but you’re often much better off with a sponsorship instead, something that sponsors and industry veterans I’ve talked to have echoed.
Bottom Line: In short, unless your game’s hugely popular, is a Facebook/social game or really fits the virtual currency model, stick to the other methods of generating revenue instead.
Note: This advice is specifically for web games.
Note: This advice is specifically for web games.
Stencyl Games that won Major Sponsorships
All of what's been said about making money would be for naught if we didn’t have games of our own to back up our words.
Many more Stencyl games have received sponsorships than listed here. These are the highlights among them. Although I can’t give figures in respect to the creators, each ranged from 4 to 5 figures.
(More Stencyl games have been sponsored in 2013 and beyond. Check our showcase for the latest.)
Skullface (Greg Sergeant, 2012)
Sponsored by Armor Games
Sponsored by Armor Games
Kreayshawn Goes to Japan (Beth Maher, 2012)
Sponsored by Columbia Records (Sony)
Sponsored by Columbia Records (Sony)
Making Monkeys (Greg Sergeant, 2011)
Sponsored by ArmorGames
Sponsored by ArmorGames
Gyossait (amon26, 2011)
Sponsored by Newgrounds
Sponsored by Newgrounds
Balls in Space (Michael Gribbin, 2010)
Sponsored by mofunzone
Sponsored by mofunzone
Summary
- It’s possible to make decent money creating Flash games.
- Go for a sponsorship if you want to make money.
- Protect your IP (intellectual property) - don’t sign away your rights, unless you don’t intend to use that IP again.
2015-02-27
Game Design Document from famous games
I'm sharing my collection of Game Design Documents from famous games. Just select the link bellow and you will open a new page to a PDF file.
Note: All these GDD have been approved to be shared by the authors.
Doom
Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel 2
Grand Theft Auto
As many do not know. GTA started out as a racing game that later developed into GTA on PSX which we have today.
Grim Fandango
Silent Hill
Torment
Tron
2014-12-26
2013-11-28
Tamagotchi, FarmVille, and "Fun Pain"
FarmVille is a game about periodic, repetitive action, grinding slowly over the course of days and weeks to a minor goal. When you get tired of grinding, you can spam your friends to get rewards faster. And eventually, when you get sick of that, you'll pay to get where you need to be. Is this really fun? Well, it's "fun pain", as Roger Dickey of Zynga puts it.
Why do this to gamers? It's a lucrative strategy. From 2009-2012, Zynga was a supergiant of social gaming, experiencing high growth and huge success, with millions of daily active users. Regardless of Zynga's eventual fate, for those years they were king. Let's get something straight; I'm not here to demonize Zynga. They capitalize on an evil mechanic, but it's our job as game designers to create something both better and more lucrative than "fun pain". With the current trend towards Freemium mobile apps and in-app purchases, this is a significant challenge, but I think we're up to it. I'm here to tell you that in the long run, creating games that add value to people's lives is a better strategy than getting them addicted to fun pain.
Tamagotchi was a virtual pet sold by Bandai in 1996, created by Japanese designer Aki Maita. Tamagotchi is responsible for the entire virtual pet craze, predating Pokemon(1996), Furby (1998), and current generation mobile pet-raising games like DragonVale (2011).
Tamagotchi is responsible for the periodic attention mechanic that "social gaming" is now known for. In order to keep your Tamagotchi alive, you had to check on it about once an hour. You pull it out of your pocket, feed it, play with it, clean up after it, and then that's it. Nothing left to do after a couple minutes. You put it back in your pocket and wait for it to need you again. The more periodic attention you gave it, the better a final form it would achieve. Treat your Tamagotchi well, and you were rewarded with the cute and well-behaved Mametchi. Treat it poorly, and you were punished with the odious and short-lived Tarakotchi. You couldn't pause the original Tamagotchi. It was a commitment. Tamagotchi could live anywhere from a month to years, and if it died early you knew it was your fault.
If Tamagotchi and FarmVille have the same core mechanic, why do I still get a warm fuzzy feeling when I remember my Tamagotchi, but an oily prickling when I think about my days playing FarmVille? I think it has to do with the intent of the creators, and why and how they used the time mechanic. Tamagotchi's real-time mechanic was designed not as a way to support in-app purchases and frustrate gamers, but to create a feeling of connection with a virtual creature. "I think it's very important for humans to find joy caring for something" said Aki Maita of her creation. Maita didn't just spout this truism, she designed and playtested for it. She spent weeks observing how high-school girls used her Tamagotchi prototypes, and used the feedback to optimize her pets for emotional attachment. Compare to the philosophy of Marc Pinkus, CEO of Zynga: "I don't want innovation. You're not smarter than your competitor. Just copy what they do and do it until you get their numbers."
You can see the difference in intent in the way the time mechanic is handled. Tamagatchi is a living, feeling creature. When it needs to sleep, it sleeps. When it's hungry, it whines at you. You can't pay gems or gold to force it to stop being hungry. Compare to the more recent Dragon Story by Storm8-- if it's taking too long for an egg to hatch, you can pay gold to make it happen instantly. Rather than simulating a biological need, the game is transparently making you wait in order to bait you into paying. Periodic events aren't a mechanic for you, the gamer, they're a mechanic for the company to get you to pay them. The fact that it's possible to pay a dollar to bypass waiting demonstrates how badly this mechanic is being abused. Waiting should be used as a mechanic to foster anticipation and surprise, not as a money grab.
I think that if creators keep in-mind the emotions and feelings they intend to instill in their audiences, and design their game mechanics around those rather than money, they will create happier games that enrich instead of detract from people's lives. In the long term, success, fame, and money will come to those designers who seek to add value to players, rather than go for quick cash and addiction. Periodic gameplay is being derided as "skinner box" gameplay, but it doesn't have to be that way. Social games and social mechanics don't have to be evil. They can be used to give busy people fun, interesting toys that grow, change, and surprise them, to create virtual worlds that live and develop even when they aren't playing. As game developers and designers, it's our duty to create those worlds.
I'll leave it to this article to explain exactly how Zynga's strategy works. I'm just here to figure out where this all started. Zynga didn't make this mess. FarmVille (2009) was a clone of Chinese developer Ellison Gao's "Happy Farm" (2008), which in turn was a clone of a Russian farming game. Going further back in time, World of Warcraft (2004) is often cited as one of the originators of the addiction model, for creating a "rested XP" system that encouraged players to log in every day to reap the rewards of boosted experience points. However, I think that periodic gameplay is much older than that.
Tamagotchi was a virtual pet sold by Bandai in 1996, created by Japanese designer Aki Maita. Tamagotchi is responsible for the entire virtual pet craze, predating Pokemon(1996), Furby (1998), and current generation mobile pet-raising games like DragonVale (2011).
Tamagotchi is responsible for the periodic attention mechanic that "social gaming" is now known for. In order to keep your Tamagotchi alive, you had to check on it about once an hour. You pull it out of your pocket, feed it, play with it, clean up after it, and then that's it. Nothing left to do after a couple minutes. You put it back in your pocket and wait for it to need you again. The more periodic attention you gave it, the better a final form it would achieve. Treat your Tamagotchi well, and you were rewarded with the cute and well-behaved Mametchi. Treat it poorly, and you were punished with the odious and short-lived Tarakotchi. You couldn't pause the original Tamagotchi. It was a commitment. Tamagotchi could live anywhere from a month to years, and if it died early you knew it was your fault.
If Tamagotchi and FarmVille have the same core mechanic, why do I still get a warm fuzzy feeling when I remember my Tamagotchi, but an oily prickling when I think about my days playing FarmVille? I think it has to do with the intent of the creators, and why and how they used the time mechanic. Tamagotchi's real-time mechanic was designed not as a way to support in-app purchases and frustrate gamers, but to create a feeling of connection with a virtual creature. "I think it's very important for humans to find joy caring for something" said Aki Maita of her creation. Maita didn't just spout this truism, she designed and playtested for it. She spent weeks observing how high-school girls used her Tamagotchi prototypes, and used the feedback to optimize her pets for emotional attachment. Compare to the philosophy of Marc Pinkus, CEO of Zynga: "I don't want innovation. You're not smarter than your competitor. Just copy what they do and do it until you get their numbers." You can see the difference in intent in the way the time mechanic is handled. Tamagatchi is a living, feeling creature. When it needs to sleep, it sleeps. When it's hungry, it whines at you. You can't pay gems or gold to force it to stop being hungry. Compare to the more recent Dragon Story by Storm8-- if it's taking too long for an egg to hatch, you can pay gold to make it happen instantly. Rather than simulating a biological need, the game is transparently making you wait in order to bait you into paying. Periodic events aren't a mechanic for you, the gamer, they're a mechanic for the company to get you to pay them. The fact that it's possible to pay a dollar to bypass waiting demonstrates how badly this mechanic is being abused. Waiting should be used as a mechanic to foster anticipation and surprise, not as a money grab. I think that if creators keep in-mind the emotions and feelings they intend to instill in their audiences, and design their game mechanics around those rather than money, they will create happier games that enrich instead of detract from people's lives. In the long term, success, fame, and money will come to those designers who seek to add value to players, rather than go for quick cash and addiction. Periodic gameplay is being derided as "skinner box" gameplay, but it doesn't have to be that way. Social games and social mechanics don't have to be evil. They can be used to give busy people fun, interesting toys that grow, change, and surprise them, to create virtual worlds that live and develop even when they aren't playing. As game developers and designers, it's our duty to create those worlds.
Takeaways:
- Why you implement game mechanics is just as important as what mechanics you implement.
- If you have good intentions and design your mechanics to create good feelings in your players, it will show.
- Realtime mechanics don't have to be evil. Use them to foster immersion and anticipation.
- Don't allow people pay gems to avoid waiting. Make waiting part of the enjoyment of the game, or take it out.
- Don't use realtime mechanics to hide your lack of content.
By Rosstin Murphy, Gamasutra
2013-08-07
Updated My CV
I've updated my CV with adding list of commercial games I've worked on, and elaborated on my computer and development skill that would be interesting to game developers.
Peace and love
Peace and love
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)