{"id":5836,"date":"2010-09-27T08:59:29","date_gmt":"2010-09-27T15:59:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/?post_type=trends&p=5836"},"modified":"2018-08-02T21:54:29","modified_gmt":"2018-08-02T21:54:29","slug":"analysis-game-marketing-gets-harder","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/analysis-game-marketing-gets-harder\/","title":{"rendered":"Analysis: Game Marketing Gets Harder"},"content":{"rendered":"

SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 \u2022 Video game marketing is changing radically. A quick look at the traditional advertising vehicles such as enthusiast magazines would suggest that marketing budgets are shrinking. But that isn\u2019t necessarily the case. True, some publishers will have decreased their ad spend significantly as a result of the impact on revenue.\u00a0 True, publishers are releasing fewer titles, which suggests fewer dollars spent overall. The reality, however, is not so clear cut.<\/p>\n

The major trend in game marketing is the explosion of popular platforms. In 2005 there wasn’t a significant mobile phone game business, handheld consoles were not effectively connected to the Internet, social networks were not growing game platforms, online free-to-play and strong multiplayer experiences are stretching the life cycles of games enormously, and mass-market tablet computers were still a gleam in Steve Jobs’ eye. Today publishers are faced with such a diverse distribution reality that they could throw substantially more money at marketing than in past years and that additional commitment wouldn’t be obvious.<\/p>\n

\"Steve_Fowler\"<\/a>\"Ayzenberg\"<\/a>Steve Fowler, vice president of strategy at the Ayzenberg Group, a firm specializing in advertising for interactive entertainment, says that game marketing is just getting harder.\u00a0 Especially during the last 12 months. \u00a0In August, Ayzenberg hosted the third annual [a]list summit in Napa, California.\u00a0 The theme of this year’s summit was The New CCCP:\u00a0 Content, Conversation, Conversion and Participation and how the wall between the consumer and the marketer has crumbled.<\/p>\n

A major focus of the conference was using social networks as marketing vehicles to communicate directly with consumers.\u00a0 The biggest change since last year, Fowler tells DFC, is the emergence of social tools, and how marketers can take advantage of those tools.\u00a0 They were available in limited form a year ago, and marketers dabbled with them some.\u00a0 However, the last year has seen a much more sophisticated approach to using social networks as a marketing tool.\u00a0 \u201cEspecially with the downturn in the economy, marketers have been looking at alternatives to get their message across,\u201d Fowler notes.<\/p>\n

With the maturation of Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube social networks have become not only an effective way to market products, but a mandatory way.\u00a0 Fowler observes that conversations are happening all the time about brands.\u00a0 As a brand marketer, you can watch it happen, or, \u201cYou can choose to take part in the conversation.\u201d<\/p>\n

Fowler sees that as a fundamental shift in the way products are marketed.\u00a0 Formerly cost-prohibitive outreach like building community, providing content, entertaining an audience can all be done relatively inexpensively by a marketer today.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019ve found that the tastemakers, the content evangelists, appreciate when they have a direct communication link. They feel empowered that way, and will actually do more work for you, helping spread the word of whatever your product is to their social networks,\u201d Fowler explains.<\/p>\n

What’s more, these social networks are accumulating a tremendous amount of unique user data that can be used for targeted marketing tailored at these individuals.<\/p>\n

It may sound like an Orwellian scenario, especially with the realization that social networks are starting to push for more control over what happens on their platforms.\u00a0 But Fowler has few predictions here.<\/p>\n

\"MySpace\"<\/a>\u201cWe have no idea \u2013 not only what restrictions or rules the networks will place on their outlets going forward \u2013 but we also don\u2019t know which ones will be the most important outlets,\u201d says Fowler. \u201cToday, Facebook is a king, but not less than two years ago MySpace was the king.\u00a0 Facebook was this small emerging platform, and Twitter didn\u2019t exist,\u201d recalls Fowler.<\/p>\n

The pace of change is so rapid that agencies have to be nimble, and forecast future migrations of users. Just as game developers must look at new technologies and new platforms, so must game marketers.\u00a0 Fowler gives the example of the Ayzenberg Group putting together a team of coders who can write APIs to take advantage of an emerging platform like Foursquare that uses geo-location.<\/p>\n

Social networks will very frequently up and change their API, regulations or restrictions.\u00a0 The consequence is that applications created for a publishing client can be disabled. Fowler says this comes with the territory.\u00a0 It\u2019s difficult, Fowler admits, but an agency has to be dedicated if they want to stay close to how content distribution is evolving.\u00a0 He discusses instances of being burned by Facebook in the past, admitting: \u201cTheir development relations have been challenging.\u201d<\/p>\n

One issue DFC has been curious about is how much a network like Facebook pays attention to how their service is used for marketing.\u00a0 To put it more bluntly we asked Fowler if Facebook was aware of Ayzenberg.\u00a0 Fowler says yes they are, because the Ayzenberg Group will negotiate with Facebook on ad dollars.\u00a0 \u201cThat\u2019s where it really comes down to money,\u201d he says.\u00a0 \u201cAnd money talks to them.\u201d<\/p>\n

A media planner can talk to someone in ad sales, and say, \u2018We have a client interested in advertising on the site, but you\u2019ve just killed the app they\u2019ve had running for two weeks.\u00a0 I\u2019ve got 200,000 people in the community complaining they can\u2019t finish the campaign that we\u2019ve done.<\/i>\u2019<\/p>\n

\u201cThey\u2019re starting to listen to those things,\u201d Fowler says of Facebook.\u00a0 But with such a new and fast-growing company, who is responsible for what at Facebook can be somewhat of a mystery.\u00a0 \u201cSometimes it\u2019s hard to find who is the person I need to talk to internally there,\u201d he reports.<\/p>\n

Fowler remains pragmatic, saying the problems are offset by the opportunities.\u00a0 The rapid change in technology on social platforms gives his firm an advantage if they can act quickly or adapt to a new feature or new function.\u00a0 \u201cThe big agencies are a little bit slower than us,\u201d he admits.<\/p>\n

As the Facebook platform gets closer to establishing how best to monetize its operations, Ayzenberg becomes more relevant, continues Fowler.\u00a0 Earlier on the platform was an experiment, still in development, and profits weren\u2019t a priority.\u00a0 That\u2019s changed as Facebook attracts more investors and becomes a topic of M&A speculation.<\/p>\n

But Fowler doesn\u2019t see social marketing supplanting traditional advertising, \u201cWe always preach that you want to surround your consumer.\u201d\u00a0 \u00a0Instead of placing everything on television spots, it\u2019s better to split television with web coverage, achieving what Fowler calls the exponential effect of placing in multiple mediums.\u00a0 \u201cIt\u2019s not going to work if you\u2019re just advertising on Facebook,\u201d Fowler concedes.<\/p>\n

Fowler describes every outlet as a potential way to communicate with people.\u00a0 \u201cIt comes down to marketing fundamentals of surrounding your consumer,\u201d he explains<\/p>\n

The nuance of social marketing that everyone is trying to perfect, according to Fowler, is the question of how you contribute to the ongoing discussion.<\/p>\n

Fowler views budgetary planning as still relatively the same compared to what he’s seen from publishers in the past. Which means the financial commitment has remained stable. The social spend so far is coming from experimental budgets.<\/p>\n

Therefore, Fowler reports that game marketing budgets on the whole \u2013 calculated as a percentage of projected revenues on the product \u2013 have remained relatively unchanged year-over-year.\u00a0 Which also means that game industry spending is still fairly well behind other industries.\u00a0 Movie budgets will spend 20%-to-40% of forecasted revenue, while game budgets spend 10%-to-20% of forecasted revenue on marketing.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe do see that the game industry is still not as aggressive, when it comes to marketing products, as some of the other industries in the entertainment field,\u201d Fowler notes.<\/p>\n

But the approach of game marketers will change over of the next twelve months, prompted by the challenges and differences in marketing digital products versus boxed goods, says Fowler.\u00a0 \u201cSince that\u2019s very much where our industry is headed, as retailers become less and less relevant.\u201d<\/p>\n

Game marketers need to think less about the “fire and forget” blockbuster movie approach to marketing, and to figure out how to better sustain brands, Fowler advises. Especially as digital distribution becomes more and more relevant.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s going to be less about the two-week window that you have to sell 60% of your sell-in.\u00a0That really is an artificial restriction that retailers put in, based on the lack of shelf-space, and the lack of ability to create end-caps,\u201d Fowler points out there is no lack of shelf space with digital distribution. \u201cNow you don\u2019t need to take ninety-five percent of your budget and spend it in two weeks.\u201d<\/p>\n

What publishers must do now with digital distribution is to figure out how to sustain a marketing campaign and give more life to a brand.\u00a0 Even with full-featured next-gen games, downloadable content lessens the downtime between product iterations \u2013 making titles feel more like a subscription based product. On the plus side, Fowler notes that these extended cycles give marketers the chance to test several different campaigns to find the message that works for a certain group of consumers.<\/p>\n

\u201cEven traditional, packaged-goods publishers are going to change the way they approach marketing products \u2013 especially when more and more of those dollars come from digital,\u201d predicts Fowler.\u00a0 But having a persistent campaign isn\u2019t easier, he warns.\u00a0 \u201cI would say it\u2019s harder.\u201d<\/p>\n

There is a certain satisfaction in firing all your guns at once, and then evaluating how a massive launch campaign went.\u00a0 But if your salvo missed its target, that satisfaction turns sour.<\/p>\n

In talking about the changing requirements of always-on game marketing Fowler admits, \u201cIt does require a lot more maintenance, a lot more attention to data, and it is not quite as glamorous.\u201d<\/p>\n

On the plus side, Fowler concludes the results from always-on efforts are potentially more effective from a return-on-investment perspective.\u00a0 And that\u2019s exactly what’s necessary for game publishers to leverage social network marketing opportunities.<\/p>\n

In the end, it is all a part of the emergence of games as an ongoing service.\u00a0 Historically it was develop a product, do a big launch and move on to the next product.\u00a0 Going forward, when a product launches to consumers the hard work is just getting started.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 \u2022 Video game marketing is changing radically. A quick look at the traditional advertising vehicles such as enthusiast magazines would suggest that marketing budgets are shrinking. But that isn\u2019t necessarily the case. True, some publishers will have decreased their ad spend significantly as a result of the impact on revenue.\u00a0 True, publishers […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[49,143],"tags":[12,144],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5836"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5836"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5836\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16756,"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5836\/revisions\/16756"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5836"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5836"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dfcint.com\/dossier\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5836"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}