This post is separated into several posts due to character length. This post is meant to be as objective as possible, but of course it is still all my opinion. This post will contain the TL;DR, but separate posts contain more detail as to how and why I came to such conclusions.
Before I get in-depth, let us first define success. I’ll use Halo 4 as an example. In this thread, ‘success’ remains in the context of gaming of course. There are multiple definitions varying between each person, but each generally boil down to:
a) it was successful due to its initial sales
b) it was/n’t successful due to individual opinion
c) it wasn’t successful due to player population and mass player perception.
Now let me explain why c) is a more reliable source of determining success than a) or b). With b), obviously it is too subjective (this includes the opinions of players, critics, and 343 industries). With a), what we can draw from is
initial profits were large. But we can’t tell if Halo 5 will make a 25% increase based off of Halo 4’s sales.
a lot of people bought it. But we can’t tell how much a proportion of those people are still playing, nor whether people like it or not post-purchase.
With c), the number of conclusions we can either state with confidence or estimate with accuracy include
future and DLC profits are likely to be minimal, due to the lack of interest. I know of a couple of people that are refusing to buy Halo 5 because of Halo 4.
a lot of people have stopped playing it, relative to the number who bought it.
a lot of people dislike Halo 4, evidenced by the amount of negative complaining in forums. Of course, there will be 1 or 2 trolls. But it would be obnoxious to disregard every complaint as needless ‘b-tching’ rather than reasoned criticism.
the game for a large amount of people is not replayable.
As you can see, the player base holds more merit in deciding the success of a game, as it is less biased but also accounts for more variables than simply revenue minus costs of production (profit). One can argue that regardless, each individual in a population is biased. Whilst singularly, a person’s opinion is subjective, if we look at mass perception, we can at the very least come to the conclusion that the majority likes/dislikes ‘x’. In conclusion, success is best defined as the opinions of the entirety of the player base. NOTE: not necessarily a majority. A game with 51% of players liking it and 49% of players hating it does not mean it is a good game, because holistically only around half the players enjoy it. ADDITIONAL NOTE: a) and b) still determine a game’s success to an extent.
TL;DR:
Success is best defined as the opinions of the entirety of the player base.
Be decisive, consistent, and honest about your target market, and research what they want so they will buy your product.
Market your game well enough and a lot of people will buy it initially, regardless of the gameplay.
Competition, exploration, and accessibility achieve replayability only when founded on a fun and balanced base. NEVER sacrifice replayability for the sake of initial sales. NEVER. EVER.
Now that that’s out of the way, here are the general methods as to how to make a game successful. Again, I’ll be using Halo 4 as a case study. Notice these methods are derived from the three major possibilities to define success, and all three are interdependent.
a) Marketing - a game needs to make money, and it does this by getting people to buy it (or for F2P games through advertising and premium content, but that’s irrelevant to Halo). The primary way to attract people to buy it is marketing. This includes everything aesthetic about the game as well as anything said about the game. Good marketing, like with all Halo games to date, ensures a great return for 343 industry’s coffers. Bad marketing, like with the ‘dog’ addition to your squad in the new Call of Duty, can detract players from it, even if the implementation is possibly one of the most in-depth and strategic features of any shooter.
Subsequently, and take notes Microsoft, people buy games because of marketing, NOT because of game features, at least not specifically. Of course, the features of the game are a part of marketing, but observe two ways to sell Jetpack; 1) The addition of Jetpack results in another layer of depth in gameplay, allowing easy vertical maneuvers at the touch of a button 2) We at 343i decided to add Jetpack, because players get to flying around like headless pigeons. If 1) is said, what is the bet that every competitive player would all of a sudden think “dang jetpack doesn’t seem so bad”? For the inverse, lets take visible ranking; 1) 343 industries is a firm supporter of skill-based ranking, and thus we have implemented CSR as a means for representing a player’s skill level in-game whilst finding equal matches 2) We at 343 industries feel like the CSR will be exactly like Halo 3’s 1-50, and it allows the best players to dominate the noobs. If 1) were said, every casual player would be like “hmm i wouldn’t mind some visible in-game ranks”. Halo 4 was successful with its marketing.
A lot of players bought some of the ‘half-truths’ told by 343 industries, like flinch being a bug. Whilst unethical, it gave pro-descope players faith, which led to them buying the game. Unfortunately, there is not a specific set of tips to ensure good marketing, so the following general ones will do; have a target market, set goals, have good presentation, be resourceful in marketing (use the internet and technology. For example, 343i used YouTube for FUD) and act friendly.
The final point: market your game well enough and a lot of people will buy it initially, regardless of the gameplay.
b) Identify and Satisfy Target(s) - any product needs to have a target market. This is its intended audience. Without correctly identifying the main consumers of your product, you cannot conduct marketing properly (imagine a women’s underwear ad featuring Arnold Schwarzenegger shooting down terrorists) and thus you cannot sell or attract as well as you potentially could. However, it is not merely aesthetics, but also the functions of your product that must take into account your target market. 343 industries failed at identifying Halo’s niche in Halo 4. Traditionally, Halo has always been about fun, diverse sandbox gameplay with a good story to boot. Of course, a sequel can change the series’ niche, but it must be done in a clean way. Halo 4 tried to appeal to Call of Duty fans, but marketed it to Halo fans, then coerced competitive players to buy it, whilst implementing features better suited for casual play. Had 343 industries been consistent, at least the consumer would know the product they’re getting. Instead, most were left dissatisfied. Imagine if Halo 4 had grittier audiovisuals with a variety of custom game options and also a classic playlist with radar at release day. There’s CoD, casual, competitive, and old school fans pleased in one go. Which leads to the next point, satisfying your target market.
The only way to find out how to satisfy your target market is research. This can be done in multiple ways, such as beta testing, surveys, and communicating with the player base in a two-way path (that is, instead of 343i simply telling us the changes they will make, they ask us if we want those changes and we ask them for changes). In Halo 4, there was none of this. Some may argue that 343 industries ‘listened’ to us, but they never held a poll or interviewed random community members or had a survey done, they simply assumed we wanted this or that from population numbers (granted, a lot of the assumptions were true, such as the want for the return of the red x). NEVER assume two target markets are incompatible, and one’s wants cannot be satisfied whilst the other’s are. ALWAYS go for a balance. You’re alienating competitive players by assuming that adding skill rankings and no sprint will upset casual players.
The final point: be decisive, consistent, and honest about your target market, and research what they want so they will buy your product.
c) Ensure Replayability - so you’ve clearly identified your target market, and what they like/dislike. And you’ve adapted your marketing to attract your intended audience. The former two will grant you good sales, which may lead to financial success. But replayability is the key to maintaining success in the best-defined manner. It results in DLC sales and positive word-of-mouth, which leads to future sales and even sales for the sequel. Generally, there is an exponential effect from replayability as well; the more people buy and play the game, the more they will spread news of it, and the more popular it will get, meaning more people will buy and play the game.
But how does one achieve replayability? Well there are three ways to achieve replayability within a game: a) Competition, which incentiveses players to become better, and in doing so, play the game more b) Exploration, which includes progression and EXP systems, or unlockables c) Accessibility, meaning a game that anyone can pick up. Seeing that the target market of Halo are shooter fans, unless Halo suddenly markets itself as an RPG like Mass Effect, it needs to use competition and accessibility. Sadly, Halo 4 used neither to its detriment. It does not encourage players to defeat other players and improve (and regardless of an individual’s opinion, other players don’t find winning to be a reward in itself), and it’s not accessible like League of Legends (being free) or Call of Duty (having a lower skill gap).
The basis of replayability however is within the game mechanics in itself. A game needs to be fun and balanced in the perspective of its target market(s) to be replayable. This is why it is better to have a consistent target market, because sometimes different perspectives collide (though customisation and options could solve this). Anyhow, to be fun and balance, make sure when the player wins he is amply rewarded, and when he loses, he recognises the reason for his loss. That is a major problem in H4. Before CSR, one only gained EXP from winning (part of exploration, which unfortunately is largely irrelevant for MP shooters), and one was often in scenarios where his defeat was at the hands of the game itself, rather than him getting out-BR’d or getting flanked. Personally, I can’t count the number of times I was unfairly killed because of a random incineration cannon. This is not to do with competition. This is not some anti-random user flaming infinity settings. This is a user stressing the importance of the principles of reward and justified loss towards a player, and how it makes the player satisfied and want to play another game again. There’s nothing wrong with a bit of randomness, but the randomness should not frustrate the player to a significant extent as getting needlers in my PoD 4 times in a row.
Lastly, I cannot make the following any more clear. NEVER sacrifice replayability for the sake of initial sales. NEVER. It is marketing’s job to secure profits, replayability is to make sure the consumers think that their income was well spent. With Halo 4, 343i clearly used gameplay mechanics such as ordnance and loadouts to attract certain types of gamers. Look at it now. Sure, relative to other games it is doing excellent. But relative to previous Halo games, it is doing terrible. No hyperbole intended; a 7-month old AAA sequel from a flagship franchise is doing worse than a game released 2 years ago (MW3) of the same genre. Now, numbers shouldn’t impact on your enjoyment of the game true. But you’re being blind to the obvious if you are to ignore the game’s (relatively) derelict state.
The final point: competition, exploration, and accessibility achieve replayability only when founded on a fun and balanced base. NEVER sacrifice replayability for the sake of initial sales. NEVER. EVER.
In all seriousness, pal, no one is gonna read that. You must admit it’s a bit much.
Rewrite/shorten that stuff and you might actually gain someone’s attention.
And that’s a bit short.
Just take the stuff, get straight to the point and be satisfied with one example per statement. And don’t get side-jacked.
Just sad to see someone making well thoughts, but wasting 'em by not getting to the point.
This is basic business knowledge. You identify the target market you want, you advertise towards them, and then you make them want to keep using/buying your product.
Halo 4 honestly just appealed to every Halo fan in commercials and advertising as “Back to the roots”. This ensured that any/every Halo fan would buy it.