By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Digital costs more than you think

Leading games industry analyst and SuperData CEO Joost van Dreunen on how the move to digital isn’t generating revenue quite as easily as some companies might have hoped...

I attended several analyst meetings at this year’s E3. Almost unanimously publishers pointed toward digital - the transition to digital development, publishing and distribution – as the most important strategic decision to grow their business. Implicit in this transition to digital is the notion that, different from the physical retail model, publishers get to keep more of what a gamer pays. It improves margins, as they say in business speak.

But does it?

There are some obvious benefits to digital. Reaching a global audience has never been easier, and allows even the most obscure title to gather a sustainable audience. It also reduces the value chain as digital games do not require publishers to hold any inventory or rent trucks to drive boxes to stores. It provides publishers with a lot of information on their customers, allowing them to better market and develop games. And, most importantly, digital distribution reduces the bargaining power of the retailers.

 

But digital is not without its costs.

Salaries need to be paid even after the game has launched. In the past, publishers would cut their workforce after the release of a big title to reduce overhead. Digital games require ongoing development, maintenance and improvements, forcing companies to keep more staff – a good thing because giving people job security allows them to do great things. And publishers now find themselves having to fill new positions in marketing and analytics.

There’s also the infrastructure needed to sustain online. Last year Take-Two found out what happens when 25m console gamers all go online at once. The money spent on resolving infrastructural issues when GTA Online went live put a hefty dent in Take-Two’s initial cost estimates.

And finally companies are still dependent on distributors. Facebook, Valve and Apple still take their 30 per cent cut and have control over what gets placed front and centre, and play a key role in connecting games with gamers.

So the question that publishers are trying to answer is does digital improve their margins? 

Take-Two suffered, but survived, the initial shock of infrastructure needs for a large online console audience. Yet when it comes to monetisation, there is little upside: GTA Online players can purchase in-game currency but there’s no strong incentive to keep spending. So while the servers have to keep running, incremental revenue is on a constant decline.

Take-Two’s mobile efforts so far seem to be focused on building a secondary revenue stream. Releasing old GTA games on tablets earns a few extra million, but does little to extend the franchise.

Ubisoft, on the other hand, has been looking at digital differently. Growing its online sales slowly, but steadily, to $267m on a 12 month trailing basis, digital presents one fifth of its total revenue. Instead of seeing digital as incremental, Ubisoft is aggressively moving into mobile, claiming 90 per cent ofthese titles arriving next year will be free-to-play. 

So the appropriate response to whether digital improves margins is how serious about digital are you? Only by making it central to your operation, formulating a detailed strategy across digital platforms, and staffing accordingly, will a transition to digital improve margins.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/digital-costs-more-than-you-think/0134751



Around the Network

No! It costs exactly what i think.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

dlc, patches, and online gameplay have nothing to do with digital distribution margins.



Yes, but even though digital is not as profitable at this moment, it will be.

Servers will be faster, more eficient and (at least on PC) the games will become cheaper due to competition between distributors. Physical distribution has a limitation: costs of production and transportation. It's better for a company to upgrade their digital servers and services than to buy DVDs (guessing how many copies are going to sell), burn the games on them, produce the plastic cases, artworks and instructions, put the games on boats or trucks, not to mention to refund damaged copies, store the copies not sold, destroy the copies not sold, process the wastes...
Those costs will go to the producers of storage devices.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

this thread is talking about a different type of digital.

a digital release of a physical game costs less than a physical game.



Around the Network

i want to know why everything NEW is £10 more expensive on PSN from launch,
for example destiny £55 on PSN £45 on amazon,it seems strange to lose revenue to amazon to me,they aren't a high street shop which is always the reason i hear for things being more expensive



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

Going digital and maintenance is different. They can make more money selling their games digitally.

Also, they wouldn't have to keep all those staff if they had released a perfect game in the first place. These days after a game is released, they start working on patches and updates cause they know the game has problems.



    

NNID: FrequentFlyer54