Florent wrote:
Marty, I would like to add that we named the game 'Forever' and I our first desire was to have an audience big enough to support the studio by sole advertising revenues. It was achievable if we multiplied our audience with Forever, compared to ESWC and we did it! However, the crisis arrived and a company that has been bought 200M€ by Microsoft is now closing it's external services. It can't be more clear that the revenues have declined and the hopes in the sector reduced. So, to keep the 'Forever' concept alive, we are looking to increase the revenues from the primary source: the conversion of accounts to the paying one from the wide audience, and not the core community. For the later, we implemented the 'favorite servers' solution as well as the direct access solution (enabling to join any server) It is not a perfect solution, mainly for host like you that want audience on their servers. But what I intented to explain here, is that those moves are to keep Forever and that this game should survive the release of TM2. And from my point of view, I would like players to have both shortcuts on their desktop. There is value in both games from my point of view and the gameplays are all differents.
Do I understand it right, that all depends of the (now missing) advertisements? Is there a big problem to find another solution to do advertisement ingame?
Big_Al, if you look in the first post, there is a link that explains it
www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2 ... y-year-end
we have been informed, a month ago, that they will stop their activity
we are working with another agency, but things are not so simple
in game advertising has suffered a lot and you can read this here
www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/q ... g-business
but we were not exactly in that case since we have generated more than 10 times their audience. (quote from them: "players have spent over 8.9 million hours", while it was 100 millions hours for us at that time)
the fun fact, is that we probably inspired them to do this (same agency IGA and this recent interview can witness it)
www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2 ... iew?page=2
we have been innovative, we have reached our audience target to make the game sustainable "Forever" but somehow, the world is changing a little... a least the in game advertising one ^_^
Thx vm for that detailed indication Florent.
I wonder about 2 things. Was Nations Forever from the beginning planned to earn money with advertisement or was the idea born later?
As I remember in the beginning there was no advertising in-game.
And since the advertising started, was it profitable?
Is the loss of income so huge? What I read about in-game advertisement doesn´t look like a gold-claim.
I really wonder why there is so much money now needed for a 3 years old game? Okay Nadeo needs money for employees and hire. And even the masterservers, but are they really so expensive?
If the money is just needed for further project like TM2, sorry but i have to say that train has departed to sqeeze more out of TM in that way to force players buy the United edition.
Many are just interested in stadium. So i think it would be more senseful to do a small stadium buy-version for lower price.
How can You expect that this old game will get now again big business? Without patches, without new design and development? That can´t be serious.
Even if Nadeo is in trouble, it will give You a backdraft if you keep changes like they are done now. Nadeo won´t make much extra money I guess, and Nadeo will loose community I promise. Additionally many voices I heared, that players who said they want to buy TM2 are now not interested anymore.
The trackmania community is one of the nicest communities of all online games I ever played, and they all are faithful to Nadeo. Would be very sad if that would be hurt.
Big_Al, We have spend 7 figures numbers to make Nations. The future of it's model and the fact that we can get some revenues is strategic, even if only running the server would not cost so much.
Advertising was at the core of the "Forever" concept, in a way, that our target was to multiply the revenues of the previous version, ESWC, by multiplying the audience. We succeeded, but other things created other obstacles.
Maybe it will bring us more knowledge, to know how to make the future of our games. If there is a free entering model, maybe we can think better of a Nations 2, or not (it is purely for the example) There are way too much parameter that are proper to the studio to really get all that lead to this, but at the end, we are providing space for the community to organize itself. Microsoft adapt, we adapt, the community adapt and the players adapt (buy or use favorites, for example)
lille: sure. It is part of the negative effect of the solution and like I said earlier, the idea to integrate players wanting to participage to improve the solution is also behind this. It will take time to improve this and we were aware of it, off course.
Hmmm. Jetzt weiß ich auch nix mehr