Close
Report Comment to a Moderator Our Moderators review all comments for abusive and offensive language, and ensure comments are from Verified Users only.
Please report a comment only if you feel it requires our urgent attention.
I understand, report it. Cancel

Wooga: Social gamers spend on shortcuts, not decoration

By Dan Pearson

Mon 15 Aug 2011 12:07pm GMT / 8:07am EDT / 5:07am PDT
Development

CEO Jens Begeman reveals spending stats behind Wooga's Facebook success

Wooga CEO Jens Begeman has revealed the percentage revenue split of his company's social game income, with the unexpected revelation that his audience is far more interested in saving time than buying customisation and decoration.

Wooga's audience is 70% female, which Begeman says leads many to believe that they'll be spending most cash on avatar costumes and decorative items. Instead, those players are using cash to buy in-game shortcuts which provide them with time advantages over other players.

Of the eight ways to spend real-world money in Wooga's flagship Monster World, just 0.3 per cent is spent on avatar customisation and only 2.3 per cent goes on cosmetic decorations.

2.8 per cent is spent on territory expansions, 6.3 on instant building shortcuts, 9.6 per cent on buying materials instead of finding or farming them and 10.5 per cent goes on in-game currency.

The two biggest sectors of income, by far, are Magic Wands – which make crops grow instantly – and Woogoo fuel, which powers the factories which make rare items. Both of these sections bring in around a third of Monster World's revenue each.

What that big spend shows, says Begeman, is that for players time is money. Whilst received wisdom may be that the largely female audience spends on customisation and cosmetic items, Wooga has found that this revenue split carries broadly across all demographics.

Time, for the average social game player, appears to be the most valuable resource, at least when measured against achievement.

During the same presentation, Begeman also announced Wooga's new title, Magic World – a resource farming/town building title combined with RPG mechanics and exploration.

From GamesIndustry.biz Recommendations by Taboola

14 Comments

Rick Cody PBnGames-Board Member

144 14 0.1
That's huge. I think that's the lead towards "better game design" a lot of people wanted to hear. No more micromanaging menial tasks in game. It's not about competing to show what you've earned it's about the tasks in the game... Maybe I'm off there.
Interesting article though. Got me thinking

Posted:4 years ago

#1

Nathan Ruck Programmer, Media Molecule

3 1 0.3
Ah, the freemium model. Let people play your game for free until they are hooked, then make them pay you for the privilege of not playing it.

Posted:4 years ago

#2

Emily Rose Freelance Artist

107 93 0.9
Male and female gamers are much less different than people think. This is something any gamer that has friends from different demographics has known forever.

Posted:4 years ago

#3
"Time, for the average social game player, appears to be the most valuable resource"

This is true for more than just the social gamer crowd.

Posted:4 years ago

#4
well - the question to ask is, was the price of customization worth it. perhaps if the range of variety is great and has attractive designs, then like real life fashion it has a impetus on its own....

Posted:4 years ago

#5

Matthew Elliott GameStrong Founder, GameStrong

2 0 0.0
It might be true in the short-term but I believe paid short-cuts also reduce the games halflife and accelerate decay.

Posted:4 years ago

#6

David Robinson Product Manager, Mighty Play

3 0 0.0
This is a matter of context, not an axiom. You can't generalize findings for a farming type social game to the social games industry in it's entirety.

It'd be the same if you studied It Girl, and came away with the opposite conclusion; that social gamers spend money on avatar customization over shortcuts.

Time is an extremely powerful motivator for monetization, but if you want to generalize the results across social games as a whole you need to look at more than one game.

Posted:4 years ago

#7

Jessica Weimar Staff Writer/Community Manager, Mash Those Buttons

1 0 0.0
I agree with what someone above here said. Female gamers are defining themselves now to be a lot more like male gamers in that they are not concerned with buying clothes and such, but more concerned with getting farther in the game. On the same token, I think it varies per game and that different games may yield a favor-ism to customization.

Posted:4 years ago

#8

Christopher McCraken CEO/Production Director, Double Cluepon Software

111 257 2.3
My take away from this is that, on some level, I already knew this, from talks with players. My other take on this, when you factor the gender data: Women want to win with efficiency. Im sure a lot of men do too, but I am thinking perhaps...in other perhaps less direct ways.

Another side to consider is...what would the data show outside of the carrot and stick market? (Read: typical "social"/FB games) If we looked, perhaps...at Puzzle Pirates doubloon sinks, Ragnarok, etc...I am curious as to where the sunk money is going..broken down into gender, and age group.

Posted:4 years ago

#9

Murray Lorden Game Designer & Developer, MUZBOZ

213 75 0.4
"Time, for the average social game player, appears to be the most valuable resource."

There's something very humorous about this quote. The idea of these people, frittering away their most valuable resource (time), all the while spending that time playing social games online!

I know that's not what it truly meant by the quote! But it just seems a strange twist of irony.

Really, I would argue that "flow" and "removing barriers to their game flow, and overall rapid progress" is what they are spending their money on. Which is similar to "time", but not as simply put.



Posted:4 years ago

#10

Andrew Goodchild Studying development, Train2Game

1,289 450 0.3
I've not played Monster World, but my general experience of freemium games where you can buy these advantages, are that purposefully crap/boring parts are put into the game, so that you have to pay to skip the crap bits. This seems to be a brilliant business model, but does nothing to improve the game quality. The strongest advocates of freemium try to say that the games will potentially be as good as a pay once game, but with the people who love your game being able to spend more money. But if you put crap bits in a pay once game on purpose, people won't keep buying your next game.
Business, art and entertainment are a fine balance in any expensive to produce mass media product, and what makes good business sense cannot be summararily dismissed, but at the same time from the game as entertainment perspective, everything should be fun, including grinding, if it's boring or crap then it should be cut, but this will never happen in freemium, becuase far less people will pay to skip fun bits.

Posted:4 years ago

#11

John Blackburne Programmers

41 0 0.0
It's not 'crap bits', it's tedious bits: it's elements of the game which take time which can be speeded by spending money. Many games have similar elements, usually labelled grind. In a boxed game they are seen as a way of padding out the game so you feel you've got value for money. In a subscription game they make sure no-one gets to the end game too soon and so cuts short their subscription.

Too much grind though and the game suffers from people giving up through boredom. At least with a boxed game or a subscription game the user has already paid. In a Freemium game it's much more important to keep players engaged and interested, and make sure it doesn't feel like grind even though it is.

Posted:4 years ago

#12

Guy Costantini Managing Partner

12 0 0.0
I am concerned that this motivates designers to build games that are less fun in order to offer ways to skip the non-fun parts. I think the whole issue of progression in games is one that should be discussed. Shouldn't a game just be fun to play? And shouldn't things you can buy enhance the fun? Maybe I am an idealist.

Posted:4 years ago

#13

Matt Falcus Product Manager, Team17 Software Ltd

1 0 0.0
I don't think many games would survive if the free part wasn't fun to play. Yet we know, many of them have millions of players, of which a small number of users monetize - suggesting the rest are still enjoying playing it for free

Posted:4 years ago

#14

Login or register to post

Take part in the GamesIndustry community

Register now