The tech world has found itself in a position I don't think that it could have foresaw 10 years ago. It's now in the business of providing services for its customers as opposed to pure technical power. It's not merely enough to provide a platform for which a product can stand alone, where the merit lies in how advanced the technology has become. In this day and age, the industry leaders must tie a service into the technology for mass adoption. The new paradigm shifts are now what services a company should provide, how many services should the platform provide vs how open the platform should be to allow outside companies to provide additional services, and what is the best way to monetize the hardware and service combination. In order to stay afloat, companies must take a gamble on what the proper balances should be, being careful not to be too much like the competition. Companies that refuse to play the game and only provide the technology without additional support find themselves falling far behind, and eventually whittled down to a small company with small profits, if not out of business all together.
A prime example of the way that services are important to technology adoption is the smart phone industry. RIM's Blackberry line has been a mainstay in the smartphone industry since its inception. It provided the platform that business users needed to stay connected to their company at any given moment. Unable to keep up with the new paradigm of providing services, in this case a competent application infrastructure, RIM has seen major market share disruption, and a drop in sales. Apple's iPhone line and Google's Android system have both seen strong profits because they offer an application market on top of the hardware. This allows other companies and individuals to provide an expanded service to users based on a very flexible cost. Moreover, these applications ensure that the consumer maintains product loyalty. The more the consumer invests in their phone the less likely that they'll switch companies, ensuring that they will continue to purchase compatible hardware in the future. Google and Apple also continually update their operating systems with new features and new services to match the ever shifting hardware updates. They also copy features from each other, which multiplies the expansion of services on each of the platforms.
Apple expands the philosophy of service integration with AirPlay and iCloud. With AirPlay, Apple has created a plug and play media network. All of their devices on a wireless network can access each other. The Apple TV can play media files from iTunes, iPhones, and iPads on the attached television. Said devices only have to be allowed access to the Home Sharing Network, so foreign devices can begranted access and play media files on the Apple TV. iPhones and iPads can also be used as remote controls for iTunes and Apple TVs, and can also stream content from iTunes. With iCloud, users are able to store data and stream media from Apple servers. Data can be pushed to all hardware registered to the same account at any time, and purchased content can be streamed to users anywhere in the world. Television shows can be streamed to Apple TVs that are registered with that account, even if not on the home network. That way, users can take their Apple TV with them on vacation and not have to wait to get home to watch shows they purchased with their season pass.
This philosophy isn't limited to just the mobile realm. Microsoft recognized how important services are for hardware with Xbox Live. According to Nielson, the total percentage of console usage is Xbox 360's 26.5% vs PS3's 20.5% (Wii's is 21.8%). Take into account that more than half of the PS3's use time is not on video games, and we can see how much a service like Xbox Live affects the Xbox 360's sales figures. [Note: Microsoft has said that Xbox Live gets used an average of 40 hours/month, which means that the PS3 gets used an average of 32 hours/month] The Playstation 3's big service added is in other media, such as blu-rays and free access to streaming services like Netflix and Hulu. Their service added is that it's a multi-media device that can also play games. Finally, the Wii's service added is ease of adoption. It doesn't offer much in actual added value. There isn't a uniform online service, nor does it play movies (although it does have Netflix). It has high adoption rates because it's a gaming system that people who don't play games can play, and it's fun. That's the service that it offers. All offer a different service that make them stand out and get different customer bases to buy into them. The Xbox 360's focus is on the games-centric crowd. The Playstation 3's focus is on the media-focused crowd [Note: While I have no statistics, I do know a lot of men who own the PS3 because they could sell it to their wives as a blu-ray player that also plays games, which I'm sure largely affects it's sales and usage figures]. The Wii's focus is on the casual adoption gaming crowd.
Even television sets are coming with services like access to Netflix, Hulu, Vudu, YouTube, etc. Everyone must now learn to adopt new and better services to not only come out on top, but just to survive in today's market.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Friday, October 7, 2011
A Letter to the Gaming Industry
Dear Gaming Industry,
According to the Entertainment Software Association, the average age of a gamer is 37 (who have been playing for 12 years), with the average age of frequent buyers being 41. So, why are we still advertising to ages 14-22? Why are there no gaming news outlets or stores geared towards adult sensibilities? Why must we endure ridiculous commercials for games that are rated M for Mature?
It's as if the entire industry still thinks of games as mere toys. How do you expect games to become a legitimate entertainment if you don't take yourselves seriously? As much as I like Avatars, and the fun they can bring, why are all of the consoles only pitching their ideas to children, teenagers, and young adults? Granted, most adults don't have time or desire to spend their money on digital items that don't mean anything, but image if you created that market.
Granted, there are some games that are trying to break the mold by telling a story that doesn't have to appeal to young adults, but there are still plenty more that are geared towards the young. I'm not saying that the industry has to stop making games for teenagers, just start to realize that not everyone who play video games are teenagers. Even if it's the just the way it's advertised, any game can have an emotionally charged trailer that appeals to adults.
Still, as much as I'd like to say that the games are the answer, sadly, they're not the problem. I enjoy a lot of the games that seem to be geared towards younger audiences. Sometimes it's the uniqueness, the gameplay, the setting, or the fact that games that appeal to young adults more sell well, so they have more money put behind them. Adults seem to find value in a wider variety of entertainment than children do, so the industry doesn't feel the need to gear anything towards adults. No, I feel the problem with the perception is not the games themselves. It's in what outsiders see of them. Those perceptions come from video game stores, magazines, websites, and advertisements.
While there is no need to change the product that is produced currently, in order to bring gaming into an established and legitimate realm of entertainment, the industry as a whole must present itself in a mature light. It also wouldn't hurt to realize that gamers are much older than you realize, and that you don't need to be simple or stupid to bring in a new audience. Your current customer base is already trying to introduce your product to the masses. You just need to create a reason for them to want to play.
Sincerely,
An Adult Gamer
According to the Entertainment Software Association, the average age of a gamer is 37 (who have been playing for 12 years), with the average age of frequent buyers being 41. So, why are we still advertising to ages 14-22? Why are there no gaming news outlets or stores geared towards adult sensibilities? Why must we endure ridiculous commercials for games that are rated M for Mature?
It's as if the entire industry still thinks of games as mere toys. How do you expect games to become a legitimate entertainment if you don't take yourselves seriously? As much as I like Avatars, and the fun they can bring, why are all of the consoles only pitching their ideas to children, teenagers, and young adults? Granted, most adults don't have time or desire to spend their money on digital items that don't mean anything, but image if you created that market.
Granted, there are some games that are trying to break the mold by telling a story that doesn't have to appeal to young adults, but there are still plenty more that are geared towards the young. I'm not saying that the industry has to stop making games for teenagers, just start to realize that not everyone who play video games are teenagers. Even if it's the just the way it's advertised, any game can have an emotionally charged trailer that appeals to adults.
Still, as much as I'd like to say that the games are the answer, sadly, they're not the problem. I enjoy a lot of the games that seem to be geared towards younger audiences. Sometimes it's the uniqueness, the gameplay, the setting, or the fact that games that appeal to young adults more sell well, so they have more money put behind them. Adults seem to find value in a wider variety of entertainment than children do, so the industry doesn't feel the need to gear anything towards adults. No, I feel the problem with the perception is not the games themselves. It's in what outsiders see of them. Those perceptions come from video game stores, magazines, websites, and advertisements.
While there is no need to change the product that is produced currently, in order to bring gaming into an established and legitimate realm of entertainment, the industry as a whole must present itself in a mature light. It also wouldn't hurt to realize that gamers are much older than you realize, and that you don't need to be simple or stupid to bring in a new audience. Your current customer base is already trying to introduce your product to the masses. You just need to create a reason for them to want to play.
Sincerely,
An Adult Gamer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)