A blueprint for game marketing (or: what happened to Psychonauts?)
by Ross Miller 
{ Feb 12th 2007 at 8:09PM }
Game designer Pierre-Alexandre Garneau ("just call me Pag") has written a piece for Gamasutra that is essentially a Magic 8-ball for determining the success, by means of marketing, of a quality title. The piece, entitled "10 Minute Game Sales Potential Test," presents six questions for determining whether a publisher will be able to successfully market a title.It's a fascinating read. The words of wisdom one can reap from the piece, if you believe Garneau's analysis, is that original, complex ideas have a steep curve when it comes to profitability. Spore without Will Wright would likely not garner so much attention and anticipation, and we're inclined to agree. As much as one might despise EA for rather annually "rehashing" Madden titles, the company still manages to sell millions of copies of each iteration -- as a business, they are acting as we'd expect.
Also presented in the piece are examples where the test explains the financial success and failure of quality titles (Grand Theft Auto 3 and Psychonauts, respectively). It would be interesting to see how the analysis stacks up to other games both deserving and undeserving of their sales.
See Also: Ad Critic
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
sheppy @ Feb 12th 2007 8:18PM
You know, I read this way earlier this morning. And yes, you can apply this formula to recent "sales disappointments" like Okami.
Myke @ Feb 12th 2007 8:38PM
5 stars for a Psychonauts reference
Antonio @ Feb 12th 2007 8:50PM
I didn't find the column particularly fascinating. The questions work well enough though. The most obvious reason Psychonauts didn't sell is its main character. Raz just isn't appealing to the mass market. He has this humongous head, bony limbs, and drab, brown clothing. Of course, the same can't be said of Beyond Good and Evil.
nick @ Feb 12th 2007 9:21PM
It's funny...
"Does Psychonauts stand out viscerally? Yes. The unique visual style and the humor help make this game stand apart."
and while they think this is a good thing, it's the graphic style that turned me off and lead to my avoidance of the game. A guy with a huge head and small body? Sorry... pass!
also, another platformer? strike two!
epobirs @ Feb 12th 2007 9:33PM
Okami was not the sales failure that Psychonauts has been. It managed to squeak into the Top 100 sellers of 2006 referenced earlier today. The big problem with Okami, and something it shares with Psychonauts, is that the developments schedule went into extreme overtime. Both games appeared two years or longer after their first announced release targets had passed. If Okami had managed to keep its schedule within reason and avoided the added expense, it would be regarded as a nice little niche title that was profitable and lent some prestige to the company. The publisher could afford what Okami did manage to produce for them but Psychonauts was nearly the death, although not the sole cause, of its publisher.
People like some things to be dependable. They may disparage McDonalds but a major virtue of the prototypical fast food joint is that the food is reliably the same wherever you find the franchise. The same can be applied to a favorite non-chain restaurant whose menu you know well. Going to a new place with an unfamiliar specialty can be rewarding or disastrous. It depends whether you're in a gambling mood or not. You can wait for reviews but then have to decide if your tastes are aligned with the reviewer. (I know a food critic who lavishes praise on stuff I wouldn't force on the family dog.)
So marketers have to do their jobs well when selling a new product. Despite reviewers parise they failed miserably when it came to Psychonauts, Beyond Good & Evil, and other notorious beloved failures.
VerticalEvent @ Feb 12th 2007 9:59PM
Another thing with Okami, was that it was released two months prior to the Wii, during the hype about Zelda and it's control scheme. Okami was often described as the PS2's answer to Zelda, while Zelda was... Zelda.
Too often, do titles get released during a torrent (Christmas season), that, often, titles are forgotten when the big name games come out. Marketers need to start releasing games in drier seasons, like Summer, when no one releases games, but a vast majority of the intended population is working (Summer jobs), and actually have the disposable income to splurge on a game.
sheppy @ Feb 12th 2007 9:59PM
Beyond Good & Evil, despite the claims made here, did not feature a mainstream appeal. It had several strikes against it, actually.
1. Despite the claim of Samus Aran among others, the game industry was not used to a lead female character that was not a visible slut. In fact, BG&E lead character actually stood against the grain and had a smart character, wearing actual clothing, and she explored a steady diet of self reliance. In fact, I wish the industry would support more female characters like this. Just as I wish I could play some games featuring a black male lead character where he isn't a walking stereotype straight out of Def Jam. Facing facts, Jade, as a character design was about 10 years ahead of her time. She was a breath of fresh air but considering EA sales figures, that isn't exactly something the industry enjoys supporting.
2. BG&E came out when Ubisoft was still without a large amount of their current clout. To give history on this period, Prince of Persia was selling so poorly, that they gave it away for free if you bought one of Ubisofts other releases. Even though this was enough for me to drop the cash on BG&E, many others weren't taking the bait. Nowadays, Ubisoft commands a large amount of respect among the casuals just for being known from Splinter Cell, GRAW, and Rainbow 6. Granted, with each new Wii release, this respect is getting pissed away (IMO) but regardless. You're expecting a relatively unknown publisher (despite being around, Ubisoft had their big growing up period post BG&E) to push a relatively unknown franchise, of all times, during the gaming flood of christmas? Reviewers may have applauded the effort but it would have been more noticed by the consumer during a less flooded time.
3. Inability to "sell" the title. I have to be honest. I'm sitting with the box right in front of me and unless I knew what Beyond Good & Evil was, nothing about this package seems interesting. I mean, the commercials even tried to "sell" the game with its resident Pigman. Personally, if you're trying to sell someone on a "serious" adventure game, one would think... ONE WOULD THINK, you would do your best to hide the anthropomorphic characters until you have them in the game. The game spins on hell of a yarn and keeps you until the very end. But you have to get people INTO the game and I'm afraid the marketing, packaging, and even commercials for the game did almost everything they can to push away the casual consumer. And during the crowded holiday season, no less.
BloodyDuck @ Feb 12th 2007 10:38PM
I don't think the author's necessarily wrong here - but he's not providing a very useful tool. Whether or not a game is likely to be successful will have much more to do with specifically how each question is phrased than the questions themselves.
Of the 6 questions, the first two are really the same thing... the gameplay has to be part of the "visceral appeal" of the game, since otherwise the visceral appeal would be entirely graphics-related. The third question is nice to have, but it's worth pointing out that "uniqueness" is probably the critical factor here, not being socially involving per se. What these questions boil down to is whether or not the game actually stands out from its peers. How it does so is less important... and unfortunately, simply being distinctive isn't enough to make a game a commercial success (even by the author's admission, Psychonauts and GTA3 were roughly equivalent here - but the latter was a huge success and the former was a failure).
With respect to the second group of questions, 2.1 ("Is the idea behind the game easy to communicate?") is not really the central question here. Lots of things are easy to communicate: Psychonauts could easily be described as "a platformer where you control a young camper with telepathic abilities." On the other hand, it's pretty difficult to describe the interlocking themes and complex gameplay elements in The Legend of Zelda - but that hasn't stopped that series from being an enormous success.
At the same time, 2.3 ("Is the target market large?") is either irrelevant or addresses something that can only be known after a game is released. Obviously, the *target* market for the game is large. Games only get made if their financial sponsors think there's a decent audience, which means by definition that the target is significant. On the other hand, whether or not the game can successfully market itself to that audience - and thus get them to buy the game - is a much bigger issue, and one that isn't addressed in the article. This question also depends on phrasing: sure, the market for "surreal experiences involving psychic kids" is small, but I'd bet the market for "colorful, funny platform adventure games" is pretty huge. The only difference is that Psychonauts flopped, and so the author needs to try to find a reason that fits his framework.
So: the first set of questions don't seem to actually determine a game's success, and the second set of questions can't really be answered until after the game has either succeeded or failed. Nice try, but not a very useful tool.
miles foreman @ Feb 12th 2007 10:53PM
Another good example would be one of the greatest PC adventure games to grace the genre -- The Longest Journey. A fantastic, realistic female protagonist and an engaging story... that no one played.
The developers even made a sequel, Dreamfall, last year. I'm ashamed to say I never bought it. I'm going to though, now. Fry's still has it on the shelves!
otaking241 @ Feb 12th 2007 11:34PM
Regarding visual appeal:
Psychonauts seemed like the type of game I'd really enjoy, but it's just too damn ugly. It's like The Nightmare Before Christmas meets The Rugrats. Sure it's distinctive and original, and strikingly so, but at some level you have to think "Am I really going to enjoy spending a couple dozen hours looking at this?" Which I think would indicate that you have to temper "visual impact" with "visual appeal."
Bangbang... @ Feb 12th 2007 11:40PM
"If you can’t explain the idea behind the game clearly, chances are management or publishers won’t choose that project because they don’t understand it. No matter how good your game idea is, if you can’t communicate what makes it good in a simple and compelling way, it won’t become a success."
I dont think this is always true, but thats definatly what killed Viva Panita. "Umm... It's a game about...You know how in Animal Crossing you can have a garden... umm..."
Seriously, the game is like crack. cute crack.
Strangler @ Feb 13th 2007 2:29AM
http://www.pspfanboy.com/2007/02/06/the-trials-and-tribulations-of-tiki-games-part-2/
"But for what I did right there were also things that were naïve. It's easy to convince yourself "I'll create an original IP for the PSP that focuses on an untapped market – the RTS. It's huge on the PC – let's try to bring them over by creating an RTS from the ground-up for the PSP. And we'll also be relatively low-cost in terms of overall budget. Surely publishers will appreciate that!"
In reality, while myself and my team had been in the industry for a long time, and shipped a number of titles, as a new start-up we're unproven from a publisher's viewpoint. And an original IP isn't nearly as powerful as having a license for some big property.
So to step into this with "I'll create a new IP in the RTS genre for the PSP. We'll then create a solid proof-of-concept playable demo. How can it go wrong?" Well, toward the end of 2006 I did a lot of traveling (and have done similar this year so far), and while Galaxy's End was well-received at most publishers, we're still a new company with no shipped titles, and the RTS genre doesn't equate to guaranteed success on a handheld.
We had some extremely positive meetings with publishers – they felt the game looked sharp, that we had conquered any control doubts (meaning the game does play well on a handheld), and they liked the overall game concept. Then the following week was something along the lines of "marketing finds it too risky." Lots of temporary elated moments followed by extended periods of frustration."
Grunge @ Feb 13th 2007 3:45AM
This is bullshit - why are they applying their magic questions to games that have already come out? Sure it's a lot easier to "prove" your prediction system if you already have the results, but this doesn't mean that it really works. Apply it to a dozen games that have yet to be released, and we'll talk once you can match up the results with the guesses.
Also, nice comment sheppy. I loved BG&E with a passion, and I've bought it three times so far (the initial time, once as a gift, and another because I lost my first copy).
JET @ Feb 13th 2007 5:38AM
What happened with Psychonauts was that it was an entirely generic platformer with repetitious level design and horrible voice acting. I was really hoping for something special but all I got was a lazy Mario ripoff.
(I found the previous comment that it looked like a cross between Nighmare Before Christmas and Rugrats to be spot on and very funny.)
Psychonauts, Beyond Good and Evil, and Shadow of the Colossus were the three most unfairly overrated games of the past few years. Interesting ideas, but all deeply and fundamentally flawed.
JET
grable @ Feb 13th 2007 6:27AM
Psychonauts is a GREAT game! People complaining about the visual style should have played a little longer, its not just a platformer.
The laters "levels" feks in the insane asylum are realy well done, im thinking the milk-man & napolean levels.
Dont poo on things you dont understand!
Btw, Beyond Good & Evil was allso a great game!
Why are generic half assed titles so popular, compared to gems like this?!?
Crono @ Feb 13th 2007 2:47PM
Milk man level was beyond awesome. So screwed up.
DiRT @ Feb 13th 2007 9:17PM
I bought, played, and disliked BG&E and Psychonauts. The problem was they weren't very good. Psychonauts was billed as the next game from "the guy who did Grim Fandango." I love Grim Fandango. Psychonauts is nothing like Grim Fandango. BG&E was poorly designed. There were too many open environments and poor event direction leading to aimless wandering through the environment.