Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

arcticstartup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#21

Post by dirtyaura »

madewulf wrote: post #8

With all this talk about how the good days of the app store are over, it is good to see a relatively unknown company making it. I also noticed that a big part of the Apple selection for the end of the year is made by indie developers, like Super Hexagon, Letterpress or the education stuff from l'Escapadou, which means that they will probably make a lot of money. With talent and flair, it is still possible to do it. E…

Now, I wouldn't say that Supercell is an indie developer. They have an experienced team of game industry veterans and over $10M dollars of funding from the beginning.

But that doesn't take away from the fact that CEO Ilkka Paananen and guys are running a stellar company with interesting culture: small teams of 5 people form "cells" that work independently on their own prototype game. Lots of prototypes are killed and these "failures" are celebrated with bottles of champaigne.

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#22

Post by Gravityloss »

_b8r0 wrote: post #17

I think this is an unfair comparison. I mean, I could claim that Mandalorian is bigger than EA in terms of monthly penetration testing revenue and be right, but it doesn't really mean much. Having said that, Supercell have a good product and are shifting volume, so more power to them.

EA is the second biggest in monthly iOS revenue, that's why he compared to that. It's not unfair at all.

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#23

Post by LaGrange »

emcl wrote: post #11
Tichy wrote: post #5

"efficiently monetizing their userbase." Is this newspeech for ripping off their customers? I don't know their games, but I wouldn't be surprised if their clients are mostly teens maxing out their parents credit cards. Yeah sorry, I am a bit in a cynical mood I suppose.

Are candy/confectionery manufacturers supposed to feel guilty that they make stuff kids like and nag their parents to spend money on their products? Supercell has carefully designed the game to encourage impulsive purchases but that doesn't mean that the players are not deriving any pleasure out of it. And teens maxing out credit cards is something that can be easily stopped.

You know, Luxemburgerli are ridiculously expensive. But they're mostly marketed to adults, and as a luxury food that you get to indulge on, and don't even buy in huge amounts.

This is different from marketing something to children, or making something addictive, or doing both at the same time. And, this shows that you can make something with a big profit margin without relegating to abusing your customers.

Of course, games may be different. At some point everyone and their dog will own Minecraft, and not everyone can live off donations like Dwarf Fortress. I don't think that justifies going into dependency-forming mechanisms, though. If that means you can't ethically fund the rest of your life out of a single game (nor does it automatically make you ultra-wealthy), well, welcome to the movie business. Or book business.

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#24

Post by fulafel »

zurn wrote: post #2

I wonder if Supercell's widely advetised cells structure explains their success (and could be learned from?) or if it's just a "secret sauce" myth they cultivate to add flair to a well-run and/or lucky company.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/183064/supercells_secr...

> "Now it's a lot more about the product quality and the product itself," Paananen notes. "If we want to create the best products, we need the best people. That was actually how the whole thing started, and where the name Supercell comes from. We're creating these small but ultra-dynamic teams of developers who work relatively independently. And despite the small size of the group, we have big dreams -- hence Supercell."

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#25

Post by ericcholis »

Tichy wrote: post #5

"efficiently monetizing their userbase." Is this newspeech for ripping off their customers? I don't know their games, but I wouldn't be surprised if their clients are mostly teens maxing out their parents credit cards. Yeah sorry, I am a bit in a cynical mood I suppose.

I'm usually inclined to agree, but it's not as clear cut with Clash of Clans as a Zynga game for example. Clash of Clans follows a traditional RTS model, building things takes time. Now, they've given you the option to purchase gems to automatically finish buildings.

This clearly exploits people's need for instant gratification. However, that need for gratification is up to the user, not the game. The game itself is quite fun and easy without ever spending a dime. There is nothing "game breaking" that has to be purchased with real funds. It's one of the truer time = money models out there.

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#26

Post by jmpeax »

fulafel wrote: post #24
zurn wrote: post #2

I wonder if Supercell's widely advetised cells structure explains their success (and could be learned from?) or if it's just a "secret sauce" myth they cultivate to add flair to a well-run and/or lucky company.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/183064/supercells_secr... > "Now it's a lot more about the product quality and the product itself," Paananen notes. "If we want to create the best products, we need the best people. That was actually how the whole thing started, and where the name Supercell comes from. We're creating these small but ultra-dynamic teams of developers who work relatively independently. And despite…

The CEO of Supercells says that the "secret sauce" of his company's success is "product quality". Forgive me if I feel like I'm being sold to.

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#27

Post by lmm »

emcl wrote: post #11
Tichy wrote: post #5

"efficiently monetizing their userbase." Is this newspeech for ripping off their customers? I don't know their games, but I wouldn't be surprised if their clients are mostly teens maxing out their parents credit cards. Yeah sorry, I am a bit in a cynical mood I suppose.

Are candy/confectionery manufacturers supposed to feel guilty that they make stuff kids like and nag their parents to spend money on their products? Supercell has carefully designed the game to encourage impulsive purchases but that doesn't mean that the players are not deriving any pleasure out of it. And teens maxing out credit cards is something that can be easily stopped.

>Are candy/confectionery manufacturers supposed to feel guilty that they make stuff kids like and nag their parents to spend money on their products?

Yes?

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#28

Post by xutopia »

ericcholis wrote: post #25
Tichy wrote: post #5

"efficiently monetizing their userbase." Is this newspeech for ripping off their customers? I don't know their games, but I wouldn't be surprised if their clients are mostly teens maxing out their parents credit cards. Yeah sorry, I am a bit in a cynical mood I suppose.

I'm usually inclined to agree, but it's not as clear cut with Clash of Clans as a Zynga game for example. Clash of Clans follows a traditional RTS model, building things takes time. Now, they've given you the option to purchase gems to automatically finish buildings. This clearly exploits people's need for instant gratification. However, that need for gratification is up to the user, not the game. The game itself is…

One detail though is that some buildings at the beginning of the game (I couldn't play any more than that) take 10 minutes to build. If you want to shorten that time to a playable amount of time you have to purchase gems.

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#29

Post by jerf »

Tichy wrote: post #5

"efficiently monetizing their userbase." Is this newspeech for ripping off their customers? I don't know their games, but I wouldn't be surprised if their clients are mostly teens maxing out their parents credit cards. Yeah sorry, I am a bit in a cynical mood I suppose.

I dunno. It's not as if mobile games cost $50 bucks, but ship basically incomplete and you have to buy more stuff in the game itself to really play it. We're starting from a baseline of what is, in general, grossly inefficient "monetization", so seeing someone succeed at actually making some money probably isn't grounds for immediate cynicism. (And I too am a natural cynic.) Compare with MMORPGs that did cost $50 and then you had to have a monthly subscription too, or Diablo III and its real-money auction house.

Re: Supercell is bigger than EA in terms of monthly iOS revenue

#30

Post by EwanToo »

jerf wrote: post #29
Tichy wrote: post #5

"efficiently monetizing their userbase." Is this newspeech for ripping off their customers? I don't know their games, but I wouldn't be surprised if their clients are mostly teens maxing out their parents credit cards. Yeah sorry, I am a bit in a cynical mood I suppose.

I dunno. It's not as if mobile games cost $50 bucks, but ship basically incomplete and you have to buy more stuff in the game itself to really play it. We're starting from a baseline of what is, in general, grossly inefficient "monetization", so seeing someone succeed at actually making some money probably isn't grounds for immediate cynicism. (And I too am a natural cynic.) Compare with MMORPGs that did cost $50 and…

If you look at some recent "freemium" games like My Little Pony [1], then mobile games can very quickly start to cost $50 or more. In that case, it was selling a single in-game pony for £50/$80, but cut the price for that pony to $8 after user complaints.

1 - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20629245

Post reply on HN