Live data from Hacker News

Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

rovio.com

21–30 of 34 posts

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#21
post #4

I guess they were not able to innovate enough. It was a good franchise, but it hasn't had the longevity of things like Minecraft or Halo. Details: http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=angry%20birds%2C%20mi... I wonder what they could have done differently? They sure licensed enough IP to create Star Wars, Rio, etc variants. They tried expanding into freemium racing games. I wonder if there was a way forward for the…

Probably they just grew too much. The Angry Birds franchise does well for itself, but there's a finite number of employees you can support off of a handful of good mobile games.

Still, thankful they made Amazing Alex. The Incredible Machine needed a re-make, and theirs is great.

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#22
post #12

This post was an opportunity to discover that Rovio had much more employee than what I expected. Angry bird looks so much like one of those flash games you can create with a single coder and a single designer I never imagined they had more than 800 people now. I would have guessed a small dozen max...

Rovio does much more than just games. Videos and content delivery platforms, both promotional deals (NASA, movies etc.) and merchandizing deals need business dev people to make them happen. 800 is still a lot, but the difference in operations is obvious compared to your standard game studio.

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#23
I worked on Crush the Castle for Armor Games in the late 2000s. Angry Birds took the same game concept, added much cuter characters and art, and blew us out of the water with it. (No offense: we took it from someone else.) Now I feel kinda sad, kinda smug that their glory is fading a bit. Rovio seems to have forgotten the lesson that the greater your success, the more likely you are not to be able to repeat it. People tend to assume their best days are ahead, and thus expansion proves to be overexpansion when the best days turn out to be behind.

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#25
post #12

This post was an opportunity to discover that Rovio had much more employee than what I expected. Angry bird looks so much like one of those flash games you can create with a single coder and a single designer I never imagined they had more than 800 people now. I would have guessed a small dozen max...

I like how they never even gave money to the guy that built the physics engine powering their whole schtick. He only asked for a shirt--when they finally sent him one, it wasn't the one he'd asked for. Stay classy Rovio!

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#26

I worked on Crush the Castle for Armor Games in the late 2000s. Angry Birds took the same game concept, added much cuter characters and art, and blew us out of the water with it. (No offense: we took it from someone else.) Now I feel kinda sad, kinda smug that their glory is fading a bit. Rovio seems to have forgotten the lesson that the greater your success, the more likely you are not to be able to repeat it. Peopl…

> Rovio seems to have forgotten the lesson that the greater your success, the more likely you are not to be able to repeat it.

Well said.

Another way to look at it is if your company can grow very quickly from almost nothing, it's vulnerable to shrinking almost as quickly too.

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#27
post #2

the press release doesn't give much context to what this is about - why are they reducing headcount? what's the story here?

Inability to find / produce / buy another Angry Birds.

Bad Piggies is fun and has better replay value as you unlock more abilities to get to previously unreachable areas.

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#28

I worked on Crush the Castle for Armor Games in the late 2000s. Angry Birds took the same game concept, added much cuter characters and art, and blew us out of the water with it. (No offense: we took it from someone else.) Now I feel kinda sad, kinda smug that their glory is fading a bit. Rovio seems to have forgotten the lesson that the greater your success, the more likely you are not to be able to repeat it. Peopl…

> Angry Birds took the same game concept, added much cuter characters and art, and blew us out of the water with it.

Those were certainly factors, but don't underestimate Angry Birds' better controls and better interface.

I eventually gave Angry Birds a try, well past the initial hype, played the free version for a while and then bought the paid version to get more levels.

I then gave Crush the Castle a try. Yes, the characters and art were not as cute (although personally I actually prefer leaving crushed bloody corpses behind instead of merely displaced living pigs...), but it took me just a few minutes to completely forget about that. When playing either game, I'm not spending my time admiring the art...I'm looking at how the structure reacts to my shot and figuring out what I have to do next to complete the destruction.

What stopped me from buying CtC was aiming. Angry Birds uses a slingshot, so I can pretty easily set the angle of my shot. CtC uses a trebuchet where the player selects the release point after the trebuchet is in motion. Getting a specific angle becomes a test of figuring out the right release point, and then getting the timing right to tap at just the right time.

Worse, with Angry Birds I can zoom out if I want so that I can see the slingshot and the target at the same time, which helps in figuring out the angle I need and the force I need. With CtC, you cannot see the trebuchet and the castle at the same time. Making that even more annoying, when the shot is in flight the camera uses a close up on the shot so you cannot see the in flight shot and the castle at the same time. You don't see them together until near the time of impact. This makes it harder to decide what correction you need to your timing.

The result is that Angry Birds for me is the more cerebral game. I want to concentrate on the physics problem of determining the weaknesses of the structure and where to apply force and how much to achieve that. The gameplay does not get in the way of the structural physics game. With CtC, there is this annoying reaction time game (timing the release tap) that gets in the way of the physics puzzle at the castle, and the annoying camera adds needless difficulty, and so although I enjoyed it enough to play all the way through the free version, I did not open my wallet to continue.

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#29
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My kid and I would still be playing Angry Birds and he would still be asking for the merch this Christmas if I hadn't become extremely disgusted with the constant push to make in-app purchases and buy other apps. It's before, during and after every board, every retry. I stopped playing, encouraged him to play other things and I eventually removed it from all our devices, it hasn't been missed since. They should have…

I never appreciated how awful the modern gaming environment was until I had a kid. For little kids in particular, it's incredibly difficult for them to deal with accidentally clicking the "buy X now" buttons and back out of the purchase process. Personally, I shifted my son and nephews/nieces to old video game consoles. They love the NES, N64 and ColecoVision that we found in my parent's attic, and there's no nickel…

I can't get behind it, I prefer to pay 5-75$ upfront for a full game (depending on platform) and no in-game purchases.

If I can't play the whole game without in-game purchases, then it's not a game, it's an interactive ad. If on top of that I have to pay for the privilege of playing the ad, it's downright criminal.

(I'm excluding expansion-type DLC, I don't mind paying for more optional content.)

Re: Rovio Employee Negotiations Concluded

#30
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never appreciated how awful the modern gaming environment was until I had a kid. For little kids in particular, it's incredibly difficult for them to deal with accidentally clicking the "buy X now" buttons and back out of the purchase process. Personally, I shifted my son and nephews/nieces to old video game consoles. They love the NES, N64 and ColecoVision that we found in my parent's attic, and there's no nickel…

I can't get behind it, I prefer to pay 5-75$ upfront for a full game (depending on platform) and no in-game purchases. If I can't play the whole game without in-game purchases, then it's not a game, it's an interactive ad. If on top of that I have to pay for the privilege of playing the ad, it's downright criminal. (I'm excluding expansion-type DLC, I don't mind paying for more optional content.)

it's unfortunate that the market has spoken - a studio earns more money doing IAP than traditional selling. I don't like IAP model either, but because it simply out-earns the old model, it's either do it or die for most studios.

I really wish more people would paid for a game the traditional way.

Post reply on HN