I decided to try two different ad providers for the android version of Stock Shock and compare their results. (http://bit.ly/1Iqlysf). I chose these two because they seem to be two of them more popular interstitial ad providers out there for android, and interstitials seemed like they would have less of an effect on the design on the game, in theory, something like a commercial on TV. (An interstitial ad is one that takes up the full screen periodically, as opposed to a banner ad that takes up a smaller portion of the screen, often during gameplay).
Vungle exclusively provides interstitial video ads, and was extremely easy to set up in Unity (just had to register a vungle account, import their package into Unity, paste in my account identifier and call Vungle.playAd(). One downside here is that I couldn’t find a way to determine whether an ad had actually played. However there is a callback when the ad ends, (or the ad fails to play). So as a hack, I call a function one second after the ad starts and see if the Ad ended function has been called. If the ad started one second ago, and hasn’t ended yet, it probably is actually playing an ad. The reason for doing this is that if the ad HASN’T played…
I play an AdMob interstitial instead. AdMob ads were harder to set up, requiring me to manage the nuts and bolts of pre-loading an ad when the game started up, then showing the ad, and destroying it when it had been seen. However, AdMob provides a good deal more callbacks, so it is much easier to tell when an ad has failed. In hindsight, it may have been a better idea technologically to have AdMob be the default ad, and Vungle be the fallback, but I knew someone who had previously had success with Vungle so I decided to go with anecdotal evidence (:P lizard brain).
Revenue from both providers has so far been similar, but the sample size is still relatively small. For the next project (which I’m already starting to sketch out a bit!) I’ll probably have admob be the default, fall back to Vungle, and integrate AdColony as well (I’ll know more about how when I dig into it).
Been playing a few ketchapp apps today to check out what kind of techniques they use to make their games well suited to both the mobile platform and the app supported model.
Ad-supported model: The game lengths are usually very short, with the vast majority of “lives” taking less than a minute. It seems like having an avatar on screen is helpful for intuitively communicating the game loop mechanic. Restart button is featured prominently.
The ways that this design is influenced by monetization reminds me of coin-op arcade games. Simple to pickup and play punishingly unfair. Crucially though the player is given some small taste of success so they can see how they could have done better. (Only negative feedback is the one moment of game over)
In terms of the mobile platform, many of these games hinge on one button control schemes (either tapping or holding or both). It’s an extreme way to circumvent the imprecise input on a touchscreen device, and is pretty restrictive design-wise. On the other hand, one thing these games also have in spades is elegance, which I value highly. 🙂
I decided to put ads in stock shock!
On the one hand, the traditional paid games model is attractive because the deal with the customer is extremely clear. Once they have purchased the app, the developer has no other considerations other than designing a compelling experience (hard enough by itself).
On the other hand, on a platform that tends towards bite-sized experiences like mobile, it can be hard for a potential player to justify spending money on something that they may only play once or twice, especially when there are a ton of free alternatives available. On a platform with intense device diversity like Android, it can also be hard for them to know for sure whether the game will even RUN before handing over their cash.
Cons for ads
-Can be distracting/invasive
-Can cheapen the feel of the experience
Pros for ads
-Allows players to try with no risk
-Can extend with ad disabling in-app-purchase to get best of both worlds
-Less impact on game design than free-to-play model
Later posts will probably go into my experience with the app providers I’m using, further details about F2P vs Ads, and the different types of ads that can be used.
1) Probably should have been obvious from the beginning but people don’t read when they are in a time sensitive situation, so the stock ticker probably can’t provide more than flavor
2) ”Juicy” effects like tweens and screen shaker DO go a long way to making your game enjoyable to play
3) Color certainly makes things visually exciting, but changing a background color can make it difficult to design a UI that works with all possible backgrounds
4) The timer bar communicated effectively as a game over timer, esp with the countdown and screen shake. Most players understood that activity replenished it as well. Don’t think most people understood the transaction cost
5) Big wins are the exciting part of a game like this, nickel and diming your way to success isn’t that fun
6) The best moment stock shock creates is when you buy a lot for $1 and sell for much more. Did a good job of having the achievement text tweens and additional SFX tied to this moment
7) @codemedicine on twitter suggested that it might be better to have the stocks auto scroll. The difficulty here comes from selling. Maybe the ownership buttons are the sell buttons, and the stock window has one big buy button. (see terrible mockup) might be a problem where you just don’t have any good moves most of the time/less frantic
8) Even this fairly simple design might have too many rules for its frantic nature, as it seems to tend towards a bite sized-mobile experience. The title card was good at communicating what was needed, but some nuance was lost in translation. (i.e cost per transaction).
:O over 1000 views on cubemaze! Cool!
Random scribblings from the dev board. thinking about making a time sensitive game with LOZ style block puzzles