Visualization of Video Gaming Platform
Conceptual Tool to Navigate Jargon Juggle in Gaming. GPS #1
Greetings from James.
This is my first post / newsletter on substack. I primarily explore topics related to platform business with Nintendo as my anchor coverage. The newsletter will be sent out on an irregular basis.
Over the past few weeks, there’re a lot of news flow and discussion in gaming (as always). When reading through those news coverage and analysis on twitter threads or blogs, I found myself easily got lost among terms and concepts used for specific topics.
The reason is that for each topics in gaming it is inevitable to touch gaming platforms, the services that platform provides, genre of game / content, monetization methods adopted in service or game on the platform (the concept of business model is broader than monetization method)… etc. Everything is easily scrambled together. In a Stadia/xCloud post, you might encounter the following terms: game streaming, cloud gaming, subscription, game-as-a-service, Netflix of gaming… If you’re reading a post related to future of gaming, it’s quite likely you see game genre being added in now-vs-future analysis.
One might wonder whether every game / genre suitable is for Free-to-Play and being a living franchise (continuing updates and on-going game operation). And another question on the supply side is: does every developer want to follow the living game recipe when making their games?🥴 Probably not.
A game might not need to live forever (in terms of service being continuously provided whether monetized or not) but the developer can extend the lifespan game by joining an aggregator that provides game subscription service by bundling different games. Being integrated into a service, a game theoretically lives until the service ends.
Here we notice that there a two levels when we discuss game-as-a-service or subscription as a monetization method: individual game and aggregated gaming service.
Maybe it’s only me who finds it’s a little bit hard to follow discussion above (probably my writing skill exacerbates a little bit 😝). I believe what we’re try to make sense of has multiple dimensions and layers. Without visualization of concepts and their relationship, it would be too complicated for someone like me to understand and analyze (this is why specific games are often mentioned in analysis because that helps reader grasp concepts quickly by mapping a game to various concepts).
The recent introduction of Stadia and xCloud and the discussion surrounding gaming streaming make me feel that I need a tool to navigate the value network and landscape in gaming.
Partial Visualization of Gaming Platform
- General
The diagram above illustrates a gaming platform and content /service with adopted monetization on the platform. The diagram omits the tech and community parts in broader gaming ecosystem. It can help us understand which part the analysis is referring to no matter it’s about mobile gaming, console gaming, platform holder’s service, specific game and their monetization methods.
I use the diagram to analyze the competition between Stadia and XBOX platform, not just Stadia vs xCloud because this comparison is just one business model on both platforms (game subscription) enabled by specific execution/delivery method (streaming).
- Specific Platform (Reduced)
The similarity between xCloud and Stadia is how the game is executed / delivered (streaming; there should be better term to describe this) and game subscription contained in the service (Microsoft might eventually come up with various monetization on xCloud after preview).
As gaming platforms, xCloud and Stadia have different meanings for both XBOX and Stadia.
XBOX
For XBOX, xCloud is a new feature (streaming) added to existing gaming platform. When launching a new console, backward compatibility is key to migrate user base from previous generation to new generation. On the supply side, console follows certain tech trajectory to keep learning cost / entry barriers low for existing / new suppliers to develop a game. When adding a new feature to the platform, the company would like to make friction as low as possible for both demand side and supply side to use the feature. The primary friction on supply side is how much cost / time it takes to use the feature on existing games.
Microsoft knows what they’re doing.
Stadia
On the other hand, while Stadia is cross-platform by using web browser to aggregate Chrome-equipped devices, it is actually a new gaming platform with streaming as sole execution / delivery. Games previously developed for other platforms might still require some works to just use streaming feature on Stadia.
Launch of Service and It’s Long-Term
Undoubtedly, XBOX will have stronger launch line-up on the feature as it has larger game library and established developer/publisher relationship on the platform and the friction to get a game on board is relatively low.
Stadia might prefer time-to-market to strong line-up. Probably its launch line-up might be never as strong as xCloud’s for the reason discussed above (introduction of a feature on an existing platform vs introduction of a feature on a new gaming platform).
However, Stadia’s apparent premature service launch might be fine for Google Stadia because 1) the concept of “generation” does not exist on this gaming platform; 2) adoption on the demand side will be driven by the first Stadia-native hit which really leverages new features on the gaming platform, not just a game being streamed to Chrome-equipped devices; 3) Supply side takes time to really understand the potential of the platform and build up conviction. This can only be achieved by first-party game which not only drives the adoption but also serves as a demo for developers (of course Stadia can accelerate the process by content acquisition).
Cloud gaming is not just game streaming and it takes time for platform holders to show the market the full potential of cloud gaming.
Cheers,
James
If you like the post you can
and / or