The attention problem: Outfit7’s Urška Leskovar on rethinking live ops

• Copying a repair from one recreation to a different usually simply wastes sources, since two titles can share the identical symptom for various causes.
• Outfit7 as soon as added extra content material to repair an engagement dip and noticed no enchancment, proving content material is not all the time the reply.
• A big viewers provides you extra knowledge, however it may additionally cover actual issues inside a smaller section of gamers.

Stay Informed

Get Industry News In Your Inbox…

Sign Up Today

Many dwell cell video games do not undergo from a content material scarcity, they undergo from an consideration scarcity.

That is the premise behind Outfit7 senior lead product supervisor Urška Leskovar‘s upcoming discuss at Pocket Gamer Connects Nordics, which takes place on October twentieth and twenty first.

The discuss goals to problem the frequent assumption that retention and engagement issues could be solved by means of content material manufacturing alone. As a substitute, it explores how participant consideration turns into one of the constrained sources in long-running dwell video games, and why serving to gamers focus could also be extra beneficial than giving them extra to do.

Forward of her discuss, we caught up with Leskovar to debate portfolio technique, why “add extra content material” is not all the time the repair for flagging engagement and the way groups can inform an consideration downside from a content material downside.

Pocketgamer.biz: You’ve got managed a portfolio of dwell video games slightly than only one. What does portfolio-level considering educate you that operating a single title simply cannot?

Urška Leskova: It requires a extra macro method, the place you want to take into consideration the place to place your effort to attain the most important influence. In fact, the identical precept applies to a single title, the place you wish to concentrate on the issues that can have the best influence, however with a portfolio you begin seeing patterns and behaviours throughout video games which may not be seen in any other case.

Completely different titles can face very totally different challenges, and you want to recognise these variations and deal with them appropriately. One thing that works very effectively for one recreation won’t work in any respect for an additional, whereas on different events, a breakthrough on one recreation can completely be related to a special title as effectively.

In my expertise, portfolio considering teaches you that the identical symptom hardly ever has the identical trigger. Two video games might present similar retention drops for fully totally different causes, which suggests copying options between titles is usually the quickest strategy to waste sources. It additionally forces you to suppose not nearly what might work, however the place your effort is most definitely to make a distinction.

Reside ops groups default to “add extra” when engagement dips. When did you first discover that intuition wasn’t really working?

Truthfully, it has been loads of trial and error. We made the error within the not-so-recent previous of considering that including extra content material would remedy an issue, but it surely did not. Regardless of investing important sources into it, we did not see a significant enchancment within the engagement metrics we have been making an attempt to affect.

For me, that is a really clear sign that you want to cease and reassess. If you happen to add a significant quantity of content material and it does not transfer the metrics you anticipated it to, you must ask whether or not you are addressing the fallacious downside or whether or not the answer itself wasn’t proper.

In the end, our job is to supply worth to the participant. If we’re not seeing proof that we’re creating an improved expertise, we have to perceive why earlier than we make investments much more into the identical method.

That is the place knowledge turns into vital, however not within the sense of merely dashboards and following no matter quantity strikes. Information does not provide the reply robotically; it provides you proof to problem your assumptions and make much less instinctive, extra knowledgeable choices.

Throughout Outfit7’s video games, is there a typical second in a title’s lifecycle the place the group’s intuition so as to add content material is strongest – and most definitely to be fallacious?

There is not actually a one-size-fits-all reply, but when I needed to generalise, I might say it usually occurs as video games mature and the group begins decoding declining engagement as a sign that gamers want extra contemporary content material.

That may completely be true, however I feel the higher query to ask at that time is: why aren’t the issues that exist already within the recreation compelling sufficient?

If gamers are staying with the sport for a very long time and engagement is wholesome, however you begin seeing indicators of fatigue amongst your most loyal gamers, then including new content material could be precisely the appropriate method. Even a fantastic gameplay loop can develop into stale for loyal gamers, so giving them new experiences is vital.

Then again, in the event you’re seeing important churn early within the participant journey, that is a sign to research the basics earlier than assuming that extra content material is the reply. It might be an onboarding situation, an financial system or development downside, friction within the core expertise, or one thing else completely.

The hot button is to not assume that the identical symptom all the time has the identical trigger.

Managing a number of dwell titles directly means fixed trade-offs for a similar finite group. How do you determine which recreation will get consideration this quarter, and which one waits?

The easy reply is that we wish to make investments the place we consider we will obtain essentially the most influence.

In observe, there are a number of components we take a look at:

• The place can we enhance the participant expertise considerably?
• The place can the funding change the trajectory of the sport in essentially the most significant method?
• What does it value us to attain that influence?
• What position does this recreation play throughout the broader portfolio?

Business influence issues, but it surely is not the one consideration. Typically a recreation is strategically vital past its quick monetary return.

These components do not make the choice computerized, however they provide us a framework for making the trade-offs intentionally. With finite sources, it is in the end about understanding the place our consideration and funding can have the best leverage.

“Consideration scarcity” is a player-side downside, however studios usually deal with it as a content-supply downside internally. Are studios fixing for what’s simple to ship slightly than what gamers really need?

Completely. Groups have an consideration downside too. We will get so targeted on delivering the roadmap that we cease asking whether or not we’re nonetheless fixing the issue the participant really has.

You may also be constrained by budgets, timelines, manufacturing capability and different sensible realities, and generally a good suggestion will get steadily lowered till what you are really transport now not solves the issue it was meant to resolve.

That is notably harmful when the group remains to be targeted on transport one thing just because it was on the roadmap. You possibly can find yourself with an replace that’s technically delivered, however does not present sufficient worth to justify the sources that went into it.

That is why I feel it is vital to have common checkpoints all through growth the place the group challenges whether or not what we’re constructing nonetheless is smart.

Peer opinions, knowledgeable opinions and easily asking the uncomfortable questions could be beneficial: are we nonetheless fixing the unique downside? Has the scope been lowered to the purpose the place the answer now not issues? And, maybe most significantly, would the participant really discover or care about this?

Franchise video games like Speaking Tom carry enormous built-in audiences. Does that scale make the eye vs content material downside simpler to diagnose, or does it cover it for longer?

It is positively a double-edged sword.

Having a really massive viewers provides you an enormous quantity of knowledge to work with, which may make it simpler to establish patterns and perceive participant behaviour. However scale may masks issues which may develop into extra important over time. You probably have tens of millions of gamers nonetheless interacting along with your recreation, a comparatively small dip in retention or engagement can look insignificant at first.

You additionally should watch out with mixture numbers, as a result of a big viewers is made up of many alternative participant segments with totally different behaviours and motivations. What appears steady on the total stage could be altering fairly considerably inside a specific section.

So I feel assuming that viewers measurement robotically means high quality consideration is a mistake. A big viewers is clearly beneficial, however we nonetheless want to know the standard of that engagement and what’s really driving it. In any other case, the size itself could make it more durable to see what’s actually occurring.

If a mid-sized studio does not have Outfit7’s knowledge or portfolio scale, what is the smallest, most cost-effective sign they might search for to inform whether or not they have a content material downside or an consideration downside?

I’d begin with a quite simple query: what are gamers really partaking with within the recreation immediately?

In case your recreation already has loads of content material and also you see gamers solely partaking with one or two options, whereas ignoring the remaining, that may be a probably robust sign that you’re going through an consideration scarcity slightly than a content material scarcity.

Moreover, you possibly can take a look at what occurs once you introduce a brand new function. Does it create a real incremental distinction within the recreation, or are you merely taking consideration away from different elements?

You do not want an enormous knowledge science setup to reply these questions. Even fundamental engagement knowledge can inform you whether or not gamers are asking for extra issues to do, or whether or not you are already competing for extra of their consideration than you realise.

Your PGC Nordics is on dwell ops optimisation. What’s one factor a dwell ops group might cease constructing tomorrow, with out dropping gamers, that will show your level?

My recommendation can be to cease robotically including one other occasion at any time when engagement dips. Gamers do not want extra to do. They want a purpose to care.

Occasions aren’t inherently unhealthy, and they could be a very efficient method of preserving a dwell recreation contemporary. But when the primary response to declining engagement is all the time so as to add one other occasion, you are assuming the issue is a scarcity of issues to do earlier than you have really established that it’s.

In some circumstances, the higher experiment could be to take away one thing that gamers aren’t partaking with and see what occurs. If no one notices that it is gone, you have discovered one thing beneficial: the issue wasn’t that gamers wanted extra content material. You have been already asking them to divide their consideration throughout one thing they did not want.

Catch Urška Leskovar’s discuss, ‘Gamers Aren’t Leaving As a result of You Lack Content material’, at PGC Nordics – get your ticket.