In the square market, the channel’s right to speak has been repeatedly elevated.
Even, data show that Tencent had implemented a 1:9 malformation ratio in the early years. Later, Ali introduced an 8:2 ratio in order to grab the cake. Meizu even chose to give all the benefits to developers and implement it on its own platform. 10:0 ratio.
However, no matter how these challengers make concessions in the share ratio, in the face of the “traffic empire” Tencent, the spoilers will eventually die out due to the user base and excess supply.
The latest domestic Android channel rake data revealed by netizens shows:
“TX does not promote the platform and only receives 30%, and 50%~60% for promotion and use of the server; if it is a mobile game, the application treasure is about 70%; Netease “Minecraft” is for development Players get 70%; Android stores such as Huawei, OV, Xiaomi and other Android stores are all around 50%, and a few strong channels even exceed 50%.”
Game practitioners provide screenshots of domestic platform rake
In other words, channels such as Appbao, Huawei, Xiaomi, 360, OV, etc. have almost monopolized the game distribution business. Any mobile game must be distributed and promoted through channel vendors. The fifty-fifth split is the domestic Android channel division practice. .
So, on the one hand, the game company alone bears product development, operating costs, and the risk of failure to get 50% of the revenue. On the other hand, it can get 50% of the revenue by guarding the channel to distribute the game. Who can be convinced?
Furthermore, the income of domestic game manufacturers at the time of actual sharing is even less than 50%. The reason is that channel fees are deducted before being divided into five to five major app stores. Moreover, Tencent could get 70%~90% of the share in the single-generation game mode that year, and using Tencent to pay another 20% of the channel fee.
In addition, domestic game manufacturers alsoFaced with various channels of SDK(software development kit), frequently changing interface protocols. If you can’t get to the channel, you will be cracked until the last drop of blood is sucked up by the copycat piracy.
No wonder the industry has been jokingly saying: “Domestic game manufacturers are struggling to survive, and even if they make a hit, they are working for the platform.”
However, in recent years, the mobile game industry has become more mature, and the overall product texture has gradually transitioned from a no-brained learning page game to a learning side game. The version number policy and product quality have naturally shown a shrinking trend on the supply side; plus TapTap Emerging community platforms such as, Bilibili, Douyin, Kuaishou, etc. have risen rapidly, and the room for game manufacturers to choose from has become infinite. Good games require higher revenues but it is the general trend.
At the “China Game Industry Annual Conference” in December 2020, Perfect World CEO Xiao Hong said that with the disappearance of the demographic dividend, traffic thinking is gradually declining, product thinking is dominant, and the game industry is gradually changing from “channels to kings” “Towards “content is king.”
In this regard, Guosen Securities Research Report also believes that:
“With the development of the mobile Internet entering the deep water zone, user behaviors have changed from “search” to “recommendation”. Traditional app stores are squeezed by both users and high-quality developers. The demonstration effect of head games may be promoted. With the’resistance’ of multiple content parties, the bargaining power of high-quality content will continue to improve.
For example, the developers of “Tomorrow’s Ark”, “Pascal Contract”, “Hundred Scenes of the South of the Yangtze River”, “Original God” and “The Awakening of Nations” successively announced that they would no longer cooperate with traditional Android channels, let alone major manufacturers such as Tencent and NetEase. , Naturally have the confidence to sit down with the major distributors to re-agree on the share ratio.
However, out of self-interest and market fairness considerations, whether Huawei, Xiaomi, or 360, OV and other app stores, they will naturally kill 50-50 without showing weakness.
For example, when Huawei delisted Tencent Games in January this year, it was quite meaningful to say, “Huawei admires Tencent Games’ achievements in the industry and its absolute market position. Although it disagrees, it also understands Tencent’s proposal based on this. Required.”
In this regard, a game announcer told Tiger Sniff:
“Apps such as Jiuyou, Yingyongbao, and 360 rely more and more on buying users from internal and external purchases. They really have to lose 30% of their losses, so they will not give in.
However, “The Original God” and “The Awakening of the Nations” proved that boutique games can be operated independently. Isn’t Sanqi just to buy? Everyone is just because of running channels in the past few years, and giving some face, the channels will only become weaker and weaker in the future. “
There are junk games everywhere, who is responsible for it?
“There are rubbish games everywhere in the country, and avoiding pits is like buying a lottery.” Although this is a self-deprecating stalk of the game circle, there are two reasons behind it:
On the one hand, it is due to the domestic game environment and the short-sightedness of game manufacturers.
Foreign game manufacturers can sell dozens of millions of single-player games every minute, which not only earns word of mouth but also saves money; while in the country, even if they have the best ideas, they have to bow to online games in order to survive. , Earning (piàn) money takes precedence over game quality (quality means enough Funding, technology, and talent support), skin-changing games have long been the norm in the industry.
At least most game makers think it’s okay to do this, so everyone will have the mentality of what type of copy is what, and the game developed by tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of people will be comfortable with dolls, even if something goes wrong. Frame, change the vest to go online again.
Additionally, a good game is undoubtedly higher in cost and risk than a skin-changing game. If it can only achieve the same popularity, decision makers will naturally choose to play a skin-changing game. For example, this time, Ding Lei, the boss of the domestic Android channel, is openly bombarding the domestic Android channel. Now, the only artists who can use the presence of his new game in the player group are almost left. In addition to the screen that makes people’s eyes brighter, most of them feel it as soon as they get started. “Seems familiar.”
In this case, the entire tour>
For example, “Break 999 ingots in one blow”, “If you are a brother, come and cut me” These skin-changing games with worrying quality and lack of distribution capabilities have long been parasitic on the push and guidance of the app store, and they are often promoted through channels regardless of cost. It is inevitable Forming an unhealthy trend of bad money expelling good money.
Netizen @lxr1001625 once replied very sadly:
“At the time, Netease, Shanda, Giant and other big players valued top players rather than leeks. After Tencent entered the market, it quickly lowered the threshold of krypton gold, which caused many people to feel that Tencent games are worth money. No matter how much you spend, you can see the effect. As a result, this strategy of accumulating less and adding more has cut almost all players.
So, Tencent’s gameplay is aimed at the weakness of human nature comparison without creating a high threshold. In fact, it magnifies the inferior nature of people. “
When a game has the right to speak, it is no longer a top elite player but a RMB player-“As long as you recharge, you can become stronger”, when a game is more and more newcomers by manufacturers Activity entrapment-all kinds of induced consumption, all kinds of stimulus recharge, the game experience is bound to deteriorate, and the recharge behavior becomes cheap and blind.
This situation continues to develop, not only hurting consumers, but also the entire game industry.
In this regard, Ding Lei expressed his views in the “2015 Game Lovers Annual Ceremony” speech (Slightly cut):
“Game companies should not make themselves capital-led. Capital is for you to make quick money. If you can’t make money, you will call the cold winter. Game companies are the grassroots who are always ready to attack the goddess.
The goddess is not capital, but the player. If you don’t do well today, the player will choose to leave tomorrow, and you will close the door the day after tomorrow. So the player is more like a goddess, you have to know her preferences and temperament, but also understand the current fashion and do the right thing. “
Nowadays, only when the profit model of the entire chain becomes rationalized-players pay reasonable time and money for happiness, channels earn reasonable promotion fees according to their work, and game developers can get IP and other benefits with the majority of the share. Therefore, game manufacturers will not continue to “drink poison to quench their thirst” in order to survive.