Do we still need publishers?

Can the available promotional methods replace the need for a traditional publisher? I honestly would like to know, since I have an app that just last week stopped generating sales. I mean, can the social networks, tweets, and those paid marketing efforts be as effective as gameloft's promotional efforts for example? Or is there some sort of insider information big game names like ngmoco have that are needed to make any real serious earnings.

 

Well, those bug guys are nothing without good content. So if developers stay away from them, they are irrelevant. It is the same as the music busienss. Go indie or go with a big label. I like to think the technology allows us to not have to rely on publishers. Of course , they can focus on the promotional part, I would prefer that the terms be the developers terms not the publishers though.

 

How much percent in profit do they ask for?

 

This is a good question, but it isn't the right question. The correct question is how much can they increase your sales.

Let's say your sales are $10 a day. You approach a publisher and they take something crazy like 90%. That looks really, really bad and scary.

However, if the publisher is able to increase and stabilize your sales to $5000 a day, you'll be bringing in $500 a day. That is way more than your previous take.

Publishers aren't stupid, but they like to play it safe and play stupid. Part of their job is to estimate and calculate risk. They probably won't tell you what they expect sales to be, but I guarantee that they have a figure in mind. They don't throw money at things unless they know they can see a return on the investment.

So the original question is "are publishers relevant?". Yes they are for the simple reason that marketing is a job by itself, and it isn't easy. Most indies go at it by themselves and suffer greatly.

 

Yes, most do, especially if you're a new-comer. Unless you have a broad background in the subject of marketing (which is unlikely if you also happen to be a programmer, artist, or both), already had several hits, or come from a big name company and have already established a good reputation, it's almost impossible. Apple uses their hundreds of thousands of apps as great features for consumers, but it makes it almost impossible for developers to get their name out.

 

A (good) publisher enables a developer do what they do best, while they go out and sell the product. So yeah, there is still a huge place for publisher in the app market.

Of course you if have a fan base, good contacts and time to spare on PR, probably you can do without.

To tell you the truth I wouldn't mind scoring a publisher in my next game, but I doubt any publisher will be interested in our indie retro pseudo-cool game

 

Its arguable that publishers are more needed then ever. The number of people trying their hand at iphone deving is increasing by the week, and its getting harder and harder to shine above the others. Heck, there are a LOT of good quality indie games appearing now, and there is certainly a lot more talent (sheer volume wise) then there was before. So now you really have to try to be unique AND quality. One or the other on its own doesn't really cut it anymore.

For these reasons, standing out and being able to have a publisher market your game for you can be essential. Just the fact that you would be releasing under one of the "big boys" names is marketing in itself. Any website is far more likely to give your game coverage when its associated with a big name.

Its just one of those things you have to weigh as a dev. Going with a publisher is less of a risk, and you're much more certain to at least get moderate success and earn some money. Going on your own is a huge risk, but POTENTIALLY has higher reward (though that scenario is by far the exception)... but also a much higher potential to earn next to nothing.

With N.Y.Zombies we did everything ourselves and are surviving in the middle ground right now, which is definitely a viable option as well. Its not strictly "success or failure" like people make it out to be.

 

From what I understand Chillingo skims about 20%, although it's possible those terms are negotiable and/or based on certain criteria, but one developer I talk to frequently and work with from time to time is taking that hit for his latest game -- though this is the first time he's gone with a publisher.

Me, I'm not interested in publishers at all. My big problem with publishers is that their brand gets top billing despite the fact that it's you who did all the work; they just promoted it (to whatever extent they do so). That makes it hard for a developer to build their own brand and reputation. Honestly: How many times have you heard the average user here refer to "Chillingo's latest game"? Chillingo's. Not the developer's. Ditto for Ngmoco and the rest. That's not a place I want to go with my stuff.

However, I suppose it really depends entirely on how much of a one-man show you want to be -- how much time, effort and money you want to put into self-promotion. There is something to be said for getting on with updates or a new project while someone else toots the horns. It just depends on what you think that's worth to you while also keeping in mind that it's not just money you sacrifice.

 

My suggestion would be to approach these publishers and ask for their terms. Then assess from the information that you got if you'll go the publishing route or not. Though I highly suggest that you try releasing your product by yourself at first and get a "feel" of all the marketing work needed and involved. Whether your app becomes a bestseller or not, the learning experience will always be worthwhile. It is still after all, a huge part of being an indie.

 

I'm suprised to hear it's this low, and in addition I'd have expected that a publisher such as Chillingo would want IP ownership too. That is one of the primarly goals of the traditional games publisher, acquire a bucketload of IPs and bank on some of them becoming huge. It then becomes more about the prospects for that IP bringing in new future opportunities, than how much money the original game brought in.

It's interesting how in other forms of published creations, the author is always more pronounced than the publisher. You don't hear about Sony's latest album, or Penguin Books' newest novel.

 

Yeah it's complicated this bit. I mean, Chillingo's games sell because it's Chillingo's new game. They are doing a lot in this regard to pick up the best games, advertise them everywhere as a big release and use their weight to promote the product.

Personally, I'd love to become involved with the publishers on a bigger project, but I'd want to "share" branding and I'm not sure how that would be feasible.

 

I think that the reason is pretty simple... If the author of the work is a single person, or a band whose picture you can see on the cover, it's easier to create a bond among who created the content and the final user. It all becomes more impersonal if you are presented a list a logos before playing a game. You'll generally remember the first one, especially if you have seen it many times before...

Consider also movies... you generally care about actors and director if they are famous, but when it comes to companies... some movies show two, three or even four of them in the opening credits, and you generally won't care about what's the difference about Universal, Working Title, or so on... you'll just remember the "big guy"...

 

Aye, true indeed. More celebrity developers needed!

 

I can't speak for IP ownership, but I have seen developers break away from publishers with their game and take it solo. They've had to submit it as a new game and thus original owners could not get updates for it, but it's been done, so I assume ownership is also either negotiable or Chillingo does not assert it over the app. The low fees surprised me too, to be honest, but again that's just one example, and the only one I have, so it may not be representative of the whole.

The reason for this is because it's their name you see on the App Store, being that it's submitted by Chillingo and resides under their name. All the developer gets is (usually) a mention at the end of the description in the store, a splash screen (after Chillingo's, of course), and their name in the credits. But it's the name associated with the game in the App Store that makes the difference. You don't see "Game X" by "Developer." You see "Game X" by "Chillingo" or whichever publisher it is, so that's the name that sticks with you.

Publishers have their place, naturally, but as you said, it's more complicated than that on the App Store. You can't share branding on the App Store in any obvious way; it's their name that appears in the header, and nobody can change that. You as the developer get relegated to effectively being an also-ran when it comes to getting the credit because your name is tucked away at the bottom of the description, and in the app itself.

 

and you're a serious candidate!

 

.!$MM

 

I think we developers should change the game a bit. How good is a publisher? Well, they can be decent sometimes but there is definitely room for huge improvement that could provide additional benefits to the developers.

- I don't want my publisher to control or own me

- I want my publisher who can give me the resources I need to make informed decision on the best possible next game for my market.

- I want my publisher to promote not only my games but also my company

- I want my publisher who be a transparent marketing and sales extension of my company without promoting their own brand as the "main guy".

- I want access to my customers so that I can make informed strategic decisions and reach out to them as I see fit.

- I want my publisher to connect me with matching partner opportunities and talent.

- I want my publisher to provide me with tools that will help me develop better games, faster.

- I want my publisher to find me funding partners

- I want my publisher to make money when I make money

Is that too much to ask?

 

it is asking a lot. One needs some really good piece of software and a solid track record to have such a list of expectations.

These days pubs really hold all the cards; I'd say it is nearly useless for joe schmoe to throw their hat into the ring unless they are going to make a dedicated effort (re: money and politics) to get the word out, the amount of product out there (and the quality bar) is simply staggering and it's going to keep compounding.

I still am not hip to partner up with a big pub myself at this point, but I'll say this much; given the opportunity, it's good out "be out there" and talk to as many people as you can on these matters, to get a feel for the weather.. some pubs may be out to gut you, but others may be hungry as well and though not as resourceful as the bigger ones, they may be trying hard to grow and will see value in growing with you as a partner. This can only be deduced by doing your homework, though..