On one hand, it’s clear that we’re seeing a greater merging of gaming with broader entertainment trends.
A recent survey by Newzoo revealed that a significant percentage of gamers are drawn to engagement types that extend beyond gameplay (“A𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘺𝘱𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘺”).
These include:
🔹 “Movies or TV based on game” (56% in US, 55% in UK, 73% in Brasil, 75% in India, 81% in Indonesia) 🔹 “Toys or collectibles of a game” (45% in US, 39% in UK, 60% in Brasil, 68% in Indonesia) 🔹 “Fast food or drinks that give rewards in the game” (49% in US, 42% in UK, 61% in Brasil, 66% in India, 69% in Indonesia) 🔹 “In-game rewards by subscribing to other services” (51% in US, 45% in UK, 76% in Brasil, 69% in India, 80% in Indonesia).
How does IP actually help with game discoverability? It’s admittedly difficult to answer this question objectively. To find some answers, I examined relevant data. Below is a comparison of traffic for different game segments in US (top 10 by revenue, top 21-50 by revenue, etc.) with similar game segments, although based on commercial IP. I specifically focused on the share of paid traffic for these games. These are estimates based on Sensor Tower data for the US market. However, since these estimates are applied to both segments, they don’t need to be perfectly accurate to reveal some insights.
It is interesting to see that games based on IP have much lower share of Paid traffic. There are 2 possible explanations: ✅ games with IP get some additional “boost”/discoverability help so they have lower % of Paid traffic 🛑 Most of the games based on IP are pretty weak games, with weak monetisation so they can really afford effective and strong User Acquisition.
Which version do you think is correct? Or maybe some other theory? 😎