Whether you agree with Peter or not, it does seem like Rovio knows what they are doing. Angry Birds certainly is showing no signs of slowing down. In fact, it was announced that Rovio received a $42 million dollar investment and the EEDAR (Electronic Entertainment Design and Research) reported Angry Birds as one of the most profitable video game titles ever. Angry Birds has also been quick to add content since its release and has expanded its releases to come out for almost every platform imaginable (they’re even making a board game) in a remarkably short time span when compared to most other, “traditional” games.
Peter did admit however, that no one has totally figured out the mobile gaming business model yet. It sure seems like Rovio is trying though, from ad-supported free games, to downloadable titles, to micro-transactions, Rovio has certainly shown its flexibility in attacking the mobile gaming business model.
Peter also challenged the idea of the “casual game.” He said that no one talks about movies as being “casual movies” and then argued that an Angry Birds player can be just as a involved and addicted as any other gamer. There might very well be a point there. With the single-player portion of games like Homefront lasting 5 hours, who is to say which game is more hardcore or casual. What exactly makes a game a “casual game”?
What is your take? Do you think console games are dying? Do you think this was just one person trying to defend the type of games his company makes? Do you think there is a difference between casual and non-casual games? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
Source: Games Beat
