How to make the next match-3 game?

[[140846]]

Mobile games have entered a white-hot stage, which is an indisputable fact. I believe that the teams that entered this circle early have now made a lot of money. Those who once had the most capital to engage in mobile games but doubted mobile games and were reluctant to enter are probably crying in the bathroom now. At this point, I can only say that they deserve it. However, it is a bit regrettable that seeing that mobile games are making money, all kinds of chickens, ducks and fish have become restless, whether they are video developers, hamburgers, or coal miners, all want to come in and make a fortune. The mobile game market has been messed up, and a good circle has been messed up. Individual developers have no room to survive, and small and medium-sized groups are struggling to survive. LouKit is deeply saddened!

Industry Views

Although mobile games have entered a white-hot stage, in my opinion, if you really like games and understand games, you can definitely get involved. Why? Because the market is too chaotic now, few people are seriously making games, and there are too few good games. In the field of mobile casual games, match-3 games have always been an unchanging theme and the most popular among the public. I believe that there will still be no less than a hundred match-3 games waiting to be released in the market, and the fierce competition is self-evident. Today I will share my own views on the current match-3 games.

Making games also requires positioning

I think that making games, whether it is a match-3 game, an ARPG, or anything else, should be like making an APP, and there should be a minimum positioning. For example, if it is divided by male and female players, is this game aimed at male players or female players? If it is divided by age group, is this game aimed at children, young people, or middle-aged and elderly users? And so on. Don't think about everything, it's impossible. Even if you are a god, you can't bite it off, and don't use a vague concept to say that my game is suitable for the public. And I believe that if you have a precise positioning, you can "start small and grow big". For example, if your game is aimed at female users and succeeds, male players will naturally come later. If you grab both ends now, it is estimated that you can't catch any, so the other way around is completely impossible, not to mention that the current mobile game environment is no longer the environment three years ago. And the most important thing is that after positioning, it will also be of great help to the subsequent work of the game, which can make the art and planning direction more specific, etc.

Choosing match-3 games, to some extent, means choosing leisure and choosing female players. Since you have chosen this route, you should create the game strictly in accordance with this route. So from the pictures, sounds, background themes, all should follow this route. Don't deviate from it, otherwise the game will end up with a monster that is neither male nor female. The only ending is "out of the box = out of the box".

Analysis of user groups of match-3 games

The overview in the previous paragraph has almost shown that the majority of match-3 game players are female players. Of course, there are also a small number of male players who like match-3 games. We will not consider male players here, and then conduct an in-depth analysis of female players.

When analyzing the game users, if we just give a direct statement that the majority of the gamers are female, it is definitely a relatively broad range, which is greatly disadvantageous for the future development of the game. ***, female players are divided into age groups. Here I analyze the two age groups of 16-30 and 30-45 (don’t worry about other age groups, to some extent, they will hardly be involved in your game). Users in the age group of 16 to 30 are relatively young, and they are also relatively trendy. They are relatively well educated and have a high willingness to accept new things. It is estimated that they are the ones who keep checking WeChat circles every day. Therefore, since the characteristics of the user group at this stage have been obtained (young, trendy, individual, highly educated, fresh, and "high IQ"), the interface design must be designed according to the preferences of this type of users.

What about the 30-45 stage users? This stage of players is probably the most forgotten user when designing games, which is a pity. The characteristics of this type of users are almost opposite to those of the above (16-30) users. There are too few games for them to play in the market now, and most importantly, they also need entertainment, but the market has always forgotten them. Therefore, when we design games for this type of users, the interface design should not be too complicated. Even if you think it is very simple, it is sometimes too complicated for them. Unnecessary steps should be removed as much as possible, and it should be clean. Another important point is that due to the characteristics of this type of users, we can conclude that they are very reluctant to accept new things. Once they choose your game, they are likely to be your real fans, lifelong fans, and will not abandon you soon like young users (16~30) do, and continue to look for new things, pursue trends, and excitement. Therefore, I personally feel that this type of players should not be forgotten during game design, because the value they give you may be beyond your imagination. Now we have the characteristics of players in these two age groups, so when designing the game (art, interface, digital planning, etc.), we should find a balance between them and carry out the subsequent game work.

Okay, let’s not talk about this topic for now. Here I would like to ask you a question. When we are on the subway, we often see some older players playing Happy Candy Crush, but fewer of them play other elimination games?

Is the match-3 + ARPG type feasible?

Another point is that we have seen many games of the type of match-3 + ARPG. It can be said to be an innovative form, but from my personal point of view, I do not recommend this type of game. As mentioned earlier, games should have a certain positioning. Match-3 games are casual and female-oriented games. I classify them as lightweight here. In my impression, ARPG is a theme game for male players. I classify it as heavyweight. The game made by combining these two should naturally be the intersection of these two types of players. How much of this intersection can there be? You can think about it yourself, I won’t say it. Of course, there are several games of this type on the market, and the results are not bad. I understand this phenomenon as follows: first, they appeared early enough, and second, this phenomenon will not last too long. Of course, this has nothing to do with their operation. Therefore, my point of view is that if you are not very confident about this kind of match-3 + ARPG game, try to avoid it. At the same time, it is not absolute, because female players also like to play ARPG games to some extent, but their so-called liking for ARPG games will never reach the level of male liking for ARPG games in our opinion. Therefore, I still agree with another point of view that match-3 + "low ARPG" game. It depends on the degree and whether you can grasp it correctly.

To make a match-3 game, you must subvert

I have summarized the match-3 games on the market now. They are nothing more than connecting lines, exchanging two by two, moving at will, and destroying stars (there are certainly others). Players have played some of them, but some of them have been abandoned by players. At the same time, I believe that 80% of match-3 players in the market are conquered by Happy Match-3 and Everyday Match-3. So here we ask ourselves a question: if I release another match-3 game now, how can I snatch users from them? How can I make users willing to give up the Candy Crush Saga or other match-3 games that they have worked hard to play dozens or hundreds of levels for your game and join your arms? If you tell me now that your game is more fun than theirs and the gameplay has changed, there is absolutely no such thing on the market. Here I will pour cold water on you directly. If you just slightly change the gameplay, change some level types, and change the skin directly, it will be useless. To put it bluntly, it is still the same old story. The most important thing is how long it will take for players to see your so-called gameplay. It is estimated that by then, the players will have already left. Therefore, I can only say that these so-called innovations are necessary for another match-3 game, but they are far from enough to make players throw themselves into your arms.

In general, if you want to release another match-3 game, you must have a change that subverts the traditional match-3 game and "destroys everything", so that users can feel it the moment they enter your game, instead of letting them wait for thousands of years, and still have Candy Crush Saga and Happy Match-3. How can they survive like this? The subversion and destruction of everything I mentioned here, you may say, who can't do it, the problem is that it is difficult to do it. In fact, these so-called subversion and destruction of everything changes are not that scary or difficult. Here I will give an example. For example, the current match-3 games can be classified as cute and lovely in terms of graphics, and players have seen a lot of them. Therefore, even when they see a game with the same design style, they will not think it is very good. Therefore, when we make it, we can completely change the design style in design and change the design route, such as flat design. There is also the subject matter. It can't be the same few things all the time, either candy or fruit, or just a few different things that can be matched and eliminated. Isn't this approach just messing around? So there must be a background story of the subject matter, and it must be strong. Of course, there are special exceptions.

When making games, it is inevitable to use references, but don’t lose yourself

I am a coder. When I was working on apps, I often complained about the products. Why? For example, we are working on an e-commerce app, and some so-called products directly talk about apps of Tmall, JD.com, and Yihaodian. When you express your opinions, they will say that Tmall does the same thing. I have been in this business for 5 years. What else can I say? I just write the code quietly. It is none of my business if it fails. I can only comfort myself in this way.

In fact, I am not against reference, or even copying some, but quite the opposite, because this will increase the success rate of your own products, after all, it is better to take the essence and discard the dross. But you must not copy it. The development of other people's apps (or games) has also gone through a process. At this stage, many things in their apps (games) are added based on their existing needs or other factors. We are just in the starting stage. If you copy everything or copy a certain function of it, you must also determine whether the function you copied is in line with your route and positioning. Even if it is in line with it, how much is the cost of implementing it from a technical perspective, whether it is worth adding, and how much help it will have for your product after adding it. So when making reference, you need to be cautious in every step, whether it is making games or apps. I think this should be the case.

In addition, we must always keep a clear mind. Now some games have been successful, and they brag about how good their design is, how many sets they have made, how good the sound effects are, how good the planning and operation are, how good the program is, etc. In fact, these factors do exist for their success, but they are not so awesome that they are awesome. One of the reasons that cannot be ignored is that they entered the market early enough. In a word, the success of a game is composed of various factors, of course there are bad ones, and we must treat this objectively. Not all are good. In addition, when we refer to other games, we must always keep a clear mind, because when making games, it is easy to get stuck in them when referring to other games, and let your thinking be imprisoned in their games, so that some of your original ideas begin to be questioned, and finally all are abandoned, and you turn around in their games. This is a taboo.

I have talked a lot, but there is still a lot I want to say, but I don’t know how to describe it. At the same time, I am tired of writing, and it is time to end it. In a word, the success of a game is often the accumulation of various factors bit by bit. It is definitely not a matter of diving in, finding a few programmers to crackle the code, and throwing it into the market to make money. I wish you all a happy game making, and hope to communicate with you later!