Rovio earnings report - 200 million people playing Angry Birds monthly
- Thread starter gofreak
- Start date
B_Rik_Schitthaus
Banned
It's playable for free on Chrome, the numbers are impressive but people should always remember the context.
I'm just wondering how far this can scale. Their primary platforms are still growing hugely and Angry Birds is the closest thing to an established, 'institutional' brand in the space. Can it stay in that position and scale up commensurately?
If so the figures in a few years will be even more interesting.
If so the figures in a few years will be even more interesting.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Rovio will be dead in 3 years.
Supreme Stephan
Member
They need more IP's.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Jealous? I own and like Angry Birds, but it's 2 games based on 1 ip. Do people honestly expect us to be talking about this still being mega popular in 5 years?
Diablohead
Member
They will all flop, angry birds was all down to luck and timing on the app store, and forced marketing by making plushies and selling them EVERYWHERE, can't walk into a shop without seeing them plushies on the shelves.
60 million in revenue is less than many lotteries these days.
Depends whether they're engaging or not.
If they were lucky with their timing on Angry Birds, they'll be lucky in the future to have a massive audience to cross-promote to. They're in a pretty advantageous position wrt launching new products and turbo-boosting any new product out of the gate. The key, IMO, will be if their future games will engage.
Cygnus X-1
Member
Thanks for posting.
For comparison, any 60$ game would have to be able to sell 1.257 million copies WW in order to generate such an income.
SirIgbyCeaser
Banned
When you invent the Cellphone equivalent to Tetris. You have money for many lifetimes.
Cygnus X-1
Member
Angry birds is a very bright burning fire. The brightest, the shortest lifetime. As soon as the mass market finds something as or more interesting, Angry Birds will start to decline. The reason is the market itself, which does not bind to a franchise like gamers usually do.
Halfbrick's done pretty well regarding multiple IP, so it's not inpossible
If you're saying their next game won't be as popular as Angry Birds, almost certainly yes, but considering the cost of making the game (a smidge of what they make per day) they would provably make it back in a week, just because they have the power to push their next title to people via AB.
Metalmurphy
Member
200 million individual people? Yeah I don't believe that at all.
200 million play sessions maybe.
200 million play sessions maybe.
Pretty sure people were willing to buy GameBoys in order to play Tetris. Are people buying cell phones to play Angry Birds?
For the developer?
It's a little bit apples-to-oranges given how many ways that 60 is split before the developer sees a slice*, vs here, what is direct revenue for a developer, if Rovio's reported revenue excludes (for example), Apple or Google's take on their marketplaces.
*Yes, I know Rovio had a publisher at one point, but once that pub was sold, their claim to any cut of Angry Birds income was relinquished IIRC.
They could track unique devices, but they couldn't track across devices. So indeed there'd be some overlap in the latter. But I think monthly average users is meant to be 'unique', within one platform.
The charts on these devices seem pretty bound to Angry Birds, have been for prolonged periods - at least, in iOS chart land, a year, two years, is a verrry long time for a game to stick around high on the chart. There are few brands with staying power on these charts, but Angry Birds has been one so far. And that's massive free advertising for it, it may become almost self-fueling...depending on the growth of the platforms.
IrishNinja
Member
i think it's kinda cool that many people are playing games, much less one that's like...this gen's pac-man or something.
it's also cool to see plushies & shirts and stuff of a video game in wal-mart...you see mario a lot (i know there's polls saying he's more recognizable to kids than mickey) but a newcomer like that...it's hard for me to hate that. even if there's more fun/deserving/etc games, it really kinda shows you how much gaming's grown.
i don't like all the "everything must go to ios/android" any more than the "all games will be motion controls" etc talk years back too, but you gotta take the good with the bad.
it's also cool to see plushies & shirts and stuff of a video game in wal-mart...you see mario a lot (i know there's polls saying he's more recognizable to kids than mickey) but a newcomer like that...it's hard for me to hate that. even if there's more fun/deserving/etc games, it really kinda shows you how much gaming's grown.
i don't like all the "everything must go to ios/android" any more than the "all games will be motion controls" etc talk years back too, but you gotta take the good with the bad.
michaelius
Banned
Considering anyone who has smartphone/pc/psp/psv/ps3 and probably few others platforms can play i doubt people are jealous
This. It also should put Rovio's creativity in context.
Angry Birds is miles better than CtC.
650 million times better?
SirIgbyCeaser
Banned
Well, if you had a gameboy you could hardly do without buying Tetris. If you have a cellphone it seems, you can't live without angry birds.
This is just sales wise though. Tetris is a better game obviously. And on better hardware.
B_Rik_Schitthaus
Banned
http://chrome.angrybirds.com/
If you click the link you'll be added to the number.
200 million is more then believably fro unique users*
Keep in mind if one person plays it on IOS, Chrome and Android they will count as 3, but there is no way of getting 100 percent accurate numbers.
that's awesome that you can make that much money yourself!
Sentenza
Member
Oh, please. It's just a more polished version of the same fucking silly game.
I see Angry Birds compared to Tetris, Pac-Man and Super Mario Bros. What separates it from those games is that they presented something entirely new in their day.
When I first played Angry Birds, it didn't seem like a fresh experience. It felt like a clone of Crush the Castle, which I had played the hell out of for a day or so when it was new. Yes, the interface and level design are improved and there's a lot more content, but it lacks the spark of brilliance that could cause me to consider it on its own terms.
Rovio clearly think Angry Birds is the new Mario, as evidenced by their recent comments that they want to take the brand across genres in a similar manner to Nintendo's leveraging of the Mario IP. The thing is, when Mario really exploded in popularity, Miyamoto's well of ideas had already brought forward Donkey Kong and Super Mario Bros., two revolutionary game designs. I don't think the evidence suggests that Rovio has the game design ingenuity to create original hit games across a variety of genres, and given the way they do business, I'm not convinced they're interested in building a team of designers who could do that for them in the future. I certainly don't see them putting out something as brilliant and sustainable as Mario Kart.
The question is, is the Angry Birds brand strong enough that whatever games they attach it ti will automatically become hits? I think it is in the short term, but it won't take long for the worth of the IP to be significantly devalued.
I also think the movie will be about as successful as the Super Mario Bros. movie, but maybe that's just wishful thinking.
When I first played Angry Birds, it didn't seem like a fresh experience. It felt like a clone of Crush the Castle, which I had played the hell out of for a day or so when it was new. Yes, the interface and level design are improved and there's a lot more content, but it lacks the spark of brilliance that could cause me to consider it on its own terms.
Rovio clearly think Angry Birds is the new Mario, as evidenced by their recent comments that they want to take the brand across genres in a similar manner to Nintendo's leveraging of the Mario IP. The thing is, when Mario really exploded in popularity, Miyamoto's well of ideas had already brought forward Donkey Kong and Super Mario Bros., two revolutionary game designs. I don't think the evidence suggests that Rovio has the game design ingenuity to create original hit games across a variety of genres, and given the way they do business, I'm not convinced they're interested in building a team of designers who could do that for them in the future. I certainly don't see them putting out something as brilliant and sustainable as Mario Kart.
The question is, is the Angry Birds brand strong enough that whatever games they attach it ti will automatically become hits? I think it is in the short term, but it won't take long for the worth of the IP to be significantly devalued.
I also think the movie will be about as successful as the Super Mario Bros. movie, but maybe that's just wishful thinking.
SturokBGD
Member
It's really worth noting that not actually 200 million people a month have actually paid or will ever pay for Angry Birds. Not even close. Off the top of my head I think actual "sales" at December 2011 across all platforms was around 12 million (probably way more now that Space is out). Still hella impressive considering how much of Angry Birds you can play for free in various forms.
electroplankton
Banned
But not so much considering the installed base the game can exploit and the fact that it's the most known brand on them by far (if the 12 million number is true).
TheContact
Member
I can't figure out how this got so popular. It's a fun little game, but seriously there's merchandise for it and everything. Even when I went to Bermuda, in the shops there they had Angry Birds stuffed animals and mugs and stuff. It's just a little game for a dollar!
StoppedInTracks
Member
I enjoyed Angry Birds for what its worth. Pretty cool little game and somehow different than Crush the Castle. Did not try Angry Birds Space yet.
I played it a couple times in Chrome. All it took was my time
Misleading numbers ahoy!
This statement just kind of irked me. I get what you're saying and don't deny it, but comparing AB to Tetris at all actually bothered me a tiny bit.
and gaming soul
Misleading numbers ahoy!
This statement just kind of irked me. I get what you're saying and don't deny it, but comparing AB to Tetris at all actually bothered me a tiny bit.
This post is so salty I had to get a drink after reading it.
Sentenza
Member
It's beyond me as well.
It's fun, yes, for a couple of hours, but it's not even that addicting.
In fact when I played it I was bored of it quite quickly.
Davey Cakes
Member
I agree. Like with many iOS games, I downloaded the free version, played it for a little while, and then never really bothered with it again.
The game is a good value for a dollar but a time-waster is still a time-waster. I will never understand the explosion of it as a big game with a significant market presence.
Then again, maybe because it's so accessible and so many people play it or have tried it, the natural occurrence is that we'd eventually be beaten over the head with marketing and merchandise.
SturokBGD
Member
Maybe, maybe not. It's all about the market the game is for; one thing the analysts fail to mention when everyone's getting exited about 10 billion smartphone owners and 60 gazillion Facebook users is that the lion's share of those users are not even nearly as likely to dig out a credit card and pay for their entertainment like a "traditional" videogame enthusiast would.
Poor anecdotal evidence (sorry) - being known as a "gamer" in my workplace and among family & friends, I've had many "non gamer" types come and talk to me about how they've got three stars on all the Angry Birds levels. I ask if they bought the full game and they look at me like I'm out of my mind. IMO that's the elephant in the room - the same people who are unlikely to buy a Super Mario Bros or Call of Duty at $40-$60 are also unlikely to buy Angry Birds at only $1.
Auto_aim1
MeisaMcCaffrey
The budget to create these games weren't that high; it's extremely profitable for them.
electroplankton
Banned
Or maybe, they are more willing to spend the full retail price for a packaged game rather than few bucks for a mobile games which is, as a matter of fact, a more limited experience (usually).
Why buy what you can get for free?
Actually now I'm wondering how many paid versions of AB are pirated.
The thing is that even the free version(with ads) bring revenue. I'm pretty sure it bring more than the paid version.
Diddy Kong
Banned
This.