We have all seen them walk around campus or somewhere in the city: people behind their phones playing ‘Pokémon Go’. Although the hype is somewhat over at this time, it has changed the way of playing video games.
Pokémon Go applies the old franchise to the real world using augmented reality. The game is played on a smartphone and direct players to various locations, either to find Pokémon or virtual items. They can even battle against other Pokémon. The game uses an ‘augmented-reality’ feature by using the phone’s camera to show a picture of the real world with a Pokémon digitally pictured.
Since the release of Pokémon Go it was an immediately success, ‘it has generated $14.04 million across mobile platforms’ (GamesIndustry.biz, 2016). This free to play game somehow disrupted the gaming industry. This game has managed to normalize the use of augmented reality. I think everybody believed that AR would never become a success without a Virtual Reality headset or Google Glasses. But Nintendo and Niantic (makers of Pokémon Go) show us how to make the best out of 5 billion people with a smartphone (MarketingWeek, 2016).
Not only the platforms where we play on changes, from PlayStations to Wii to smartphone and maybe even to Google Glass, but the way we interact with other players change. Players go out of their houses to play Pokémon Go, they meet other players at so called ‘Lures’ (an in game item that is planted at a Pokéstop to attract Pokémon). And they even travel to different cities to catch rare Pokémon.
I think we can say that Nintendo and Niantic re-invented the way of playing video games. The video games will be more community or social network driven, include augmented or virtual reality and relay on different online strategies. I hope that this is the new way of playing games and that this ‘old’ Pokémon franchise has disrupted the gaming industry.
Pokémon Go has been in the center of attention since its release because of a number of reasons. The first and most obvious one is the popularity of the Pokémon franchise. When it was still just a cartoon, it glued millions in front of the TV, and those (more or less) the same people are now interacting with the world they liked so much and which reminds them of their childhood. AR, contrary to popular belief, didn’t contribute much. Only 33% of users prefer to use the AR feature (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2016-09-13-there-is-a-formula-to-pokemon-gos-success-but-its-not-ar) and the success is built on social interaction rather than technology. The highest proportion of users, 27% said that they play the game because they can interact with family and friends in the process. It seems after all, that the ‘social’ element was well implemented indeed.
Just a technical: Nintendo hasn’t created anything, Niantic is the developer, The Pokémon Company (which Nintendo partially owns) is the one selling the rights.
There is no doubt about the success of Pokémon Go. But calling it industry disruption seems a long shot right now, since we have seen that AR didn’t have much to do with it. There is definitely a shift towards more social integration in gaming (which has been happening for years now) and we might see more games being built on AR.
Pokémon Go is very different from other games played on other platforms and the people playing it have different preferences and gaming needs, so the effect of its success (or disruptive property) will most likely not influence older market segments. Has it disrupted smartphone gaming? Probably. Has it disrupted an entire industry with an annual revenue of 99.6bn USD? Hardly.
Hi laurens,
I think that Pokemon Go indeed has disrupted the gaming industry, and that this is only the beginning. It went very fast. Some of my friends were already playing Pokemon go, before it was officialy available in the Netherlands.
Maybe some of us thought it would be a hype (maybe 2/3 weeks?). But a lot of people are still playing it. It’s important for companies in the gaming industry to consider augmented or virtual reality and use different online strategies. Consumers are ready for these games as their needs are changing as well. It’s time for companies to adapt as fast as they can.
In my opinion, the changing gaming industry has both benefits and cons. For example, the people in Kijkduin are definitely not happy with Pokemon Go. More than 1,000 people went over there to catch Pokémons and also, unfortunately, left a lot of trash and caused a lot of damage. People were literally running and pushing each other as soon as they saw a rare Pokémon. This is not only a problem in the Netherlands, but also, for example in Central Park New York. Some people are also using 2 phones and use jailbreak to hack the game. I’ve never played Pokémon Go, but I think this is going a little bit too far. And I also think that there will be more games like Pokémon Go…
But there are also benefits. It’s not only the gaming industry that is changing. Also other industries are showing the world that augmented or virtual reality can be interesting for other purposes (I hope, for example, health care as well). Already in February 2015, Goldman Sachs estimated that augmented or virtual reality will have a market worth at least of $80 billion by 2025. (cnbc.com,2016).
This is only the beginning and I’m curious what other developments will bring us.
First of all thank you for your interesting post. I am not a Pokémon Go player by myself, but the growing herds of people hunting for the best Pokémon attracted my attention as well and I am curious how this game will evolve during the next years.
Talking about the disruptive energy of Pokémon Go itself I read an article from Christensen, Raynor and McDonald (2015) about the definition of disruptive technologies, which I guess might fit in this discussion about the disruptive energy of the mentioned gaming application. I will briefly explain to you why I don’t think Pokémon Go is a disruptive technology in every aspect.
Firstly, the authors of this particular article defined disruptive technologies by two main characteristics. On the one hand the “low-end foothold” and on the other hand the “new-market footholds”. The former involves a group of consumers, which was ignored by incumbent companies of a certain market. The latter implies the creation of a market where there was no market before the disruptive company came up with a new idea. As an example the authors apply their criteria to a pretended disruptive technology: Uber. They figure out that the hyped tech company is not a disruptive technology, because there was neither a low-end foothold nor a new-market foothold for Uber and therefore Uber wasn’t crushing the taxi industry because of their disruptive technology. but rather because of their more convenient and less expensive alternative to call a cab simply by using the smartphone.
In the case of Pokémon Go both characteristics do not fit completely as well due to the fact that Nintendo is not offering a new product to a neglected consumer group nor did Nintendo create a new market for smartphone-game enthusiastic individuals. Therefore, Pokémon Go might not be a disruptive technology from my perspective, whereby no doubt exists about the innovative and the new system of this game.
References:
https://hbr.org/2015/12/what-is-disruptive-innovation
Hi Laurens,
Thank you for your interesting post. As a super Pokemon fan (both the animation and the GBA card game), I believe I can barely attribute such huge success to augmented reality. In fact, it is the Nintendo franchise that plays the key role.
Earlier in late 2012, Niantic released its location-based, augmented-reality, massively multiplayer online game by the name of Ingress. In this game players also have to walk to real locations to either capture a “portal” or destroy enemy portals. The game was quite unique back then but did not become phenomenal after its release. Niantic has actually pulled straight much of the data from Ingress to add it in Pokemon go, for example, many of the pokestops and gyms in Pokemon go share the same location with portals in Ingress. In fact, Ingress can be seen as an early version of Pokemon go but with different playing modes and background story. Pokemon go, on the other hand, has a very strong media franchise to back it up. Up to 2014, the Pokemon video game franchise has sold more than 260 million games worldwide; The Pokemon trading card game has shipped more than 21.5 billion cards to 74 countries in 10 languages (T.Lien 2014). It is hard to ignore these numbers when talking about Pokemon go’s huge success.
To summarize, Pokemon go’s accomplishment is hardly repeatable. AR provides a wonderful new platform, but how to combine with a multimillion reader media franchise is still the key to success.
Reference:
http://www.polygon.com/pokemon/2014/8/18/6030089/Pokemon-sales-numbers
Thank you for your interesting post about gaming industry and Pokemon GO, the game which was some kind of a phenomenon that lured millions of people who grabbed their phones in the search for the creatures.
I have to admit that I have also tried the game at the time of its highest popularity. Unfortunately, I cannot agree with you that the game was disruptive for the gaming industry.
Firstly, I believe that people didn’t play Pokemon GO, because of the Augmented Reality features only. These had been introduced into the mobile gaming before Pokemon GO and haven’t been very successful. The best example here is the game called Ingress, which has only around 370,000 downloads in Google Play, compared to around 6,130,000 downloads of Pokemon GO. Ingress was developed by the same company which developed the Pokemon GO game (Niantic Labs) and was a base for the Pokemon GO. (Truong, 2016).
What I believe was the most significant reason behind the Pokemon GO popularity, was the nostalgia for the old good childhood times. 78% of Pokemon GO players are between 18 and 34 years old (Smith, 2016). They, most probably, remember the old Pokemon anime and Nintendo’s games, which were extremely popular around two decades ago (Pokemon games sold in over 200 million copies over past two decades (Winegarner, 2016). Frankly speaking, I am one of these guys. When I was a kid I watched the Pokemon anime and played one of the Pokemon games on my old GameBoy Color. That is why I have tried the new Pokemon GO game.
Secondly, the mobile gaming industry is not equal to gaming industry in overall. The mobile games account for 37% of total gaming industry revenues. Despite prediction of mobile sector gaining bigger share, the other ways of playing games will still be dominant in the forthcoming years (newzoo.com, 2016).
To sum up, I think that Pokemon GO may make AR more popular, however, it will certainly not revolutionize or disrupt the whole gaming industry.
Sources:
1. A. Truong (2016), Pokémon Go’s predecessor, Ingress, has never been more popular, qz.com/738737/pokemon-gos-predecessor-ingress-has-never-been-more-popular/
2. C. Smith (2016), Pokemon Go Statistics (September 2016), Expandedramblings.com/index.php/pokemon-go-statistics/
3. B. Winegarner (2016), Forget Pokémon Go, there’s another augmented reality game that’s way better, qz.com/732809/forget-pokemon-go-theres-another-augmented-reality-game-that’s-way-better/
4. Newzoo.com (2016), THE GLOBAL GAMES MARKET REACHES $99.6 BILLION IN 2016, MOBILE GENERATING 37%, Newzoo.com/insights/articles/global-gaming-market-reaches-99-6-billion-2016-mobile-generating-37/
Hi Laurens!
First of all thank you for your interesting post! I think that Pokemon indeed changed the gaming industry. Although one of the major reasons behind Pokémon GO’s amazing success has been its intelligence to leverage the power of the Pokémon brand and reach the players who grew up with the franchise, as 72% of Pokémon GO players have played at least one of the original Pokémon franchises in their lifetime (Newzoo,2016). But i do think that the most popular aspects of Pokémon GO was how easy it was to pick up and play and also to play outside and explore the world and third its competitiveness (you can choose a team and defeat gym leaders). Pokemon GO attracted also 24% new people to the mobile gaming industry, this suggests that Pokemon GO has attracted more than 20 million new mobile gamers across the US, UK, Germany, and France alone (Newzoo,2016) . This gives evidence for disruption, Pokemon created a different way of gaming which attracted another audience. Pokemon GO has thrown AR into the spotlight, creating many opportunities for the wider adoption of AR. I therefore think that AR games will be widely adopted.
https://disruptionhub.com/disrupted-gaming-ar-goes-mainstream-pokemon-go/
Indeed part of the major success was the combination of the Pokemon franchise together with the augmented reality. However, another important success factor was the initial business plan of the game itself, being released in the summer period, July, when the weather is great for outside walks, kids are on vacation and adults are enjoying their holiday. However, where Niantic failed is that they did not manage to keep their user base interested in the game after a couple of months. More than 33% of the users have stopped playing the game after one month (Apptopia, https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/ib1EgyZWoO_c/v0/-1x-1.png) and the user engage was in a constant decline besides certain new patches (Apptopia, https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/imCenfd.A2wk/v0/-1x-1.png). A report done by Google Trends shows that virtual reality has a higher user interest (https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/idNWVQQB5Ttk/v0/-1x-1.png). This is an interesting fact as it is a good indicator of where the focus is going to be in the future.