The Power of Brand Loyalty

Apr 2009

20

Ryu's Ultimate Combo

Ryu's Ultimate Combo

It is extremely difficult to convince a customer to use a product, let alone to be a brand ambassador for it. It’s a process that takes time, money and forces the product’s creator to often forego revenue with no guarantee that you’ll ever make that money back. However, if you’re in it for the long run, the benefits of brand loyalty will far outweigh your losses in the short term.

 

Though there are countless examples, let’s take a look at the gaming world for a case study. Recently Capcom released a downloadable game add-on for the game Resident Evil 5. Less than 2MB of content was actually downloaded to disk, yet it cost $5. The small download led to speculation that the downloadable content (DLC) was just a key to unlock what was already on the disc. That, in turn, brought up discussion of whether gamers should be entitled to everything on a game disc or not. Ben Fritz from The Cut Scene believes it is “a rather ridiculous attitude of entitlement that gamers need to lose“.

 

I think this is exactly the problem at hand. Even if it comes from a selfish sense of entitlement, why are we looking to blame gamers? For developers, the added benefit of appeasing gamers should offset the monetary reward and knowledge that you’ve incensed a community of users who have already spent $60 on your product. Two biggest software developers, Blizzard and Valve, are well known for their product support. In fact, there have been nearly 100 updates for Team Fortress 2 since launch. And Left 4 Dead is coming out with a big multiplayer update within the next month. The best news? None of these updates cost a cent after the original purchase. Blizzard still supports Diablo II, a game that’s coming up on 10 years old.

 

Resident Evil 5 is a title that has shipped 4 million units since launch, but some of its biggest fans are turning sour on the franchise. With a little more attention to customers and a little less focus on the short-term bottom line, this might not have happened. Right now there is a turning point in the industry, where game developers are supporting games more than ever, but some choose to do it for free (often PC developers), while others do it by offering game add-ons and paid downloadable content. If you have the ability and opportunity to build brand loyalty and create uberfans and brand loyalists for your product, why not forego extra profit in order to create long-lasting relationships with your customers? Yes, it’s a scary thought, but if you’re in it for the long haul, isn’t it worth it to your brand? When a map pack is a $4.99 purchase, and a game is $59.99, wouldn’t you rather have an extra 200K people buying your next title at launch than an extra 1M people downloading your PDLC? Software developers need to look at the long run. It’s time to stop nickel-and-diming consumers and to give them what they want. Not only does releasing additional content for free make ethical sense, but five years down the line, shareholders will appreciate it too.

  • Zach Berman
    First off, I like the concept for this blog.

    My only comment for this is while you are praising companies like Blizzard for their continued support of games (which I think they still support the original Starcraft) you fail to mention their biggest game at the moment, World of Warcraft. While I am not a player of World of Warcraft, I understand that they have monthly updates that they issue for free (for which they deserve praise for). However, they have issued two expansions that cost $50ish, with the content of a glorified update or two.

    I feel that this type of content is here to stay and companies that are trying to avoid having downloadable content are realizing that they can't compete unless they start to issue it.

    I look forward to more posts.
  • Thanks for visiting Zach. You make a good point, though World of Warcraft updates are actually quite vast though. They are still only "expansions", and as such I don't believe that they should be priced so high (say, $29.99?).
  • Alienating an established fan base just to make a few extra dollars through DLC is wrong. I was shocked when Capcom made the decision to charge $4.99 for content that rightfully should have been included in the game upon launch - free of charge.

    While Resident Evil 5 has sold considerably well, it is hard to put a quantitative price on the amount of PR damage the Resident Evil franchise has suffered and/or will suffer in the future from this decision by Capcom. My hope is that RE5 serves as an example on "what not to do" when implementing DLC. Just because developers and publishers can charge for DLC, does not mean fans will, nor should, download and pay for it.
  • Exactly. It's troubling to me that the industry is beginning to rely more and more on DLC. I think that long-term game support is something that should be expected from the best games, especially multiplayer titles.
blog comments powered by Disqus