Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:So (Score 1) 343

by (#35893474) Attached to: Dollar Apps Killing Traditional Gaming?

Make a good game and it will sell itself. Don't spend most of the funds on marketing. -Ex beta tester.

This is the same erroneous assumption that causes many managers to resist marketing efforts so strongly even when marketing has been shown to be essential for achieving maximum potential sales. It's true that the marketing effort starts with a good product with preferably unique, value-laden features or benefits, and a poor product ultimately has a much higher likelihood of failure. However to just discount marketing completely is naive. In point of fact designing an excellent product is actually a part of the overall marketing strategy. The problem Epic and other console game developers face IS essentially a marketing problem. It all comes down to the quote given by Mr. Capps: "How do you sell someone a $60 game that's really worth it? They're used to 99 cents" The key is to identify the value that the professionally developed, full featured console game provides above and beyond that of the 99 cent smartphone app games and effectively communicate this value to customers in order to induce them to buy the game. Without more extensive marketing tactics, there is no way to tell consumers why your game has more value than, ie why they should pay a higher price than, a smart-phone based game

Comment: Re:Make it static. (Score 1) 586

by (#34450638) Attached to: WikiLeaks Starts Mass Mirroring Effort
Although I'm sure that in some respects you are right, seeing as the US is a larger first world country that is not rife with unmanageable corruption among other problems inherent with government in less developed countries, I think that the main reason that we see the emphasis on foreign entities is because the leaked cables were US State Department communiques regarding these various other entities. Had the leak been from some other foreign State Department we may have seen several damning reports regarding the US instead.

CCI Power 6/40: one board, a megabyte of cache, and an attitude...