Support NeoGAF

[GCX]

Clash of Clans developer valued at $3bn in purchase

GhungHo Entertainment Online and parent company Softbank have purchased a 51 per cent stake in Clash of Clans developer Supercell for $1.5bn.

The deal, reported by TechCrunch, see's the coming together of two of the industry's biggest free-to-play developers, and values Supercell at $3 billion.

Supercell is said to make around $2.4 million a day from its two flagship titles Clash of Clans and Hay Day.

GungHo meanwhile, is thought to be generating around $4.9 million a day from mobile hit Puzzle & Dragons, with most of its revenue coming from just Japan.

The two studios had teamed up earlier in the year for a cross-over promotion between Clash of Clans and Puzzle & Dragons. GungHo's title temporarily featured spceial content related to Clash of Clans, such as a themed dungeon and new monsters which players could fight and collect.

Supercell's title meanwhile featured cross-promotions for Puzzle & Dragons.

In a blog post, Supercell CEO lkka Paananen said the partnership would accelerate Supercell's growth toward being a global games company.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/gungho-and-softbank-buy-51-stake-in-supercell-for-1-5bn/0184481

Supercell CEO's open letter:

Hi Everyone,

I have some very exciting news to share with you today. We have received a strategic investment of $1.5 billion from SoftBank and GungHo. This new partnership will accelerate Supercell towards our goal of being the first truly global games company, and gives us enough time to get there.

Let me try to explain why.

The combination of tablets, mobile and the free-to-play business model has created a new market for games, one that will be accessible to billions of consumers, more people than ever before in the history of games. This truly is a new era of gaming and has opened up exciting opportunities for new kinds of companies.

At Supercell, one of our greatest aspirations is to become the first truly global games company, one that has a strong foothold in both the West and the East, including Japan, Korea and China. We want to build a company that people all over the globe will look back in 30 years and talk about all the great games that we developed and the impact they had on people’s lives. The same way I personally feel about Nintendo, for example.

This is a lofty goal and getting there takes persistence, passion, and luck – but just as importantly, it takes time, and requires a lot of patience. Even if we have had a pretty good start on our journey, it is still very early days. Creating history takes time.

The strategic investment from SoftBank helps us to accelerate towards our goal in two different ways:

1) SoftBank provides us with a massive selection of strategic resources that will help us deliver our games to hundreds of millions of new consumers all over the globe.

2) SoftBank is all about the long term. In fact, I have never met anyone who thinks as long term as its founder, Masayoshi Son, does. When we first met, he told me he has a 300-year vision, and I thought he was joking until the following day when he ran me through what it actually looks like and it is indeed very real and extremely inspirational. When you meet someone like Masa you realize what it takes to build a global business that will last forever. It further strengthened my belief that, we are just getting started. As a company, we are 3 years old so we’re only 1% done if we plan for the next 300 years.

In his own words, here’s what Masa wanted to tell our players, employees and friends about Supercell and our new partnership:

“In our quest to become the #1 mobile Internet company, we scour the globe in search of interesting opportunities and right now some of the most exciting companies and innovations are coming out of Finland. Supercell is one of those rare and special companies. While your success is impressive, it is your amazing culture and deep passion that truly inspired me. After getting to know Ilkka and some of the team, it became clear to me that you, like us at Softbank, are on a similar long and aspirational journey to shape the future of entertainment for the next hundred years. And, I'm excited to see an independent Supercell continue to rise with great people and great games, delivering happiness to so many people around the world."

This new partnership also takes our collaboration with our good friends at GungHo to the next level. We are super excited to have them participate in this investment by putting in 20% of the total amount. We’ve had a great collaboration between Puzzle & Dragons and Clash of Clans. They’re an amazing bunch of people, and they have a terrific culture. Through them we’ve come to learn that the Japanese and Finnish cultures are pretty similar on many levels. Not only when it comes to taking your shoes off before you enter someone’s home, but also and more importantly, when it comes to partying, if you know what I mean.

It may sound like a detail, but I should also mention that the company that will end up owning 51% of Supercell is incorporated in Finland. This is both exciting and important for me personally. Although our aspirations are global, our roots and future are very much in Finland. Our operations remain in Finland, our management team remains in Finland and in San Francisco, and we continue to pay taxes in Finland. I think more and more people in this country are realizing that there is life after Nokia!

Naturally, this transaction is great for us from an economic perspective. As many of you know, a big part of Supercell’s culture is the idea of “we are all in this together”. In line with this thinking, everyone at the company will participate in the upside and receive a portion of the proceeds from the investment. None of us work here just for of money, but when the company succeeds, everyone should get their fair share of it and this transaction is no exception.

Although we now have a major new investor in Softbank, it is extremely important to understand that we are still in full control of our future and will continue to operate independently. In fact, and this may sound surprising to some, I feel that with this deal, we're now more independent and in control of our future than we ever have been.

Lastly, I want to thank our players, all the Supercellians, and everyone else whose support has been so valuable in getting us this far. We’ve had an amazing journey together, and it will only get more exciting in the years to come.

Thank you for reading this far. I know this was a lengthy post, but since this is such an important milestone for the company, I wanted to take the time to fully explain our thinking behind it and exactly what it means to all of you.

Now, let’s go make history together! Kippis! Kampai!

Crazy amount of money considering it's a company of only 130 employees.

 

[ЯAW]

Crazy, considering it was only founded in 2010. A real success story. Bit sad that they didn't pull Rovio and try to manage at their own. It's a risky business but the strong will prevail.

 

[sprsk]

such money

 

[markot]

Smart of them to sell before the pop.

Also, its such a terrible game.... 99% of the 'huge money making games' on app stores are just these awul time sink nickle and dime bs fests with no real gameplay at all.....

^_~

Imagine the next miyamoto, making their game on the app store. Designing not for fun, but for how much they can suck out of their users. $2 for 5 stars! $5 for 10 lives! Act now!

I see the top grossing lists of the app stores, and its just depressing, these awful games that suck money out of people just like the pokie machines, except you cant even 'win', because the carrot is never close enough to bite.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

Well done Supercell Clash of Clans is so damn addictive.

 

[Killer]

Clash of clans>> GTA V

 

[ramine]

Superb execution from Supercell. Definitely shows that mobile and F2P can be and will be a great business in the years to come.

 

[markot]

Superb execution from Supercell. Definitely shows that mobile and F2P can be and will be a great business in the years to come.

Yes a good business.

Shame about the games.

But games dont matter, making the chickens wait the for the next piece of feed to drop is all that matters.

Psychology 101 is now in more demand in the gaming world then 'how to make fun games'.

 

[Rlan]

Yes a good business.

Shame about the games.

But games dont matter, making the chickens wait the for the next piece of feed to drop is all that matters.

Psychology 101 is now in more demand in the gaming world then 'how to make fun games'.

Attacking other people in Clash of Clans is a ton of fun as Tower-Offensive. Trying to solve the "puzzle" of other people's defenses. Creating your own defensive structure and outlay is fun too.

I've played a ton of it and not paid a cent.

Interestingly the big games currently, like Clash of Clans, Hay Day and Candy Crush, don't really push themselves to any of the Toy manufacturing and merch stuff, which has been Rovio's bread and butter.

 

[GCX]

Interestingly the big games currently, like Clash of Clans, Hay Day and Candy Crush, don't really push themselves to any of the Toy manufacturing and merch stuff, which has been Rovio's bread and butter.

Rovio and Supercell have very different aspirations. Rovio wishes to become a Disney like multimedia empire while Supercell's role model (according to the open letter in the OP) is Nintendo.

 

[markot]

Nintendo wouldnt do a game like this. It has too much respect for its consumers to turn them into pavlovs dogs >.<

Also just wait, 1 year from now youll see this shit all over the place. Moshi monsters biatche.

 

[Vhalyar]

Psychology 101 is now in more demand in the gaming world then 'how to make fun games'.

But they do make fun games. And what's the problem if psychology is used to create something that people consider fun? Not every game has to be made for you.

 

[markot]

Its not fun. Fun doesnt gate you. You dont have to wait 5 minutes or purchase a new level boost to finish a mario game.

Its all psychologically devised to screw as many dollars as they can hollas from your collars. And when that is part of the 'design' process? Well you get unfun. When it isnt part of the design process? Hats.

It is scientifically impossible to create a 'fun' game that is designed around f2p. You can take that to the bank! Fun as in eliciting emotions of joy from well designed game play elements designed to do only one thing, be fun, not the feeling of a pavlovian dog whos ears perk up when the right tone is made by your new master.

In my experience with these 'games' they arent what I would consider 'fun'. No Mario, not anything like that, you will never see a f2p game along these lines be remembered with the names of the greats in gaming.

Instead its remembered like a druggy hippy go free free love in, pure guilt after you finally awake from its neon gaze, and can never wash the feeling of being used and abused off yourself.

Games dont use you, you use games. f2p is premised on the opposite. That is why they can hardly be called games.


Facts!

When you get down to it, you are just a chicken waiting for that feed schute to open up. Thats how all these games end up feeling. The joy is in that feed finally dropping, not in anything the 'game' does. The carrot, the endless carrot, always within reach, but never attainable.

 

[ramine]

Attacking other people in Clash of Clans is a ton of fun as Tower-Offensive. Trying to solve the "puzzle" of other people's defenses. Creating your own defensive structure and outlay is fun too.

I've played a ton of it and not paid a cent.

Interestingly the big games currently, like Clash of Clans, Hay Day and Candy Crush, don't really push themselves to any of the Toy manufacturing and merch stuff, which has been Rovio's bread and butter.

There's a few reasons for that:
1) Afaik, Supercell doesn't have a dedicated manager for licensing currently. They did hire Thomas Lundstrom from Rovio's licensing team, but his title says he's focusing on marketing.

2) Shipping a toy to the market requires an average of 12 months. So it's very possible that they'd be working on toys right now but weren't able to ship them so far.

3) The company is super focused. Android support just came out. Licensing is quite outside their field of expertise, so even if the will is there, it would be a slow effort.

 

[Fragamemnon]

Facts!

Has it ever crossed your mind that other people play games and incorporate them as a fleeting part of their day in ways that you do not. Judging from your posts, probably not.

The difference by which people enjoy mobile gaming experiences vs. traditional gaming experiences is pretty vast. That's why we have things like async multiplayer and successful F2P designs in the mobile space-they fit well with the way that people consume the games.

 

[markot]

Has it ever crossed your mind that other people play games and incorporate them as a fleeting part of their day in ways that you do not. Judging from your posts, probably not.

The difference by which people enjoy mobile gaming experiences vs. traditional gaming experiences is pretty vast. That's why we have things like async multiplayer and successful F2P designs in the mobile space-they fit well with the way that people consume the games.

I guess so.

But then, you could just say 'theres a sucker born every minute' , its much easier then pretending these games are anything other then huge cash grabs designed specifically to milk the cow till its milk has blood in it.

 

[airmangataosenai]

Nintendo wouldnt do a game like this. It has too much respect for its consumers to turn them into pavlovs dogs >.<

Oh give me a break. Nintendo is every bit as money hungry as Rovio and the like.

 

[-PXG-]

Look. Another company that is way over valued. DAT bubble.

 

[ЯAW]

I guess so.

But then, you could just say 'theres a sucker born every minute' , its much easier then pretending these games are anything other then huge cash grabs designed specifically to milk the cow till its milk has blood in it.

You can enjoy f2p games even if you don't buy anything. I have put hours and hours in World of Tanks and haven't paid a dime.

Look. Another company that is way over valued. DAT bubble.

They were actually making money.
The $2.4 Million-Per-Day Company: Supercell

 

[twofold]

Look. Another company that is way over valued. DAT bubble.

They're making $2.4 million a day. Assuming they do that for a year, that's $876 million. And the thing is, their revenues are actually tracking upwards, so they're probably going to make more than that. 3-3.5x valuation doesn't seem too off the mark at all.

Supercell is also one of the only F2P developers that I think might have some longevity. They have a very smart approach to mobile development, unlike companies like Zynga which expanded way too quickly. I think they'll be around for a long time.

 

[Sendou]

Oh give me a break. Nintendo is every bit as money hungry as Rovio and the like.

Money hungry... It's almost as if we're talking about companies here.

Supercell has a lot of talent working there. People should take that in account.

 

[element]

This is crazy amount of money!

It is amazing that a company with two games is making $2.4 million a day, but EA with their 70 mobile games aren't making anything close to that amount.

Totally amazing for a company with a 150 employees and been around for only three years.

 

[ZoddGutts]

Yikes at Markot's post, not bitter at all....

 

[Fafalada]

The difference by which people enjoy mobile gaming experiences vs. traditional gaming experiences is pretty vast.

That's obvious - but I don't particularly care for parading the defense of "well people enjoy it, so it must be fun".
People get addicted to all kinds of things - including the slot-machine levers, and it's pretty obvious the psychology behind that isn't derived from "fun" or even entertainment in the real sense.

At its core, CoC has more in common with gambling than it does with Tower defense or RTS games, but they have long-term retention, so it obviously does something right compared to typical web/mobile F2P.

 

[lefantome]

This is madness.

First GungHo post is quoted in the court case between exxon mobil and fox, then he buys a company nobody here have heard of after reading a thread about it this morning.



Being serious:

Spoiler

this is madness
they are paying 1.5 billion for a couple of f2p games and nothing more in a market where competition is extremely high and brand awareness is 0 unless you have cute birds in your game.

 

[dark_prinny]

Bubbles, how do they work?

 

[theSlacker]

Its not fun. Fun doesnt gate you. You dont have to wait 5 minutes or purchase a new level boost to finish a mario game.

Its all psychologically devised to screw as many dollars as they can hollas from your collars. And when that is part of the 'design' process? Well you get unfun. When it isnt part of the design process? Hats.

It is scientifically impossible to create a 'fun' game that is designed around f2p. You can take that to the bank! Fun as in eliciting emotions of joy from well designed game play elements designed to do only one thing, be fun, not the feeling of a pavlovian dog whos ears perk up when the right tone is made by your new master.

In my experience with these 'games' they arent what I would consider 'fun'. No Mario, not anything like that, you will never see a f2p game along these lines be remembered with the names of the greats in gaming.

Instead its remembered like a druggy hippy go free free love in, pure guilt after you finally awake from its neon gaze, and can never wash the feeling of being used and abused off yourself.

Games dont use you, you use games. f2p is premised on the opposite. That is why they can hardly be called games.


Facts!

When you get down to it, you are just a chicken waiting for that feed schute to open up. Thats how all these games end up feeling. The joy is in that feed finally dropping, not in anything the 'game' does. The carrot, the endless carrot, always within reach, but never attainable.

Do you have some sort of newsletter I can subscribe to?

 

[Daknight]

For some reason this reminds me a lot of Zynga buying the developers of 'Draw with friends' or whatever the game was. It was a hit...but die down and nothing to follow. Every time I read of this company it reads like a page from Zynga movements.

I am not hating on the free to play model actually and wouldn't want them to go down like Zynga at all. I always respect those that manage success in someway, I also don't hate f2p game, except in some exceptions (damn you Gamevil for ruining Baseball Stars 2013, 2012 was PEFECT, then the nickle and dime it to the point of unplayable without paying ;_; I loved those game). Is just that this read so similar to the rise of Zynga, hopefully they don't experience the fall. Actually interested to try Puzzle and Dragon on 3DS if it ever comes out here. My cellphone has problems (aka I need a new phone xP)

 

[Alchemy]

If you make F2P games you will never have the same reputation as Nintendo, sorry. The very nature of that monetization model prevents 99% of your user base from having amazing experiences.

 

[Devilgunman]

$1.5B? That was 10 times more than what Sega paid for Index. Fucking crazy. But Gungho does what Gungho does. They're probably one of, if not the most profitable business in Japan right now.

 

[troushers]

There is no doubt that Clash of Clans is a well designed F2P game, I'm not sure why some people are taking a pop at them. I've played it off and and for several months as a free player. It's main genius is (unfortunately) at skilfully concealing the traditional F2P wall where you are required to pay to win behind some gameplay elements. It's more difficult to percieve that you are essentially being steam rollered by people who have invested heavily into the game when you have some control over the defenses which they are hammering. You can continue searching for a more optimal defensive solution, when in reality you need to pay to get some breathing space to upgrade enough to survive, just like your attackers did.

I'm currently right at this brick wall of free/paid and experimenting a bit to see if it is passable. The android release let me set up a new town, which I'm leaving completely undefended as a gold farm for my main. I think also, paradoxically, it is better to have a completely undefended town which is 100% destroyed, so giving you a 12h shield from attacks, than losing the gold from 3 or 4 minor attacks that you 'win'.

Anyway, I cannot concieve of how this company with two games is so overvalued. Tastes will ultimately move on, and whales migrate to the next F2P darling. Remember Playfish? 55 million users/month at one point, bought by EA for $400m and now dead in the water. iOS/Facebook etc. is profitable for some, but it sure isn't stable.

 

[GCX]

Every time I read of this company it reads like a page from Zynga movements.

Except unlike Zynga they're not expanding in every direction. Even though they make millions every day they still only have 130 employees, Zynga had thousands at this point.

 

[markot]

Do you have some sort of newsletter I can subscribe to?

I did, but I let Ron Paul write articles for me and it got alittle racisty.

 

[ЯAW]

Except unlike Zynga they're not expanding in every direction. Even though they make millions every day they still only have 130 employees, Zynga had thousands at this point.

I think he was talking about GungHo.

 

[Sendou]

People are talking like they bought Supercell only for Clash of Clans and Hay Day. The thing is that Supercell was founded in 2010 and since then it has made four games. Two of the latest turned out to be smash hits. I doubt GungHo is that much interested in riding out Clash of Clasn and Hay Day even if that will no doubt happen because of course they are extremely profitable. Supercell is more than cabable of producing another smash hit game and that is what I bet they want them to do. They certainly have the talent to do so.

When talking about GungHo people should note that they only own just over 10% of the company after this. Far bigger contributor was Soft Bank who now owns 41% of Supercell.

 

[Jonnyram]

The loony train keeps chugging along.

 

[U-R]

Its not fun. Fun doesnt gate you. You dont have to wait 5 minutes or purchase a new level boost to finish a mario game.

You're absolutely right. In fact, you're so right that a F2P game that doesn't use exploitative tactics like the ones you describe is "badly designed" and may put its developer in trouble (unless it's rooted in a community so big as to be insanely profitable just by numbers).

As the "zynga lifecycle" teached: sooner or later the mass of players will drop the "repetition habits" they mislabel as "fun" and the bubble will pop, leaving behind just a marginal bunch of addicted "happy players" and a couple homeless suckers.

 

[twofold]

You're absolutely right. In fact, you're so right that a F2P game that doesn't use exploitative tactics like the ones you describe is "badly designed" and may put its developer in trouble (unless it's rooted in a community so big as to be insanely profitable just by numbers).

As the "zynga lifecycle" teached: sooner or later the mass of players will drop the "repetition habits" they mislabel as "fun" and the bubble will pop, leaving behind just a marginal bunch of addicted "happy players" and a couple homeless suckers.

Here's the difference between Zynga and Supercell.

Zynga used incredibly exploitative techniques to extract money from their players. Supercell doesn't.

Zynga expanded at an astonishingly quick rate, hiring thousands of extra staff. Supercell is 130 people.

Zynga had one idea that they repeated ad nauseam until gamers were sick of it. Supercell, on the other hand, has a very iterative design process that is built around small teams. So, if a team builds a game and it's no fun, they can scrap it and it barely cost them anything. It's a very low risk high reward way of making F2P games, and it encourages creativity and trying wild ideas.

One of the main reasons why Supercell sold for so much is because of the talent behind it. They're learning from the mistakes Zynga, Rovio, OMGPOP, etc. made, and they're all the better for it.

Sure, there's a chance that Supercell won't be able to repeat their success. I think the chance of that happening is fairly slim, though, since it seems they're on their way to developing an effective way of quickly creating mobile F2P games that people want to play. If they manage to crack that code.. Well, that's worth way more than the $1.5 billion GungHo and Softbank have paid for them.

Edit --

"We think that the biggest advantage we have in this company is culture," offers the industry veteran. "We want to build a very different type of company. At the center of it is this idea of small -- if you think around the console industry, or even if you look at newer platforms like Facebook, what happens is that somebody comes in, and they have this small and very passionate team, and they make a great game, and consumers pick it up."

He continues, "That company then becomes financially very successful, and investors come onboard, and there are growth targets you need to hit. What happens is you end up growing really, really quickly with employees, and you start to build these bigger and more expensive products and so on, and at some point the company grows to hundreds of people in size, and the products become more and more expensive. And then you don't want to take risks anymore -- you can see that evidence by all the sequels that are being built. Nobody wants to take any risks anymore."

"Quite frankly, it's not fun to work in those sorts of companies. They're run by process, and top-down management," he says. Paananen is keen to avoid such a situation this time around, promising himself that no matter how success Supercell gets, the idea of keeping small will always be a core part of the company's ideology.

"I have this thing about becoming too big," he notes. "Zynga is an example of that kind of threat. The original FarmVille was built by five or six guys, and 84 million people played it on a monthly basis. Clearly people really loved the game. But since then what has happened is, Mark Pincus was quite proud that their latest product was made in 18 months by 100 people, and they are getting to this triple-A scale, blah blah blah.

"Okay, but what did the users think? Did they love the game? Well, maybe not. It really hasn't done that well. It's unbelievable that time after time after time, this industry falls into this same trap. You get bigger, you get slower, you build more expensive products, but they might not be the best products for the consumers."

More here - http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/183064/supercells_secret_sauce.php?print=1

TLDR; they recognise the problems that brought Zynga to their knees. They're working hard to avoid a similar fate.

 

[Daknight]

Except unlike Zynga they're not expanding in every direction. Even though they make millions every day they still only have 130 employees, Zynga had thousands at this point.

Yeah was talking of Gungho. I am not saying they are working like Zynga, just mentioning all the news reminds me of Zynga. I do hope there plan is better...but 3 successful games does not make for great continuity of a company (they had one with Puzzle and Dragons and now added Hay Day and Clash). If they die in popularity...the company dies with them.

I do hope they continue with success as that keeps people with employment and like I mention I don't care how success is made (unless is in an illegal way that is) as that allows for people to have jobs.

I think he was talking about GungHo.

 

[Sendou]

Yeah was talking of Gungho. I am not saying they are working like Zynga, just mentioning all the news reminds me of Zynga. I do hope there plan is better...but 3 successful games those not make for great continuity of a company (they had one with Puzzle and Dragons and now added Hay Day and Clash). If they die in popularity...the company dies with them.

Like I mentioned above they only bought about 10% of Supercell using 300 million US dollars. Now they just own a relatively small slice of an extremely succesful company. Soft Bank is far bigger contributor than GungHo in this deal.

 

[Haunted]

wow @ that letter.

Smart of them to sell before the pop.

Bubbles, how do they work?

The loony train keeps chugging along.

I agree.


Then again, their bubble already lasted long enough for the guys from Supercell to become filthy rich along the way, I guess they could not care less about it bursting eventually.

 

[wapplew]

I wonder all these success on mobile, will they stick with us like Nintendo and Mario stick with us for decade?
Ravio, Angry bird, Candy crush, PvZ, PnD, all these titles and developer, what impact they have on our younger generation? Will they get nostalgia and say"ah, Clash of clan, good old day"?

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

The problem with all of this is their consumer base is really fickle and majority have no idea who even makes these games, and thus has no loyalty to their future releases. The moment a new game becomes a craze by some upstart developer these overvalued companies will see a massive hit to the number of people playing their games.

Really it is up to them to create another Clash of the Clans/Candy Crush type success, but that seems really hard to sustain. Whose to say those games weren't a fluke for those companies never to be repeated? Then what is their value 3 years from now?

 

[markot]

I wonder all there success on mobile, will they stick with us like Nintendo and Mario stick with us for decade?
Ravio, Angry bird, Candy crush, PvZ, PnD, all these titles and developer, what impact they have on our younger generation? Will they get nostalgia and say"ah, Clash of clan, good old day"?

No.

Never.

Not even slightly.

 

[Aureon]

*sigh*

 

[Enkidu]

When talking about GungHo people should note that they only own just over 10% of the company after this. Far bigger contributor was Soft Bank who now owns 41% of Supercell.

Since SoftBank owns 58.5% of GungHo it's practically all the same company at this point.

 

[Usobuko]

Supercell is said to make around $2.4 million a day from its two flagship titles Clash of Clans and Hay Day.

GungHo meanwhile, is thought to be generating around $4.9 million a day from mobile hit Puzzle & Dragons

Political marriage for the King and Queen of mobile games.

 

[Cosmo Clock 21]

The problem with all of this is their consumer base is really fickle and majority have no idea who even makes these games, and thus has no loyalty to their future releases. The moment a new game becomes a craze by some upstart developer these overvalued companies will see a massive hit to the number of people playing their games.

Really it is up to them to create another Clash of the Clans/Candy Crush type success, but that seems really hard to sustain. Whose to say those games weren't a fluke for those companies never to be repeated? Then what is their value 3 years from now?

GungHo was successful in the traditional gaming space before Puzzle & Dragons happened and they still develop and publish those types of games. Even if their F2P player base dries up they won't collapse like Zynga.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

I thought they were referring to the Japanese music group Supercell and got scared lol.

 

[Derrick01]

Clash of clans>> GTA V

As far as F2P schemes go? I'll give it that much. I'm really struggling to stay involved with GTA Online because it's such a blatant scheme to suck money out of people or else face an endless wall of grinding.