The Gamerscore challenge
So Microsoft is doing a contest to encourage people to raise their Gamerscores.
But somehow, it feels like they have the incentive wrong.
The prize brackets say that
Those players with a gamerscore between 0-4,999 who elevate their score by 1,500 points during the contest will win a new gamer picture, dashboard theme, and Konami’s Contra for Xbox Live Arcade.
In addition, contest participants with an annual gamerscore between 5,000-9,999 will be able to win the previous tier’s prizes, plus 100 Microsoft Points and a contest T-shirt. Contestants with a 10,000+ annual gamerscore will be able to win all of the previously mentioned prizes, in addition to another 100 Microsoft Points as well as a copy of Fusion Frenzy 2.
Huh. Why are they giving the nicest prizes to the people who are already hooked on achievements, instead of those who aren’t yet hooked on them?
I’m sure the logic is that it’s harder for those high-end people to find 1500 points they haven’t already claimed. But that could be fixed by scaling the number of points you need to get. Say, 500 for the high-end folks, and 1500 for the low-end folks. Instead, what you get is the more casual folks, the ones you want to get more involved in the system, facing a monster-sized gain relative to their skill level, and eligible for pretty meager awards.
(I own 20 or so 360 games, and another 15 XBLA games, and have not yet crested 1000 in Gamerscore).
Then again, I really don’t know that I want Fuzion Frenzy 2 🙂
4 Responses to “The Gamerscore challenge”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I see your point, but I think what Microsoft is doing makes some sense. Those gamers who are already attentive to their gamerscores are probably the most likely to be seduced by this appeal…because they are already so close and because they’re being encouraged to place greater emphasis on an old goal, rather than pursue a new goal.
That said, Microsoft would be smart to offer lesser rewards of a different type to gamers who have not focused on gamerscores. To offer lesser rewards of the same type might convince some of those avid gamers at the top to settle for the lesser goal. Those in the top tiers and those in the lower tiers likely are often gamers with different mindsets and general goals (exploration or society, versus achievement), so their rewards should be different by nature and not just degree.
The answer is obvious to me: feed the hungry. Those users who are most involved with a product usually fit the profile of opinion leaders. Marketing campaigns that target these consumers seek to transform opinion leaders into qualified brand champions who will encourage others, nonleader consumers and nonconsumers alike, to "get hooked" on the product.
@Morgan
Assuming there is a built in network, or some kind of social
cohesivness where behavior is variant amongst a group??? (this is a question to you).
What I mean is you dont want hardcores preachibng to the hardcore
choir, youd want “A” hardcore preaching to “many” choirs (casuals) no?
Why would you not want to empower the people closest to your cause?