One of the first things I set out to prove when I left online banking cybersecurity for games was that criminals were, in fact, simply “following the money” away from hardened targets like banks, wire transfer services, credit card providers, and other financial services sites, and into online video games. After interviewing more than 50 different publishers, it’s clear to me that bad guys are in fact targeting online game worlds with increasing frequency as games have begun to rely more and more on the movement of money across the internet to keep the lights on, their developers paid, and their customers happy.
When I tell people not in the game community about this idea, however, I’m often asked the same question: Is there really all that much money to be made breaking into video games?
Rather than cite statistics (which, let’s admit, can be kind of boring), I think a much better way to show the awesome shift in the public’s perception of and reaction to video games can be found by looking at the biggest media event of the year: the Super Bowl, specifically the ads.
At this year’s Super Bowl, not only did we see an ad featuring Liam Neeson for Clash of Clans ranked #5 in USA Today’s annual Ad Meter tracking event, but we also saw a near media frenzy over Kate Upton’s Game of War ad, part of a reported $40 MILLION ad campaign for the popular mobile game.
If you haven’t seen the ads, go ahead and watch them… I’ll wait.
Ars Technica commented on the nature (and scale) of the mobile games featured in the ads, pointing out:
“Many “hardcore gamers” might look down on the simplistic, microtransaction-driven nature of most free-to-play mobile titles, but the numbers behind these games show why their ads showed up during the Super Bowl. Game of War maker Machine Zone is valued at over $3 billion. Clash of Clans generated $2.4 million in revenue a day as of 2013, enough to pay for a minute-long Super Bowl spot in less than a week. Even relative upstart uCool has seen 10 million downloads for Heroes Charge, the smallest title from this year’s super Bowl gaming ad crop.”
The key words that encapsulate the overwhelming opportunity that game publishers are looking to tap into here, of course, are “microtransaction-driven”.
Advertising during the Super Bowl clearly shows that games have shifted, both in the public’s perception, as well as in regards to their reach. Ad like these show that there is clearly MORE acceptance (from folks who would not traditionally identify themselves as “gamers”), which will inevitably lead to to MORE people playing, resulting in MORE $$$ going into (and through) those game worlds.
But all this glorious opportunity comes (as banks found out ten years ago) with a price: as more people — and money — flood towards games, history always shows that as a result more criminals will flow in with them.
Whether or not you like Clash of Clans, Game of War, supermodels, Liam Neeson, or even playing games on a phone, this is all great news for game developers, publishers, and, yes, even players. But in our excitement, let’s not forget what happened when banks popularized online banking via free, online, pay-anyone billpay ten years ago, and the absolutely massive influx of cyber criminals that “followed the money” into that online space, a threat we all must still be vigilant against to this very day.
It’s taken the banking industry almost a decade to dig themselves out of the hole criminals put them into (the question of whether they’ve actually gotten out yet is still a matter of debate, actually). Let’s all learn from their example, shall we, and start better protecting these wonderful (and profitable) game worlds before digital arsonists burn them to the ground and ruin the fun for everyone.
Matthew Cook ()
04 February, 2015
