Gaining Better Retention from Game Testing

Gaining Better Retention from Game Testing
One of the biggest issues that TestBird wanted to address when creating the company was the issue of retention rate in mobile gamers. Though many Chinese and Western developers were not thinking about this issue when our company started, the amount of phones entering the market with different form factors and internal specifications, it was just a matter of time before problems would occur with keeping everyone playing their games.
 
TestBird did research in 2014 on how much retention rates fell due to poor functional testing and found that around 20 – 30% of gamers are lost due to issues in the game. This included installation issues, first-run problems, as well as issues during the main screen and tutorial stages. With the cost to promote gamers to install your game only for them to find out they can’t play it and instantly uninstall the game is bad. But it grows worse as it becomes a big loss in a company’s marketing budget when you paid for the install and the knowing you lost revenue from players who would have purchased micro-transactions or clicked on ads.
 
Not only can developers lose revenue for their current game due to bad functional testing, but future games could suffer as gamers lose confidence in the new game being compatible with their device or from the same compatibility issues that occurred in the last game. With so many options in the marketplace, losing gamers from bad development and having to pay advertising networks for player installs will cost more money then you could have saved by taking the time to test more.
 
TestBird helps companies that are in need before they even release their game with our years of experience in testing and our “Eagle-Eye” technology, allowing for better knowledge of what problems need to be addressed and increase the ability to retain more players. Fixing these issues helps developers to be more confident in their acquisition attempts and not fear their loss of players isn’t a functionality issue.

Comments are closed.