Shared publicly  - 
Garrett Greer's profile photoAndrew Chen's profile photoKenneth Backus's profile photoAubrey Hesselgren's profile photo
That's a very good point, but all those successes that it points built their own monetization platforms. The ones that I can tell how they make money at least.
+Garrett Greer My point isn't that making money (far from it, the first sentence of the first paragraph is all about that) but rather, you start with a great product that's growing well, and you solve the monetization as a step 2, through the use of numerous pre-built options, after you're already providing value to the world. Launching a mediocre product with a great monetization model is backwards.
I'm wondering how this sits with the classic game monetization method of "ask people a set amount of money for your game". It's difficult to release the product and then decide to go for that monetization model later, if you decide that's what best fits your game. I suppose the only way would be to treat your original release as a free demo, like with Minecraft.
I keep thinking that people who are socialifying and gamifying their stuff, just because it's the "done thing" now, and possibly out of a sense of insecurity about their game/website/creative endeavour/product, are perfect marks for the current wave of digital snake oil salesmen, promising improved traffic and retention.

I like that this article cuts to the point: focus on making an intrinsically good/desirable product. All that extraneous stuff, unless it's TRULY core to the product, can come later if you find you've got something worthwhile. Doing it early and expecting it to do the legwork for you is mad as hell, since ANYONE can add that stuff to a blank website as easily as you can. The differentiator is YOUR CREATIVITY, so focus on that!
Add a comment...