Many maintain that games creation is a ‘black art,’ but IGT is too consistent with its products for such a thing to be random. Is there a formula?


I don’t subscribe to the theory of a magic formula, I believe that proximity to the market helps, which is why we have local design teams and investment in markets to maintain that constant connection. We do see similarity between markets at the player level, as opposed to geographic proximity. For example, there are similarities between the Eastern European market and specific markets in Latin America. Peru and Colombia, for example, are closer to Eastern European games, while Argentina is closer as a market to North America.


Player dynamics and preferences have been influenced by first-movers in these markets. Te first mover in Argentina was IGT, and so we maintain a leading market share in the country. In Peru and Colombia, which are more volatile, multi-game markets, are similar to Romania – despite the fact that culturally and geographically they are very far apart.


How much latitude do you give your teams to choose the games best suited for different markets and how much is the decision yours?


My view is that the data does not lie – which is always the starting point. I seek to challenge the teams from the perspective of the data as it relates to the best possible package for a specific market. We have a European team and a Latin American team that are responsible for their regions.


I think we are the only manufacturer with a global test bank, which helps us to shape our product proposition. Data is critical to be able to make educated decisions.


Do you know that a game is going to be successful only when the data comes in or are there games that you instinctively know will work?


It is a combination of the two. Some of the games on the floor at G2E are already in test and they must have performed over a certain threshold, otherwise they wouldn’t be shown on the booth. However, we had a game in the booth, and removed it the day before the show opened because we received data over the weekend that showed that the game wasn’t meeting our performance standards. We removed it from the floor and installed another game.


Additionally, we did not place products on the show floor that are more than six months out from release, which is very important for IGT. If you go back five years, we would have shown games over two years out. However, we don’t do that anymore as we feel the game must be mature to be shown here.


Tere is an element that at an exhibition you want to show something from the ‘future,’ but we will only show proven games from our test


“I don’t subscribe to the theory of a magic formula, I believe that proximity to the market helps, which is why we have local design teams and


investment in markets to maintain that constant connection. We do see similarity between markets at the player level, as opposed to geographic proximity. For example, there are similarities between the Eastern European market and specific markets in Latin America. Peru and Colombia, for example, are closer to Eastern European games, while Argentina is closer as a market to North America.”


Domenico Pastia


“We always test both zone and floor – and the other parameters - arranging


different types of testing sites for diversity, taking a large enough sample so that you can trust that data. If you have one outlier, you are skeptical. If there are two, you start to believe. And three – it’s


probably true. In each specific market, we actually don’t see a large variance in results. ” Domenico Pastia


bank at an exhibition like G2E. Our philosophy is to be disciplined.


So you’re only showing products at G2E that you know work on casinos floors?


Yes, to a certain extent, but we are also showing product in relation to what customers are looking for at this time. If a customer from Southern California comes to the show, we show multi-level progressives and stepper high-denom games. If a customer is from Canada, we will show them a PowerBucks solution that has been designed for their market. We train the sales team to provide a


customised experience for the casino operator no matter what region they arrive here from.


Tere are also products that are more mass market as compared to niche product. For example, poker is huge in Nevada – 50 per cent of the market in fact - so we concentrate time on the booth looking at this product. We wouldn’t waste the time of a Canadian operator as poker represents one per cent of their floor. Knowledge of the product is key.


In terms of knowing the customer, do you try to gain data from every specific market and the position of the product on the floor?


We always test both zone and floor – and the other parameters - arranging different types of testing sites for diversity, taking a large enough sample so that you can trust that data. If you have one outlier, you are skeptical. If there are two, you start to believe. And three – it’s probably true. In each specific market, we actually don’t see a large variance in results.


Te game that was taken off the floor on the Monday before the show – what happens to that game? Is it re-developed or binned?


Sometimes you re-work and sometimes you need to accept failure. It is a tough decision.


Does the test bank feedback give you enough specific data to understand why a game isn’t working?


Statistics don’t give you the exact reason, but we gain insight and then, like an investigator, we seek to crack the case. Being creative is unpredictable – and as much as our teams are convinced a game will work, the reality is that we can’t be certain until we test the game. We also conduct extensive focus groups with players for contextual feedback and we are extremely disciplined in conducting player research, as we gain a lot of insights.


Failure is the cost of doing business in game development and we take failure in a positive way. A successful business needs to be set up this way, as it is better to fail with a game before it gets into the hands of the customer. Our success rate has improved over time however.


Te test bank has obviously changed the number of successful games IGT places into the marketplace, but has it also changed the hit rate of the studios in creating successful games as opposed to failures?


We give visibility to the studios with regular results and feedback, which is one of the highlights of the month as they want to know how their games are performing. Once it goes well – or bad – there is a follow-up with the studio and we try to understand the reasons either way. Does it change the success rate overall? Absolutely, but only over time as it’s a multi-part process. It also changes the way we interact with our creative team as its fact- based. Bottom line, creating a great game is and will always be a mix of art and science.


WIRE / PULSE / INSIGHT / REPORTS P59


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98