El ciclo de vida del producto (CVP) es una herramienta utilizada por los directores de marketing para medir el progreso de un producto, especialmente en lo que respecta a las ventas o los ingresos acumulados a lo largo del tiempo. Un producto determinado poseería la etapa de introducción, crecimiento, madurez Guías y estrategias de marketing digital en México declive. Ningún producto dura para siempre en el mercado. Una empresa debe emplear diferentes estrategias según el lugar que ocupe un producto en el CVP. En la fase de introducción, se lanza un producto al mercado. Para estimular el crecimiento de las ventas/ingresos, el uso de la publicidad puede ser elevado para dar a conocer el producto en cuestión. Durante la etapa de crecimiento, las ventas e ingresos del producto aumentan, lo que puede estimular más comunicaciones de marketing para mantener las ventas. Más participantes entran en el mercado para cosechar los aparentes altos beneficios que produce la industria. Cuando el producto llega a su madurez, empieza a nivelarse, y un número creciente de participantes en un mercado produce caídas en el precio del producto. Las empresas pueden utilizar promociones de ventas para aumentarlas. Durante el declive, la demanda de un bien empieza a disminuir y la empresa puede optar por dejar de fabricarlo. Esto es así si los ingresos del producto proceden del ahorro de eficiencia en la producción sobre las ventas reales de un bien o servicio. Sin embargo, supongamos que un producto da servicio a un nicho de mercado o es complementario a otro producto. En ese caso, puede continuar la fabricación del producto, a pesar de que el nivel de ventas e ingresos sea bajo.

These are just objectively better screens than anything I have in the game right now. For most indiedevs improvements like this one are going to give you much more bang for your buck than anything related to marketing. You should think of marketing as a multiplier on a game’s base quality. If the base quality level is high, then optimizing for marketing is the thing to do that makes the most sense. But very few indiedevs are making games of high base quality, and so that’s not the thing they should focus on. I’m definitely not making games of high base quality, as SNKRX just looks like garbage, and most games I’ll release in the near future will similarly also look like garbage. So I really don’t need to worry about marketing that much because there are much more solid gains to be had elsewhere. The reason the gifs above look objectively better than the UI I have going on in the game now is because they just are composed better.

In my opinion, easily the best thing indiedevs can do to improve the quality of their games is to learn to become more attuned to how well a screen is composed. It’s very hard for me to pinpoint exactly what makes a screen well composed, but generally they’re just better balanced. It has little to do with the quality of each individual asset. You can have games with assets that look amazing but that are composed poorly, or you can have a game with very simple looking assets but that are composed well. But the main thing about screen composition is that a well composed screen will pass most people’s visual quality filter at a glance. If you look at a screenshot/frame of a game for 1-2 seconds, you can already tell if you think it looks good or not. That’s mostly about the screen’s composition. So improving this skill has obvious ramifications to how well your marketing efforts will do, since if the game passes more people’s filters, they will be more likely to share it and so the game is more likely to get a better response whenever you post it online.

Let’s look at a few examples. Below there will be 7 images of 7 different games. All you have to do is look at the images for a few seconds and try to get a sense of which ones look the best and which ones look the worst. Done? Try ranking the images now. 3rd… etc. I’ll give you some space to not bias your ranking, so scroll down once you’re done. 6th. Meaning, 3rd and 6th images are the worst, while 5th and 7th are the best. I would guess that for most people at least these extremes would be similar, while the middle might have more variation. Why exactly are 5th and 7th so much better than all the others? It’s just better art, but it’s not only better art, the art is composed properly on the screen. For instance, the 4th image has very simple looking art, yet it’s better than the others because everything comes together properly on the screen.