What Digital Marketing And RTS Games Have In Common

Today’s post is going to be pretty geeky. Consider yourself warned. Anyway, growing up I was really into RTS (real-time strategy) games. Titles like Warcraft 1 and 2, Age of Empires, Starcraft, I couldn’t get enough of them.
In case you’re unfamiliar, here’s a brief definition of RTS games:
Real-time strategy (RTS) is a sub-genre of strategy video game which does not progress incrementally in turns.
In an RTS, as in other wargames, the participants position and maneuver units and structures under their control to secure areas of the map and/or destroy their opponents’ assets. In a typical RTS, it is possible to create additional units and structures during the course of a game. This is generally limited by a requirement to expend accumulated resources. These resources are in turn garnered by controlling special points on the map and/or possessing certain types of units and structures devoted to this purpose. More specifically, the typical game of the RTS genre features resource gathering, base building, in-game technological development and indirect control of units.
Perhaps I enjoyed them so much as I was always fairly strategy-minded having also been a chess player since a young age.
Recently I was chatting with a friend and somehow the subject turned to RTS. I hadn’t thought of them in years, but I made an almost instant connection back to them and realized how they have quite a bit in common with digital marketing.
Think about how the commonalities between the two:
You need equity before you get to outcomes
In RTS you need resources: whether gold, food, wood or minerals before you’re able to upgrade your armies or stronghold. You need to search for these resources and setup a process to harvest them. Then, you need to use your resources for outcomes: to summon additional forces or increase your defenses.
Not really so different in digital marketing. Before you’re able to get conversions from your activities or have them resonate, you need to to build equity: in the form of links, content, subscribers, etc. For example, you don’t immediately gain outcomes from social media, rather you need to build your community before you need them. Only then can you activate them for results.
Newbies want shiny objects, experienced pros want to win
In RTS new players always want the biggest and most expensive weapons or fortresses. What they don’t realize is in their quest to pursue these things, they skip over tactics that would actually let them easily win. Frequently the most common items are the most valuable if used properly, the cost of investing in the larger items is so great they actually don’t make sense to invest in until you are already rocking the basics.
In digital marketing, newbies want to skip to execute complex ideas that might generate buzz. And buzz absolutely makes sense as part of a mix of tactics. But without consistency it doesn’t matter because you’re not building up any momentum behind your brand or community. It’s the daily stuff in between the big items that actually matters most.
Being committed and passionate count
In RTS, those who practiced their craft dominated those who weren’t as efficient with the systems. They learned the keyboard shortcuts, they spent time thinking about strategies and they practiced like it was nobody’s business.
In digital marketing, it’s very much the same. Those who are committed and passionate take the time to practice personally and professionally. For it, they understand better how to lead their companies or clients to success. In both cases being committed and passionate count.
What do you think – any RTS players here see other similarities?






Zachary Adam Cohen replied | May 25, 2011 (1 comment)
Adam
Lovely piece. You stole my thunder from a short while ago when I brought up Civilization in the context of Foursquare. My general thesis is that Foursquare needs to start letting people “play the game” as they wish to, not as the service wants them to. We should be allowed to go off on side adventures and achieve the things we want to achieve. People don’t just want to be lumped into mayors and super users, etc..
Here is the post if you are interested: http://www.zacharyadamcohen.com/apps-and-services/the-next-step-for-foursquare/
Zac
Mohau Mpoti replied | May 25, 2011 (1 comment)
Quite an interesting interrelation between RTS games and marketing. I don’t have a history of playing such games but I definitely agree with you on this point: it takes some dedication, patience, and persistence to see your strategy through
Renee replied | May 25, 2011 (5 comments)
However nerdy this piece may be, great job in showing the connection. You can even broaden this into strategy games in general, not just RTS games. Take the board game Risk for example. Throughout the game players position and maneuver their units to secure areas of the map and destroy their opponents’ units, cities and capitals. There is no one way to go about conquering the world, and you can choose to try and gain achievements or not. The game contains basically the same three commonalities of RTS games. On a side note, I probably would have never thought about this had it not been for this post, so thank you.
jelly roll sale replied | May 25, 2011 (1 comment)
Funny but true. My boyfriend is a big time gamer… everything you’ve written I’ve heard him mention many times over.
Piczenik replied | May 29, 2011 (1 comment)
Agreed to good extent, RTS and MMORPGs are similar with regards to strategically building your base first before attacking an enemy base. I was one of these people who thought that having a Facebook fan page and twitter account equalled social media marketing, but its so much more than that, Its about building trust and relationship.
janwong replied | May 30, 2011 (10 comments)
I really liked how you managed to put the two together. It definitely takes all of that to be successful in social media marketing. Also, anyone that charges in blindly with their troops are doomed to fail! Ground units vs a bunch of siege tanks? They better have a better strategy.
Adam Singer replied | May 30, 2011 (596 comments)
I like the charging without a strategy analogy – spot on!