But in the game of chasing tuyere, will inevitably be some regularity phenomenon, a recent “05 cousin cousin poking fun at 90 after the answer” weibo sparked some concern on the Internet, though most netizens point of discussion in self-mockery old aunt than 05 after “90”, but it also reflected from the side live the answer already in homogeneity competition, Everyone is looking for the most cost-effective answer products.

Homogenization becomes the culprit of user anxiety

Homogenization seems to be the problem most tuyere will encounter in the early stage, such as retail, live broadcasting and other fields. Or, it is also hard to avoid the regular capital trap. At present, there are two aspects of the homogenization of livestreaming answers. One is that there is a single mode and it is difficult for users to find other ways of playing livestreaming answers. The other is that the game takes the same time.

It’s not hard to understand why. Firstly, the mode of live answering is rooted in live broadcasting platform, and the form of presentation can only rely on the interactive media of live broadcasting. Secondly, in order to establish a barrier advantage as soon as possible, the vast majority of players are trying to attract traffic quickly and make blood transfusion for their own live broadcasting platform, so they spend money lavishingly, and do not care what kind of live broadcasting answering method users want.

The formation of homogeneity phenomenon is also an evolution law of live answering as a trend. Its multiple features jointly describe the initial outline of live answering, namely version 1.0. But the biggest drawback of homogenization is that it reduces users’ passion for participation, and with it, users’ growing anxiety about answering questions live.

According to a report by Imedia, 37% of netizens hope to increase the total amount of prize money for a single match, indicating that users are dissatisfied with the current low amount of prize money. One well-known reason is that the prize, or expectation bonus, is the first driving force behind most users’ willingness to participate in live answering. However, if the reality is not as expected, users will feel frustrated, and in the long run, participants will even have negative feelings of boredom. For the platform, not only the traffic will decline, but also the reputation will suffer a certain degree of decline.

This is not grounariness. The essence of livestreaming answers is “inevitable effort (time loss) + high probability and low yield”. In order to maintain a high level of user engagement and activity, some changes must be made. It is this evolutionary mechanism that has prompted some players to move towards version 2.0 of the live quiz.

Evolutionary choices: Time, fun, and flow

When humans evolved from hominids, they changed not just their form, but their brains. What is the “brain” of the live quiz? Traffic, obviously, current users and potential users. Obviously, the 2.0 version of live answering should change the uncomfortable feeling brought to the audience by the 1.0 version, especially the anxiety feeling of less prize money, time-consuming and laborious.

As a result, version 2.0 must be clearly differentiated and tailored to the user experience. As mentioned above, in the event of “the post-2005 generation defeated the post-1990 old aunt” ferment on Weibo, the younger brother mentioned that UC’s crazy gold medal was praised by users precisely because of its differentiated gameplay.

First of all, what are the characteristics of version 2.0? If live answering is regarded as a commodity transaction, then the user’s time is the “currency” of the transaction. Answering activities on various platforms are goods. Users inevitably expect that their time can be exchanged for goods with the highest cost performance, namely knowledge and bonus.

So there are three features of version 2.0.

1. Improve the time value of users

User value can be increased in two ways, either by increasing the bonus the user gets, or by shortening the user’s participation time in a single session. Because users eager to use the least time for one of the most money, and the 1.0 version of the live broadcast of the answer of the defects in the model is not paying attention to the user degree of attention to the value of time, so it is easy to damage the user’s participation experience, after all, the user is holding the victory or the attitude to participate in, if the last not empty-handed made big fear of business transactions.

Recently UC launched crazy Gold may have started a good start, according to relevant information, crazy gold creatively shortened the single game time to 5 minutes, other similar to the 1.0 version of some players, but also set a low threshold, can use a resurrection card, single game bonus between hundreds of thousands.

Compared with 20 minutes, 5 minutes is equivalent to cutting the activity time in half twice. UC naturally shortens the time spent on a single question or reduces the number of questions. 5 minutes, it has to be said that UC is also taking a considerable risk. First, can 5 minutes create a good participation experience for users? Second, does 5 minutes mean less money for users?

In fact, it is not the case. According to the introduction of the crazy gold-winning activity, the idea of 5 minutes mainly caters to the fragmented time of users. It will not and cannot be used for the bonus of users, but to help users to solve the problem of the utilization efficiency of fragmented time. Moreover, Youku and UC are also recreational apps, and users’ usage habits are fragmented, which is also the main reason why the 5-minute setting is considered to win gold.

Second, let users touch the core of the answer broadcast

In version 1.0, due to the impatience of admission players, they all emphasized the amount of “coin coin”, but rarely paid sufficient attention to the core of answer livestream — knowledge interaction. For example, we see that some questions are set with no nutrition purely for the sake of difficulty, which not only fails to bring users the joy of acquiring knowledge, but also undermines the educational nature of live answering.

Therefore, money should not always be the most important thing for livestream answering. What users want more is to have some fun in livestream answering activities. Therefore, some players also start to try new answering methods.

Why would you do that? There may be two reasons. One is that most players in the field are in the same gameplay mode, and it is difficult to break through and attract users without differentiation. Second, the graphic answer itself is consistent with UC crazy gold medal 5 minutes, faster to allow users to complete the answer activities.

The interest of pictures and texts is obviously greater than that of simple words. In the era of 1.0 version of live answering mode, the freshness brought by pictures and texts to users may form a very strong barrier. From this point of view, UC’s graphic mode is also a bold attempt, which may be the best antidote to users’ anxiety after predicting users’ short and fast participation psychology.

Three, the formation of flow and user closed loop

In order to survive, livestream answering platforms must find a balance between output and input, which may be a supply package for the evolution of livestream answering into a flow ecology, or a stable entertainment item for users. It is worth noting that the crazy gold medal campaign is on both UC and Youku platforms. This may mean that the concept of a traffic ecology for live answering is taking shape.

UC is obviously doing so in order to give full play to the flow advantages of dual platforms, and the combination of youku this entertainment property platform is also a natural thing. Therefore, an obvious trend of 2.0 version is multi-platform linkage. 1.0 version is a single-soldier battle, attracting traffic only depends on the pulling capacity of a single APP.

However, multi-platform linkage will first ensure a stable flow ecology. APP ecology of the nature of Youku and UC also conforms to the leisure nature of livestream answering, which can not only drive the increase of the number of participants, but also help supplement the original entertainment ecology. Moreover, the linkage between UC and Youku may promote the formation of a certain flow loop. After tasting the benefits of such linkage, other flow ecology of Albania may also be involved, such as e-commerce, payment and so on. There is a considerable space for imagination.

Users do not need to cross apps, fragmentation time can be arranged, and UC and Youku rely on Ali ecology and have the financial rapid withdrawal channel Alipay. In this way, such linkage is not a simple coincidence, but a decision made after careful consideration of user psychology.

There are quick circulation channels at the beginning and end of the answer questions, which is what users are most willing to see, as well as what the platform is willing to see, because the bonus users get can also be consumed in this ecosystem. Why not? Looking forward, this evolutionary trend is bound to be embraced by everyone, because the accumulation of user traffic can be said to guarantee the infrastructure of livestream answering.

Continuous evolution needs the help of both user platforms

Livestream quizzes will evolve, indicating that the model is healthy for now. More importantly, the user’s recognition of this model is also obvious. According to iMedia.com, 79.0% of respondents are optimistic about the development model of live answering, believing that the incentive effect of prize money can keep it attractive.

Bonuses and fun are the key factors that make users want to stay. So what will be the evolution of live answering after version 2.0? Will these developments determine the final tone of the live quiz? Judging from users’ feedback and platforms’ actions, there are three possible trends in the future evolution of live answering.

First, users force the platform to evolve, so that players tend to calm down and the industry moves towards healthy competition. **UC’s crazy gold-winning “5-minute answer” and “graphic mode” are to some extent to solve users’ anxiety, just like the consumption upgrade in the new retail era. In fact, we all know what users don’t want and what they want.

With the rise of version 2.0, the new twist on UC’s gold frenzy is likely to be replicated by other players, and while there is still a risk of homogenization, it is a healthy trend. Users and platforms are extremely crazy in 1.0 mode, but users are passive and their passion is dissipated more quickly. The new experience brought by the new live answering method can also fully leverage users’ hidden curiosity, which is conducive to the improvement of the ecological atmosphere of the whole live answering flow. When everyone cools down, the fixed mindset of spending money to win the top spot may be abandoned and the competition will be healthy.

** Second, live answering has become a traffic tool, and the mode changes rapidly and the carrier changes. ** The emergence of livestreaming questions has saved downlink livestreaming platforms to a certain extent, and its large traffic tags will have many applications in the future. In fact, we can see one or two from the APP ecosystem of players entering the game. Baidu has browser, video, network disk, finance and so on, while netease has news, social networking, music and so on.

Regardless of the various ecological development of these giants in the future, the flow of livestream answers is quite considerable, which is beneficial to the ecology. UC is a browser, youku is a video platform, but why to join the live answering questions, the value of this piece of traffic is indisputable. Baidu, netease and so on also have this idea.

When live answering becomes a traffic tool, the available space will be infinitely wide. Short video, audio and other carriers may become the “show” of live answering in the future, becoming hot candidates.

** Third, the incentive mechanism of live answering has changed from “money desire” to “material desire”. ** In the current trend of spending money, users’ recognition of live answering is mainly the result of financial incentives. But as users and platforms cool off, some players may start offering new incentives, offering goods instead of money.

But before that happens, users may need a time of psychological transition. Because the incentive difference of money-seeking items lies in their value, it is most worth thinking about how to make users feel less abrupt in the case of changing the incentive, otherwise people and money may be empty.

However, the advent of 2.0 mode has shown that livestream answering has the conditions for continuous evolution. Livestream answering can only move to a healthier development track when players in the field start to think about differentiated play. Whether or not this vent can evolve into a stable and viable model requires not only active adjustment from the players who enter, but also continuous attention from the users. To put it simply, the platform is changing and the user is at ease.

Liu Kuang, meditation on the Internet, wechat official account: Liukuang110