3 ms·
What a nice barrel of straw men you have there. I love the bonfire you've constructed for them! For the purposes of a thread about Zynga, it's reasonable to as
by danilocampos 16y ago
What a nice barrel of straw men you have there. I love the bonfire you've constructed for them!
For the purposes of a thread about Zynga, it's reasonable to assume a social game in this context is, indeed, a Facebook-flavored game.
Realtime multiplayer has enjoyed a lot of evolution since you had to bind curses and status reports to your F-keys in Quake. Definitely share your enthusiasm for where it is going right now.
Asynch casual multiplayer is in a dreadful rut. The big beef I have with it is that so little of it is skill based that you can't enjoy improvement over time, except with more and more swipes of the credit card (edit: or pointless grinding). I don't think the games I like are universally recognized as fun. What I said, if you'll read my post, is that asynch casual games are relying more on ill-concealed compulsion loops than on anything an observer would look at and think "boy, that looks fun to play."
Until asynch casual multiplayer, as your semantic nitpicking requires I call it, leverages gameplay that lets players feel themselves grow more skilled, we're just not talking about anything of lasting value. Personal growth is a huge component of enjoyable gameplay and you can't just add a row to a spreadsheet game to simulate that.
- jshen 16y agoBejeweled It's social, casual, skill based, and fun. To answer a likely question, it's social be use I want to beat my friends scores each week
- mattmaroon 16y agoSo is Farmville. One of the biggest motivators in those sorts of games is the comparison bar at the bottom that shows your level and that of your friends. Notice that is in every Flash map-based game on Facebook.
- jshen 16y agobut I don't consider farmville gameplay fun which I think the previous commenters were also implying.
- danilocampos 16y agoNice one, jshen. Definitely buy that example. Much more fun than Farmville, too. It could use more depth but match three as a game style has some compelling play.
- mattmaroon 16y agoAgain, you're applying your definition of fun. Your definition is something that allows you to grow in skill. I certainly enjoy that. Scott Adams wrote a very good article about the illusion of skill this week. Skill is mostly the result of a compulsion loop. I play Scrabble, I improve, so I play more Scrabble. It's not much different than harvest crop, get money, build another crop. If I play Scrabble more than you, I will probably beat you when you and I play Scrabble. If I play Farmville more than you, I will have a bigger and better farm. Both of those are generalities (it is of course quite possible to play both games sub-optimally, though easier with the former). Also that's not the only thing anyone considers fun. A lot of people look at a virtual farm full of crops and chickens and barns and think "boy that looks fun to play". Millions. There's more to it than compulsion loops, they don't keep players around for very long.