4 ms·
"Social" in the context of games basically means "multiplayer for everyone". This aspect of the game can be approached in many ways, just like "platformer" may
by Jare 13y ago
"Social" in the context of games basically means "multiplayer for everyone". This aspect of the game can be approached in many ways, just like "platformer" may mean Rayman, Mario, Sonic or even Temple Run. Some examples:
- spam your friends or pay
- asynchronous trade
- visiting each other
- multiplayer features introduced slowly over time
- promoting the creation of groups and structured relationships among players
- automatic interaction with other players
- any combination of these
It normally does mean avoiding things like these:
- synchronous play
- highly competitive or highly skilled play
The above should cover 90%+ of the social gaming spectrum without entering value judgements.
- bad_user 13y agoUnfortunately the current crop of "social" games preferred social/psychological gimmicks, over having fun. But in the end, the need for fun always wins. Spamming your friends, buying FB gold, visiting your friend's stupid farm, these are not fun activities, these are just actives required to advance in a stupid game that involves incrementing counters. When I'm thinking of what social should be, I'm thinking of chess, or strategy games, or Monopoly, or whatever that involves playing against other users, instead of a computer. It doesn't even have to be synchronous multiplayer. Chess doesn't have to be synchronous. You can have turn-based strategies or RPGs (as in Heroes of Might and Magic, which used to be pretty fun). You can have games where the users themselves establish what the game is. But companies like Zynga went the other way around, focusing on the virality aspects, instead of those aspects being a side-effects or an add-on to a fun game. These games are broken by design.