5 ms·

This story is incredibly reductionist to the point of being false. Flappy Bird tells you nothing about what the 'People' want. Today they want a single button

This story is incredibly reductionist to the point of being false. Flappy Bird tells you nothing about what the 'People' want. Today they want a single button physics game, tomorrow they want hardcore shooters. Some people want RPGs, others want micropayment sandboxes. They problem is that everyone is trying to copy the dumb luck of developers who happen upon the right mix of categories at the right moment in time. Once flappy bird is copied 100x times and becomes an expected mechanic it will no longer be what the people want.

jessedhillon 13y ago
It turns out that what the people really want, for the moment at least, is Flappy Bird. The point of the story is not that people want Flappy Bird -- it's that despite numerous predictions and formulas used in the industry to determine which projects get funded, nobody was talking about doing a game like Flappy Bird. Prior to its success, it would have been dismissed out of hand to spend resources on a title like that. The author is making the point that predicting what people want is not formulaic, it appears to be quite random.
- alttab 13y ago
  Some thing tells me this dude spent way less on development. Justifying it is easier when there is no budget.
- prof_hobart 13y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean by nobody talking about doing a game like Flappy Bird. Of course, no one was talking about a game exactly like it - every game is different. But there's loads of games quite a lot like it already - it's basically a very simple version of something like Jetpack Joyride with a subtly different input mechanism (repeated tap instead of holding down to fly). That's a game so common that there's even a tutorial (http://www.raywenderlich.com/9050/how-to-make-a-game-like-jetpack-joyride-using-levelhelper-spritehelper-and-corona-sdk-part-1 http://www.raywenderlich.com/9050/how-to-make-a-game-like-je...) on how to write your own version. There's a fair chance that the author of Flappy Bird used this as the source for the game. I've no idea what actually made Flappy Bird successful, but whatever it was it's certainly not any huge gameplay innovation that others had failed to spot.
  - checker 13y ago
    A few points to compare the two: - Jetpack Joyride is way easier. I think something "unique" about Flappy Bird is how difficult it is. - It's extremely easy to start a new round in Flappy Bird (and it happens quite often). Die on the first pipe? Tap again to jump right back in. You don't even need to hit a button, it's pretty much tap anywhere on the screen. - Sharing high scores with friends is way easier. "I got a 22 the other day." is way easier than saying "I got 108,000". - The high scores are more meaningful to other players because they will know exactly how Player1 got that score. The 108,000 in Jetpack Joyride is ambiguous because the score is a function of distance, coins, kills, etc. Remember back in the day, hearing about some dude's cousin that made it to level 55, and how seemingly impossible that was?
    - prof_hobart 13y ago
      The two games clearly have some differences, but I'm not sure that I'd class any of those as being particularly unique. Somehow, something about this game has grabbed people's interest, but it's not some brilliant gameplay innovation that the rest of the gaming world had overlooked.
jcfrei 13y ago
absolutely. if the success of flappy birds teaches us anything it's certainly not a lesson about game design. the big players in the mobile space know very well how to generate long term revenues with their games. flappy birds is a lesson about virality (and how unpredictable it is).
alexcroox 13y ago
Not to mention a certain Youtuber with a bazillion subs put it in front of a lot of kids who love to share it with their friends.
- ryan-allen 13y ago
  Which Youtuber was this?
  - nomoredistance 13y ago
    I believe it's pewdiepie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQz6xhlOt18 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQz6xhlOt18
- Reedx 13y ago
  Apparently it was already #1 on the App Store before that, though. Pewdiepie's video was 10 days afterwards: http://tabtimes.com/feature/tablet-game-business/2014/02/04/why-flappy-bird-so-popular http://tabtimes.com/feature/tablet-game-business/2014/02/04/... It's bizarre that the game has been out since May 2013, didn't do very well, and then suddenly went viral 8 months later. It'd be fascinating to see what exactly kicked it off.
  - robmcm 13y ago
    Malcolm Gladwell would love to get his grubby little hands on that fact!
    - zimpenfish 13y ago
      Then beat the crap out of the poor fact until not even its own mother could recognise it and prove that aliens once walked on Mars because, like, there's a carrot in New York and Flappy Bird and THEREFORE TRUE. Several quintillion dollars later from the sales of his book "I think you'll find the plural of anecdote is actually my 12 figure bank account", he retires.
tlrobinson 13y ago
Relevant: Malcolm Gladwell: Choice, happiness and spaghetti sauce http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce...
mtdewcmu 13y ago
It shows that people want birds, but they had grown tired of the anger of angry birds. This bird speaks to now.

jessedhillon 13y ago

It turns out that what the people really want, for the moment at least, is Flappy Bird. The point of the story is not that people want Flappy Bird -- it's that despite numerous predictions and formulas used in the industry to determine which projects get funded, nobody was talking about doing a game like Flappy Bird. Prior to its success, it would have been dismissed out of hand to spend resources on a title like that. The author is making the point that predicting what people want is not formulaic, it appears to be quite random.

alttab 13y ago
Some thing tells me this dude spent way less on development. Justifying it is easier when there is no budget.
prof_hobart 13y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by nobody talking about doing a game like Flappy Bird. Of course, no one was talking about a game exactly like it - every game is different. But there's loads of games quite a lot like it already - it's basically a very simple version of something like Jetpack Joyride with a subtly different input mechanism (repeated tap instead of holding down to fly). That's a game so common that there's even a tutorial (http://www.raywenderlich.com/9050/how-to-make-a-game-like-jetpack-joyride-using-levelhelper-spritehelper-and-corona-sdk-part-1 http://www.raywenderlich.com/9050/how-to-make-a-game-like-je...) on how to write your own version. There's a fair chance that the author of Flappy Bird used this as the source for the game. I've no idea what actually made Flappy Bird successful, but whatever it was it's certainly not any huge gameplay innovation that others had failed to spot.
- checker 13y ago
  A few points to compare the two: - Jetpack Joyride is way easier. I think something "unique" about Flappy Bird is how difficult it is. - It's extremely easy to start a new round in Flappy Bird (and it happens quite often). Die on the first pipe? Tap again to jump right back in. You don't even need to hit a button, it's pretty much tap anywhere on the screen. - Sharing high scores with friends is way easier. "I got a 22 the other day." is way easier than saying "I got 108,000". - The high scores are more meaningful to other players because they will know exactly how Player1 got that score. The 108,000 in Jetpack Joyride is ambiguous because the score is a function of distance, coins, kills, etc. Remember back in the day, hearing about some dude's cousin that made it to level 55, and how seemingly impossible that was?
  - prof_hobart 13y ago
    The two games clearly have some differences, but I'm not sure that I'd class any of those as being particularly unique. Somehow, something about this game has grabbed people's interest, but it's not some brilliant gameplay innovation that the rest of the gaming world had overlooked.

jcfrei 13y ago

absolutely. if the success of flappy birds teaches us anything it's certainly not a lesson about game design. the big players in the mobile space know very well how to generate long term revenues with their games. flappy birds is a lesson about virality (and how unpredictable it is).

alexcroox 13y ago

Not to mention a certain Youtuber with a bazillion subs put it in front of a lot of kids who love to share it with their friends.

ryan-allen 13y ago
Which Youtuber was this?
- nomoredistance 13y ago
  I believe it's pewdiepie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQz6xhlOt18 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQz6xhlOt18
Reedx 13y ago
Apparently it was already #1 on the App Store before that, though. Pewdiepie's video was 10 days afterwards: http://tabtimes.com/feature/tablet-game-business/2014/02/04/why-flappy-bird-so-popular http://tabtimes.com/feature/tablet-game-business/2014/02/04/... It's bizarre that the game has been out since May 2013, didn't do very well, and then suddenly went viral 8 months later. It'd be fascinating to see what exactly kicked it off.
- robmcm 13y ago
  Malcolm Gladwell would love to get his grubby little hands on that fact!
  - zimpenfish 13y ago
    Then beat the crap out of the poor fact until not even its own mother could recognise it and prove that aliens once walked on Mars because, like, there's a carrot in New York and Flappy Bird and THEREFORE TRUE. Several quintillion dollars later from the sales of his book "I think you'll find the plural of anecdote is actually my 12 figure bank account", he retires.

tlrobinson 13y ago

Relevant: Malcolm Gladwell: Choice, happiness and spaghetti sauce http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce...

mtdewcmu 13y ago

It shows that people want birds, but they had grown tired of the anger of angry birds. This bird speaks to now.