Sadly, the percentage of the population who would be into that is probably single digit, and large companies rarely care about single digit niches :( I would a

Sadly, the percentage of the population who would be into that is probably single digit, and large companies rarely care about single digit niches :( I would argue that those single-digit percent niches can matter quite a bit. People follow the upscale. Facebook started at Harvard, branched out to the Ivies, then the top 100 colleges, and so on. At every step, it was associated with a higher level of prestige than what it was expanding into. If you start with cognitively upscale games, you get a core of highly intelligent people who love your product and will evangelize it. Through that, and by just having a great product, you move the rest. Games is a really hard space for Google to get because it emerged as the anti-Yahoo. Yahoos and AOLs and Facebooks want their users inside the walled garden spending as much time as they can. Google established itself by being the "we won't waste your time" search engine; its job is to get you where you want to go, as fast as it can. So Games were really a new thing for Google and G+ Games wasn't a fit for its traditional ideology, and that may explain why it made such bad decisions (and ultimately failed) in that space.