| Scott Siegel |
|
|
I would wager that the majority of analysts have not sunk more than trivial amounts of time into Zynga's games, or Facebook games in general. And I'd bet the same's true even more so for those buying and selling on the market. The problem with this business isn't the business itself; it's that not enough people understand how the business works, or why it works.
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Martin Sabom |
|
...and then online gambling....
|
|
|
| Timothy Dernick |
|
There are larger problems at hand than just the "bottle neck" described in this article. First of all is that fact that Zynga began spending lump sums of money on competition, spending more money on proven teams to eat competition rather than hire individual designers and developers at a more steady base; they grew far to big much to fast and are just now slowing the pace and hiring young designers at a lower price point. 2) Facebook has implemented a plethora of changes that are not necessarily game friendly in the hopes of becoming larger than a social network with games. Biggest of all is the timeline, which mixes game updates into the convoluted user interface of time line itself. More than anything though, the botched public release of Facebook has hurt the not only Facebook but all the major players that depend on it, so when Facebook loses users and its share fall, Zynga's fall as well. I do not see Zynga as an empire in trouble, but rather a large game company that is slowly falling back into the reality of development and reworking its production process to accommodate the changes around them. One only need look at the fact that Zynga is shuffling their studios around to know that they are making required changes to regain stability.
|
|
|
| Scott Siegel |
|
|
E: I'm concerned that with this latest news, we've reached a critical mass of "chicken little" reactions to the social games business model. Second waves are always possible; I think there's still good business to be had in social, but good luck convincing shareholders and investors.
I think that unless you're profitable and/or comfortably bootstrapped, it's a dangerous time to be a Facebook-focused game developer. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Michael Joseph |
|
|
I think this brings us full circle to the newspeak phrase "social gaming."
We know that a so called social game is NOT simply a game that is played on a social networking site. The defining feature and objective of social games are one in the same - virality. In a way, this makes them trojan horses. It makes them fundamentally dishonest. http://trekmovie.com/2011/02/21/viral-video-angry-birds-take-on-star-trek/ I don't think the impact of a lot of the negative online discussions about social games in forums all over the web can be discounted either. "Game X is uncool" too can become viral. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Jonathan Murphy |
|
|
Imagine what that $200,000,000 could have gone to. It could have fully funded hundreds of indie companies. There's a theme these past few years with CEOs. Get an insane amount of cash and horde it.
Most likely the bulk of the cash will sit in a vault for a couple decades rotting like food past expiration. Meanwhile people bicker about the morality of what they would have done. Not what should have been done. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Bill Tordonero |
|
In the end, the problem is all in the games: I liked a few of Zynga's titles in the beginning and played them for a while but now I got back to them and found them unplayable: screen after screen of spamming offers before I can start playing, an (apparently) random mess of countless and pointless items to buy and place everywhere, dozen of friends to spam to activate just one building, countless of stupid "quests" clobbering the screen that just spoonfeed players telling exactly what to do instead of simply providing some direction and let them explore the game to find out whats cool in it... and more!
It's time for SNG to evolve into something better now! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Joshua Oreskovich |
|
|
"The company must have been betting on the fact that although plenty of players would be deterred, the ones that remained would be the "whales" that would carry the game through their higher-than-average spend"
There is no spoon. There is no whale. There are those that put there heart and sole into a love of games, it's these people that create the true under current of game sustainability. And has nothing to do with the slippery slope of what a viable market is. those that don't love games but love to play have been bought. they play FPS and commercial mindless junk. You would be just as well off selling them a football or a blockbuster movie ticket as a game. People that play Zynga junk, aren't there for the games. they would be just as well off solving a crossword, putting together a puzzle, knitting a sweater or baking a cake. Zynga has no influence without the social network that fed it. Zyngas death is guaranteed and no tears to be seen except from it's employees who soon will be desperate to hold a job. It is however most likely just as ironic those that will be fired from Zynga in the near future will likely get a job before someone who actually has a love for intelligent games. Due to their adaptability. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Gavin Koh |
|
|
I have been playing social games to death (so I can review them) and find all of them rely on the following gimmicks. Here they are, and in no particular order of merit:
1. Initial Engagement - The first thing that pops up on a Facebook wall / email (or in the advert section) must be something visually appealing that will make him click on and install the game. The recommendation from a friend may make it easier in getting a potential player to give the game a try. 2. Underlying Theme - There must be that special something to catch the attention of a player - be it a theme close to heart ("Wow, I can build up my own gang?") or a genre that he likes ("Wow, that looks like Simcity on Facebook steroids!"). 3. Addictive Game Play - The game play must give daily rewards - lots of shiny baubles to tempt players to return the next day. 4. Social Virality - The abilty to spread news about the game like wild fire comes next. The more easier it is to spam friends, the greater will be the number of players flocking to the game. 5. Change, the only constant - Once a growth spurt dies down, the only way to level up the virality factor is to introduce new game play items/objects or even something new and novel. 6. Ego trip - There should be a way to boast about how well you're doing in a game. A leaderboard chart goes a long way for those who love such things. If not, why play it? 7. Reward Preview - There must be a way in the game to see the rewards at a higher level. This is why all Facebook games have a high level BOT player waiting for a player to visit. 8. Reward Desirability - There must be a set of innovative rewards that will entice a player to work towards. The Shop Menu should show all the things that a player can buy and unlock in the long run. 9. Feature Announcements - There must obviously be a way to announce to the players about new rewards - usually at the start of a game play session. You could call this a "nag"-tastic way to hook players. 10. Arena Game Play - Games that allow you to compete in friendly matches will help to enrich the game play experience. You might look forward to turning up at your local bar and talking about the memorable match up arena battle you had with a friend over a beer. 11. Return on Investment - When will a player hand out his hard earned cash? If he finds the game addictive and fun, has a whole bunch of friends to play with, has a means to boast about his current standing, and the game is constantly updated with lots of rewards. You've then got your potential "whale" - and up goes your ARPU/ARPPU. 12. Retention - If a game has done all of the above correctly, it will definitely result in the retention of players. The problem with Zynga (and all other Facebook games) is that everything is starting to look too formulaic and predictable. All the steps from 1 to 12 are being repeated in every new Facebook game that players keep seeing countless clones (and "clones of clones", plus "clones of clones of clones"). The only thing that can break this vicious cycle is to strengthen points 3, 4, 5, and 8 and throw in new features to buck the trend. For example (like in some MMOs) allow a player to sell/auction in-game items to friends within the game. I am all too bleary eyed and dread to try another Facebook game that goes by the book. Too much of point number 9 is also driving me away from some games (and Zynga games are a big-time culprit). There is simply no longer any perceivable ROI and therefore no way you're going to retain me as a "whale" for your Facebook game unless you truly innovate to the next level. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| James Margaris |
|
I like how this is running concurrently with the piece about GDC Online Awards and is completely contrary to the numerous Zynga nominations there.
Kind of seems like I should ignore one of these two pieces. |
|
|
| Nooh Ha |
|
What many seem to often forget on gamasutra when discussing Facebook gaming is that Zynga and most other leading Facebook games developers make most of their games for 25-55 year old women whose gameplay and games design interests are fundamentally different to MMOG and console gamers (and i would wager most of the commenters on gamasutra). That the bulk of Facebook gamers' interests are relatively superficial compared the the hard-core player base means that the games are by necessity relatively superficial, that the barriers to entry and exit for these games are low so the players are more fickle in their choice of games. The primary audience Zynga is targeting is still there and spending increasing amounts but is doing so on other FB games and on other platforms such as smartphone and tablet.
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Bob Johnson |
|
Zynga was never worth what its stock was priced at.
They also started overpaying for these games and game companies. And forgot that videogames are gimmicky by nature. They are novelties. And can die out as quickly as they heat up. Or they didn't forget and instead tried to stay ahead of this inevitably as the article outlined. Hell Facebook and the entire so-called "social game" genre are novelties right now. They are new to people and that is in and of itself entertaining. That only lasts for so long. The new and exciting becomes old and tired or been there, done that. And use levels dip, level off or sometimes completely die out. |
|
|
| Lewis Pulsipher |
|
|
Zynga's fundamental problem may be the fundamental characteristic of the video game industry as a whole: video games are designed to be played for a while and then discarded. You "beat the game" or you learn the story, or you get tired of "the grind", because there's an emphasis on the destination, not on the journey.
Good board and card games are played over and over again, over the course of many years. I know people who have played five hour board games five hundred times. I may have played D&D that many times. Video games do not match that, though MMOs may approach it. But social network games are nothing like MMOs. Inevitably, in a video game that more or less constantly asks you for money, that builds in frustration so that you'll spend money to stop being frustrated, the player will get tired of the game and quit playing. And when the next game is practically just like the last (as is typical of Zynga Facebook games), the player is going to get tired of the next one that much sooner. Yet Zynga is so big, every incentive is to avoid risk, hence the games are the same over and over again. I'm glad I don't own Zynga stock. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Mathieu MarquisBolduc |
|
There were plenty of people who warned that Zynga's revenues were very vulnerable to minor changes in Facebook's policies, but their voices were drowned in a flood of "social games are the future!" articles and comments.
|
|
|
| Leonardo Ferreira |
|
|
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/27754/Opinion_Fear_and_Loathing_in_Farmville.
php Oh how the world turns. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Patric Mondou |
|
|
I think there's good and bad in Zynga's downfall.
The good: it's clear now that social platform games are not *the* way of the future for the industry but merely a platform among others. Hopefully we'll see the return of balance in media coverage between all platforms. The bad: some "more responsible" social game devs (there are good ones out there after all) might suffer unjustly of lack of funds for the next few years. |
|
|
| Maximillian Eglasias |
|
Gamers everywhere saw this coming a mile away. Lots of good reports were written on the generally ethics-free environment at Zynga long ago.
Most analysts only really look at the stock market from what I can tell, and general sales figures. The see a line going up, and so they base their logic around that. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| GameViewPoint Developer |
|
Zynga through Facebook tapped into a huge unused pool of players, which for the lack of a better term are called "casual gamers", a lot of Nintendo's success also stemmed from the same pool of players, but it needed Facebook to come along to really introduce casual games to the masses. The term then changed from casual to social, because all the games were on a social network, but the terms basically means the same.
The point here is that regardless of what happens with Facebook or Zynga, that audience still exists, will always be much larger than the hardcore player audience, and will be more willing to spend money in games. Whether it's a hardcore player paying for new DLC in MW3 or someone upgrading their farm in a farm game, it amounts to the same, people paying money in games they are having fun playing. And that really is a seed change in the games industry, people willing to keep on paying within a game. The problem with Facebook and Zynga is that there tent poles are firmly rooted on the web, and this is a huge problem because going forward it's all going to be mobile and nothing else. The good news is that there is still huge potential for new players to make an impact in the mobile sphere, games or otherwise, but the people behind Facebook and Zynga have lots of cash, which they can use to come up with new IP's on mobile. |
|
|
| Marc-Andre Caron |
|
|
"Also, how did anyone who's played a Zynga game on Facebook not see this coming?"
This is exactly the opposite of what I've been thinking the last few days. Of those who've tried their games, I'd say a big part saw it coming. But voicing this in the workplace could be dangerous. Never cast doubt on the latest fad when your bosses bet the house on it. |
|
|
| Alan Rimkeit |
|
|
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/07/law-firms-investigating-zynga-for-insider-
stock-sell-off/?comments=1#comments-bar Law firms investigating Zynga for insider stock sell-off. It is official, the investigation has begun. My bet is someone is going to the slammer. |
|
|
| Ron Dippold |
|
|
'What can the company do now?'
If we're lucky, die horribly. |
|
|
| Eric Schwarz |
|
|
If it wasn't Zynga, it would have been someone else. The gold rush on social games was inevitable, as was the collapse when too many parties got involved. It could have been any games developer, really. I feel bad for Zynga and its employees, but I think it was the sort of thing that needed to happen as part of social gaming's growing pains.
|
|
|
| Timothy Ryan |
|
|
LOL. DIE, ZINGA, DIE! FREE-FUN < REAL FUN.
|
|
|
| Cody Scott |
|
|
How is this a shock. Users on this site have been saying before they went public it was going to crash and burn.
|
|
|
| Geoff Yates |
|
My personal opinion is if the stock of an IPO is hyped to buggery than there is a really good chance you will be taken to the cleaners. In other words "If it seems too good to be true, than it probably is". Use that guiding principle through life and you won't look back wondering where you squandered your money.
|
|
|
| Marc Schaerer |
|
Its shocking to see that analysts, people that shoul know their field, didn't see this comming, when many indie developers said for years now that the dumbification that zynga started either will drown zynga or the whole game economy.
As the game economy survived the early 1980s, it in the end was rather rational to assume that a near trillion USD business would not die just cause a single greedy and freaking stupid company like Zynga lost any interest in what it was meant to do as a game developer, creating fun. Zynga started out with interesting ideas and then wasted an absolutely insane amount of time on how to monetize every fart from an animal instead of focusing on creating longer term fun and engagement and try to monetize basing on this as the real game developers do it. I personally do not wish Zyngas management any less than going bancrupt while their more talented starts to realize that they likely had great ideas the past years when being forced to do these absolutely bad games, which they could bring to life. And as we are on it: I wish EA the same for absolutely destroying the sim city and sims experience their their social rippoffs. Any so called social games that has a money wall earlier than a few hours into the game experience (sims had it at 11min, sim city at 6min) simply should be trash voted by the whole gamer community to ensure that no poor 'new soul' gets dragged into that utter greedfilled darkness just cause it shows up at the top of the popularity rankings :( EA might have some real genius working for them on the game design side but they seem to have management layers that do their best to force upon them decisions basing on monetary factors that 10 years ago would have kicked them out of business within a year if they offended any 'thinking' being to the degree they do it currently with their whole social gaming - origin 'business model and decision making'. I hope that zyngas downfall will send a serious signal through the dev world and their management 'trashers' that this kind of rippoff attitude is not even tolerated in social games (in other genres it never was tolerated. hellgate london didn't go down the toilet financially for no reason after all and anyone else trying to go that path will have the same fate), cause the 'facebook dumbification' game style approach has been flodding android and ios for a too long time out of my view and I doubt that any of these 0 game experience titles with 'near instant money walls' will survive 2012 in the 'greens', yet I fear that the lack of longer term user experience there might even allow these dev to push another generation of 'top grossing list crap games' hits ... |
|
|
| Ramin Shokrizade |
|
|
This analyst does play games, and when 2K Games asked for my analysis of Zynga's market potential more than a year ago, I *did* almost perfectly predict all of Zynga's market trends and gave the reasons for these trends. I published my analysis in the public space a full year ago. Anyone following my work was well prepared for the changes in the social gaming environment. So I would propose that it is not correct to say that no analysts successfully predicted the Zynga implosion. It is more correct that Gamasutrians were following the wrong analysts, just like the rest of the industry that put 57% of all interactive media investments into Facebook game development last year, and another 30% into mobile game development.
You can find that original report here: http://gameful.org/groups/games-for-change/forum/topic/zynga-analysis/ |
|
|
More: Social/Online, Design, Business/Marketing, Exclusive