|
That's what I find really fascinating. It's a well-known fact that what game designers might think is cool is not necessarily what users might like. But it's also true that potentially what users might think they want isn't exactly what they want.
AT: That's exactly right. If you ask users, "Would you want this thing?" If you just base your entire game design evolution based on strictly what your users tell you do, you'll probably fail. Any input has noise. Any data we collect has noise that needs to be filtered and cleaned up. With qualitative feedback, users also have noise that we can filter and then take that as input.
How do you obtain qualitative feedback? Is that just simply community interaction?
AT: Yeah. We have a very, very active forum, as you've probably seen. Community users usually give us feedback all the time.
They give us more feedback than we can process. So, there's never a lack of qualitative feedback from users, which is one thing that we really appreciate, because they are really passionate about our games, and they just tell us, "Hey, here's what I'd like you to change."
Do you think games can run indefinitely? Can FarmVille last forever, essentially, as long as you keep updating it? Or is there a certain saturation point?
AT: So far, it's been running for a year and a half, so we don't know. I guess we'll find out!
Popular television shows come to an end. MMO audiences drop off after years. It's an open question for the social game industry.
AT: It's an open question. And the one that we're also looking to find out, and we're also looking to expand our lifetime as much as users want us. So far, users don't seem to be complaining, so...
Retention is a real concern, obviously.
AT: Yes.
Have you honed in on like the right ways to retain users? Is it through content updates?
AT: Yes. Well, that's one of the basic things that must be done, but it's definitely nowhere sufficient. It's a basic thing that you need to have constantly updated things -- not only content, but also feature updates. Like I said before, like our farm game at launch had this many features [gestures, expanding his hands] it now has this many features. That's one of the reasons why you see the retention there.
And two, is to kind of be able to keep up the quality of games. Is it stable? Is it fast to load? Is it easy to play? Is all the content clearly labeled, to users? The basic user experience needs to be kept up to speed.
And third, it's just servicing on the community side. Are you listening to users? When a user complains, are you listening to them? Are you responding to them? Are you ensuring that there are no people trying to hack the game?
It's a lot of those things combined that eventually result in this thing called "retention". So, you need to do all these things right. I'm sure we could be doing a lot more things. Again, it's a matter of being in a young industry. We have limited resources.

Playfish has discussed having creative and metrics at the same level, so there's a feedback between them -- no one's telling the other what to do. Do you have a similar philosophy at Zynga?
AT: I think we are metrics-driven. It depends on what you mean by "creative". Like, what is creative? People's definition of creative is very, very different. We ask different people... What is creative to us? [If] people like it. Many times, to a game designer, what is "creative" is what is new. "What I think is creative."
I think we want to leave that judgment to the end users more. The end users will tell us what they like, what's creative. In fact, they'll give us a ton of ideas, too. So, I think that's where we differ. We want to drive as many things as possible through metrics and achieve, in the very beginning, not a balance, but a really, really integrated effort between metrics and creative. I think they can exist both in the same time. Very much so.
A lot of traditional game people sort of recoil from this idea, this sense that their creativity is being shut down, but I think if you look at it as, "I have some ideas. Now I can find out which one's right, which one people respond to," it's more appealing.
AT: Exactly. That's exactly right. Everything can be improved, because you're not doing a painting where everyone can just sit back and appreciate it. What you're building is a consumer product. Users have to use it, have to touch it, have to play it. As soon as that happens, you're in a different category than how creative an artist is.
And this is why I say game building is a craft; it's not painting. To build a cool looking bowl, first of all it has to be a bowl first. It has to be functional first. And different people have different ways of using that bowl, of looking at it. And you take that feedback and continue to improve it.
Everyone's creative. I have 10 million ideas if you ask me today. But whether or not users will like those ideas, well, let's ask the users. And metrics is a way to ask the user in the right way. They'll give you the answer to pick which creative idea, and once you've implemented that idea, how to keep iterating, keep on improving it.
I think in the traditional and console mobile industry... new releases are very, very expensive. New sequels are very, very expensive. But for us, we're Flash-based, PHP-based. We can change like that. That enables to continually improve an idea.
|
Stop right there. If the aim was to produce eyeball hits and comments, that's understandable, but if the aim was to offer more detail into the factors that make up the balance of this issue, it may have been more helpful to highlight this more:
"... that metrics are a tool to hone that craft, essentially. And that is your philosophy."
While we can agree that expanding our sources of input (from other disciplines, other forms of design, from science, from related industry) to solve problems of the Art and Business of Game Development is very helpful and informative, inviting an imbalanced presentation to set up simple contrary opinion seems a reliable way to lose traction on the discussion. I expect more from Gamasutra, frankly.
This is a business philosophy, and an enlightened, reliably valid one that design must coordinate with intelligently, but do not frame it as a creative philosophy. Suggesting so appears to do a disservice to the creative talent and effort of Zygna and other creative professionals.
To illustrate the disconnect as presented is not difficult:
"So, how do you, as a gamer, build a game that can be continually enjoyed by the really, really non-gamers, like the students, like accountants, lawyers, like housewives, househusbands, children, etcetera?"
To suggest we need to adhere to customer metrics and analytics, then to off-handedly categorize students, housewives and ... children as non-gamers appears ridiculous. It doesn't seem realistic that this perspective could be lost during the composition of this article. And at the end of the interview, the clear "designer as auteur, designing for herself" zero-sum mentality is discussed as if fact; which is an obvious powder keg for this community, the design community at large, etc. Personally, I have other things that seem interesting to talk about surrounding this issue and various points raised during the interview (novelty-agnostic success, retention tactics, design/business philosophy crossovers, etc.), but it almost appears pointless to try.
One can reasonably expect this imbalance to be highlighted by heated comment responses from this community in three, two, one ...
The what now?
really non-gamers, like the students, like accountants, lawyers, like housewives,
househusbands, children, etcetera?"
I found that quite a silly statement. Just because a game designer is a gamer, it doesn't mean they can only design for gamers. Surely a good game designer can design for any demographic.
That's a bit like saying surely a great literary novelist would be able to spin out pulp fiction. Not all designers are able to work to all ends of the market. There are subsets.
“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”
Metrics are a dream tool for any designer. Who doesn't want to have that closer relationship with the customer? Unfortunately it's a numerical relationship that will be good at delivering what people want but (if powers that be push it as the end-all solution) may prevent creative people from giving people something they didn't expect.
It saddens me that this man (and perhaps most of Zynga) believe that creating games is all calculations and business. What ever happened to the contention that games are art or could be considered as such?
I do think his idea that games are just a craft isn't supportable though. He's confusing late-stage optimisation with craft, and they're not really the same thing.
CityVille, for example, is clearly based on the roots of many other city-making games before it, which at some point required other people to create (Will Wright, for example). Games definitely ARE an art, but it's more like saying that Zynga regard themselves as Jerry Bruckheimer's formulaic CSI franchise compared to Hill Street Blue.
Which, actually, I have no issue with. The pinball industry and many other kinds of game have had much the same attitude (if not quite the ability to measure it) for years. It doesn't really harm games as an art for someone to have come along with an optimising approach, because in the end of the day it is still drawing in way more people to play games than otherwise would have. Some of those people will go on to look for more engaging/creative games.
That makes sense to me if creative design is understood as using human insight and experience to perceive "fun gaps" and then dream up features that fill those gaps, while also understanding metrics as a reductionistic way to identify where existing systems can be made more fun.
How is that not a best-of-both-worlds, art+craft approach to serving customers? (Maybe even holistic-reductionistic, East+West philosophy of design?)
"the general manager... creative philosophy"... it's good to remember that the designers of the games they cloned did things they though were cool...
Some of the most cloned game designs may have been born from that leap of faith creative people make day in and day out.