|
Furthermore, unlike on MMOs
or casual game portals, people don't tend make new friends on social games.
They've already got an established network of friends and acquaintances.
Instead, this type of socializing cements existing ones. The average Facebook
user has 120 friends, but would not consider them to be all close, personal
friendships. Social networking sites join "weak ties," people like
high school classmates and old work buddies, and encourage what psychologists
call parasocial relationships. You observe snippets of people's lives, but do
you really know them? For deep relationships, it seems, you still need to put
in the face time and have shared experiences.

(fluff)Friends
Exceptions exist, mainly in
virtual pet and virtual world simulations like (fluff)Friends and YoVille.
(fluff)Friends has even had a (fluff)Con for Fluff Fanatics. Lately, (fluff)Friends
has been holding (fluff)Art contests, which appeal to users' creativity, but
even without these contests, the (fluff)Friends community would still
eagerly upload fluff(Art) for peer ratings a la YouTube or Flickr. These
activities fulfill a basic human desire for approval, self-expression, and
recognition.
In fact, these human desires
may be heightened when interacting with friends rather than strangers. Emotions
such as competitiveness, affection, love, envy, and pride are what Playfish
calls "social emotions."
"Social emotions form the basic
building blocks in each of our games," says Kim Daniel Arthur, VP of
Global Studios at Playfish. "This requires a new way of designing and
thinking about games, from simple elements such as our friends score bars in Word
Challenge to the more intricate social interactions in Pet Society." For Playfish, the social experience of a game
is the primary focus.
Again, look to social psychology as to why social
comparison and friend-trading games exist alongside RPGs, virtual worlds,
strategy games, and casual games on social networking sites.
Bragging rights
and the need for social status are a big part of this landscape, especially
when a person's every move is recorded by Facebook's continual newsfeed of
updates, links, videos, photos, activities, purchasing habits, game scores,
likes/dislikes, and even recipe selections. "Social games are
communication tools," says Shervin Pishevar, founder and CEO of SGN.
"That's why they do well in a massive communication network like MySpace
or Facebook."
Other games, such as the
Facebook RPG Mob Wars, are stripped-down versions of PC or console
games. Although an RPG, Mob Wars is a game without gameplay, in a way,
because the gameplay is replaced by a button click of "Do Job." It's
as if every player had a Glider autopilot program to go out and kill mobs.
However, the strategic elements of deciding which task to do first and
inventory management remain intact.
Tom Abernathy, Writer at
Microsoft Game Studios, remarks, "It's a serviceable but not exceptional
little bare bones RPG. But I can play it while I'm doing other things."
This type of passive play,
called sporadic play, and asynchronous or turn-based play, says social game
blogger Bret Terrill, now Director of Business Development at Zynga, is
critical to the success of social games. While not prevalent on casual game
portals, passive play is common on social networking sites.
However, Playfish's
Who Has the Biggest Brain? and Word Challenge are basically short
single-player games. Launched in December 2007 as Playfish's first title, Who
Has the Biggest Brain? seems to have a permanent lock in the Top 10 of
Facebook games.
For now, there doesn't seem
to be a unifying characteristic among all of these games, other than they exist
on social networking sites. However, I would posit that there are certain
design characteristics that could make social games a unique category.
An Ideal for Social Games
Social networking sites have
changed how we consume information and how we play games. It is only fitting
that social games reflect the characteristics of the platform. When combined together, the social graph,
ambient awareness, and inclusive play are the design characteristics that make
social games distinctive to me.
While new initiatives like
Facebook Connect and MySpace Data Availability will allow these applications to
run outside of social networking sites, these defining characteristics are not
affected due to data portability.
Social Graph
Looking back to the proposed
definitions in the previous section, there is one that does describe games that
cannot be played anywhere else without data portability. These are games that
utilize the social graph.
Most games do pull data from
the social graph for challenges and friends-only leaderboards, but some go
further by incorporating the social graph into gameplay. In Parking Wars,
I can park on each friend's street and in PackRat, I can browse through
my friends' pages.
In order to do well
in Parking Wars, I need to know the usage patterns of my friends. I find that these games have the camaraderie
of a board game, in that there are conversations about the game among friends,
and yet, it's not necessary for all my friends to be online at the same time to
play the game.
In theory, any sort of
information, like fave bands or travel photos, can be pulled from people's
profiles, much like Facebook ads do on the side. Ideally, these games would
require people to know something about their friends to do well. Or at least,
by playing the game, people would end up knowing more about their friends.
|
I've written about similar issues regarding motivations and design, with slightly different terms, in a couple of posts. Check out 'Game Design for Social Networks', parts 1 & 2:
http://www.mygamestudies.com/content/game-design-social-networks-part-1
@aquito
After reading this article it made me think about where communication and gaming is going now, more online and not so much face-to-face, which seems to favor our students. Do you think that the more kids use the social networking, MMOG's, and electronic communication in general is degrading those essential face-to-face social skills? When thinking of trying to develop lesson plans and curriculum for these video game groups that is a question taht keeps popping up.
Lets face it, we know the masses aren't often right. Lets not let the uneducated make what should be our educated decisions. Companies are spending so much time trying to get an extra buck and broadening their audience, that they are forgetting the gamers that spent their cash getting the game industry where it is today.
I realize different games have different goals, such as passing time, and sure, take the good and better your titles. I'm just against it effecting the mainstream hardcore AAA industry negatively, which it is.
I really don't like where the gaming industry is going.
Making a social network game still requires a hard work, a clever idea that engages people and ultimately makes the lives of those who interact with it happy. they are games. Games are about having fun... and most people don't find serious all that fun... Isn't fun the business we're in?