Business Models
Although the development
cycle of social games is similar to that of casual games, their business models
are more aligned with MMOs. Given their
origins, however, social games almost always have a free component. Beyond that, game developers are free to
monetize applications as they see fit and they've been doing well with a
mixture of the following business models:
- Advertising or Sponsorship
- Microtransactions: virtual currency and/or virtual goods
- Subscriptions or Premium modes
The advantages for developers
for using a social network like Facebook are evident. The barriers to entry are
low but the potential for profit is high. They're getting wide distribution on
a trusted network and moreover, they don't need to share revenue with Facebook.
The approval for Facebook applications is quick -- something like 24 hours from
submission. Ali built his first app in
two weeks, but nowadays, with better graphics and production values expected,
it might take three to six months for an application to go online.
Even after a game goes live,
social game developers must maintain the service and answer to customers. Like
MMO developers, social game developers are constantly adding content and
evolving their games. Compared to MMOs, though, these iterations occur at a
blistering pace.
"Facebook time is faster
than normal Internet time," says Ali. "Facebook enables rapid
feedback in a way that the Web never did before."
As such, clones of games run
rampant, but the first mover may not have the advantage as other developers
improve upon the design. The friend-trading stock market game, Friends for
Sale, for instance, was preceded by Owned! and Owned! in turn
was preceded by Human Pets. Mobsters, Mob Wars, and Mafia Wars
are all similar takes on a RPG.
Some developers also sweeten
their app's sales by appealing to users' charitable natures. (Lil) Green
Patch, a top Facebook virtual pet application, purports to help save the
rainforest while you tend to your garden and scare off pests.
Numerous other
apps of this kind exist, some with ties to charities like the Nature
Conservancy. The causes supported range from world hunger to global warming.
It's unknown how much of this revenue actually goes to the charities. A few
users from the IGDA Women in Games mailing list reported that by playing these
games every day or by buying the game's virtual currency, they felt that they
were assisting a valuable cause.

(Lil) Green Patch
Because these business models
do better when there are more users, some developers had "forced
invites" built into the application. If users wanted to progress in the
game, then they needed to invite friends to add the application. "The days
of Facebook games after the API was introduced were horrible for a lot of
people," says Green, "because of the constant spamming by your
friends to join some new game."
In February 2008, Facebook
banned forced invites, which has led developers down creative routes to
incentivize invites in game design or otherwise, use newsfeed notifications to
their advantage. Both SGN and Playfish steadfastly avoid spamming, instead
relying on word of mouth for their games.
Playfish is experimenting
with all three business models and has been successful in monetizing these
multiple revenue streams. Overall, Ali estimates that 80% of revenue for games
comes from virtual currency whereas 80% of revenue for non-games comes from
advertising or sponsorship.
Advertising/Sponsorship
The game developer can place
interstitial ads, banner ads, video ads, links, or branded virtual items inside
the game. Most advertisers are looking for an application that will integrate
their brands into the game. This hasn't happened as much in games, but can with
the help of 3rd party ad networks like AppSavvy, SocialMedia.com, and Cubics.
Else, the game developer can sell ads or get sponsorship on its own.
Developers can also use
networks like Super Rewards and Offerpal Media to receive a referral fee. In
exchange for filling out offers to join NetFlix or other services, players
receive virtual currency or goods. (Lil)
Green Patch, for example, offers more acreage for your garden if you sign up
for a number of offers.
Microtransactions
In most cases, developers use
a dual currency system. In (fluff)Friends, there's munny and there's
gold. Munny is earned while playing the game and can be used to purchase
virtual goods to pamper your (fluff)Friend. Gold, however, is used to purchase
limited edition characters, merchandise that simply isn't available to those
with just munny. To obtain virtual currency like gold, players pay for it with
PayPal or credit cards. Across Facebook, virtual items range in price, from $1
to $50.
As in the case with
free-to-play MMOs with microtransactions, developers must be careful to keep
these special items from unbalancing the game. It's important that non-paying
players enjoy the game as much as paying players. For games like (fluff)Friends,
it's definitely more fun with more players. Developers need to take care
not to alienate non-paying players.
Subscriptions/Premium Modes
In the subscription or
premium mode scenarios, players pay a monthly or yearly fee for extra modes or
advantages. In Word Challenge, a player can pay for Pro Player Club
membership and get more taunts, no ads, and exclusive modes of play, like Word
Grid. Again, the issue here is
whether or not the premium mode unbalances the game or gives subscribers an
unfair advantage. In the case of Word Challenge, it doesn't.
In PackRat, though,
the subscription definitely gives an advantage to XL (premium) players by giving XL
players access to XL markets, double pack size, and tix, the PackRat equivalent
of (fluff)Friends gold.
Although these perks are understandable because
XL players want value for their subscription, it has slowed down the game
considerably. With the extra pack size,
XL players, whether intentionally or unintentionally, hoard cards and remove
them from circulation. This was more apparent in PackRat v2.0, which has
since been dismantled.
Future of Social Games
While the first generation of social games had simplistic
gameplay and simplistic graphics, the second generation has upped the ante.
Production values match Web games and game developers are merging the gameplay
qualities of casual games, MMOGs, and virtual worlds. With Flash 10's 3D
capabilities, 3D games may be coming to social networking sites soon.
"The sky's the
limit," says Davis.
One day in the future,
players will enjoy immersive strategy games, arcade games, casual games, RPGs,
ARGs, and virtual worlds, all on a social networking site. Davis fully expects larger game publishers to join the fray
and make this vision a reality.
As for indie developers, Ali, now a partner at
Shotput Ventures, says, "Just do it. There are so many stories of people
who are building an app for Facebook and it ends up being such a great success
that they quit their day job. It's totally possible."
|
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?