Baffled By the Obsession With Pretend-Business Games 252
theodp writes "Newsweek's Daniel Lyons confesses to being mystified by all the people tending to their virtual farms and virtual pets on Facebook. Even stranger, he says, is their willingness to spend real money to buy virtual products, like pretend guns and fertilizer, to gain advantage in these Web-based games. Pretend products are a serious business, estimated to grow to $1.6B next year, and have captured the attention of economists and academics who view the virtual economy as a lab for modeling behavior in the real world. Still, Lyons can't help but question whether the kind of people who spend hours online taking care of imaginary pets are representative of the rest of the population. 'The data might be "perfect" and "complete,"' says Lyons, 'but the world from which it's gathered is anything but that.'"
Not surprised (Score:5, Insightful)
Dan "Lyin'" Lyons is mystified by many things.
He's still mystified why SCOX.PK hasn't buried IBM.
--
BMO
Re:If only we could harness this in RL (Score:5, Insightful)
Not hard to figure out really... (Score:2, Insightful)
That's interesting, coming from Dan "Lyin" Lyons (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the same rent-a-rant tool* that shouted at the top of his lungs on what a great case The SCO Group had against IBM - and who consequently jumped off of the pro-SCO shill bandwagon so fast, he almost broke both ankles, when it became apparent that the whole thing was an extortion scam... it's interesting to me since The SCO Group doesn't really have real products anymore, and the bankruptcy trustee currently in charge has stated that the only thing he finds of value in the company is the litigation they're involved in.
Dan can't understand something that makes money, that Microsoft didn't invent - world points, laughs. Dan is worse than a has-been... he's a never-was.
*Not to be confused with another worthless tech "analyst", Rob "Rent-A-Rant" Enderle, who has never met a Microsoft check he didn't like.
Just like MMORPGs (Score:5, Insightful)
So how, exactly, is this any different from spending money on WOW? Not everyone likes the same kind of games.
Just because the average Joe doesn't like Farmwille, WOW, curling or knitting that doesn't mean it's not worth the investment in time and/or money to someone else.
To each his own.
Re:Business Games (Score:4, Insightful)
They went out of fashion together with adventures. The times of "brainy" games are gone. Since games got mainstream and the average IQ of the average gamer dropped below room temperature, what's left is twitch games. Hell, even RTS games are more twitch than planning these days.
Yeah, mod me flamebait all you want, you know it's true.
Re:Content filtering :0 (Score:5, Insightful)
Fact is, Facebook, Myspace, etc. are not security risks. On the other hand, obscurefacebookproxy.ru probably is, if an employee or student can get their work done while using Facebook, Myspace, etc. more power to them. If they can't they get fired/flunk out. It is that simple. Try to block the sites that people want and end up with more security flaws as they go to less reputable sites.
(PS. Sonic Wall is overpriced and sucks)
It mystifies me (Score:3, Insightful)
Even stranger, he says, is their willingness to spend real money to buy virtual products
If people put a fraction of the time they spend on fake farms into a real business, they'd be rich. So much effort goes into collecting fake gold and going on quests to kill monsters that are nothing but a collection of 1's and 0's. It just seems like such a waste. If we could harness a small amount of that effort and put it toward something productive, it would be astonishing what could be accomplished.
Re:If only we could harness this in RL (Score:5, Insightful)
The real cash comes in to play because some people are even more impatient and want the absolute best of everything, even if it doesn't really matter. Fortunately, my wife is of the opinion that she can wait for her FV coins to build up and not even worry about the FV dollars.
Re:MMORPGS. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes but these "social" games don't really have any social aspect apart from spamming your friends for new items. My mom convinced me to try a popular facebook game, and the only social aspect was me having to spam everyone else that I either have extra crap or I want their extra crap. In general there is no interaction apart from "give me", and even that is based on preset buttons rather than conversation. I probably have more social interaction with a 1 minute conversation with the clerk at the convenience store than I would in hours of playing these shitty social media games. In your case it is different, as you were on an MMO, but these social casual games are much more limited in interaction.
Re:If only we could harness this in RL (Score:1, Insightful)
I think you are the first one to try to attach your internal fear onto a large group of external people. Obviously, your fear is their fault.
Yawn...
Can someone wake me when these tea-party types take on some personal responsibility? Wait, nevermind, I dont want to sleep for the rest of my life...
Re:There's an xkcd for that (Score:3, Insightful)
I find that xkcd ironic, because the conclusion is the very intro to Idiocracy: The bickering, hesitant couple never reproduces. They're deliberately portrayed as unlikable, stuck-up people. The movie isn't just the narration. The story doesn't take sides. And no, Idiocracy is not a documentary of the future, it is a satire of the present, with 20 percent more electrolytes.
Re:Business Games (Score:3, Insightful)
You missed the big one: World of Warcraft. Many people don't realize this, but it's quite possible to make hundreds of gold just by sitting around and buying and selling stuff.
Stupid is as stupid does (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:He was also on SCO's side for _years_ (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only that but ... ermmmm DUH!
In a world of reality tv, real housewives, and shopping networks etc. why should anyone be _surprised_ that real vegetables will spend real money and real time trying to grow virtual vegetables?
We used to smirk at stamp collectors and train spotters. Now we have virtual farmers and others. The world has not changed, we simply have an easier way to collect data about people with odd hobbies, like stupid lawsuits, stupid patents, karaoke, leg warmer collecting, virtual farming, and many more.
Or maybe they are just bored at work?
Re:If only we could harness this in RL (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:achievement porn (Score:3, Insightful)
Care to enlighten us as to the difference between real and virtual entertainment? It sounds like a distinction solely for the sake of looking down on entertainment forms you don't share in personally.
Well (Score:4, Insightful)
It's a Skinner Box. It doesn't just apply to humans; it applies to most animals. It's the same effect that makes rats press levers for food, and that underlies Pavlov's Dog and standard drug dealer techniques.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinner_Box [wikipedia.org]
Farmville short-circuits the reward relationship in a number of psychologically sophisticated ways. It's essentially a hoarding generator with addiction back-off.
Re:Really. (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I think this trend was clear way back in Ultima Online days.
Wander by a "mountainside" and there would be dozens of players just standing there "mining" ore, which they would haul back and smelt to iron, which they would use it to make some crappy item, which they would sell to a shopkeeper for some and then wander off to the mines for another day of hard work...
Re:It mystifies me (Score:5, Insightful)
In real life people have jobs because they either cannot or do not want to start their own business, so simply saying "if you would have invested x amount of time doing y then you'd" whatever is just making a big assumption without really considering what you're saying. Go ask a successful business manager how much more he could accomplish if he spent less time on the golf course (assuming he golfs). I'm sure he would not take it well.
Re:If only we could harness this in RL (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, I disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, I would disagree.
1. The notions that adventure games disappeared because people are dumb, was false all the time. The adventure games market was actually a growing market when it got dumped by the publishers. There never was as much as a dip in sales, it went up each year... then nearly went extinct.
I'm serious. Read some interviews with the Sierra people. Their last adventure game actually sold a lot more units than any of their previous adventure games.
What nearly killed adventures was... 3D. In the 90's, when the tools were in their infancy, the complex scripting and animation that adventure games needed, cost a lot more to do in 3D than 2D. An adventure game suddenly became 10 times more expensive to make. And it sold more units than last year's 2D adventure game... but not 10 times more.
2. Why the FPS nearly killed them is the opposite: early FPS were mindless affairs and dirt-cheap to make. You just needed to license a 3D engine, make some random maps and a couple of models, and you were all set.
Probably most FPS actually sold less units than some adventure games from the same age. But, think of it this way: if it sold half as many units, but cost 4 times less to make, you'd actually make more profit with a FPS. (Or just you'd make a profit at all with a FPS.)
People getting dumber simply wasn't the issue. Bang per buck, FPS in the 90's was simply the better investment of a publisher's money. (Somewhat like why nowadays every publisher wants a slice of the MMO market.)
3. The adventure genre has been actually making a comeback in force. Which kinda disputes the claim that people got dumber.
4. I dunno, economic games don't seem to me quite that dead either. There have been a lot of "tycoon" wannabe games released in the last decade, hotel simulators, restaurant simulators, mall simulators, etc. Including the occasional major title like The Guild 2.
So on the whole, while I won't mod you "flamebait" (and just blew my mod points for this thread by answering instead), I have to wonder if you're seriously into the genres you mourn. I find it hard that someone would be apparently so hard at decrying their loss... but somehow miss all the titles that have been released lately. Are you really a fan of those genres, or, no offense, just wanted to whine about other people's IQ?
Re:It mystifies me (Score:3, Insightful)
If people put a fraction of the time they spend on fake farms into a real business, they'd be rich.
There's a limited number of real-world businesses that can be successful. There's an unlimited number of virtual businesses that can be successful.
Also, starting an unsuccessful real-world business can mess up your life. Starting an unsuccessful virtual business wastes nothing but a few hours of your time.
Re:Stupidity (Score:4, Insightful)
What ever happened to buying old cars and restoring them
And that's different... how? People don't restore some arbitrary car, they restore a 1966 Mustang or a 1960 Corvette. Why? Those cars are objectively not very good for transportation. They restore those because of their virtual attributes: branding, styling, nostalgia.
or going on bike rides or outdoor activites?
If you do those things by yourself, you're weird. What gives meaning to those activities is that they're social activities. And you can engage in the same kind of social activities in many other contexts. And to many urbanites, the idea of socializing during outdoor activities has always been preposterous anyway; why would you want to put up with bug bites and broken bones?
Re:Actually, I disagree (Score:1, Insightful)
People getting dumber is the issue - FPS is the capital of low IQ gamers, this is why every game developer eventually makes an FPS (mass market).
Games like Descent 1 + 2 would never get a green light today because "Guy with a gun" is the most popular game-type.
And how is this different from (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If only we could harness this in RL (Score:1, Insightful)
I would love to own my own business... The progressives are hell-bent at destroying and redistributing wealth, they are dangerous, clueless, and evil.
Yes, because the top 10% controlling 90% of the wealth leaves you so much room to advance in business. I guess the "progressives" are taking away all of the "facts" and "education" from you as well. There is a reason behind why the largest companies refer to the average American as "peasants" and "serfs" in their business plans. Face it, we live in a plutocracy, and "we the people" have a very, very small piece of the pie. If you fear the progressives there is no need for you to buy into a business; you have already been sold a bill of goods....
Also, don't leave out those of us that spend a few minutes on Farmville and such to see what our family does on the web, and to see what kind of programs/malware my laptop is getting exposed to everyday.
Re:Less than 300 IQ? (Score:4, Insightful)
No, he means 21 C.
Re:Business Games (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Actually, I disagree (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, and I learned C while making a variant of it. Nethack is not an adventure game. It is a roguelike game. It has absolutely nothing to do with Monkey Island, Sam & Max Hit the Road, or any other adventure game. So what's your point?
Re:Content filtering :0 (Score:3, Insightful)
This attitude is probably why you're either not a boss or not a smart boss.
I've worked with a lot of people who fucked around playing web games or chatting part of their day. Some of those people were relatively useless and should have been replaced; others were the most productive members of their teams by a wide margin. A good boss can tell the difference between these people.
If Person A gets 10 units of work done in a week and doesn't Facebook, and Person B gets 100 units of work done in a week and plays Farmtown or whatever, you'd be a fool to choose Employee A over B, but that's exactly what you're endorsing whether you realize it or not.
Imaginary products are not new... (Score:4, Insightful)
The idea that imaginary or virtual products are new is really only true in the US Patent Office sense, that is, they are new... on a computer. The truth is that we've been buying virtual products all along. When someone buys an article of clothing from a manufacturer whose products are fashionable, yes, they are buying something real -- shoes, a shirt, a jacket, whatever -- but they are also buying the associated fashionability, which is purely imaginary. People buy all kinds of things for reasons that make the physical object itself a secondary concern. The only thing that has changed is that computers and the Internet have made it possible to dispense with the inessential -- the object -- and directly purchase the intangible benefit.
Looked at another way, buying game-related virtual products is not really any different from a lot of entertainment purchases. When you buy tickets to a concert, what tangible thing are you purchasing? Absolutely nothing. You're paying for an experience. The difference between a musician and a stored value in a game server is, from the point of view of the customer, quite irrelevant: in both cases, the customer is paying to be entertained.
If anything is new here, it's just the introduction of a new medium for entertainment and -- as Apple's recent success amply demonstrates -- brand-based social status contests. That may very well be interesting in its own right, but it doesn't represent anything novel as far as market economics are concerned.
Re:And how is this different from (Score:3, Insightful)
Arguably, sports confer real-world physical advantages, and this is why they were invented.
But you could equally argue that modern video games confer real-world mental advantages.
Meanwhile both can cause injury in their given area by overdoing it - physical injuries, or screwing up your priorities, respectively.
Re:And how is this different from (Score:3, Insightful)
The person you replied to wasn't talking about playing sports. I doubt the GP would have a problem with playing sport. Participating in sport requires you to develop good qualities e.g. the discipline required to get fit and improve your skills, actual teamwork and communication skills.
The GP was talking about spectator sports. And I think he was right. Fans of a team - the hardcore ones who go to every game and watch re-runs on DVD - are living vicariously through their team. It doesn't require any investment other than their time and dollars and provides them with a false sense of achievement if their team does win.