FarmVille Now Worth More Than EA 344
tekgoblin writes "Zynga, the creators of the popular hit Facebook game FarmVille, should be happy today as the company's worth has passed that of EA (Electronic Arts)."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
FarmVille Now Worth More Than EA
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde
Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
I can already see how many posts here will be about how dumb the game is and how only dumb people play it, but I don't think it matters. People like it and the company is making more money than EA. They don't have piracy problems, they have lower development costs and a have HUGE untapped market to gain that will most likely grow a lot more in the future as this all is still so new. But that they already passed the industry giant EA really shows something.
And good for them and the people who play FarmVille and other social games on social networking games. I think it has been over 20 years that we have talked about how to get gaming to be more "normal" and how to get girls to game too - this is it. Let people enjoy the games they like.
Estimated Worth and the 7 Eleven Stratagem (Score:5, Insightful)
Sort of nitpicking but if you click through to the businessweek source [businessweek.com] article, you'll notice that Zynga Game Network's value is an estimated worth while EA's value is a stock-market value. You should note that the former is estimated by SharesPost Inc. while the latter is determined by the Nasdaq Stock Exchange (in the past year EA has slumped almost 20%).
That's not to say Zynga isn't worth this much, I had a very shocking realization one day as I went to 7 Eleven to pick up some milk. Zynga has partnered with 7 Eleven [7-eleven.com] in selling and marketing FarmVille, Mafia Wars and YoVille items and 'currency.' That's right, like a phone card you can get a prepaid Farmville card at any 7 Eleven (at least in my area) and they were putting free items on Slurpees, Big Gulps, coffee, candy and fast food they sold in the store. So you'd get this little peel off thing giving you a bulletproof vest in Mafia Wars and then it'd tell you how to log in to use it. I bet that alone got a lot more people hooked on Facebook -- just to get to their free item in Zynga's game (and this is why I feel borderline justified to call it a stratagem instead of strategy)!
For sometime now you've been able to buy WoW prepaid cards at 7 Eleven and there's been a handful of Xbox/PS/Wii games behind the counter but when I saw the shelf space and signs devoted to this stuff I knew it was going to dwarf all other forms of gaming very quickly. I know there are plenty of other reasons [slashdot.org] but when you see something completely outside the realm of where you think you should see a social game (I was going to 7 Eleven to pick up some skim milk), it really hits you right in the face how big this is going to get. Put yourself even spread out across the entire United States with ~10,000 locations of advertising and insertion and you're going to beat anything EA can put out with its billion of dollars. In order to compete with this, EA would have to put a demo disc of four different games targeting different ages for free on the counter of 7 Elevens (like a separate AOL disc for three different consoles and CPU). Despite how relatively inexpensive that would be for them, they aren't going to do that. And that's how Zynga wins out, the illusion that it's 'free' paired with efficient mass distribution of the free concept.
This seems appropriate. (Score:3, Insightful)
"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." - H.L. Mencken.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
I can already see how many posts here will be about how dumb the game is and how only dumb people play it
This was my knee-jerk reaction when I first heard of Farmville.
Let people enjoy the games they like.
After I got over my indignant nerdrage, this was the line of thinking I took. To me, a game like Farmville is a waste of time...but then again, I'm sure there are plenty of people that think putting 100+ hours into Oblivion or lord knows how many hours into MMOs is also a waste of time.
"Different games for different lames", as a fellow gamer in my office put it.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
If you put a value to your time and then do ANYTHING that is "less profitable" than that perceived value then you are wasting time, right?
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
Misleading at best (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Social games (Score:3, Insightful)
We had this discussion yesterday here on Slashdot.
There are plenty of difficult modern titles out there if you want a challenge. Try beating Ninja Gaiden Black on the highest difficulty. Try playing The Dark Spire or any of the Etrian Odyssey games. Try playing Demon Souls. Try playing Dragon Age on the hardest difficulty setting. Hell, try playing Fallout New Vegas on the highest difficulty setting.
I get what you are saying about a general shift towards more "simplified" gaming, but there are plenty of challenges out there...you just gotta know where to look for them.
EA had every opportunity (Score:2, Insightful)
I've always felt that one of EA's greatest challenges has been recognizing disruptive technology and capitalizing on it.
This played out numerous times with the PS3 vs. Wii, PSP vs. DS, and especially regarding micro-transactions. There is a producer at EA who, since at least 2005, was not only aware of how important MTX was in Asia, but that we couldn't keep believing that cultural barriers wouldn't keep games on the pay-per-month subscription model forever here in the U.S. I remember going to his brown-bag lunches and saying "Wow, here's a guy who gets it!" But no one took social gaming or micro-transactions seriously back then: it was Sims, Warhammer, Madden, and Pogo. Speaking of, imagine if EA had immediately recognized how powerful a platform Facebook was, and flooded the early app/games scene with MTX versions of Pogo games?
Now we're seeing the advent of Social Gaming 1.0 mixed with these micro-transactions, and already it's been so disruptive that a completely new company with low budget games has surpassed an industry giant that spends tens of millions per title. Why? Because the market has been broadened yet again, far beyond the bounds of the comfort zones most larger companies have established for themselves. EA hasn't ignored this, of course, but they reacted late and with the time-honored response of buying a company that specializes in the area, hoping to get into the market immediately.
Admittedly, the current state of games on Facebook is... I don't know, someone said it was like the Atari days before the big crash. Yet imagine what Social Gaming 2.0 will look like as more high-quality games and free-to-play 3D MMOs start hitting the browsers.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
with lot of time to waste
"Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted." -John Lennon
Re:Wait, I'm confused (Score:5, Insightful)
This says more about market analysts and valuation than either company. Remember back when AOL bought Time Warner with essentially monopoly money? Same thing here.
The valuation of something becomes detached from their revenue, assets, long-term prospects, and other things. You get a completely fictional valuation that in a couple of months or years won't be worth a damn. In the mean time, someone will cash out a huge amount of actual dollars, and leave everyone else holding the bag when the value of this stuff becomes worthless.
Unless you're a day trader from the 90s, or were involved in selling Asset Backed Paper Commodities, you should treat this like a temporary blip that has nothing to do with actual money.
Basically, this is equating a fad with no real tangible value with real assets and revenues. Only the suckers buy into this.
Re:Social games (Score:4, Insightful)
My obligatory response to any mention of Zynga games:
"Addicted to Fake Achievement" :
http://www.pixelpoppers.com/2009/11/awesome-by-proxy-addicted-to-fake.html [pixelpoppers.com]
I was hooked on MafiaWars and Starfleet Commander for a spell. Quit cold turkey a few months back.
I do have a whole new understanding of my hamsters on their treadmills now.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
My wife likes to point out that me playing Civ III is just about the same as her playing Farmville. The only difference is that in Civ III I get to kill people.
Re:Social games (Score:1, Insightful)
If you don't like it, don't play it.
Why be an asshole and shit on someone else's fun ?
Oh, I'm sorry it's because you're an asshole.
Re:Estimated Worth and the 7 Eleven Stratagem (Score:1, Insightful)
"Zynga Game Network's value is an estimated worth while EA's value is a stock-market value"
I work for an investment bank that has just posted a 1.2bn profit for the quarter. They did this by buying items that don't exist, using money they don't have and selling them to people who don't actually want it.
Economics is a funny thing - the only thing that really matters is that bottom line.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
And you use strategy and planning, and actually think. Versus simply clicking on what's flashing. There is a huge difference between "traditional" games and Farmville type stuff. The majority of "casual" games are made for people who don't like thinking and just want to... do repetitive things I guess.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
As opposed to the grown man in his thirties who goes into a fit of depression when some millionaires on TV don't catch a ball in a kid's game?
We aren't all writing the next great novel. What are you working for anyway? To relax and amuse yourself I assume. If people want to play a game let them.
Not bad for a rip off of Farm Town (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Social games (Score:4, Insightful)
Does it make it less enjoyable for her? I'd say she probably is happy it isn't as complex and she can just poke around for a few minutes a day and be done with it.
Re:Social games (Score:4, Insightful)
Pretty much all computer games are about fake achievements - apart from possibly the drums on Rock Band/Guitar Hero, and soon the real guitar playing on Rock Band 3, which translate to skills that could actually have real world applications. The worth of real world achievements is probably pretty hard to define too though.
For example you could learn how to do a backflip. It looks cool, and is certainly an achievement as it requires getting over your fears and perfecting your technique. But it is essentially useless. Is it a fake achievement? I'm not sure. People certainly think it's cool anyway. But, plenty of people must think Farmville is cool too.. if someone is happy with virtual achievements, then I suppose just let them be. They'll get bored eventually. Even what you consider real achievements will get boring eventually if you don't vary it up.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well duh? (Score:2, Insightful)
Electronic Arts are the main reason what is wrong with gaming industry today. Their attempt to be a Hollywood or the games by using same old crap is unmatched in the gaming industry:
1. Take a money making franchise (Need For Speed, Battlefield, the Sims, all sorts of sport simulations)
2. Make it flashier, update the present day data if there are any (new cars, planes, players) and clog the brand new machines into oblivion
3. ???
4. Profit!
Yes, yes, there are some high quality games in their arsenal (Crysis, System Shock, Mass Effect) - but do they come from EA? Or do they come from some group of talented programmers, still untainted by ridiculous management suggestions, that was later being bought by them?
But most annoying thing is their utmost stupidity then it comes to political correctness. I'm playing a goddamn game, what is wrong with me playing as Taliban?
All Hollywood and no soul.
Re:Wait, I'm confused (Score:5, Insightful)
They're welcome to do so. But, it was major brokerage houses who were betting on the funny money that led to the meltdown of financial markets. Gamble with your own money if you're willing/can afford it -- don't mingle my money in with the monopoly money though.
Having a viable, long-term business model, operations, assets, and profits isn't antiquated. Though, over the last 10-15 years, stock-holders have come to expect unreasonable growth, leading to companies making bad decisions to make the numbers for this quarter match what is expected -- usually at the expense of future results as they gut their operations so they can "improve efficiencies".
So you cut your workforce now, show an improved profit, get your bonuses and run. And, in five years, you no longer have the ability to make product.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is that Civ III is a game. Farmville is a drug. Zynga employs full-time psychologists and their "games" serve one purpose: Make you return and return and return.
There've been some excellent articles including some with real research and investigative journalism. Anyone who still thinks that Zynga makes games has been living under a rock.
Re:Social games (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, a lot of people who play farmville DON't like the game. They feel trapped and socially obligated to help their friends out. That's why Farmville is evil. It's OK for those who like the game, but for those who don't but still play, it's pure evil.
By the same measure, Civ V is partly evil. I love the game, but dragging at work because of "one more turn" hitting 4AM is just nasty.
Kind of a biased rating system. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Misleading at best (Score:3, Insightful)
I think he's not so much talking about people leaving FaceBook.
FaceBook are currently allowing third parties to put games on their network. They probably won't change that, but they could decide to try and make their own games and block every one else. Having your companies entire livelihood depend on someone else (who has proven themselves to be fickle in the past) is not a good long-term strategy.
Re:Kind of a biased rating system. (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean it's bad. 'Good' is highly subjective. I think sports are idiotic because it consists of people throwing/hitting random objects around on fields. Does that mean I think that anyone who likes them is an idiot or are wrong? No. It's just my opinion, like that is yours.
Re:Social games (Score:3, Insightful)
Is this Farmville game actually hard / exciting, or is it an exercise in button pushing?
If pushing buttons is fun, who cares?
Most games are "button pushing" these days. Even the more tactical ones, since most strategies are long discovered and explained.
Re:Social games (Score:3, Insightful)
This is where humans are really fundamentally different. Some find that work is mind-numbingly boring, and when they go home they want something mentally challinging so they play a highly multitasking RTS, a twitching FPS or a deeply strategic TBS. Then there are the people that find that work is all the work they need, and when they come home they just want to zone out.
Not do nothing, because that is too boring but put on some light entertainment on TV. Read a tabloid or gossip magazine. Turn in to same "easy listening" radio channel. Farmville is a game for those people, or rather it's not a game and they don't play to win. It's just something they do to pass the time, just like watering the plants on the windowsill.