The tech industry spent decades trying to get to the TV, but now that it's finally happening, it turns out not to matter much.Read More
Professionally, I'm fascinated by Candy Crush and similar F2P games. But as a consumer, this kind of thing is just as appealing (link).
It's interesting to see how new input methods and devices shape new game types, as do business models (very obviously in the case of Candy Crush). My colleague Chris Dixon, who's used Oculus, tells me that using a first person shooter in VR could well be problematic - it's just too real.
The Google Trends chart for Flappy Bird is a wonder to behold.
Chris Dixon wrote an interesting piece a while ago (link) talking about how changes in user interface technology lead to changes in productivity applications. The same might be applied to games: this Google Trends chart is a handy short-hand illustration of four games, each of which were driven by a particular model for user interaction:
- Tetris, which began decades ago, was everywhere on button-led feature phones but doesn't really work well with touch screens
- Farmville, one of the biggest of the now-dead genre of Facebook games
- Angry Birds, one of the first big mobile games hits to exploit multi-touch screens effectively
- Candy Crush, the exemplar of the trend for systematic use of psychology (link) to exploit the availability of in-app purchases on smartphones
Games like Candy Crush are massively dependant on the attitudes of the platform owners (both within the game itself and in the visibility that comes from sitting at the top of the top-grossing lists), as was Farmville before it. This would make me slightly nervous if I was in that business. And of course, this poses the question of what changes in interaction models will drive the next wave of innovation in mobile games.