Jump to navigation

Table of contents

Page Previous 1 2 Next

Advertisement

ScamVille Article

Article by Rob Fahey

28 November, 2009

Page 1 of 2. Page 2 ->

Published as part of our sister-site GamesIndustry.biz' widely-read weekly newsletter, the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial is a weekly dissection of one of the issues weighing on the minds of the people at the top of the games business. It appears on Eurogamer after it goes out to GI.biz newsletter subscribers.

The quest to uncover new business models and revenue streams has become something of a crusade for the games business in the past five years. After decades of selling full-price games and the occasional expansion pack, the industry has been forced into rethinking its models by a combination of factors - demographic expansion on the one hand, and technological advancement on the other.

Games are hardly alone in this, of course. The advent of high-speed connections and the rapid pace of change in digital media technology has forced every media business to look hard at its fundamentals. New opportunities have been opened up, of course - consumers now want to access media in contexts which were unthinkable even a few decades ago, which has expended old markets as well as creating brand new ones. Old doors are also shutting, leaving businesses which fail to adapt to new market realities to die slowly, their oxygen supply cut off not only by piracy but by fundamental changes in consumer behaviour and perception.

As such, finding new ways of making money and new classes of product is a healthy and necessary exercise for any industry which wants to survive. However, the recent behaviour of Zynga - possibly the world's most successful casual games company - is a salutary example of the kind of pitfalls which businesses face in creating such new opportunities.

Zynga is a San Francisco-based company which creates games for Facebook, MySpace and other social network platforms. If the name of the company is not familiar, its games certainly will be. Anyone who uses Facebook is bound to have run across Mafia Wars, Dope Wars or FarmVille - the company's most successful game, with over 60 million active users.

These games are fairly straightforward in their concepts, but well-designed in their execution - by no means the pinnacle of casual game design, but good enough to be able to leverage the advantage of their social setting to create a compelling ongoing experience. Scratch the surface, however, and you find that they all share a common business model - one which has come under a great deal of unwelcome scrutiny in recent weeks.

Essentially, the games are based on a "freemium" model. Players can enjoy them for free, in which case Zynga makes a bit of money from straightforward advertising revenues. If they want to buy extra items (or simply to play for longer, by acquiring more "action points" instead of waiting for them to recharge over time), they can do so either with real money (a direct revenue stream from consumers), or by signing up to an offer from one of Zynga's partners.

It's the last part of the equation which has caused the scandal around Zynga's business model. Some of those partners were perfectly legitimate - Netflix, for example, encouraged people to subscribe to a 30-day trial of their service, and provided action points for Zynga games in return. Others, however, amounted to little more than scams, often promising people free items and then signing them up for subscription services which cost vast amounts of money and were nigh-on impossible to cancel.

Other partner offers would install applications on players' computers which were little more than malware, interfering with their programs and operating system and providing no clear way to uninstall the offending software. Some of them were merely extremely morally dubious - others may well have been illegal, at least in certain jurisdictions which don't take kindly to companies deliberately scamming their consumers.

What's certainly the case is that such scams were a breach both of Zynga's own restrictions on advertising - which the company appears to have completely ignored - and of Facebook's restrictions. As such, Facebook pulled the company's most high-profile game launch, FishVille, after only two days of operation, only restoring it to the site when Zynga had removed the offending partner offers.

Advertisement

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-34 of 34 in total

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
Dizzy
28/11/09 @ 12:06
#1
+19
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
When will people realize that "free" is never free.
rogueJT
28/11/09 @ 12:25
#2
+10
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
All I play from that company is Word Twist.

mindnumbingly addictive mind you.

Edit: Negged for Stating that I play Word Twist and find it addictive. Really hate this Fkn community.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 28/11/09 @ 12:39
Sharzam
28/11/09 @ 12:26
#3
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Screwing over consumers is something all companys do whether big or small, they do what they can to survive its just a matter of how good there PR department is at spin and damage limitation. As for illegal practises well that is a fine line just ask microsoft and the europeon courts.
Kanjin
28/11/09 @ 12:59
#5
+3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
On one hand... disgraceful conduct by the company, but also, how naive do you have to be to fall for dubious links + downloads??
RobotRocker
28/11/09 @ 13:07
#6
+12
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
how naive do you have to be to fall for dubious links + downloads??

Because Facebook apps currently have the connotation that the majority of them are safe. Very few people would believe that they have malware in them and most think that Facebook app games are just like flash games.

Its an exceedingly scummy practice, particularly with Farmville attracting a very young audience who wouldn't understand it too.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 28/11/09 @ 13:08
Jeepers
28/11/09 @ 13:09
#7
+12
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"The whole affair is an object lesson in how not to do new business models."

That's an interesting piece of analysis on a company that says it'll turn over $200m in the coming year.
rogueJT
28/11/09 @ 13:12
#8
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Everyone on my facebook seems to play Mafia Wars or Farmville, with males leaning toward the former and females the latter.

Fairly awful games though imo, PLAY WORD TWIST!
Hantheman
28/11/09 @ 13:39
#9
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Will found a stray cow in his farm.

Adopt it?
captain_Carl
28/11/09 @ 13:55
#10
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Farmville is addictive. I would never actually click one of the bullshit links they post up for rewards though. You can tell by the names that they are scams
Shinji [mod]
28/11/09 @ 14:10
#11
+3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
That's an interesting piece of analysis on a company that says it'll turn over $200m in the coming year.

Or rather, a company which, having announced that it expected to turn over $200 to $250 million, is now actually going to lose somewhere between 20 and 70 per cent of that revenue - and that's assuming the whole affair doesn't hit the mainstream press and cause serious reputation damage.

Zynga can do it because they're a private company. They'll survive. If a publicly listed company had made this kind of screw-up, they'd have been crucified - you'd be looking at top-level resignations. So yes, it's an object lesson for existing games industry companies in how not to approach these new markets - assuming that you want to keep your job at the end of the day.
notmyrealname
28/11/09 @ 14:12
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
nice article

''Old doors are also shutting, leaving businesses which fail to adapt to new market realities to die slowly,''

Quite an assumption there.

''It's a quick way to make money, certainly, but also a certain way to limit your sector's growth. ''

True but.. seriously who'd care in one of those companies? You make moneyyyy!

1 more edit: It would suit the article more if it made use of hyperlinks or source quotes. There are a lot of of.. some might say's in it.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 28/11/09 @ 14:22
Kerome
28/11/09 @ 14:26
#13
+3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The other thing that's often not talked about is how these kinds of free-to-play business models distort gameplay. For example, say you were to make a free-to-play online version of SimCity, the first thing you'd do is insert some growth limits which needed to be paid off in real cash so that you can "monetise" the game. Never mind that it makes no sense from a simulation point of view, and is detrimental to the game experience...

It's very possible to start building games that are little more than machines for milking the player-base of cash. A lot of Asian free-to-play games are going in that direction, and I think it's sad to see. Give me something like Dragon Age over that crap any day, at least there's a game with dramatic verve and storytelling backbone! And I don't mind paying for it, either.
floppylobster
28/11/09 @ 14:32
#14
-3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"...consumers (which are not, contrary to what some business leaders seem to believe, a limitless resource)"

Except with today's rate of breeding and the expansion of the target demographics - they are a limitless resource.
jellyhead
28/11/09 @ 14:36
#15
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I don't touch any of the Facebook games and probably never will but my facebook list is full of people who should know better playing the hell out of these games and accepting any bloody app that someone sends them. Gullible people are gullible unfortunately.
kipper
28/11/09 @ 15:30
#16
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Sounds like these social networking games may be going the way of mobile phone games, the reputation of which has been ruined (IMO) by subscription crap applications advertised continually on tv, and kids scams such as Habbo Hotel and such. I used to work for Mblox, so I know what kind of immoral/illegal scammers they work for.
ZeroAX
28/11/09 @ 15:41
#17
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
i'm surprised someone hasn't sued them for ripping off every single game idea in the world. and mostly sim expansions
Alkeno
28/11/09 @ 16:11
#18
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
This story goes straight to Facebook, maybe I can get my friends to stop flooding it with lost cows...
FairgroundTown
28/11/09 @ 16:31
#19
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@kipper - I'd never really thought about it consciously, but you are so right - I never buy phone games, because I never buy anything on my phone, because... I have a mental association of phone = scam, caused by ringtone rip-offs etc.

And I've bought games for my iPod nano, so it isn't like I'm put off by form factor or anything!
mowgli
28/11/09 @ 17:04
#20
+4
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Sorry to be a bitch but does anyone else love the irony in this article being accompanied by the scamming train2game banners?
Jeepers
28/11/09 @ 18:38
#21
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Or rather, a company which, having announced that it expected to turn over $200 to $250 million, is now actually going to lose somewhere between 20 and 70 per cent of that revenue - and that's assuming the whole affair doesn't hit the mainstream press and cause serious reputation damage.

Even if the worst-case scenario of 70% revenue loss is accurate, the cost of maintaing the business is as close to zero as makes no difference. I'd love to see the P/E but - as you say - they're a private co.

Zynga draws a substantial revenue from their market - whilst the author might not like how they do this, the fact remains that $200m/pa isn't chump-change by any stretch.
persus-9
28/11/09 @ 18:41
#22
+3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Quoting notmyrealname: "'Old doors are also shutting, leaving businesses which fail to adapt to new market realities to die slowly,' Quite an assumption there."

I'm sure the former employees of Woolworths and Zavvi will all be very happy to hear that the failure of the old media business models is still just an assumption.

orakio
28/11/09 @ 19:27
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Well, as good a time as any to stop playing their games then. I'll give it my best ^_^
Daymare
28/11/09 @ 21:09
#25
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
lessofthat
29/11/09 @ 01:49
#26
+3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'm not a natural fan of Zynga (I run a little social gaming startup that's nominally a competitor, like minnows are competitors to sharks) but there are serious gaps in this.

Here's Michael Arrington's follow-up post (from November 2): 'But boy am I surprised today to see Zynga, the worst of the offenders, admit publicly to the problem and take quick steps to change'

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/02/zyn...

>is now actually going to lose somewhere between 20 and 70 per cent of that revenue -

This broke two months before the end of the year. They won't lose the revenue they made in the rest of the year.

>Zynga can do it because they're a private company. They'll survive. If a publicly listed company had made this kind of screw-
>up

The big and constant buzz in the social gaming world is that Zynga are seeking an IPO. Which is why they're moving to clean this up so first.

IMO they knew it was a problem and they had their response ready prepared for when it finally broke: a cynical response obviously but a pretty comprehensive one.
Pastici
29/11/09 @ 09:40
#27
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@lessofthat Fiscal years and calendar years are different...
lessofthat
29/11/09 @ 10:12
#28
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Pastici you're right of course. 2am moment. Substitute five months for two months. Weaker version of the same point.

@Jeepers 70% is a high-end estimate to say the least, and it's a number I've only ever heard as an industry average, not specifically about Zynga. Although "the cost of maintaing the business is as close to zero as makes no difference.".... I wish that were true, or I wouldn't be panicking about scaling. :) Zynga employed about 200 staff last time I saw, and they must be spending a fair amount on infrastructure. But you're right, it's a very profitable industry.
Sunyavadin
29/11/09 @ 10:44
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Now do an Evony article!
Jeepers
29/11/09 @ 11:57
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@lessofthat, re number of employees:
'Close to zero' was a silly description of my part, but I'd still love to be producing their margins!

200 employees at (say £75,000p/a including NI and servicing and all that guff): £15m p/a.
Office space and infrastructure: Estimate at a high £5m p/a.

I've not counted hosting (I assume that Facebook don't host these apps?), but costs in the region of £20m p/a are still very small compared to their revenue.

Good luck with your business - and remember us little guys when you're counting your gold pieces :)
Ergates_Antius
29/11/09 @ 16:43
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Pastici: I'm guessing Zynga is an American company, in which case their fiscal year runs October to October, meaning they'd have just finished it.
Mentalist(air)
29/11/09 @ 16:53
#32
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I see this article is hosting adverts for Train2Game. Maybe they've paid for 'scam' as an adword.
BlankOBlank!
30/11/09 @ 10:40
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"the impact could be immense, not just for one company but for the entire casual games sector."

Playfish. Social gaming without treating the customer like a mug since 2007.
dirigiblebill
30/11/09 @ 14:17
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Good summary of the issues by Rob, good (and challenging) comments from industry insiders (or people who appear to be so). Thanks everybody.

Comments: 1-34 of 34 in total

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Get Games.  Download Great PC Games!

X View gallery