EA Believes Social Gaming's Collapse is Overhyped

[Fanghawk]

EA Believes Social Gaming's Collapse is Overhyped

EA's Peter Moore thinks that the state of social gaming and Zynga's collapse are two different things entirely.

Shortly before Zynga's market bubble burst, Electronic Arts <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/118884-EA-Sues-Zynga-for-Copying-The-Sims-Social>launched a lawsuit against the social games developer. Since then, EA has been more than happy to <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/119175-EA-Standing-Up-for-the-Industry-by-Suing-Zynga>share its public criticisms of the company and the belief that Zynga's business practices were its own undoing. Now, <a href=ttp://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120285-Rumor-Zynga-Hit-With-Big-Layoffs-UPDATED>in the wake of the latest series of Zynga layoffs, EA is arguably in a prime position to gloat with a well-placed "I told you so". Instead, EA COO Peter Moore extended his sympathies to Zynga's former staff and shared his belief that the death of social gaming is greatly exaggerated.

"We always feel bad when people lose their jobs," Moore said. "Our hope is certainly [that] those folks can get re-employed pretty quickly."

Some analysts have suggested that as Zynga falls, social and causal games will fall with it. While Moore stands by his previous comments about Zynga, he isn't especially worried about the state of social gaming itself. "The overheating and overhyping of social gaming over the last year-and-a-half has ... made this an interesting focal point for our industry," Moore explained. "And now the demise is being overhyped the opposite way. I still think there's a strong place for social gaming. I think a lot of social gaming is moving mobile. We feel well positioned to take advantage of that. And people shouldn't read too much into whatever is going on with Zynga."

EA does have quite a bit invested in social gaming markets at the moment, so it's not very likely to join the chorus of those decrying its demise just yet. Moore isn't wrong however; the social opportunities of social media in advertising alone, let alone gaming, <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/118756-EA-Makes-Millions-Using-Facebook-Ads>can produce millions in revenue. Moore's comments about Zynga's staff also happen to be a nice change of pace from EA's recent hostility, even if <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/119546-EA-Hiring-Employees-From-Zynga-Exodus>the layoffs ultimately benefits EA's own workforce.

Source: <a href=http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-10-24-ea-finds-no-joy-in-zyngas-collapse-reckons-social-gaming-was-overhyped>Eurogamer

Permalink

 

[Gizmo1990]

Yes because EA has been dead on with it's predictions so far.

 

[disgruntledgamer]

EA is basically the Donald Trump of gaming in that they really need to STFU.

Seriously EA has no right what so ever to criticize anyone's business practices.

 

[Baldr]

EA is one of the major causes of the social game collapse. Pay-to-play is killing it.

 

[Korzack]

Makes sense, considering EA's planning to ride so much of its future in crow-barring in social aspects in a lot of its future titles, no wonder they'd try and diffuse any panic on problems with that field. It'd the same if there was a casual game slump, what with them owning Pop-cap these days

 

[Baresark]

This is an interesting debate. The problem with Zynga and social gaming (as they call it) is that it was never more than a fad. It's acid washed jeans, not khakis. It was awesome for year here or a year there, but they aren't the backbone of gaming culture. People who are dedicated gamers are the backbone. It's nice when you can get a boost or have a temporary increase in profits, but it will not be beneficial in the long run when you try to argue that it replaces the backbone gaming culture. It's people like myself, the people who grew up playing Street Fighter in the arcades, the person who has a focus on spending extra income on games, people who read gaming websites that keep gaming alive. It has never been and never will be the people waiting for a doctors appointment, or the person who spends an average of 4 hours a day on Facebook.

EA kind of loses sight of this. They see the fad and want that money. They see COD and give us a modern version of MoH. They see people love Facebook and want to shoehorn that into Dead Space. All the while, trying to appeal to the social fads, they drive away their core audience, the people who don't care about displaying their score on Twitter. People like us don't want a barrier between the start screen and building a city on SimCity. We want to press start and make ourselves a thriving metropolis. And along the way, they have said stupid things which hurt them. They say things like single player games are dead and all future games must have a MP component to succeed. These things are not bad in and of themselves, but they drive more people away with how they implement it. One day EA will die and everyone will be like, it sucks those people lost jobs, but ultimately their strives to improve the gaming industry are not universal truths, but just more misguided ideas which are poorly implemented.

The thing that annoys me most about RE6? The advertisements for RE.NET. These things are something I'm not interested in seeing when I load the game. I want to see the game tips or the lore like they did in RE5.

 

[klaynexas3]

Well damn. I came here, read the article, and for once, felt like EA wasn't doing something stupid or adding to any reasons for them to be criticized. Then, I looked in the comments, and there was EA bashing. Seriously, is that all this site is good for now? Shitting on Bioware, EA, and Zynga? Honestly, I bet Bioware could come out with the next Planescape(in terms of quality) game and everyone would still hate it because it's under the EA/Bioware flag. At least this site would.

 

[FEichinger]

... He's right. Zynga and Social Gaming are entirely different things, and Social Gaming is not collapsing.

You know where he's wrong?
Zynga gave everyone the impression that monetizing the shit out of 2% of the consumers, while losing 96% forever was a great idea.

 

[dyre]

EA is basically the Donald Trump of gaming in that they really need to STFU.

Seriously EA has no right what so ever to criticize anyone's business practices.

To be fair, we all criticize stuff all the time. EA's comments just happen to make it to the media more often.

 

[theultimateend]

... He's right. Zynga and Social Gaming are entirely different things, and Social Gaming is not collapsing.

You know where he's wrong?
Zynga gave everyone the impression that monetizing the shit out of 2% of the consumers, while losing 96% forever was a great idea.

What are the other 2% doing?

 

[FEichinger]

... He's right. Zynga and Social Gaming are entirely different things, and Social Gaming is not collapsing.

You know where he's wrong?
Zynga gave everyone the impression that monetizing the shit out of 2% of the consumers, while losing 96% forever was a great idea.

What are the other 2% doing?

Playing for free. Like, entirely free.

 

[theultimateend]

... He's right. Zynga and Social Gaming are entirely different things, and Social Gaming is not collapsing.

You know where he's wrong?
Zynga gave everyone the impression that monetizing the shit out of 2% of the consumers, while losing 96% forever was a great idea.

What are the other 2% doing?

Playing for free. Like, entirely free.

Are you still considered a consumer if you are doing that?

I mean I guess literally you are consuming, but in the capitalist sense I would think you wouldn't be included in the 100% of consumers.

Just like I don't include my cats in video game sales charts because they don't purchase video games.

Edit: Ok that's a lie, my cats often chat with people on wow when I'm in the restroom. mostly yelling "HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNGNGNGNGNGNGNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@!!!!!!KA"

 

[The White Hunter]

Well damn. I came here, read the article, and for once, felt like EA wasn't doing something stupid or adding to any reasons for them to be criticized. Then, I looked in the comments, and there was EA bashing. Seriously, is that all this site is good for now? Shitting on Bioware, EA, and Zynga? Honestly, I bet Bioware could come out with the next Planescape(in terms of quality) game and everyone would still hate it because it's under the EA/Bioware flag. At least this site would.

Don't forget CoD and occasional PC vs Console bullshit springing up it's ugly head!
Oh and gender threads, but theys eem to have fucked off for a bit.

OT: Meh, I dont play social games, unless FPS's count but I don't think they do. MoH Warfighters multiplayer is decent, on that topic (and on the EA topic), but it definately needed 6 more months or so of work, it's so clearly unpolished and not fully tested.

I found bullet proof leaves, I shot a guy through the branches of a tree, none of my shots connected, he took a step forward and deaded me as I reloaded from my vain efforts at tree-murder.

So, how do you like your eggs guys?
I like mine fried on toast.

 

[FEichinger]

snippety snip snip snip

Not a consumer, but a potential one. Anyone who shows interest in the game should be considered "someone who might pay". And even with only few of those people actually playing the game at all after a few weeks, 4%, half of which still don't pay, is quite a disturbing figure.

 

[theultimateend]

snippety snip snip snip

Not a consumer, but a potential one. Anyone who shows interest in the game should be considered "someone who might pay". And even with only few of those people actually playing the game at all after a few weeks, 4%, half of which still don't pay, is quite a disturbing figure.

Fair enough.

I find that as I get older my interest in games has been the same (I still really want to like and play them) but the selection has shrunk considerably. I just cancelled ACIII because I realized I can wait 3 months and get it for 30 bucks cheaper. So I understand you point on "might pay".

I'm thinking the price point just ran away from the quality of games, and folks like EA are partially to blame for it. I know their recent forays into "social games" have been very succesful but pretty terrible personally speaking.

I suspect the only "social" things that will survive for games is the same thing that existed before people gave it a pretentious name, I can't have been the only kid who had a bunch of friends over playing games and laughing/hitting one another with controllers when we lose.

Well damn. I came here, read the article, and for once, felt like EA wasn't doing something stupid or adding to any reasons for them to be criticized. Then, I looked in the comments, and there was EA bashing. Seriously, is that all this site is good for now? Shitting on Bioware, EA, and Zynga? Honestly, I bet Bioware could come out with the next Planescape(in terms of quality) game and everyone would still hate it because it's under the EA/Bioware flag. At least this site would.

I'm reminded of threads about Chris Brown where he says something entirely innocuous and people shit on him because he beat the shit out of a woman. Edit: Note I feel that this is entirely valid, also.

I'm not sure that the vitriol that EA gets is entirely unwarranted, they did things that are disliked by a lot of people and those people never let them live it down.

It's no different in other industries, so I don't see why people white knight and act like its a special exception in gaming or somehow unique to any particular game forums.

Personally I don't buy any of their games because of what happened to Maxis and Westwood, is that fair? I don't know, but it was a personal decision. So yes, if Bioware made a planescape game I wouldn't buy it. Am I wrong for doing so? No.

You don't look like a deep thinker by pointing out that tired old line anymore than folks like myself look like deep thinkers for disliking things that have wronged us. It's simple thought patterns that everyone shares and not something special.

edit #2: Wow...writing is tough as nails when you didn't get any sleep.