Flappy Bird Creator Pulled Game Because it Was "Too Addictive"

[Steven Bogos]

Flappy Bird Creator Pulled Game Because it Was "Too Addictive"

Dong Nguyen says he took down Flappy Bird because it had become an "addictive product."

In an exclusive interview with Nintendo's meddling [http://www.forbes.com/sites/lananhnguyen/2014/02/11/exclusive-flappy-bird-creator-dong-nguyen-says-app-gone-forever-because-it-was-an-addictive-product/] or the game's harsh critical reception that made him pull the plug, but Nguyen insists his reasoning was altruistic.

"Flappy Bird was designed to play in a few minutes when you are relaxed," said Nguyen "But it happened to become an addictive product. I think it has become a problem. To solve that problem, it's best to take down Flappy Bird. It's gone forever."

Nguyen explained that it was guilt, as well as the disruption to his comfortable, normal life (for example, Nguyen was late to the Forbes interview on account of a meeting with the Vietnamese Prime Minister), that motivated him. "I couldn't sleep," he said, of the weeks following Flappy Bird's surprise rise to fame. He said that his conscious has now been relieved, and he has spent the past few days, Internet-free, catching up on slumber.

"I don't think it's a mistake," he said. "I have thought it through." Nguyen declined to confirm the rumor that his app was earning $50,000 per day at it's peak, admitting, "I don't know the exact figure, but I do know it's a lot."

Finally, Nguyen said that the game's resemblance to Nintendo's Super Mario Bros. was purely coincidental, and again stressed that he had not faced any kind of legal threat from the Japanese company.

Well, I didn't really know what Flappy Bird was a week ago, and now I've written two articles about it. One thing is for sure, people take smartphone games seriously these days.

Source: Forbes [http://www.forbes.com/sites/lananhnguyen/2014/02/11/exclusive-flappy-bird-creator-dong-nguyen-says-app-gone-forever-because-it-was-an-addictive-product/]

Permalink

 

[hickwarrior]

Well, all the best to the guy. We can only wonder what actually went through his head, though.

 

[TheIceQueen]

That was a rapid rise and fall. I guess that is the app market for you, though. I am not inclined to believe that it was taken down due to being too addictive. What is the point of doing that? This fad was bound to have died off, so it would make sense to just ride it out, especially given its apparent addictive nature.

 

[kurupt87]

Conscience.

And this whole story is so bizarre. I can't help but bemusedly agree with that final sentence; people really do take smartphone games seriously.

 

[Clovus]

From the Forbes article:

Striking any surface resulted in instant death. Your chance of death multiplied exponentially with each gate you passed.

I'm not sure if the writer never actually tried playing the game or is mathematically challenged.

On Topic: I think it's great that he's doing better now. I always saw this is just a guy teaching himself how to program and make games who accidentally ended up with this weird hit. I could totally see how he was not at all prepared for that. Now he can work on whatever he wants without really worrying about money.

 

[DataSnake]

From the Forbes article:

Striking any surface resulted in instant death. Your chance of death multiplied exponentially with each gate you passed.

I'm not sure if the writer never actually tried playing the game or is mathematically challenged.

My money's on gambler's fallacy. Let's say there's exactly a 50% chance of passing through each gate. Then, the probability of passing through the first two is 25%, probability of clearing the first three is 12.5%, and so on. Basically, your probability of passing through n gates is .5^n, which is an exponential function. This is exactly the same faulty reasoning that leads people to think that a coin that's come up heads twice has an 87.5% chance of coming up tails because the probability of getting three heads in a row is only .125.

 

[Strazdas]

"i pulled my game off because too many people played it". well, i think we got a first one here. when was the last time you ever saw someone in the gaming industry say that.

 

[CriticalMiss]

That was a rapid rise and fall. I guess that is the app market for you, though. I am not inclined to believe that it was taken down due to being too addictive. What is the point of doing that? This fad was bound to have died off, so it would make sense to just ride it out, especially given its apparent addictive nature.

At least he will fade from memory without getting the trademark for 'bird' and turning in to a trademark troll, unlike other mobile developers.

Also if he had a problem with the game being addictive why not put something in to the game to solve that? Like you can only upload a new high score a certain number of times per day/hour/whatever. Not to turn it in to a microtransaction but to limit the amount people play per day since they could get a super high score but they won't be able to show it off on the leaderboards.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Too addictive? I know things like Farmville(and similar games) and real life slot machines are addictive, but those have some depth to them or have a chance of real currency pay out, respectively. Flappy Bird sounds like a game that can be picked up and played for a few minutes while on the bus or waiting and the doctor's office before getting old fast, not something that entices long sessions or short intervals between sessions. There have to be more engaging games out there that have a pick up and play with no learning curve in seconds concept. People across the world have been know to have a detrimental gaming habit form, but that is usually from complex games like WoW or Starcraft. These phone games are just what people pull out when they're bored and have time to spare(or the boss isn't looking).

I think he is denying the truth. He either really is tired of the caustic criticism the game is getting him, or has reached an agreement with a party accusing him of plagiarism that he managed to get a Non-Disclosure Agreement to protect his reputation. Nintendo denies this [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/132138-Nintendo-Denies-Involvement-in-Flappy-Bird-Removal], but they may have signed an NDA. I don't think a major corporation would do such a thing, but Vietnam may have laws in place that give an individual such an advantage. So, I'm leaning towards Dong Nguyen looking at whatever money the game had made him and saying it's enough for him with all vitriol the game is getting him too.

 

[Chuppi]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/132125-Update-Flappy-Bird-Laden-Devices-Selling-for-80-500-Online

Well done pal.
Now people are gonna prostitute themselves, or sell a kidney, to get it.

 

[antidonkey]

At $50k a day, I could handle a whole lot of shit talking about a product I made. I also wouldn't care too much if they weren't using it correctly. Hell, I wouldn't care at $1k a day. There has got to be more to it than this. I'll be shocked if there isn't.

 

[Lvl 64 Klutz]

I have no problem with him shrugging off the Mario Bros. resemblance as no big deal, but *coincidental*!? The obstacles he chooses to use is completely arbitrary, so there's no way he just randomly picked green pipes out of his arse.

 

[loa]

I don't care. The game is down, end of story.
It's his game and he has every right of taking it down for the most idiotic reason you can imagine and it's not your place to judge that.
If the reason he took it down was just to piss everyone off, that's completely within his right to do.
So what does the complex reasoning behind taking it down matter now?

Why do you think we have to care about the "image" of some guy whom we have never heard about before who does the grand act of taking down a simple game he made?
I don't care if he's altruistic. I don't care if he's an asshole. He is not supposed to be my role model or anything like that.
I only do care if he made a good game and that's what I am here for. Not for worship. Not for dehumanizing people.

Why are you trying to make that guy into a celebrity?
Stop.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

At $50k a day, I could handle a whole lot of shit talking about a product I made. I also wouldn't care too much if they weren't using it correctly. Hell, I wouldn't care at $1k a day. There has got to be more to it than this. I'll be shocked if there isn't.

Well, imagine you're an up and coming game developer, and a game you just made for practice became a huge hit. Would you really want to be remembered for a poorly made, insubstantial mobile game rather than for titles you're actually proud of making?

 

[loa]

At $50k a day, I could handle a whole lot of shit talking about a product I made. I also wouldn't care too much if they weren't using it correctly. Hell, I wouldn't care at $1k a day. There has got to be more to it than this. I'll be shocked if there isn't.

Maybe some people just aren't cut out for suddenly being ushered into the spotlight.
That kind of thing effects your life in a pretty significant way you know.

 

[samaugsch]

I have no problem with him shrugging off the Mario Bros. resemblance as no big deal, but *coincidental*!? The obstacles he chooses to use is completely arbitrary, so there's no way he just randomly picked green pipes out of his arse.

Yeah, i highly doubt that whatever "original" design he came up with just happened to look almost, if not exactly like mario pipes.

 

[TelHybrid]

I'm calling publicity stunt. How many people do you think rushed to download it before it was taken down?

 

[wulfy42]

I have not made any games in over 10 years, but, I made games better then flappy birds when I was in Elementary school over 30 years ago on the Apple II. The fact that such a game could make so much money, is insane.

The fact that someone creating such a game basically won the game creators lottery...and then gave it up...is even more insane.

This is a crazy world.