Update: PopCap Bails On Google+

[azukar]

Well, if anything was going to dent Facebook's market share, it would have been Google. Its apparent failure is kinda troubling. Maybe Google should've done a forced takeover of Facebook years ago...

I don't play games on either platform (and I block any requests that come through) so I guess this doesn't really affect me.

What needs to happen now is, Blizzard merges with Facebook and Google (and maybe Redtube et al). The company they create would probably account for 95% of all Internet traffic, ever.

 

[Xannidel]

I have played a few games on Facebook and they are all...well "meh" I guess is the word I am looking for. They CAN be addicting as long as you ignore that the freebies they hand out go away rather quickly so it "indirectly tries to force" you to pay for their virtual coins to get a better enjoyment factor out of their games.
Personally, there are better flash games out there for people to mess around on and they normally do not give you temp perks that are easy to spend.

On that note, I have never been a huge Google fan (Tired of hearing them try to get me to make some stupid Google account EVERY TIME that I downloaded a program.) Plus I have been a Facebook person since 08 and have no real reason to change to G+. It is a shame that a product like G+ is not as popular but maybe this is a good thing, now they can put more focus on other projects.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

Never checked out Google+, but then again, I've barely been on Facebook. I'm really not getting what's the big deal with most social networking sites.

 

[unwesen]

I, for one, am fairly happy that Google+ is falsely reported to be "troubled". It keeps away the inane drivel that prevented me from using other, similar, sites. Keep up the good work, Escapist!

 

[RvLeshrac]

The irony here, is that by weaking Facebook's competitors, developers are acting against their own best interests. Facebook's immense popularity and unchallenged position in the social gaming market means it can get away with taking a hefty chunk out of game revenue. Facebook takes a 30 percent cut of any revenue generated on its service while Google+ takes only 5 percent. Though EA seems to believe that a 70% cut of something is worth more than a 95% cut of nothing.

A fine example of a collective action problem. Developers as a whole are acting against their best interests by, individually, acting in their own interests. It (apparently) makes no profit to develop for Google+, so developers develop for Facebook because that's where the money is. While, yes, this does strengthen Facebook's position and allows them to take an enormous cut, who wants to be the patsy who loses money developing for Google+? Such would be quite a generous service to all the other developers, but ultimately self-defeating.

Really, if Google+ is serious about competing with Facebook, it should maybe pay developers to stay. Otherwise it will just be "Facebook, without all the people or features!"

This effect is actually called Tragedy of the commons, though you can't really "deplete" internet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

Companies working solely in their own interest without regard for the world is also known as "Why we can't have nice things."

 

[theultimateend]

Google never fails. Google is simply letting Facebook win this one to lull us into a false sense of security. All hail glorious overlord Google, our lord and saviour!

Facebook is doing a mighty good job of breaking thing on their own.

If Google just sits back I'm sure they'll eventually pop in.

Or maybe we'll get beyond social networks to something more interesting . Like Backgammon.

 

[roushutsu]

I've tried both Facebook and Google+. Didn't care for either. I prefer the simplicity of Twitter myself. But regardless, that kinda sucks that gaming companies are bailing left and right like that.

 

[wsmieszek]

But... but... you can wear monocles on G+ Hangouts!

 

[PingoBlack]

So, add revenue based game cannot survive on add free G+ service? Are authors of this piece basing their "troubled" remark on some actual data?

Since you know ... Google failed to put adds on G+ because they are idiots?

Or perhaps, G+ users are not the kind of people to play spam generating games that only serve the purpose of generating more adds, but instead play their paid for Android versions?

The Twilight Zone ... *ominous music*

 

[Esotera]

Google Plus is so much better than facebook, and with the might of google behind it I'm fairly sure it will succeed or evolve into a new service that will succeed. Especially if Project Glass becomes a massive hit. This definitely isn't a good sign though.

 

[antipunt]

You've heard of Google+, right? It's kind of like Facebook, only ... uh

oh Grey; you kill me

I'm sorry. Can someone tell me what "Google+" is?

The irony of this question in the context of this article is so juicy

 

[Strazdas]

i use google+ for about 1 minute a day. that is more than i use facebook (which is 0 minutes a day). so yeah. but it didnt went the way i wanted really, i was hoping for a real deal here, but google dissapoints lately.