Hey Micha! > I have to say I'm with Simon on this one. I think that to see > Farmville as punk rock is ridiculous, since it's a huge profit seeking > corporation, with $500,000 in profit already and a projected worth of > billions.
I'm not sure about the size of Zynga, but they are certainly very efficient in their business model. However, I do not see their profit as amoral per se, in the same way that I don't consider any form of music as politically critical per se. As Julian said, the analogy between casual gaming and playing punk rock seems true on the level of strategies of circulation: both are cheap, adaptable and easy to be grasped by "the masses." While with the Sex Pistols this meant a break with the paradigm of its time's cultural industry, in Farmville it is just the best way to employ the technical possibilities of social networks - even in terms of playtesting and prototyping. Zynga seems to incorporate the social dimension of their services not only as game mechanics and marketing strategies, but also as a source for agile development. But, as you said, Minecraft's Notch does so as well. Likewise, his game seems to be pretty lucrative for a one-man endeavour. So what is the difference between both? One answer might be the degree of creative engagement players have with the gaming system. In that sense, Minecraft really is a wonderful reference for subcultural possibilities. As a non-player, I'm mesmerized by the shrines, architectures and automata people build within it and share elsewhere (mostly in youtube). However, I feel this is false distinction between it and Farmville - which, to a certain extent, is even more "sandboxy," and also allow some pixel-like crafting, which players share with each others in the appropriate forums. [1] Maybe for us, as critical spectators, there is a huge aesthetic difference between these two kinds of user-generated content - as there might be between the sophistication of their game mechanics? But I wonder if for the players (which are nothing more than "prosumers" in both cases) one creative exercise is less valid or enjoyable than the other. I must say that, for me, the crucial difference between one and the other is the kind of relation that exists between the gaming system and its platform of circulation. That implies in to what extent Zynga depends on Facebook - and, at the same time, to what extent playing Farmville commits the player to this social network. Minecraft seems to be much less constrained in that sense: it can be installed in any server, played offline, etc. (I wonder if Dave Griffiths is still around to tell us a bit how Naked on Pluto [2] employs the structure of Facebook and Twitter, and if there is any particular strategy in this interaction). Best! Menotti [1] http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/social/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=150493 [2] http://pluto.kuri.mu/ _______________________________________________ empyre forum [email protected] http://www.subtle.net/empyre
