[HN Gopher] Zynga shuts down FarmVille after 11 years
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Zynga shuts down FarmVille after 11 years
        
       Author : azhenley
       Score  : 146 points
       Date   : 2021-01-01 12:22 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | richardfey wrote:
       | Let's read now how to whitewash game addiction design..
        
       | Can_Not wrote:
       | Hopefully all the farmville clones marketing themselves as
       | simcity clones are next?
        
       | ransom1538 wrote:
       | I do not understand the legal consequences of this. There were
       | whales that paid thousands to have items in the game - those just
       | vanish?
       | 
       | Edit: These whales took the game seriously. "Meet you at the
       | office to discuss something" serious. I expect a class action
       | very quickly. Disclosure: worked at zynga.
        
         | Jach wrote:
         | What did you do at Zynga? It's surprising to think any gamer
         | let alone an employee at a game studio (let alone a studio
         | where whale hunting is the dominant business model) would think
         | this is a new phenomenon and be confused in any way about what
         | happens next. But anyway, nothing happens -- the servers shut
         | down, the game is no more, no one gets sued. I don't even have
         | to go find the EULA to be sure that it contains a clause about
         | waiving class action rights in case anyone wanted to try.
         | FarmVille isn't the first game and won't be the last game to do
         | this. If anything, it's rather refreshing to see a non-gacha
         | game in the long chain of shutdowns.
        
         | darkerside wrote:
         | The Lifecycle of Software Objects by Ted Chiang explores this
         | topic very well
        
         | mst wrote:
         | The question is who would they sue. I mean, the process seems
         | to've been roughly
         | 
         | - Apple decided not to support Flash on mobile
         | 
         | - Everybody else decided to try and deprecate Flash as a
         | browser plugin
         | 
         | - Adobe EOLed Flash
         | 
         | - Facebook EOLed support for Flash games
         | 
         | - Zynga EOLed FarmVille
         | 
         | "Whose fault this actually is" seems tricky enough to determine
         | morally, let alone legally.
        
           | tomaszs wrote:
           | It is interesting since it is not pure EOL. I mean, if
           | Microsoft discontinues support for Windows it does not force
           | you to uninstall it. And with Flash it is exactly the case.
           | Each other day it prompts me to uninstall it even while I
           | didn't ask for any of such support.
           | 
           | It seems like Adobe gave itself permission to control what is
           | on my computer. But does it really have authority to do so?
        
             | ComputerGuru wrote:
             | Actually, all Adobe-provided flash distributions will
             | refuse to run past a certain date. You'll have to go back a
             | few versions to find one compiled without the kill switch.
             | To use it, you'll literally have to run it in a VM on an
             | outdated OS with the system time set back a few years.
        
               | blibble wrote:
               | or just patch the check out?
               | 
               | I'm surprised someone hasn't done that already?
        
               | tomaszs wrote:
               | Thanks, I didn't know that. Seems like Adobe took
               | enormous effort to kill all software written with Flash.
               | While I understand some security concerns I can not stop
               | thinking it is just another way to cripple the web.
               | Obviously propertiary app platforms gain a lots with this
               | move.
        
               | colejohnson66 wrote:
               | How do proprietary platforms gain a lot with Adobe
               | killing Flash? Flash itself _was_ proprietary. And Adobe
               | is advocating for a _not proprietary_ alternative that
               | was recently released and is called HTML5.
               | 
               | Sure, killing Flash sucks for all the games, but Adobe
               | isn't really doing anything illegal.
        
               | benibela wrote:
               | What about the standalone flash version, "projector"?
        
           | giancarlostoro wrote:
           | Theres been games that have ported over multiple platforms.
           | Take for example Habbo Hotel. Started off with Shockwave,
           | then before that EOL'd they rewrote it in Flash, and now they
           | are working on a Unity web assembly based rewrite. I think
           | the reality is FarmVille isn't as popular as it once was. I
           | haven't heard of anybody playing it in years. Funny how games
           | got people to be far more active on Facebook but their usage
           | died down significantly over time. With how addictive those
           | games were for some its probably for the best.
        
             | theshrike79 wrote:
             | Also Habbo Hotel is like one three applications the company
             | has to support, so porting it to new platforms is
             | reasonable.
             | 
             | Zynga has a dozen high-performing games currently running,
             | the original Farmville isn't one of those.
        
               | giancarlostoro wrote:
               | You are probably right although its parent company does
               | own several other companies as well.
        
           | sigotirandolas wrote:
           | Morally, shouldn't it clearly be Zynga's fault, since the
           | game was designed so that it _only_ runs on top of a
           | technology stack that can not be replicated by third parties
           | _and only they_ are technically capable of changing this
           | design?
        
             | theshrike79 wrote:
             | So should companies who provide software and devices worth
             | MILLIONS to factories also port those from DOS 4.something
             | to newer operating systems?
             | 
             | Because they don't. A friend had to source BIOS chips for
             | fried ones for an out of warranty CNC machine from around
             | the world just to not have it fail completely.
        
             | m1gu3l wrote:
             | Software developers now have a moral obligation to make
             | sure their code is ready to run on any future tech stack?
             | Sounds .... not correct.
        
               | sigotirandolas wrote:
               | No, you don't have a moral obligation for it to run in
               | any future tech stack. But it should be able to run in
               | the same tech stack it was running before, or provide
               | some way to interoperate. The game shouldn't be designed
               | in a way that makes it possible for someone else to
               | unilaterally shut down the game with no recourse.
               | 
               | To illustrate, if FarmVille were an offline game that
               | costed $1000, I could still set up a Windows XP computer,
               | install Flash, and play it. It's not trivial, but it's
               | very doable and legal.
               | 
               | But instead, actual FarmVille is designed so that it
               | needs an online infrastructure (so far so good, it's a
               | core part of the game after all), _but by design this
               | infrastructure can only be provided by Zynga_. You can 't
               | replicate it even if you want to.
        
               | watwut wrote:
               | By this logic, making roblox games is immoral?
        
               | sigotirandolas wrote:
               | I'm not very familiar with Roblox, but if I understand
               | it, it's an online platform that allows others to build
               | games on top of it, and like Farmville the servers are
               | exclusively provided by Roblox.
               | 
               | In this case, I would say the moral fault lies mainly in
               | Roblox, since they are the ones providing the platform
               | and hence making the decision to exclusively provide the
               | servers (and that moral fault has not yet happened, it
               | would only happen if when they shut down they don't
               | provide an alternative).
               | 
               | If you are someone building on top of Roblox, I don't
               | think you deserve the same amount of fault, but it's
               | certainly something you have to consider. It's also a
               | risk in that building on top of this design leaves you
               | open to being de-platformed (like, for example with the
               | iOS Store if Apple doesn't like your application).
               | 
               | For what it's worth, I don't think Roblox or Zynga _are_
               | immoral because of this, just that on this particular
               | topic they are morally faulty.
               | 
               | My bar for what should be acceptable as a recourse is
               | also not very high. Providing any form of alternative
               | like LAN play, closed-source server software,
               | specifications or interoperability with other software
               | would be enough for me. The problem I see with the
               | current situation is the "last resort recourse" there is
               | now in most cases, reverse engineering, is legally shaky,
               | generally against the terms of service, terribly
               | complicated and expensive and not guaranteed to succeed
               | if critical parts of the application are server-side.
        
               | iamacyborg wrote:
               | If they sell thousands of dollars worth of digital items
               | then yes, they should have a moral obligation to support
               | those customers. Particularly given the murky
               | exploitative psychological tricks employed by these games
               | to get customers in the first place.
        
               | m1gu3l wrote:
               | If the EULA says the value of said digital items is zero
               | (as hinted at in some comment further up) then I can
               | agree that we disagree.
        
               | jhbadger wrote:
               | It may be _legal_ to steal digital items from users
               | because of antiquated laws that don 't recognize digital
               | items as items worthy of protection, but it certainly
               | isn't _moral_.
        
               | pmontra wrote:
               | Let's explore some possibilities.
               | 
               | 1. Should Zynga buy back those items at a lower price
               | because they are used items?
               | 
               | 2. What happens to cars (because we love car analogies)
               | when the manufacturer stops building spare parts? In this
               | case they are either collected from old cars or somebody
               | else build those parts. Maybe should Zynga at least try
               | to sell the game infrastructure with data? That would be
               | like relying on third party spare parts but the car keeps
               | going. Of course if nobody buys the game, maybe even for
               | free, that's it
               | 
               | 3. Other ideas?
               | 
               | By the way, this isn't the first time an online game
               | shuts down and players lose everything, right?
        
               | jhbadger wrote:
               | When Microsoft closed their cloud-based ebook business in
               | 2019, they refunded 100% of the money to the people who
               | lost access to the books they bought. This was the
               | correct response to shutting down servers.
               | 
               | https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/a27021744/mic
               | ros...
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > When Microsoft closed their cloud-based ebook business
               | in 2019, they refunded 100% of the money to the people
               | who lost access to the books they bought.
               | 
               | They probably had different terms of sale; buying books
               | contingent on an external service is less attractive than
               | buying in-game items contingent on the game.
               | 
               | > This was the correct response to shutting down servers.
               | 
               | Depending on the terms of sale, it may have been the
               | minimum legally required response.
        
               | giancarlostoro wrote:
               | Space Cadet for Windows that we all miss would like to
               | have a word....
        
           | ballenf wrote:
           | This is not tricky in the slightest. All the points you make
           | are distractions from the central concept of what people
           | understand purchasing something to mean.
           | 
           | The computers these people played on with auto-updates
           | disabled, would continue to support Flash for eternity.
           | 
           | Your points would be valid if Zynga said "the thing you
           | bought isn't going to run on new devices". But what they're
           | saying is "we're breaking the thing you bought because not
           | very many people can still give us money."
           | 
           | Purchases without a "XX years' functionality" label should be
           | required to be functional in perpetuity or refunded.
        
         | fractionalhare wrote:
         | _> "Meet you at the office to discuss something" serious._
         | 
         | Sorry, is this a reference to something?
        
           | sgpl wrote:
           | I think the original post is referring to the fact that they
           | worked at zynga and as per their experience 'whales' met with
           | or wanted to meet with zynga staff to discuss aspects of the
           | game with zynga staff.
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > There were whales that paid thousands to have items in the
         | game - those just vanish?
         | 
         | Yup.
         | 
         | > These whales took the game seriously. "Meet you at the office
         | to discuss something" serious. I expect a class action very
         | quickly.
         | 
         | Very sure the terms of sale for those items made them
         | contingent on the continuation of the service, which was
         | expressly in Zynga's discretion. Selling added privileges
         | related to another service that only survive as long as the
         | base service is offered is fairly routine; there's nothing
         | novel happening here, even prior to online games with premium
         | items (of which this is not the first to shut down, anyhow.)
        
           | jgalt212 wrote:
           | this is, in a nutshell, why I never "buy' ebooks.
        
             | larrywright wrote:
             | I tend to favor ebooks for things that I know have a
             | shorter shelf life. Especially technology stuff. There are
             | books I may read again in 10 or 20 years, but technology
             | books are outdated within a couple of years at most. It
             | seems wasteful to get them on paper.
        
             | ineedasername wrote:
             | I generally avoid them for reference books, but for novels
             | since I very rarely re-read them. I'm willing to make the
             | trade-off for convenience and (sometimes) lower prices, but
             | I go into it eyes open knowing the risks.
             | 
             | I do worry about things like Steam though, which unless the
             | game is available DRM-free from GOG, may be the only place
             | you can buy the game-- or at least no different in terms of
             | DRM lock in and risk of the platform shutting down than
             | other platforms like Epic or Origin etc.
        
             | dehrmann wrote:
             | I'd be more worried about this if I ever reread books.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | Plenty of vendors sell DRM-free ebooks in widely-supported
             | formats (PDF, ePub); most, IME, publishers that sell
             | directly do, it's the separate big stores that tend to have
             | DRM-infested content.
             | 
             | Actually, many of publishers selling directly not only sell
             | DRM free, but you get a variety of formats when you
             | purchase, rather than purchasing separately by format.
        
             | fullshark wrote:
             | I didn't mind renting videos and I don't mind "renting"
             | ebooks for an indiscriminate amount of time. The
             | convenience is worth it, having to store every book you
             | purchase comes with costs too.
        
             | Wowfunhappy wrote:
             | This is entirely dependent on whether the ebooks are DRM
             | Free or not.
             | 
             | I prefer audiobooks, but I have a large collection of them
             | which which will be mine forever, no matter what any
             | retailers decide.
        
               | mrkurt wrote:
               | It's worth stripping DRM off your Kindle books if you
               | have a large library. Pretty easy too!
        
               | misiti3780 wrote:
               | Where do you buy them from>?
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | Downpour.com, Libro.fm, and Audiobooksnow.com are my go-
               | to's (the last of these has a tiny handful of DRM'd
               | titles, so check for a "Downloadable" symbol). Each of
               | these has subscription memberships which you should take
               | advantage of; you can cancel at any time, so I usually
               | subscribe, buy, and cancel all at once when I want a
               | book.
               | 
               | Google Play audiobooks are also DRM-Free, but tend to be
               | more expensive.
               | 
               | I do also _occasionally_ buy from Audible, when a book
               | isn 't available anywhere else. You can strip the DRM
               | with ffmpeg once you know the key for your account. But
               | most audiobooks can be had natively DRM-Free if you shop
               | around a bit.
        
             | caseysoftware wrote:
             | Unless they come DRM free and downloadable outside the
             | service, I consider them "rentals"
             | 
             | But for those that are, Calibre keeps those nicely
             | organized.
        
               | markus_zhang wrote:
               | Yeah agreed. Never purchase those that needs a reader or
               | something. Of course there are programs to extract the
               | pdf files but it's always a bit too much for me.
               | ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY CHARGE ALMOST THE SAME AS A REAL
               | BOOK.
        
             | markus_zhang wrote:
             | They are good if they are in plain pdf format though.
        
             | Keyframe wrote:
             | Depends how you look at it. O'reilly sub is a good value
             | even if it's 'rental' only. If only one could read/access
             | them on kindle.. but that's another, yet related topic.
        
             | Marqin wrote:
             | Why not? When you buy ebooks you can download the PDF and
             | even print it for yourself as backup.
        
               | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
               | Oh. Why not offer non DRM formats to begin with because I
               | am paying equal to or more than the paperback price of a
               | book and not some bullshit license and shit. OP is saying
               | he/she refuses to accept the whole renting/licensing
               | shenanigans in ebooks. If Apple can sell you a non DRM
               | mp3 for $.99 a pop, why the fuck does it need DRM for an
               | eBook. ?
               | 
               | Your only option is to either buy a paperback or pirate
               | and downloading on kindle and then finding a PDF and then
               | printing it should not happen to a paying customer.
        
               | ineedasername wrote:
               | DRM is often the choice of the publisher, not the
               | retailer. (Amazon makes it very difficult to get a DRM-
               | free version though, even when the publisher has
               | authorized it)
        
               | ComputerGuru wrote:
               | That depends very much on where you buy your ebooks.
        
         | extrememacaroni wrote:
         | I too think it's preposterous that it's somehow okay for
         | companies to simply make disappear things you've bought/spent
         | money on/anything like that.
         | 
         | This is the main reason I avoid games like this. It's just a
         | trap, nothing keeps the developer from retiring the game
         | whenever it feels like, nothing keeps the developer from
         | releasing an update that completely changes how the game plays.
         | If you like a game now, next week they can rebalance it and
         | introduce microtransactions and that's... perfectly okay it
         | seems?
        
           | trash3 wrote:
           | Reminds me of me of the Green Kayle skin I bought in League
           | of Legends almost a decade ago. Pricks changed the base
           | design of the model and did so for the paid skin as well.
        
             | jabl wrote:
             | Seems to be a common pattern. Eg in world of
             | tanks/warships, there are "premium" tanks/ships you can buy
             | for money and which are slightly better than the free
             | vehicles at the same tier.
             | 
             | While they are decent enough to not reduce the specs of
             | stuff people have paid for, what they do is boost other
             | vehicles and introduce new ones, which over time has the
             | same effect.
        
         | Santosh83 wrote:
         | If you don't pay for physical products or tangible/useful
         | services, then that's what happens. But look at it the bright
         | side. The kind of people who burn cash on games would have
         | instead thrown them on drugs, cigarettes, online gambling, or
         | something even worse had these avenues never existed.
        
           | Bakary wrote:
           | The trump card of video game addiction is accessibility (in a
           | sense online gambling and game addiction are functionally the
           | same)
           | 
           | It's not easy to relinquish access to a computer and phone
           | these days
        
           | Retric wrote:
           | Many people where caught unawares by video game addiction.
           | Cultures convey the dangers of drugs and gambling quite
           | effectively allowing many susceptible people to avoid them,
           | but IAP where a very new thing.
        
         | Aeolun wrote:
         | Since they weren't able to buy them any more since November it
         | looks like they gave people at least a month to enjoy their
         | purchases.
        
         | lacker wrote:
         | Plenty of games have shut down after selling virtual goods.
         | FarmVille did not invent the concept of selling virtual things
         | for real money. I doubt a lawsuit will go anywhere.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | patrec wrote:
         | On the assumption that almost everyone would be better without
         | Farmville in their lives and that such a loss might at least
         | get some of them to reconsider the wisdom of their behavior,
         | there would be a certain irony if such a class action suit were
         | to be successful.
        
           | hshshs2 wrote:
           | life isn't about choosing only the things that are good for
           | you
        
           | willis936 wrote:
           | To play devil's advocate: addiction fills a void in an
           | unfulfilling life. Arguably computer games are better than
           | drugs and the root cause of the sad life is not the addictive
           | substance.
           | 
           | All that said, I shed no tears for any comeuppance that gets
           | delivered to those who willfully profit off of the misfortune
           | of others.
        
             | dehrmann wrote:
             | I don't think that these games are actually addicting.
             | Habit-forming, for sure, but the way people lose interest
             | makes me think it's something else.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | patrec wrote:
             | > To play devil's advocate: addiction fills a void in an
             | unfulfilling life.
             | 
             | Maybe so, but one would hope that even as far as self-
             | destructive vices are concerned it's possible to pick
             | something with more upside than Farmville addiction.
        
             | carlivar wrote:
             | Big Tech optimizing dopamine addiction makes your drugs
             | analogy quite accurate.
        
         | bob33212 wrote:
         | If they read the user agreement they would see that the cash
         | value of those items was zero. It is very similar to frequent
         | flyer miles. Their value is zero. Delta can make 1 billion
         | miles worth a diet soda tomorrow if they want.
        
         | kens wrote:
         | I figured someone in this thread should look at the terms of
         | service. It says that Zynga owns the items and you're allowed
         | to use them while the service is offered (5). It also says that
         | their maximum liability is the amount you paid in the past 180
         | days (14). They make no promises or guarantees that the service
         | will always be available and may withdraw services for business
         | or operational needs (13).
         | 
         | Specifically, it says "you do not own any Virtual Items that
         | you obtained through our Services, regardless of whether you
         | "earned" those Virtual Items or "purchased" them. Your Account
         | and any related Virtual Items are owned by Zynga. Zynga gives
         | you a limited license and right to use your Account and the
         | related Virtual Items while we offer the Services."
         | 
         | https://www.zynga.com/legal/terms-of-service
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | IG_Semmelweiss wrote:
       | Is there a viable (paid) FV alternative for seniors?
       | 
       | Loved one (senior) spent hours on FV. I noted thru FB that FV
       | kept this person going during COVID. I want to buy/suggest
       | alternatives to FV.
       | 
       | Person does not play video games. Not even casual mobile games.
       | Eye-hand coordination is not great. Person has iPhone and
       | ultralite Mac. Spends a lot of time on FB
       | 
       | What are good alternatives ?
        
         | manirelli wrote:
         | Check out stardew valley. It has some extra depth but you can
         | really play however you want.
         | 
         | https://apps.apple.com/us/app/stardew-valley/id1406710800
        
       | tsjq wrote:
       | what does Zynga do these days .
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | Mobile games. CSR2, Harry Potter, Empires & Puzzles, Words with
         | Friends, Zynga Poker.
         | 
         | Yearly revenue around $1 billion.
        
       | rightbyte wrote:
       | I kinda disgust me that he seems proud of pioneering selling in-
       | game resources for cash feeding of feeble minded and children.
        
         | paulpauper wrote:
         | if you compare the share prices of fakebook and zynga, it is
         | evident selling personal data is more lucrative than selling
         | game tokens
        
           | jabl wrote:
           | Maybe there are other less shady ways of earning a living
           | than selling people's privacy or profiteering of their
           | addiction?
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | worker767424 wrote:
           | Google and Facebook don't really sell personal data, and
           | least not directly. They might buy some, and advertisers
           | happily give them data, but I rarely hear about them actually
           | selling it. They do let advertisers run ads that are targeted
           | using this data, but that's not the same as "felling personal
           | data." It's more like selling user attention.
        
           | giancarlostoro wrote:
           | I feel like had smartphones not come sooner Zynga could of
           | reached a point where they would of outright bought out
           | Facebook. Smartphones were just slowly becoming relevant
           | during these years.
           | 
           | I almost want to call it the Eternal September Part 2 when
           | Facebook took off like wildfire on the last year or so of
           | MySpace being relevant.
           | 
           | Smartphones taking off specifically Android meant people
           | could just play games on their phone and not have to wait to
           | get home to a computer.
        
         | Aeolun wrote:
         | Well, you kind of need to deceive yourself in this way if you
         | want to justify your work to yourself.
         | 
         | Kind of easy if it makes you tons of money.
        
           | dibujaron wrote:
           | "it is difficult to make a man understand something when his
           | salary depends on him not understanding"
        
           | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
           | Indeed it is a very common pattern. People tend to believe
           | whatever is convenient (read: self serving) for them to
           | believe.
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | It's just about the feedback loop. People were addicted to
         | games long before micro-transactions.
         | 
         | Tetris has sucked countless hours out of peoples' lives. Hell,
         | I even almost lost a job because of Civilization 3. I'm
         | completely unable to play "one more turn" style games in
         | moderation.
         | 
         | Mobile games are optimised so that players like to spend time
         | playing the game, and have the option of exchanging money for
         | time in-game. You can either grind (use time) or spend money
         | (use less time).
         | 
         | If people enjoy the game and want to spend money to get ahead,
         | they have the option. No one is forcing payments, it usually
         | goes badly for the game.
        
         | watwut wrote:
         | You hate all game companies in the same way? Or just the ones
         | that make games that are not exactly for you?
        
           | rightbyte wrote:
           | Come on you know what I mean ...
        
         | sergiomattei wrote:
         | They built a widely used and loved product, why not be proud?
        
           | prepend wrote:
           | Should Cambridge Analytica love that its Facebook quizzes
           | were widely used and loved?
           | 
           | It's a bad product that people get addicted to, so I wouldn't
           | want to work on it, much less be proud of it. It would be
           | like being proud of inventing banner ads, or spam, or
           | artificial trans fats, or telemarketing robocalls, etc etc
        
             | pfisch wrote:
             | I feel like what is ignored in these conversations is that
             | the vast majority of users just play this game as an
             | entertaining piece of art. ~1% of problem users get
             | addicted to games, whether they are FarmVille or smash
             | brothers.
             | 
             | That is just the way it is. It isn't right to squash the
             | freedom of the vast majority of people because a small
             | subset of users lack self control.
        
             | watwut wrote:
             | > It's a bad product that people get addicted to,
             | 
             | Every time I hear about people having issues with partner
             | being addicted to gaming, the game in question is PC or
             | console game. Typically competitive online one, sometimes
             | single player. It is rarely mobile game, like I never heard
             | people complain about partner being addicted to Farmville.
             | 
             | But, somehow, those games get defended each time.
        
               | ratww wrote:
               | The problem here is not the addiction to the game itself,
               | but rather to the fact that sometimes they become a
               | gambling addiction issue, with all the issues it brings.
               | It ends up being a money pit for some people, with the
               | worst offenders spending thousands of dollars a month on
               | pay-to-play mobile games.
               | 
               | Gambling addiction is also something that's normally
               | hidden from the partner, and mobile games are great at
               | allowing that, so there's also this difference. The
               | partner won't see the issue until it's too late.
        
               | watwut wrote:
               | The thread was about addiction and anyway, calling these
               | gambling is a stretch. You do know about partners
               | gambling and people do complain about it. The partner and
               | kids are typically the person who get the most of
               | consequences.
               | 
               | But my other point was about hypocrisy. People here go at
               | length hating on Farmville and talking about addiction,
               | because Farmville is not cool in their social circles and
               | is game they personally dont like.
               | 
               | You do not get the same outcry about games that are
               | actually the most frequently mentioned by people who deal
               | with gaming addiction issues. Those games are mentioned
               | either positively or not at all. And if you would call
               | the people who play those games feeble minded, you would
               | not ended up upvoted.
        
           | antihero wrote:
           | Heroin is also a widely used and loved product.
        
             | sergiomattei wrote:
             | How is heroin even remotely relevant to a Facebook game?
        
           | Traubenfuchs wrote:
           | Same applies to drugs. Those game are micro-optimized to
           | trick people into paying money for it. No one would ever say
           | "The money I spent on farmville was well spent".
        
             | wesleywt wrote:
             | How do you know this? A Farmville player might have been
             | proud of his/her farm? It might have given them hours of
             | pleasure and joy. Why should you dictate what they should
             | feel?
        
               | giancarlostoro wrote:
               | Hell people who buy games literally say "I have no regret
               | buying this sooner" I say it myself all the time!
        
         | nefitty wrote:
         | I sympathize with your feeling, but it's a little astonishing
         | how easily "hacked" human brains are. I don't think you have to
         | be feeble minded or a child to spend hundreds of dollars a week
         | on digital avatars.
        
           | rightbyte wrote:
           | Ye, but most people are not falling for it. A very low share
           | get bitten for real.
           | 
           | "Up to 50% of revenue comes from 0.15% (15 in 10,000) of
           | players"
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-to-play
           | 
           | With 'feeble minded' I meant weak versus addiction. Maybe not
           | the 100% correct term.
           | 
           | The thing I don't like about online gambling is that it can
           | be hidden by the addicts. I mean sure it is their money to do
           | whatever with, but it might still be shady immoral practice
           | to enable that, like casinos or Farmville.
        
       | Jare wrote:
       | A good time to remember this interview:
       | 
       | https://techcrunch.com/2009/11/06/zynga-scamville-mark-pinku...
       | 
       | > I did every horrible thing in the book to, just to get revenues
       | right away.
       | 
       | It's not specific to FarmVille, and I do agree that FarmVille
       | deserves a place in history by turning player self-expression
       | into a massively mainstream game feature.
        
       | d99kris wrote:
       | I guess one can assume Zynga didn't make enough money from
       | FarmVille to justify porting it to a modern platform.
       | 
       | I wonder if they considered a kickstarter or similar, to gauge
       | the interest of their users to finance the porting.
        
         | ncw96 wrote:
         | They actually did make a mobile version, but it is not
         | compatible with the old Flash version that was discontinued.
        
           | jabl wrote:
           | I guess Hay Day took over the farming game market on mobile.
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | There were like 3-4 variants of Farmville 2 and FV3 is out in
         | some countries:
         | https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.zynga.farm...
        
         | giancarlostoro wrote:
         | FarmVille probably lost its popularity. I can't remember the
         | last I ever heard anybody talking about it, and I doubt a lot
         | of people can remember. Its pretty much dead by now.
        
       | IgorPartola wrote:
       | A family member of mine got horribly addicted to FarmVille back
       | in like 2008-2009. He would sneak off from the family to go
       | upstairs to grab something and then we would find him there three
       | hours later playing. He built up a huge farm and since it had the
       | mechanic for visiting nearby farms became quite famous. Then one
       | of his daughters, who was a freshman in college at the time, came
       | home with a few of her friends. The family member mentioned
       | FarmVille at one point and all these teenagers went "omg you are
       | [his game name]?!?!?!" He quite literally became an in game
       | celebrity for a time apparently. He quit a few months later and
       | never went back.
        
         | yashap wrote:
         | FarmVille launched June 2009, so it probably wasn't 2008 :) But
         | yeah, video game addiction is a real thing, I know lots of
         | people who've been addicted to all sorts of games, to the
         | detriment of their lives overall.
        
           | therealx wrote:
           | My favorite story: growing up, I was really good friends with
           | this girl who's Mom was an Everquest dev (like, the first
           | one.)
           | 
           | Post-launch, she became so addicted to her own game, she had
           | to quit her job and lived in a small apt, forgoing clothes
           | and only eaing the easiest of food.
           | 
           | At the time it was funny...
        
           | IgorPartola wrote:
           | Yup you are right. He got in right at the start.
        
         | drzaiusapelord wrote:
         | Sometimes when I see people showing off these vast and
         | intricate minecraft structures, Sims games, animal crossing
         | towns, etc I wonder what social toll it took to get there.
         | There's a lot of applauding people throwing healthier aspects
         | of their lives away for game addiction on places like reddit or
         | facebook. The story of the addict ignoring his kids, jobs,
         | health, etc almost never gets out. It did briefly for WoW when
         | "warcraft wives" made a fuss, but that died out, I imagine who
         | no small PR effort from Blizzard, and now game addiction is
         | rarely talked about, which is odd, considering so many mobile
         | games are pretty much casinos.
        
       | whoknew1122 wrote:
       | I sunk over $2,000 in a game that shut down abruptly (Marvel
       | Heroes). It sucked. I had no recourse.
       | 
       | But at the end of the day, I had well more than 2000 hours in the
       | game. Which meant that my cost per hour of entertainment was less
       | than $1. Which is really cheap as far as hobbies and
       | entertainment goes.
       | 
       | Does it suck that I can't go in any play an ARPG with any of the
       | 50+ Marvel heroes I had and adore? Yes. But that's what you
       | should expect when playing any game that operates as a service or
       | has an always-online component.
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | 1-2EUR/hour is my limit for "good value game" too. If I buy a
         | $60 game, I expect at least 30 hours of fun, preferably 60.
         | 
         | Similar with mobile games, when I notice I'm spending a hour a
         | day in a mobile game for weeks in and out, It's OK to spend
         | 10EUR on the gem package to make the game more fun.
        
         | heimatau wrote:
         | > I had well more than 2000 hours in the game. Which meant that
         | my cost per hour of entertainment was less than $1.
         | 
         | I remember when one could buy a game for $50 and play it for
         | 250-400 hours (unlocking hidden things, playing with multiple
         | friends with just my purchase). Roughly a dime for
         | entertainment. In some cases, it was sub a penny USD.
         | 
         | You have some expensive hobbies my friend.
        
           | whoknew1122 wrote:
           | Is it really expensive though?
           | 
           | I don't go out to bars. Those nights out add up quickly. I'm
           | not into cars, which is a large money sink. I don't go to the
           | movies, which is typically $20+ per person for 2-ish hours of
           | entertainment when it's all said and done.
           | 
           | Adult hobbies are expensive. $2,000 spent across 4 years
           | which gave me thousands of hours of enjoyment really isn't
           | that expensive.
        
             | heimatau wrote:
             | > Is it really expensive though? Yes.
             | 
             | > Adult hobbies are expensive. Depends on what you value.
             | 
             | > $2,000 spent across 4 years which gave me thousands of
             | hours of enjoyment really isn't that expensive. You spent
             | the money, so you saw the value in it. I'd say it was a
             | complete waste. For you, it's clearly not.
             | 
             | Value is relative, that's my point.
        
             | blackrock wrote:
             | Not bad. It's only $500 per year, when you break it down.
             | 
             | Cable TV costs $80/month, or about $1000/year.
             | 
             | So if you didn't pay for Cable TV, then I would say that
             | you saved money here.
        
         | bluedino wrote:
         | One summer I played Gauntlet Legends in the local arcade, I
         | basically maxed out all of my characters, I probably had $200
         | into it.
         | 
         | One day the game crashed, and the repair guy stuck a new hard
         | drive in the game, and I lost all my characters. :(
        
           | thih9 wrote:
           | I didn't realise that there were arcade games with save game
           | support.
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauntlet_Legends
           | 
           | > Its unusual features for an arcade game included passwords
           | and characters that could be saved, enabling players to play
           | over the course of a long period.
        
       | k__ wrote:
       | _" first game at scale that leveraged big data"_
       | 
       | Haha, yes, but not for the good of their customers.
       | 
       | It was optimized for addiction and peer pressure.
        
       | pram wrote:
       | Flash games on Facebook feels very quaint now. It makes me
       | remember all the other dead web 1.0 walled gardens like AOL
       | games, Yahoo games, MSN games etc
       | 
       | The crappy shovelware games live on though! Seems to be a
       | resilient style of software, moving from platform to platform
       | like a virus lol
        
       | kumarvvr wrote:
       | I hope this whole idea of game streaming and online only accounts
       | for purchases has a permanent solution.
       | 
       | Perhaps an non-profit controlled entity can be set up to transfer
       | assets and management of such digital assets.
       | 
       | Imagine losing all your Playstation games that are online only,
       | because Sony went down the drain, or losing all your books
       | because Amazon went belly up.
        
       | cblconfederate wrote:
       | > The real innovation of FarmVille was in making games accessible
       | to busy adults, giving them a place to invest and express
       | themselves and be seen by people in their lives as creative
       | 
       | Zynga was ripping off games that were popular in places like
       | china, they had zero innovation, not even in their slimy tactics
       | to recruit users. They used to have those "invite 10 friends to
       | be able to play" that everyone had back then. they abused every
       | possible channel to the maximum degree, that's their only
       | 'innovation'. They were the reason that facebook created rules
       | that ban those shady tactics, even though they had a special
       | agreement with facebook (basically so they can spam more than
       | indies and competitors). And a lot of more shady antics i can't
       | even remember, they were all discussed in facebook's old
       | developer forum which has been shut down long ago.
       | 
       | Zynga was not "the first" in anything
        
         | harryf wrote:
         | Remember wandering up to the Zynga booth at LeWeb years ago -
         | perhaps 2010 - and asking them if employees at Zynga ever
         | wondered if what the were doing might be evil or if the games
         | were actually any good. It was unfair as the booth was actually
         | manned by people from Dextrose AG who Zynga had just bought.
         | 
         | To cap it off I made them watch this FarmVille parody which
         | they were awkwardly amused by https://youtu.be/odBDAcOEKuI
         | 
         | In retrospect I was being a righteous prick but I couldn't
         | stand Zynga - their games or their addiction based business
         | model.
        
           | cyberlurker wrote:
           | I did something similar to a Google employee once at a
           | conference. Sorry to that person, I was also a righteous
           | prick. Definitely not the right way to go about it.
        
         | markus_zhang wrote:
         | It's all about monitization bro.
        
         | 32gbsd wrote:
         | These articles exist to rewrite history for the winners. Total
         | bs.
        
       | kumarvvr wrote:
       | For the love of god, I can never understand why this game became
       | popular.
       | 
       | I understand the pull of games and I am a gamer myself. However,
       | compared to games like minecraft, this game was boring and absurd
       | for me.
       | 
       | Make digital farms, where's the fun in that?
       | 
       | And I know intelligent, high calibre friends of mine spending
       | hours on the game and hours talking about it.
       | 
       | The sheer amount of lost productivity due to this game is
       | astounding, and I say lost productivity because this damn game
       | captured a whole lot of mindshare.
        
         | watwut wrote:
         | It was not game for you, it is that simple. Minecraft is boring
         | too many people too.
         | 
         | But productivity loss is exactly same as when playing other
         | games. People discussing this game are no different then people
         | who discuss other games.
         | 
         | What is unique is the pure outrage at the idea that people
         | might enjoy it from gamers I see in this thread. Not do much
         | you, but the anger and insults targeted at people who like it
         | are way more that I expected.
        
         | chrisjs95 wrote:
         | > Make digital farms, where's the fun in that?
         | 
         | I mean you do that in Minecraft too haha.
        
         | Lammy wrote:
         | > For the love of god, I can never understand why this game
         | became popular.
         | 
         | Imagine it's 2011, you haven't played a video game since Space
         | Invaders, and you trade your carrier-subsidized Cingular-
         | branded RAZR in for a carrier-subsidized iPhone 4. The number 1
         | app in the store is "Facebook" so you download it, sign up, and
         | are suddenly spending all your time in their garden rekindling
         | connections with everyone you ever knew. Seems like the perfect
         | low-impact game to play with one finger on a smooth piece of
         | glass, flipping back and forth between it and your FB Messages
         | / comment-thread flamewars / etc.
        
         | joveian wrote:
         | It is an interesting setting that has been used successfully in
         | other games as well, including Harvest Moon, Stardew Valley,
         | and just recently Sakuna: Of Rice and Ruin.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-01-01 23:02 UTC)