作者：Tami

我已制作或体验社交游戏数年，所以我对社交游戏的设计、营销及商业运作了如指掌。我时常体验这些游戏，极力让自己处在设计创新和平台运用的前沿。在Facebook领域，我发现游戏的商业运作呈现消极趋势。Facebook游戏不再是可持续发展的领域。

这些游戏，植入个人网页，是旨在利用Facebook传播属性的点击内容。后来，FLash开始变成标准应用技术，《FarmVille》时代的社交游戏开始繁荣发展。在过去短暂的1年里，Facebook游戏的准入门槛越来越高，因为开发者开始追求更高制作价值，个个都想挑战Zynga近乎垄断的地位。Facebook广告变成昂贵的用户获取渠道，Facebook就其病毒式传播渠道做出大规模调整，实施强制官方货币，分走开发者的大笔营收。小型公司想要窜至榜单前列不再那么简单。

Facebook游戏通常刚发行时都势头强劲，1-2个月内就会到达鼎盛时期，然后开始逐步走下坡路，直到最终被搁置或移除。这类游戏由众多新鲜内容支撑，游戏1周更新数次，融入供鲸鱼用户购买的新道具。创意游戏设计通常遭到忽略，开发者更多关注短期胜利，这能够有效提高游戏的核心参数。游戏团队由产品经理管理，其通过预测判断功能的优先顺序。开发者通常会预先投入大笔营销资金，旨在确保新游戏能够呈现最佳高峰水平，因此要维持DAU变得颇耗资金及富有挑战性。

Facebook游戏通常包含若干功能模块，明智开发者不会对此视而不见。所有游戏都包含邻居、礼物馈赠、日常奖励、神秘盒子、能够进行病毒式传播的可创建内容、物件收集、拜访、成就、能量机制及突然出现于屏幕中的诱人战利品，这些需要玩家进行点击，然后收集。这些游戏有相同的HUD和工具条，有相同的探索机制，还有同样的新手指南。若你没有进行相互借鉴，那就有些不明智。大家常讨论的共同法则是若某元素出现于Zynga游戏中，说明此元素已进行充分的A/B测试，是值得借鉴的最佳做法。

Facebook游戏存在许多限制因素。游戏不需要浏览器插件，因为其主要搭载Flash技术。不要让自己的游戏变得过于复杂，因为新社交玩家无法驾驭深层游戏机制。游戏不要融入过多故事元素，因为融入的文本越多，玩家阅读的可能性就越小。切记不要制作同步多人游戏，这完全是自寻死路。我们已测试过许多游戏，已从中找到最佳功能组。问题是，包含这一系列功能的游戏数量非常有限。

Zynga的流量水平是EA的4倍。目前行业已出现4次颇引人注目的收购协议（游戏邦注：PopCap收购ZipZapPlay，EA收购PopCap，Playdom收购Metaplace，迪斯尼收购Playdom）。有些大型IP尝试搭载Facebook，但最终以失败告终（《俄勒冈小道》），而有些则取得突出成绩（《The Sims Social》）。过去1年半以来，有许多游戏都停止运作：

Social City(from gamezebo.com)

《Social City》——Playdom

《ESPNU College Town》——Playdom

《混世海盗》——Playfish

《Gangster City》——Playfish

《Poker Rivals》——Playfish

《Tiki Farm》——Playdom

《Tattoo City》——Wonderhill/Kabam

《Roller Coaster City》——Zynga

《Fanglies》——Playdom

《Big City Life》——Playdom

《Treetopia》——Playdom

《深海寻宝》——Big Fish Games

《Island Life》——Playdom/Metaplace

《Chocolatier: Sweet Society》——Playfirst

《Market Street》——Playdom

《Ponzi Inc》——Challenge Games

《SPP Ranch!》——Slide

《Casino City》——DNA Games

《Bar World》——DNA Games

《Slot City》——DNA Games

《街头赛车》——Zynga

《美女餐厅》——PlayFirst

《Music Pets》——Conduit Labs

《酒店城市》——Playfish

《我的帝国》——Playfish

《超级名模》——Lolapps

这些不过是系列规模相对较大的作品。推出游戏后，你通常会将很多开发资源用于提高ARPU，然后在DAU依然较多时尽量多发行更新内容，随后在游戏流量出现下滑时，你会继续努力在游戏中植入丰富内容，此时你会将游戏设计暂抛脑后，主要侧重进行游戏调整，从而提高ARPU和付费转换率。此外，你还会填充工作室成员，因为你需要确保在首款游戏创收越来越少时，公司能够即时推出新作。不妨将若干成员留在首款游戏中，这样你就能够随时补充常规道具，直到游戏失去价值，然后彻底停止游戏的运作。

我已是Facebook游戏多年的忠实粉丝。我认为Facebook是颇有价值的平台，它创建了优质游戏网络。我在体验社交游戏及观察游戏发展的过程中收获许多乐趣。只是我觉得这不再是能够持续发展的领域。就目前来说，团队要达到稳固社交游戏所需要的完善和深刻标准，成员需投入5-6个月时间。如今要制作出能够同热门作品相匹敌的高质量Facebook游戏成本过高，耗时过久。游戏的用户获取成本过于昂贵。游戏几个月里就会到达高峰水平，然后开始走下坡路。Facebook是可行的战略选择，但不是唯一战略目标。就当前来说，此平台存在诸多不稳定因素，风险很大。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Facebook games are an unsustainable business strategy

by Tami

I’ve been either making or playing social games for years now, so I’m no stranger to the nuances and ins and outs of social game design, marketing, and business.  I play these games constantly, fighting a never-ending battle to stay on top of the latest innovations in the design and platform utilization. In Facebookland, I’ve been noticing a sad trend in the way businesses are operated in terms of title churn.  Facebook games are simply not sustainable.

In the early days, these games started out as clickfests built in php designed to exploit the viral nature of Facebook.  Following that, Flash became the standard and the FarmVille-era of social games were flourishing.  Fast forward one year and the barrier for entry into the Facebook game space becomes more difficult, as higher production values reign supreme and everyone fights against the powerhouse that is a Zynga near-monopoly.  Facebook ads become an incredibly expensive acquisition channel, Facebook makes all-but-devastating changes to viral architecture and implements a mandated official currency that takes a deep cut of developer revenue.  It’s no longer easy for the little guys to rise to the top.

Facebook games are designed to burst out of the gate at release, climb to their peak within a month or two, then start their slow decline until they are either put on ice or sunsetted.  They require an amazing amount of live support, with content releases multiple times a week to give the whales new items to buy.  Creative game design is often shelved in favor of shorter-term wins that give visible boosts to the game’s core metrics.  Game teams are managed by Product Managers in Excel who determine feature priorities using carefully calculated forecasting.  Marketing budgets are front loaded to make sure the new game reaches the highest peak possible before the decline starts and it becomes costly and challenging to maintain DAU.

Facebook games are designed with a cookie cutter set of features that any respectable developer would be a fool to disregard.  Every game has neighbors, and gifting, and daily bonuses, and mystery boxes, and viral buildables, and collections, and visiting, and achievements, and energy mechanics, and shiny pieces of loot that fly out on the screen and require a tap to collect.  These games have the same HUDs, the same toolbars, the same questing system, the same newbie tutorial experiences.  If you don’t learn from each other, you’re foolish.  And of course, the common rule that everyone talks about is how if it’s in a Zynga game that must mean that it’s been sufficiently A/B tested and is therefore worth stealing as a best practice.

There are all sorts of limitations on what you can’t do if you make a Facebook game.  Don’t require a browser plugin, because Flash reigns supreme.  Don’t make your game too complex, because this new breed of social game player can’t handle deep game mechanics.  Don’t include too much story, because the more text you have the less likely someone will read it.  And god forbid you try to make a synchronous multiplayer game, that’s just blasphemy.  I’ve said all this myself, I’ve been there.  I know that you have to draw these lines if you want to be successful in the Facebook space.  That’s what works.  We’ve tested the living hell out of these games and these mechanics, and we’ve landed on the perfectly optimized core feature set.  The problem is, there is only so much room for games with this feature set.

We’ve seen Zynga maintaining a traffic leadership of over 4 times higher than the next developer in line (EA). We’ve seen some impressive acquisitions, including four that I took part in (PopCap buying ZipZapPlay, EA buying PopCap, Playdom buying Metaplace, Disney buying Playdom).  We’ve seen some big IP try and fail on Facebook (The Oregon Trail), and some major IP showing massive success (The Sims Social).  And I’ve watched many games shut down in the past year and a half:

Social City – Playdom

ESPNU College Town – Playdom

Pirates Ahoy – Playfish

Gangster City – Playfish

Poker Rivals – Playfish

Tiki Farm – Playdom

Tattoo City – Wonderhill/Kabam

Roller Coaster City – Zynga

Fanglies – Playdom

Big City Life – Playdom

Treetopia – Playdom

Treasure Quest – Big Fish Games

Island Life – Playdom/Metaplace

Chocolatier: Sweet Society – Playfirst

Market Street – Playdom

Ponzi Inc – Challenge Games

SPP Ranch! – Slide

Casino City – DNA Games

Bar World – DNA Games

Slot City – DNA Games

Street Racing – Zynga

Diner Dash – PlayFirst

Music Pets – Conduit Labs

Hotel City – Playfish

My Empire – Playfish

Supermodel – Lolapps

Those are just the ones that were big enough to hit my radar, there are hundreds more.  You release a game, you pile all of your development resources on it to optimize its ARPU, release as many content updates as possible while you still have a huge DAU, then as your traffic starts to slow you put in as much content in the game as possible while you throw all game design out the window in favor of tweaks that increase ARPU and conversion to paying. You staff up your studio because you need to make sure you have Game #2 ready to ship before Game #1 starts making only a couple thousand per day.  Leave a skeleton crew on Game #1 so you can feed it with regular items for players to buy until it’s no longer worth the effort and you shut the game down.  Rinse, repeat.

I’ve been a staunch supporter of Facebook games for years.  I do believe Facebook is an extremely valuable platform for acquisition, and that it has made a fine social gaming network.  I’ve had a lot of fun playing social games and watching their evolution.  I just don’t believe that it makes for a sustainable business anymore.  The level of polish and depth required to make a solid game in this current era of Facebook games requires 5-6 months of a full team.  It is too expensive and takes too long to make a high quality Facebook game that compares with the top games now.  It costs too much to acquire users.  Games peak and start to decline within a few months.  Facebook is a viable strategy, but it shouldn’t be any company’s entire strategy.  It is far too volatile and risky at this point.（Source：tamibaribeau）