Zynga’s chief game designer, Brian Reynolds, resigns(venturebeat.com)
venturebeat.com
Zynga’s chief game designer, Brian Reynolds, resigns
http://venturebeat.com/2013/01/29/zyngas-chief-game-designer-brian-reynolds-resigns/
10 comments
I don't understand why he went in the first place. I remember hearing about it at the time, and it's not like he would've been surprised at the kind of games Zynga was working on. They were known for it.
I fear this "social" fad has wasted the time of a number of bright minds in the games industry. Has anything worthwhile and memorable come of it?
I fear this "social" fad has wasted the time of a number of bright minds in the games industry. Has anything worthwhile and memorable come of it?
I know a lot of middle aged women who use fv as the main method of keeping in touch with friends and family. Their games are addicting, but no more than WoW or LoL. Those are considered 'real games', but there is a lot of crossover in the addiction mechanics.
This board hates Zynga a whole lot more than their customers do because we are not their customers. This board is the equivalent of someone from an older generation sneering with contempt as I spend 12 hours straight in a raid.
My point is not to disparage this board, but to point out that anyone who plays modern video games shouldn't look down on casual games, because both have fully embraced addiction as a fundamental mechanic (as television did a long time ago, although it has recently upped its intensity as well).
Zynga is devoid of any emotion or creativity and is only seeking to make money through addictive mechanics, but have you played any SOE or EA games lately?
This board hates Zynga a whole lot more than their customers do because we are not their customers. This board is the equivalent of someone from an older generation sneering with contempt as I spend 12 hours straight in a raid.
My point is not to disparage this board, but to point out that anyone who plays modern video games shouldn't look down on casual games, because both have fully embraced addiction as a fundamental mechanic (as television did a long time ago, although it has recently upped its intensity as well).
Zynga is devoid of any emotion or creativity and is only seeking to make money through addictive mechanics, but have you played any SOE or EA games lately?
it is not the product but the methods which raised the ire
The product is the method. This is also true of MMOs, what would happen if you removed the xp bar from those games? The 'game' would practically cease to exist.
Just because the "artistic" values of those two games differ doesn't mean working on FarmVille was "soul destroying".
FarmVille is a game with hundreds of thousands of concurrent users, with a constraint to make as much money as possible and keep current users coming back, and with fierce competition. Sounds like an interesting space to be in.
FarmVille is a game with hundreds of thousands of concurrent users, with a constraint to make as much money as possible and keep current users coming back, and with fierce competition. Sounds like an interesting space to be in.
FarmVille is a game with hundreds of thousands of concurrent users, with a constraint to make as much money as possible and keep current users coming back, and with fierce competition.
Sounds more like a casino than game development to me.
Sounds more like a casino than game development to me.
Or an opium cartel.
<chuckle>... <gasp>, there's another level here:
"life" itself.
"life" itself.
Mmmmm... interesting thought, but I don't think I can agree that all life reduces to people exploiting other people's addictions, and wiping away the deliberate attempt to produce addictive games for money wipes away a fundamental part of the reason many of us have contempt for Zynga.
Sir,
A large portion of "Life" today consists of the process of creating desire for the unecessary (U) by association of these U's with basic human desires (sex, food et al.)
Thus the economy is born and a constant insaitable need for growth, when conceivably in a different system for a global, connected, technologically advanced race such as ours, there could be plenty for all, and we could all be provided for. (Note (1) This smells of Utopia, I admit I don't know how we would deal with boredom -- perhaps via extraordinary expressions of the creative act?) (2) The point is that the current system is a paradigm, and to sustain itself must maintain separation of "have's" and "have nots", and thus must consist in some exploitation, lest the division be destroyed and the labour force caused to cease to exist. The only way such a labour force remains in check is that there most be "money" which is "earned" via a "job" and is "required" for the meeting of basic needs and thus is what makes you win in the "struggle for survival". )
A large portion of "Life" today consists of the process of creating desire for the unecessary (U) by association of these U's with basic human desires (sex, food et al.)
Thus the economy is born and a constant insaitable need for growth, when conceivably in a different system for a global, connected, technologically advanced race such as ours, there could be plenty for all, and we could all be provided for. (Note (1) This smells of Utopia, I admit I don't know how we would deal with boredom -- perhaps via extraordinary expressions of the creative act?) (2) The point is that the current system is a paradigm, and to sustain itself must maintain separation of "have's" and "have nots", and thus must consist in some exploitation, lest the division be destroyed and the labour force caused to cease to exist. The only way such a labour force remains in check is that there most be "money" which is "earned" via a "job" and is "required" for the meeting of basic needs and thus is what makes you win in the "struggle for survival". )
This is very articulate nonsense. Not all purchases that grant utility encourage addiction, so your economics lesson doesn't apply to most of the things we buy.
Even if I stipulated your point, which I don't, all Life is not economic transactions, either.
And I don't think you established a connection to addictiveness either. (Your attempt requires me to agree with allowing you to decide what is "(un)necessary" for me and everybody else, which I do not concede.) Food, shelter, water, clothing, furniture, and the other human needs are not addictive. Even sex is generally not addictive.
And I don't think you established a connection to addictiveness either. (Your attempt requires me to agree with allowing you to decide what is "(un)necessary" for me and everybody else, which I do not concede.) Food, shelter, water, clothing, furniture, and the other human needs are not addictive. Even sex is generally not addictive.
To you and RegEx, below: Good day, Sirs.
Thank you for the compliment.
I am sorry for the misunderstanding, and perhaps anything I may have said to offend. The misunderstanding, I believe, stems from the fact that we define addiction differently. This is a matter of philosophy and opinion, and unless you would entertain me there I fear we would be communicating as one German to an Aboriginal, that is, not at all.
For what it is worth, I present my definition: For all objects and beings (X), addiction is that state whereby contact with X does not actually yield any utility (happiness, satisfaction, what ever you want to call it) but non-contact therewith is a source of discomfort. It's like an extrapolation of diminishing marginal utility, which, I must confess, I know little about. This definition of addiction is somewhat broad, but includes the narrower, more conventional versions, and contains a deep insight about human nature and the overcoming of addiction(s) in general. That is beyond the scope of this response.
It is also based on personal reflection and experience, which conventional scientists would deem "anecdotal" or not "statistically significant", but to me, this is a valid source of knowledge, especially if you have a strong, logically consistent metaphysical system which presents isomorphisms, as it were, with your own experience of Reality.
edit: Typo's
Thank you for the compliment.
I am sorry for the misunderstanding, and perhaps anything I may have said to offend. The misunderstanding, I believe, stems from the fact that we define addiction differently. This is a matter of philosophy and opinion, and unless you would entertain me there I fear we would be communicating as one German to an Aboriginal, that is, not at all.
For what it is worth, I present my definition: For all objects and beings (X), addiction is that state whereby contact with X does not actually yield any utility (happiness, satisfaction, what ever you want to call it) but non-contact therewith is a source of discomfort. It's like an extrapolation of diminishing marginal utility, which, I must confess, I know little about. This definition of addiction is somewhat broad, but includes the narrower, more conventional versions, and contains a deep insight about human nature and the overcoming of addiction(s) in general. That is beyond the scope of this response.
It is also based on personal reflection and experience, which conventional scientists would deem "anecdotal" or not "statistically significant", but to me, this is a valid source of knowledge, especially if you have a strong, logically consistent metaphysical system which presents isomorphisms, as it were, with your own experience of Reality.
edit: Typo's
> make as much money as possible and keep current users coming back, and with fierce competition.
This encourages antisocial and exploitative techniques, which many consider soul destroying.
This encourages antisocial and exploitative techniques, which many consider soul destroying.
>Sounds like an interesting space to be in.
Interesting use of interesting.
The stuff you've used to qualify Farmville there would apply to directly to dealing in drugs, sex, weapons, money laundering - just about anything.
Interesting use of interesting.
The stuff you've used to qualify Farmville there would apply to directly to dealing in drugs, sex, weapons, money laundering - just about anything.
Yes, interesting. Unfortunately, optimally fulfilling those constraints requires rather unethical means. Exploiting known vulnerabilities in human psychology is something I'd characterize as evil.
I find the linked article in which he described what he was learning from working at Zynga illuminating:
http://venturebeat.com/2010/02/18/zyngas-chief-designer-shar...
Key points to take away: - We launch new games on insignificant fractions of our overall budget - Metrics help us figure out whether newly introduced features actually help us earn more. - Devising a way to "shame" users into playing more was our most effective recent new innovation.
http://venturebeat.com/2010/02/18/zyngas-chief-designer-shar...
Key points to take away: - We launch new games on insignificant fractions of our overall budget - Metrics help us figure out whether newly introduced features actually help us earn more. - Devising a way to "shame" users into playing more was our most effective recent new innovation.
Holy hell, I didn't know about the "Alpha Cenbtauri" connection. That was the first Scf-fi strategy game I ever played. It changed my life. Hopefully he's moving on to something better than Zynga.
Yeah I agree, that takes a toll on you.
He championed a number of mechanics to put more 'game' in social games, but ultimately, he can't make miracles with the limitations of the format, the audience and the organization.
I hope he made a boatload of money and uses it to make awesome games that we all want to play.
I hope he made a boatload of money and uses it to make awesome games that we all want to play.
I really don't understand your comment about "limitations of the format". If you mean the Farmville model, why would Zynga be tied to that, beyond their own inability to innovate?
The format being "desktop web games played inside Facebook." That format has a number of consequences in terms of the kind of genres, features, production values, technology, etc that turn out to work in practice.
In addition to that, it's certainly true that Zynga as an organization with certain processes, culture and etc. may have proven unable to innovate. Their lackluster track record in the much more fertile ground of mobile suggests this is the case.
In addition to that, it's certainly true that Zynga as an organization with certain processes, culture and etc. may have proven unable to innovate. Their lackluster track record in the much more fertile ground of mobile suggests this is the case.
I assume he meant platform rather than format. The casual in browser Facebook game may be what he meant by format.
Also I certainly hope the guy did not make boatloads of money from such a horrid company.
Also I certainly hope the guy did not make boatloads of money from such a horrid company.
Fact: Zynga makes (or used to make) lots of money. Is there anyone you'd rather see getting a significant chunk of that? The CEO? Shareholders? Rank-and-file employees?
I'm very familiar with Zynga and their history, but to answer your question: nobody. I have no respect for Xynga and no desire for any employee of a thieving douchey company to profit off their behavior.
Alternate title: Brian Reynolds's stocks vest? :)
Alpha Centauri is easily the greatest game I ever played; it took the best of Civ 2 (which Brian was apparently the key designer on as well). Coincidentally, its now available on Gog.com cheap!
Oh no, that's a shame. Now who's going to help complete Zynga's next game, Rollercoaster Tycoon I mean Rollercoaster Entrepreneur? Seriously though, good riddance. The dude was responsible for helping rip off graphics from other games from sometimes smaller developers, I doubt this is much of a loss and more like an image boost if they can hire someone with some original ideas...
I hope your post is sarcastic but if not you should look up Brian Reynolds. He is one of the best designers in the industry. I had no idea that he worked for Zynga.
"Although marketed under Sid Meier's name, Civilization II, Sid Meier's Colonization and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri all credited Reynolds as lead designer. The credits for Civilization II and Alpha Centauri moreover imply that Meier had only advisory or peripheral participation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reynolds_(game_designer)
I really hope we get a Alpha Centauri II out of this.
"Although marketed under Sid Meier's name, Civilization II, Sid Meier's Colonization and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri all credited Reynolds as lead designer. The credits for Civilization II and Alpha Centauri moreover imply that Meier had only advisory or peripheral participation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reynolds_(game_designer)
I really hope we get a Alpha Centauri II out of this.
I've been dreaming and praying for an Alpha Centauri II for years, too. It could be done on the engine for Civilization IV or V, like the Colonization remake, and pick up on all the technological and gameplay advances in the franchise since SMAC.
Alas, the constraint is that Electronic Arts owns the intellectual property for Alpha Centauri and isn't at all interested in reviving it.
But Brian Reynolds leaving Zynga is an awesome piece of news, if it'll get him producing real games again rather than addiction-center manipulators. I seem to remember he joined Zynga genuinely believing that mobile-social-freemium was the future of gaming, which actually was a reasonable prediction in 2009, and it's also reasonable for that opinion to fall by the wayside now.
Alas, the constraint is that Electronic Arts owns the intellectual property for Alpha Centauri and isn't at all interested in reviving it.
But Brian Reynolds leaving Zynga is an awesome piece of news, if it'll get him producing real games again rather than addiction-center manipulators. I seem to remember he joined Zynga genuinely believing that mobile-social-freemium was the future of gaming, which actually was a reasonable prediction in 2009, and it's also reasonable for that opinion to fall by the wayside now.
I think mobile-social freemium is here to stay, but it is less fashionable these days. Most of the blame is on Zynga for that, but I believe Brain Reynolds joined Zynga in good faith that they would help the gaming ecosystem.
I really hope we get a Alpha Centauri II out of this.
I really enjoyed SMAC when it first came out.
There are some spiritual successors to it that have been out for a while. I'm currently giving Galactic Civilizations II [1] a try. So now you've got hyperdrive, and you are colonizing the galaxy. It was recently on sale for $5 USD on Steam.
[1] http://www.galciv2.com
I really enjoyed SMAC when it first came out.
There are some spiritual successors to it that have been out for a while. I'm currently giving Galactic Civilizations II [1] a try. So now you've got hyperdrive, and you are colonizing the galaxy. It was recently on sale for $5 USD on Steam.
[1] http://www.galciv2.com
I don't know Brian at all (in fact, I never heard of him before now). Are you claiming Zynga's strategy of ripping off other games derived from Brian?
According to Wikipedia, he's been the lead designer of a number of highly acclaimed games:
Age of Empires 3: The Asian Dynasties (2007) (creative director) Rise of Nations (2003) (lead designer) Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (1999) (lead designer) Sid Meier's Civilization II (1996) (lead designer) Rex Nebular and the Cosmic Gender Bender (1992) (lead programmer)
I doubt his resignation will save Zynga, or fix its reputation.
According to Wikipedia, he's been the lead designer of a number of highly acclaimed games:
Age of Empires 3: The Asian Dynasties (2007) (creative director) Rise of Nations (2003) (lead designer) Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (1999) (lead designer) Sid Meier's Civilization II (1996) (lead designer) Rex Nebular and the Cosmic Gender Bender (1992) (lead programmer)
I doubt his resignation will save Zynga, or fix its reputation.
I'm not sure if he had anything to do with that. Wikipedia only credits a single game to him under Zynga, and that's "The Pioneer Trail". Perhaps someone else can comment on whether that game followed the same pattern of rip-offs as many of the others, but from the description, it seems to be a plain rewrite of the Oregon Trail.
Anyways, Reynolds seems to have been (despite the credit generally going to Sid Meier) the lead designer of Civ 2 and Alpha Centauri, both of which are classics. Personally, I thought Rise of Nations was an even greater achievement, it successfully marries the style of Civ with Age of Empires.
Anyways, Reynolds seems to have been (despite the credit generally going to Sid Meier) the lead designer of Civ 2 and Alpha Centauri, both of which are classics. Personally, I thought Rise of Nations was an even greater achievement, it successfully marries the style of Civ with Age of Empires.
He's also designed Civ 1 and 2, Alpha Centauri, Rise of Nations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reynolds_(game_designer)
As others have pointed out; Brian is a well known and highly respected designer. He also served as the chair of the board of the International Game Developers Association (advocates of diversity, quality of life, and giving game credits to game developers among other issues). When he joined Zynga it was seen as a major image boost for the company.
Please don't pile all of Zynga's faults on his shoulders. That blame should go to the people actually responsible (if he should have avoided participating in the company for any reason is a different issue).
Disclaimer: I have worked with Brian. I don't know what motivated him to join Zynga. If you're looking for his history check out Bug Huge Games as well; a studio he helped found which was bought by THQ and threatened with closure in 2009 when Brian left to join Zynga.
Please don't pile all of Zynga's faults on his shoulders. That blame should go to the people actually responsible (if he should have avoided participating in the company for any reason is a different issue).
Disclaimer: I have worked with Brian. I don't know what motivated him to join Zynga. If you're looking for his history check out Bug Huge Games as well; a studio he helped found which was bought by THQ and threatened with closure in 2009 when Brian left to join Zynga.
Considering all the titles he worked on were verbatim copies of other IP's I think his loss won't be noticed that much.
I can understand that, he might not want to do all the clones they did, and he might not want to do games that probably isn't considered games by many gamers standards.
I know how it feels to produce crap as a day job.
I know how it feels to produce crap as a day job.
It seems Zynga is really 'doomed'.
It was a pretty dumb move to begin with for him.
Edit: If you disagree, please tell me why I am wrong. Brian Reynolds had a hand in creating classics, and he went to work for a company infamous for its lack of creativity. It was a terrible fit, and -- at least in my eyes -- tarnished the great stature of Reynolds.
Edit: If you disagree, please tell me why I am wrong. Brian Reynolds had a hand in creating classics, and he went to work for a company infamous for its lack of creativity. It was a terrible fit, and -- at least in my eyes -- tarnished the great stature of Reynolds.
It hurt to know that one of the leads from the sci-fi strategy epic 'Alpha Centauri' was working at the place that made Farmville - a known sucker-magnet. It must have been soul-destroying.
Good luck to him.