Using storyboards to build social games

If a car comes off the assembly line with only three wheels it’s obvious to everyone that someone screwed up. I wish that were true in the software industry. Maybe the Product Manager knows when a new email product is missing a “wheel” but does the rest of the build team? Maybe if they read the specs, but how often is that done? When was the last time the artist read the spec? I find the problem only gets worse when building social games, but we’ve stumbled upon a tool to make it a little more obvious a social game is missing a “wheel” – storyboards? Using storyboards we’ve found that we can lessen the confusion about what you’re building and even enlist the entire team in contributing to the design.

Storyboards

Of any product I’ve ever built, social games have to be the most open-ended. Everyone has a different vision in their head. Even when writing a screenplay I have a structure to cling to. Games are a different beast all together. To help get everyone on the same page we started using storyboards on my last project. Most games start with either a concept doc or if you’re lucky a full Game Design Document (GDD). As the Product Lead I would take that and write out use cases. However instead of handing those over to Engineering to start building we turned many of them into storyboards. Capturing a typical play session in storyboards we not only found it helpful in communicating the design but in advancing the design.

Allowed us to engage the entire team in design

I like to engage my entire team in building the game. Many of us are in this industry because we like games so why not collect everyone’s input. However it’s a bit cumbersome to get everyone from the Game Designer to Engineering, and Customer Service in one room let alone on the same page. Having not been privy to earlier design discussions most input isn’t all that helpful but using the storyboards we found we were engaging everyone in a more productive way.

We weren’t a room full of people with our own ideas or vision in our heads. In a typical meeting we might draw a diagram or two on one of the white board to clarify something. With up to a 100 slides in the storyboard it was equal to a 100 diagrams spread about the room. Everyone in the meeting understood the user experience with the current design, so our time was spent arguing how best to improve that design.

Highlighted issues we couldn’t see in use cases

Use cases are always helpful to highlight something you or the Game Designer might have missed. Seeing some of those use cases in storyboard form brought even more issues to light. Ultimately anything that isn’t caught in preproduction will cause trouble down the line. If it’s something major it might call for a major course correction – which no one enjoys. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words and that certainly goes storyboards too. Never hurts to see a little emotion too, which is nearly impossible to communicate through a use case.

Improved communication

Having storyboards I think if I would use them even if I went back to typical web development. It isn’t that far from using flows to diagram a product but I feel like it goes even further – to capture more the experience you’re trying to build.

I use to say, “you never really know a product until you’ve done a few use cases, or a few hundred”. Now I might add, “and have done a few storyboards”. One of the biggest problems of relying on use cases was that few ever read them, but having a visual and one charged with emotion goes a long way in the communication department.

Mouse ears for me

The rumors started last week with a TechCrunch article and today - Disney Paying Up To $763 Million For Social Gaming Company Playdom. So it looks like mouse ears for me and a free trip to Disneyland.

It certainly changes the landscape for social games. Also plays to the theory that the game industry at large is moving toward social games.

Companies that have embraced casual games have been the ones that have been able to revolutionize the games business. Those that have held onto the core games have not. Look at Facebook, they embraced casual games. Apple with the iPhone embraced casual games. Look at the three major consoles. Who won? The Wii. Why? They embraced casual games.

Will Apple pull an end-around Facebook with social games?

On TechCrunch over the weekend Michael Arrington claimed it the age of Facebook.

Someday, maybe a decade from now, some new technology will rise and allow other companies to threaten Facebook. But until then there is little to stop them. Their march to dominance has just begun.

I agree that with Michael that Facebook has stolen the limelight from Google however I’m not as sure they will reign for a decade. One serious threat on the horizon – social games. Some go as far as to claim social games the killer app of social networks. According to a recent PopCap survey, 49% of the time social gamers login to Facebook specifically to play games.

That’s great for Facebook, currently it’s the home of social games. However I doubt Facebook is that comfortable with such a moniker. Facebook has already taken steps to limit the viral nature of social games, showing more of a concern to fight against spam. Facebook’s hesitation to fully embrace social games fully leaves the door wide open for competition. And seeing as how Facebook takes a 30% cut from game developers with Facebook credits they’re practically driving developers to seek out alternatives. In steps in Apple with Game Center. And how far behind could Google be with Android?

Michael is correct that no one will be able to take Facebook head on, but they can surely do an end-around by embracing social games. It might not be enough to topple Facebook but it could give some a beachhead. A decade is a long time to try and stay on top.

What do you think about Facebook leaving the window for social games open?

Social games are like mini startups – always in search of a business model

After working for a fat startup that died I was introduced to lean startups by Eric Ries, I even attended Eric’s fist workshop. Friday I was lucky enough to attend Eric’s first Lean Startup Conference . Where as most hate conferences this one was power packed - Kent Beck, Steve Blank, and Randy Kosimar riled everyone up enough to run out and begin their own startups if they hadn’t already. But a startup of my own was never dream of mine so I ran out trying to figure out how to apply the methodology at Playdom. And when you think about it, each social game is like a mini startup.

It’s a dynamic hits driven business

Social game companies have already shown that there is a business model behind virtual goods and games but as we all know, every new game is a new opportunity for success as well as failure. It’s just like Hollywood and as William Goldman says:

Nobody knows anything.

That doesn’t mean Hollywood executives are stupid, but refers to the fact that prior to a movies release, Hollywood has no idea how well a film will do. It’s the same for social games but where as movies are static, social games are highly dynamic. That isn’t to say you can interact with them but that they’re continually evolving. Testing features to see if it will improve monetization, engagement, lifetime value, etc. Startups do the same thing.

Search for a business model

One of the tenets of lean startups is understanding that a startup is in the search business. Not the search business like Google, but as Steve Blank says – for a business model.

A startup is the organization used to search for a scalable business model. It’s all about the search, not execution or maximizing profits.

Blank goes on to explain that because it’s a search, startups have different metrics than a traditional business. Where they think of balance sheets and cash flow, a lean startup worries about viral coefficient, lifetime value, etc. That certainly sounds a lot like the social game business.

Built to learn

As Eric points out, lean startups also differ from fat startups in that they’re built to learn not execute.

Many founders believe that early stage startups are endeavors of execution. The customer is known, the product is known, and all we have to do is act.

Eric takes a different approach. He believes that many early stage startups are labors of learning. The customer is unknown, the product is unknown, and startups must be built to learn.

In many ways the same is true for social games. The industry is still young and wide open. The majority of players are female, the game industry has never seen that before. The game industry has a good idea what guys look for, but women?

Currently the industry use game mechanics to engage players but is there a potential to employ other mechanics? Hint, hint…

Social games as lean startups

As Steve Blank explains, lean startups execute customer development and lean startup methodology. I get to do the same with social games at Playdom. Exciting times.

Xbox live for the web – Mark Pincus keynote

Today I had the privilege to see Mark Pincus deliver the keynote at arguably the first social game conference. Many things in his keynote caught my ear but three in particular.

  • It’s going to be an app world
  • Made multiple comparisons to television
  • Need to curate the audience

An app world

The meme going around in Silicon Valley is that the future of mobile is apps and since mobile is the future – it’s also the future of the Internet. Apple is certainly a big proponent where as Google is frightened about what that might mean for search. So far Zynga and the social game industry has just dabbled in the apps market, at least where the iPhone is concerned. So if Mark sees apps as the future that sure means a big change for Zynga, for everyone in the industry. Up to now there’s been a big divide between mobile and social game companies – different revenue streams, user base, and distribution.

Multiple comparisons to television

More than once Mark mentioned social games and television. Spoke of how he was on the hunt for a new show Sunday nights, a show he could really get into and how it should be the same for social games. On another topic he mentioned how Zynga needs to strike a balance between adding and taking away features or risk their games becoming to complicated. Comparing the balance to the TV series Lost and how it isn’t fun anymore, it lost something.

It’s natural to compare the emerging social game industry to Hollywood, but maybe Mark is thinking about it more than most. Which led me to notice something else during the conference – we were still a lot of gamers talking about games. That might seem odd to say, but is there potential for more beyond games? Listening to Mark I might hazard a guess that he’s thinking beyond games.

Need to curate the audience

Mark also mentioned his concern for when a user has a bad experience in a game. It’s the classic – one bad experience might turn people off. Combined with the desire to see people search for social games like he searches for a new show to get into on Sundays and it all reminded me how unproven the social gaming market is. Sure FarmVille has revolutionized the gaming world but it’s only been two years, hardly enough time to prove it’s long term viability. Games aren’t going anywhere but the reach FarmVille has might not be repeatable.

Xbox Live for the web

Mark sort of wrapped his keynote up in saying he wants to see social games evolve into Xbox live for the web. It would have persistent navigation, universal feeds, and user communication channels. I couldn’t agree more but would also like to see the medium experiment with other mechanics to create engagement – maybe something more akin to Hollywood such as drama.