Will Google Buzz support social games?

Posted on February 12, 2010 by justingibbs

I’m catching a lot of flack for being a believer in Google Buzz. Interestingly enough most of the flack is coming in through Google Buzz itself. One theme I keep hearing is “Where’s the social games?” The launch of Google Buzz brings up an interesting debate – are social games are the killer app of social networks.

With Google’s launch of its social networking feature for Gmail and mobile devices, Google Buzz, Tuesday, some are already speculating what’s next for new service. A killer app for Buzz? Social games.

If social games are the killer app, the question then becomes – is Google Buzz going to support social games? Off of the top of my head I can think of a few reason for and against it.

Reasons not to support social games

Facebook is already having difficulty striking a balance between viratlity and spam
Social games have the potential to change the dynamic of the social network itself – A-ya Chiu of Taiwan added over 4,400 friends on Facebook to decorate her virtual house in Pet Society
Have to deal with app developers – It can be a pain as we’ve seen the flack over Apple’s app store, however Google has already dived into this with the Android app store

Reasons to support social games

Certainly promotes usage – Facebook has a good idea of how important social games and apps are to its daily usage numbers
It can promote mobile use of Buzz – People have to get the game fix on wherever they are
Promote location-based features through augmented reality games – Also lends nicely to Google’s geek cred

Reasons for supporting social games beyond Buzz

Can push Android and Chrome OS for netbooks – If they’re also working on a tablet version of Chrome OS, the games piece might be critical to its adoption
Drives transactions – Anyone remember Google Wallet, maybe they can dust it off
Push open data standards which will loosen the grip Facebook and Twitter have on users
Push Google’s campaign for HTML5 and 3D in the browser – Google Chrome OS doesn’t support Flash; they spend their own money building out O3D while at the same time supporting it’s open competitor WebGL

Google hasn’t always been consistent in their message but overall they seem to support open web standards over proprietary formats. My guess is that open standards are in their blood and they think they can out compete anyone no holds barred. If the world was using HTML5 and WebGL at the expense of other game engines and Flash they couldn’t be happier. Some have already speculated that Google could change gaming and that’s a whole new market for them to cash in on.

Problem is Gmail is a tool, not a service

Of course Gmail, the home of Buzz is a tool and not a true social network. I use Gmail for personal and business where as I use Facebook more for fun – wasting time. Google search is also a tool, and we’ve seen how much they’ve cluttered their search homepage with ads or anything else that might be of interest. Google knowingly leaves hundreds of millions of dollars on the table not putting ads on their homepage.

I’m betting that Google won’t be able to resist the chance to dive into the social game market, the question is if they do it in Gmail or outside of it? They could easily launch Buzz as a stand-alone site – get people use to it in Gmail but let it all hang out on the stand-alone site. Then again maybe they have a few tricks up their sleeve to strike a natural balance between virality and spam? It might be odd to play a game inside of Gmail, but they could also let you jump off site for the playing experience. In this scenario Buzz is just the communication piece. If that’s the route they go I would also expect them to require O3D or WebGL as they’ve already stated that they restricted Chrome OS to only web apps for security reasons.

What do you think – will Buzz support social games?

Google Buzz will nullify Facebook

Posted on February 9, 2010 by justingibbs

The echo chamber is abuzz with, we’ll Google Buzz. While some are negative:

But like many Google services, it lacks any imagination or compelling reasons to use it. (Starting with the name, a rip-off from Yahoo.) As a result, it’s probably not a threat to any of the services it’s trying to disrupt.

I’m a little more positive. Google Buzz relies on Google’s strengths – email and algorithms to surface your connections automatically based on who you correspond with. This is your own social network without the setup.

Won’t kill Facebook but will nullify it

The Silicon Alley Insider article asks who would make the switch to Google Buzz.

Why would they switch to this Google service when there are no compelling reasons to do so?

And if Google isn’t going to actually kill Facebook with this thing, what’s the point?

I disagree that the point is to kill Facebook. Users have been notoriously transient with their Internet use. First it was Friendster, then MySpace, then Facebook. Some say many have already moved from Facebook to Twitter. However one thing that has proven rock solid is email. Google Buzz is an instant social network, better than that it self-adjusting. People I haven’t talked with in a year will fade to the background, rather than hang around on Facebook prompting me to ponder when and why I added them.

Even today I hear, “don’t Facebook me, just send it to my email.” Email is where users return to time after time. It’s what goes at the top of their resumé. It’s the most sure-fire way to get in contact with someone besides their phone number. When users return to Gmail they’ll slowly begin to use Google Buzz and over time nullify Facebook. It won’t kill Facebook but it will take a chunk out of it.

What does it mean for social games and Flash?

I wonder what Google Buzz will mean for social games? With Facebook trying to strike a balance between virality and spam, how will Google tackle the issue?

There is also the issue of Falsh. Flash is to work on Google’s mobile OS Android, however not on Chrome OS for netbooks (and possibly tablets). Google is also a big proponent of HTML5 and pushes O3D as a direct competitor for Flash.

Another experiment in collaborative writing via Twitter

Posted on October 15, 2009 by justingibbs

Ever since computers started falling into the hands of average people there has been a desire to use these new tools to express story. To change how they’re delivered, consumed, or written. When the Internet hit people started experimenting with hypertext fiction. Now it’s Twitter’s turn.

Neil Gaiman, famed author and creator ofThe Sandman comic series, and BBC Audiobooks America have gotten together to produce an interesting creative fiction experiment utilizing the microblogging service. Neil tweeted the first line of the interactive story at noon EST Tuesday, with other Twitter users joining in to continue the tale using the hashtag #bbcawdio.

But unlike what Barb Dybwad’s post on Mashable attests to, Neil Gaiman’s experiment isn’t really like the Choose Your Own Adventure books she loved growing up. Those were more along the lines of interactive story, this is more an experiment in collaborative writing. There’s actually a lot such experiments as you’ll see in the comments on the Mashable article. The problem is they rarely go beyond experiments. It’s difficult to write with one partner and no technology is going to change that, no matter how hip it is. Just take a look at what Neil Gaiman’s experiment has churned out so far and you’ll see the challenge.

Seeing this I’m reminded of the great presentation Dan Hon did on augmented reality games – Everything you know about ARGs is WRONG. He nicely cut through all the hype surrounding ARGs, something that would be nice here as well.

Twitter is a great example of character development

Posted on April 16, 2009 by justingibbs

As Twitter goes mainstream I hear more questions about what makes Twitter so special? Many are from people outside the tech industry – they simply don’t get Twitter. Is it all the celebrities who got on? Is it the tech geeks? Like any successful product it’s a combination of things, but one ingredient that is often overlooked is it’s character development. Such strong character that the infamous fail whale is the equivalent of famous movie lines people quote.

Twitter’s character is more than the great art. Twitter uses every opportunity to express itself and with a touch of humor. How can you not like the “Who goes there?” screen?

Twitter did a lot of things right but beyond the more obvious they utilize classic character development techniques from screenwriting. I doubt they were thinking about screenwriting at the time but their minimalist design has unforeseen benefits.

Character is revealed through choices made under pressure

As the screenwriting guru Robert McKee explains, true character is expressed in the choices they make under pressure.

TRUE CHARACTER is revealed in the choices a human being makes under pressure – the greater the pressure, the deeper the revelation, the truer the choice to the character’s essential nature.

When Twitter is under pressure, say when the service is down, it chooses to add a little humor and a art. Where other services use the opportunity to be informative Twitter uses the majority of the error screen to express character, to have some fun.

Action moves story

Dialog doesn’t move screenplays, action does. Most of the time the action taking place on Twitter is from other users, however when there is action they use the opportunity to reveal character The service being down would certainly count as action, so would finding a user who has been removed.

Where other services rely on their ads or about pages to build character, Twitter speaks most often through their actions. Compare Twitter to Ask.com’s old mascot Jeeves. He was around for years and we never really knew him. They built ads around Jeeves and plastered him all over the site yet none of it from action.

Characters are simple

Twitter also follows another cardinal rule of screenwriting, keep it simple. We all have our favorite movie characters and think of them as being rich and complex, but in reality movies need to deliver simple characters so we can know them.

A character is a work of art, a metaphor for human nature. We relate to characters as if they were real, but they’re superior to reality. Their aspects are designed to be clear and knowable; whereas our fellow humans are difficult to understand, if not enigmatic. We know characters better than we know our friends because a character is eternal and unchanging, while people shift – just when we thing we understand them, we don’t. In fact, I know Rick Blaine in CASABLANCA better then I know myself. Rick is always Rick. I’m a bit iffy.

- Robert McKee

Twitter doesn’t do much PR or ads to confuse us. Like the service itself, Twitter’s character is simple and I can easily plug it into my head just as I do great movie characters.

Other examples of great character

Can you think of other services that exemplify character development? Or maybe some things Twitter is doing that is detrimental to the character development?

Justin Gibbs

Bringing a little drama to social games

Tag Archives: Twitter

Another experiment in collaborative writing via Twitter