The Game Design of Tinder & Online Dating | Game/Show | PBS Digital Studios

What’s behind the
game design of Tinder? [MUSIC PLAYING] Since the very beginning
of human existence, there have been two
core urges that we still do today– playing and mating. The act of mating is a
little bit of coarse, I know, kind of like a nature
documentary or something. So we evolved social
customs to civilize the act of passing on our genes
to the future of our species, just like we invented sports
like wrestling to ritualize our desire to fight. So you shouldn’t be surprised
that dating and gaming share a lot of resemblances. One could argue that it’s the
oldest form of competition amongst males and females. But the meteoric
rise of online dating has thrown the whole
virtual into flex by adding a non-user controlled
interface and mechanics on top of it. Before, you chose the rules. Now the rules choose you. I remember my
fifth grade teacher meeting her future husband
in a CompuServe chat room and how crazy that
sounded at the time. But now one in six
new marriages is the result of meetings
on internet dating sites. So Miss Tyson, you were
clearly ahead of the curve. But one consistency
throughout the ages has been that many of
dating’s game-like behaviors remain, albeit in a new
and digital expression. To be clear, I
don’t think dating itself is a game,
as Neil Strauss, the author of that creepy
pickup artist book, “The Game” would
lead you to believe. But intentionally or not,
many features of online dating pool directly from the
best that games can teach. So let’s see how they do it. I think one of the best
examples of online dating is found in the app Tinder. In fact, many of its users
openly describe it as a game. Tinder is incredibly
popular with close to 50 million active users. People log onto the app an
average of 11 times a day and spend eight
minutes a session. That’s 90 minutes a day of
just swiping through profiles. So why is it so popular? Well, first, it has the
easiest tutorial like ever. In game design, the process
of introducing players to a new experience is
called difficulty ramping. We’ve all turned on
an RPG at some point to find ourselves
immediately lost in a maze of menus and options. I’m looking at you, EVE Online. Tinder, on the other hand,
is the exact opposite. You simply log in
through Facebook, pick a couple photos
that describe you, and start looking. The mechanic is
devilishly simple. See someone you
like, swipe right. Not so much, swipe left. That’s it. [MUSIC MARVIN GAYE, “LET’S GET
IT ON”] If you say yes and someone
else has swiped right on you, you get matched. And romance,
potentially, ensues. Tinder makes the initiation
process really, really easy and front loads your
deck with matches so you don’t have
to go searching through hundreds of profiles. Early success means that
players will want to come back. The app clearly takes the words
of Sims designer Will Wright to heart. “A good game is easy to learn
but difficult to master.” Also, I don’t know if
the designers of Tinder played Magic the Gathering
or not when they were kids. I mean, I certainly did. But the app looks just like
a collectible card game. In both cases, the
information is designed for simplicity and clarity. Both even have ridiculous
photos and a little story explaining themselves. But unlike Magic, there
is an infinite deck with no cost to draw, meaning
that you can play for as long as you like. It’s like Yu-Gi-Oh but for
a potential life partner. Or, come on, let’s be
honest– a one night stand. WOMAN: In Kim
Kardashian’s world, let’s just say monogamy
is essentially dead. But the game design of Tinder
goes much deeper than that. They figured out that the
core gaming loop for the app is very, very short. In games, loops are
simple interactive circles that work like this. The player starts
the interaction. They end the interaction. They wait for a response. If no response is
forthcoming, they leave. Nope. But if they get a response,
they repeat the loop. One of the best examples
of an effective game loop is Bungie’s motto for the Halo
series, “30 seconds of fun.” Halo’s designers
repeatedly dump players into hectic battles of
heart-pounding chaos before offering a
respite, a break. Then they put players right
back in the loop again. Tinder has wisely figured
out that the trial and error process of online
dating is best served by a very, very
short cycle of game play, an infinite loop of
swiping left and swiping right. It’s the same draw of quick
fire games like swing copters or super hexagon that rely
on dozens of repeated plays, just seconds apart. They’ve wisely figured
out that the loops for other online dating
services are way too long. But here’s what I think is the
biggest revelation for Tinder. They’ve created an
experience based on two additional
game mechanics– asynchronicity and symmetry. A great example of
asynchronous symmetry is chess by mail, AKA
correspondence chess, which dates all the way back to
Byzantine emperor Nicephorus and caliph of Baghdad,
Harun al-Rashid, who played against each
other in the ninth century. [MUSIC PLAYING] It was asynchronous because
there were thousands of miles apart and had to play
one turn after another. It’s symmetrical
because each player had the same chess pieces
with the same chess abilities. So for Tinder, imagine
that but between millions of potential suitors
happening thousands of times a second with only one move
at your disposal– hot or not. The reason that asynchronous
symmetry is important is that it fixes what’s
known as the deluge problem in online dating. The deluge problem refers
to a fundamental imbalance in the social dynamic of
finding someone online. On heterosexual dating websites,
the most valuable asset is attractive females. As soon as you get them,
you get loads of creepers. They chase away the women, and
you’re left with a guys night. That’s the deluge problem. And this creates asymmetry. But on Tinder, the
asynchronous element creates balance,
ensuring that women can play on their own time
and on their own terms. Symmetry assures that both
players have to opt in mutually to initiate contact. But Tinder isn’t alone. Online dating overall bears
a resemblance to play. One common trait of
online dating services is play testing, tweaking the
site’s respective algorithms to create the best
matches possible. Or in the words of
OkCupid’s Christian Rudder, “performing experiments.” When he revealed in a blog
post that his site OkCupid had been conducting dozens of
experiments on unknowing users, he defended himself by saying,
that’s how websites work. Regardless of whether or not
you buy Rudder’s defense, games have been doing the exact
same thing for quite some time, only under a different name,
optimizing player experience. There’s Microsoft’s
user research lab that tweaks the designs
of Halo and Titanfall, according to what active
players are doing. And the behavioral
science team at Riot Games that tries to change players’
interactions in order to foster sportsmanship. In both online dating
and online games, the desired end result is
creating a perfect pairing. And of course, in
both the arenas, players are always pushing back
at the contours of the system to find an optimal strategy. Just as players study
Street Fighter to figure out the appropriate
spacing strategies, Amy Webb detailed her
exhaustive dating tactics in this TED Talk. She turned dating into
databasing, tracking 72 data points including bad vocabulary
and created fake male profiles for market research, of course. Chris McKinlay
used Python scripts to harvest six million
questions on OkCupid and then sorted 20,000 female
daters across the country into seven distinct clusters
like diverse and mindful. Some people might say that what
Webb and McKinlay are doing is cheating, because it
removes the serendipity of online dating. And yeah, that’s true. But maybe it’s not cheating. In any case, it’s a good
seg to the other being facet of modern dating that shared
with games– bluffing, AKA lying your face. Sure, people have been
lying on dates for ages. I lied to my wife-to-be about
how much I could bench press and, you know, winning
that Nobel Prize. But regardless, in
the digital age, lying has a whole
new significance. It can be really hard to verify. Game designers allow
bluffing or lying in their work to create unease. As Raph Koster says, “Once
secrets are treated as goods, misinformation becomes
a form of tug-of-war,” which is a really euphemistic
way of saying relationships. On OkCupid, men exaggerate
their income by 20% and increase their height
by up to two inches. And let’s not forget the
ubiquitous perfect photo that just so happens to
be from eight years ago. Oh, and the group
photo on Tinder where you don’t
even know who you’re supposed to be talking to. The reality is is that if
you create a game experience of any kind people with
search high and low to get some sort
of an advantage, especially when the
wind condition is a night out, amazing
sex, or everlasting love. But if dating sites want to
continue to be successful, they may want to take more
tools from the game designer handbook. You’re so beautiful. That’s adorb– ah, [INAUDIBLE]. That’s disgusting. A good game can’t be solved. So if dating sites figure
out the perfect way to match couples, maybe we’d
be less interested in them. I mean, if you just
uploaded your photo, typed in your social security
number, and it just gave you the person you’re supposed to be
with for the rest of your life, how is that any different
from arranged marriages? So what do you think? Does online dating bear
some strong resemblances to the nature of play? Or am I besmearching
the good name of games by dragging it
through the ugly messy reality that is meeting
someone romantically in the 21st century. Regardless, has it
out the comments. And if you like what you
saw, please subscribe. Big thanks to Fred [INAUDIBLE]
and Timothy Gunatilaka, who helped me think
through this episode. Have a happy holidays, and I
will see you in the new year. [MARIO COIN SOUND] Last week we talked
about whether or not all of these sales and
bundles for all these really cheap games is driving down
the value of the medium. Let’s see what you had to say. TheJaredtheJaredlong asks
a really good question. He wants to know
why there aren’t luxuries games the same way
that there are luxury cars, or I don’t know, luxury
vinyl or whatever it might be– luxury
things that are expensive and you have in your home. Well, one reason is that luxury
is usually tied to scarcity. And that games, because
they’re a digital good, have never been scarce the same
way that like a painting by van Gogh is scarce in
that there’s really only one, even if there’s
multiple sketches, et cetera. But that’s an
excellent question. I do sometimes
wonder if the market would be able to bear
that sort of thing. Like let’s say your favorite
video game designer, let’s say it’s Will Wright, made
a one of 10 version of the Sims or something that was custom to
you and only available to you. How much would you pay for that? Good question. Alex1jag is probably
in the minority. This person does
not support Steam and believes that physical
media is inherently more valuable than digital media. Putting that aside, it does
raise this really interesting question about whether or
not games will go through like a vinyl period,
vinyl as compared to sort of the previous
decade has actually been doing really, really well,
in large part because I think people have much more of a
strong physical attachment to the existence of vinyl than
compared to like CDs or a mp3s. But there’s also a note that
vinyl sounds a lot better as well. So you buy the special
Hi-Fi equipment, and you get this warmth to it. In some cases, it’s
a closer replication to what the actual recording
of live music sounds like. I wonder with games what that
sort of equivalent might be. Is it like getting
floppy disks or 3.5 disks or whatever then booting those
up and playing them instead? Good question. Ryan Rumminger argues that
the fact there are more sales means that video game makers
are making more money, which is really, really interesting. One thing we do know is that if
you’re a digital distribution platform, you’re making more
money, because it doesn’t really matter whether people buy
one game or a different game. Whether or not
this is going to be a rising tide lifts
all ships scenario, I think it’s kind of TBD. One thing I would refer you to
is the annual game developer survey that comes out
every single year. And in it, they have a
special section devoted to independent developers. You’ll know that the
average– the average– salary for indie developers is
about $10,000 a year, which is not really
enough to live on. So if there’s some
sort of boon that’s happening where
all of the sudden all these bundles and sales
are making everyone rich, then I certainly
don’t know about it. Mark Arandjus and a
bunch of others of you in the comments created
what I would say is a false dichotomy, like a
type of straw man argument, specifically saying that
for people who pirate games, cheap games are better, right? The idea there being when
you pirate something, the game developer, the
designer, receives nothing. When you buy it cheap
on a sale, at least they receive something. And I think what that does
is you can’t necessarily equate an illegal– piracy
is illegal– and a legal one. You can only compare legal
actions to other legal actions. Those are similar bodies
of human behavior. I think it’s a bigger problem–
is you can’t both be a pirate and take the moral high
ground, like you’re developers some kind of favor
by giving them something. That’s called extortion. So if you want to be a
pirate, that’s totally cool. You don’t want to pay for
games, that’s totally cool also. Just be honest about what
it is that you’re doing. InMaTeofDeath, no joke,
bought all 17, or I guess, I don’t know– are there 17? 17 Command & Conquer
games, probably for like $3 or something like that. And tops it all off
with #noregrets. I have this image of
you like driving down the highway in a Corvette
or something, top down, just like throwing Command
& Conquer CDs to the wind like it’s nothing,
like it’s paper. So good on you, bro. [MUSIC PLAYING]

82 thoughts on “The Game Design of Tinder & Online Dating | Game/Show | PBS Digital Studios

  1. Dating online is Totally a game and was way more difficult to play back in the day. I never got to try this tinder app looks fun. haha I met my wife the old fashion randomly at a GameStop

  2. So. Now that the video will end soon I ask myself 'what to do?'. I'm awful today in arenas (WoW), nor any raids are going on. opens sims 4 after he drinks some moonshine

  3. You can turn anything into a game. I look at dating like an rpg/action/strategy game. Each girl leads to a different path, each has different rewards depending on what level in the relationship you are in, and the "boss" level with each one is drastically different. Sometimes it ends up being a one night stand, others wait until marriage, and others you could end up spending your entire life with. Each woman is different, which is why men have a love/hate relationship with them.

  4. i was just on one of my friend's tinder last night (grammar) and i had alot of fun just seeing how far people would keep at it in a conversation even if i was conversing in an offputting way. that was kinda like a game….

  5. Tinder is a failure then. I know plenty of people myself included that get absolutely nothing out of tinder, no matches, no nothing.

  6. Wouldn't a collector's edition game count as a luxury game? It's limited edition, so there is scarcity, and it's prohibitively expensive in many cases.

  7. You really only talked about Tinder, which is just the "meeting strangers" bit. But on the other side, there's the "trying to get to the next level with people you already know." I don't know why I used quotation marks there. Anyway, what I just mentioned functions a lot like a game as well. But not like Tinder. See, when it's with someone you know (especially if the both of you are in the same small group, there are more factors to consider than just them. Given all the relationships between everybody, trying to romance someone you know plays most like Risk or Plague Inc. Romance has already been a game for a very long time.

  8. I take Nick Paumgarten's point that "dating apps" are search apps rather than dating apps. Dating is still a process that Jaron Lainer says requires people to deal with each other's weirdness, a term for the things that aren't included in most dating apps because it makes searching difficult.

    My question about mechanics and actions are about whom they serve. Some actions serve the site, some serve the users, and the best do both. If dating is "more than a game," the. The ethics of mechanics matter.

  9. @PBS Game/Show 
    First and foremost, what is talked about is interaction design. Not game design (granted there is a lot of overlap).
    Secondly, you state that a good game can't be "solved" and I fully agree. But saying that really contradicts former statements in other videos especially in regards to most single player games (read every game where they try to tell a story). While I don't think those systems are inherently wrong or bad, they are inherently different. Not a whole lot of people will say a playing gone home and Street Fighter are similar activities. So Street fighter is in system-wise speaking a "game proper" while gone home system-wise is a puzzle. Because 1 has a definite, always the same, solved condition while the other not.
    Granted I'm nitpicking a bit here.

    But in regards to Tinder as a whole, something they haven't fixed is "less wanted men". It being the case that men, unless you are really attractive, are less chosen (likely because women are more picky). This in turn creates men that swipe right more often. Which creates women that match far easier that in turn means less women that are "playing". Which only make it for men even more hard. Which is the reason, especially in less populated (or less people with tinder areas), that men always blindly swipe right if they "play" long enough. Wish spirals it to the deepest point.
    This could be easily fixed however by showing the less "right-swiped" men first instead of a more random assortment.

  10. 1 out of 6 marriages are credited to On-Line Dating, But the divorce rate in America is in the 40 to 50 percent range.

    If I was a betting man, I would bet against the couple that met online. No amount of internet fads have been able to actually lower the divorce rate, and I don't think that's actually what these apps (or their users) are trying to achieve (the cynic in me says it's more about getting that easy lay).

    Anyway, talking how a dating app as a game feels kinda wrong, because you are automatically objectifying yourself and those you interact with just by participating  "something something trophy, object of desire, etc."

  11. I don't understand the YUGIOH reference. Can't be un-limited cards, yugioh maxs out at 60. So could someone please explain it to me?

  12. A few different comments.  That TED talk is really good.  I've been using both Tinder and OKCupid, with little success.  That being said, I'd say you are correct in that I have been augmenting my profile in slight ways to get a leg up on others.  After reading some other comments, I guess people seem to find this idea a little reaching.  Sure there are similarities but could you then make similar comparisons between cooking and games?  Idk, maybe everything is connected.

  13. But does it help you understand your values and improve social skills? I find it better to just scour across youtube to meet people. Then of course people can lie about their pics a la catfish whereas video is much easier proof and more stimulating. It always takes time to meet someone who can fulfill your needs though that is also a skill to get easier as you improve

  14. i was worried the title was literal and we were actually proposing tinder was a game, after all it is certainly more interactive than gone home or mountain which have been defended in the past, but i was pleasantly surprised and left with that smug, superior feeling like i had leaned something.

  15. "if you want to be a pirate? that's totally cool" … Please tell me you misspoke there. If I have to explain why, I'll happily unsubscribe.

  16. Gaming's vinyl period may already be here, given that some people are actually programming and packaging new physical games for old consoles like Atari 2600 and NES.

  17. I'm glad this video was made, and not just because more people need to use Tinder (just give it a try, what's the worst that can happen?)

  18. The softwares work like a game, the actual activity of dating does not. The easy confirmation that tinder provides is what gives some kind of really cheap confidence. I really am not sure about that…

  19. Well for me. the years of dating the women I'm not supposed to be with for the rest of my life has allowed me to grow and change into a much better person. Which in turn has changed who I am able to be paired up with, increasing the overall quality of my life by not only being a better person, but by being someone that my super crush amazing fantastic current girlfriend would even be willing to talk to. 
    If I had an algorithm a decade ago that told me who I should be with the rest of my life it definitely would not have picked her, and hers would not have picked me. I'd still be with mentally unstable people that match me, and keep me exactly where I am. 
    Without the prospect of "There's something better out there, and I can achieve it" I don't know if I would have been as dedicated to self improvement.

  20. there don't need to be luxury games, luxury gaming gear is already a thing…

    but really… being able to play games in the first place, IS a luxury!

  21. Tying into that old comment about games as luxury, a lot of retro gamers insist on playing on CRT screens to get that authentic feel of old games, unlike on LCD screens, and they certainly do look a lot better with natural scanlines. There's also the appeal of having neat boxed games, like for instance NES games where the cartridges have a sticker and come with a manual with good art and storyline. I often collect boxed games like these as trophies, even if I'm not playing them that often.

  22. I wonder how meaningful the 1 in 6 marriages start online is when you consider the rising number of couples opting to just not get married in the first place, but stay together just as faithfully, if not more so, than married couples.

  23. tldr; I agree.
    Edit: Jamin, I hope you read this and perhaps reply in a comment at least, I wish to know your opinion on what I said 😀

    Online dating sites use "algorythms", statistics and a bunch of other things that can (and may) be abused to increase "profit", just as in a lot of FPS games, headglitching gives you an advantage, it has always been around, so people use it to increase their chances of winning, in another example: certain troops have better low cost/high damage ratio's, hence the zerg rush came to be. input for algorythms can be altered to receive a more promising result, same for using an outdated profile picture, or even lying about certain things about yourself (like height, income, …). Even statistics can be used to your advantage. Say, for example, that 9/10 people on datingsites won't react to a profile without a picture, adding one increases your chances, add the 7/10 people will respond to your profile if your pictures has you smiling in it… and so on. If you know the rules and the behavioural strategies of a dating site/game/anything in life, you can use that knowledge to your advantage, gain a lead on the rest, because you know them and use them to your own benefit.

    So, yes, I do believe Dating sites can be viewed as "games", but I also think they shouldn't be, but that's a completely different discussion

  24. Dating is like Bravely Default. You start a level 1 Freelancer. You want to save the world, you meet your team with common goals who help you get other jobs which help you get more abilities. You can adjust how difficult it is and getting more rewards, or just laying low and never advancing. Then it all becomes a convoluted mess of doing the same thing over and over and over again. Then you quit, because, seriously, it's pointless. WHO WANTS TO BE A FREELANCER IN BRAVELY DEFAULT FOR GOD'S SAKES. Anyway, it's the same. You learn tricks that at some point of your life will make another person interested in you, and viceversa. And then divorce. Love is pointless.

  25. I have tinder and use it as a game, but I do find it a shallow thing to do yet the reason I find it so addictive is because of the 'game design'

  26. I totally agree that their are elements in common between dating sites and games. But if you worked hard enough you can draw parallels between games and my horrible job at mcdonalds. 

  27. I tried tinder, there's no way to filter people, you just swipe and hope that person is looking for the same kind of relationship, I think they exaggerated on the "simplicity" aspect.

  28. Can we talk about how if you're not straight, young or within the bounds of the usual gender binary, dating websites/apps are depressing as all hell?

  29. As a relatively early player of EVE Online when I saw him bring up the example of EVE as a hard starting game before he said a word I was literally LOLing because I KNOW THAT 'PAIN'!!!

  30. I like to think that the wrold is a game, I like to think that every thing can be a game you just need to find it. 
    There are some people who finde cheats and some who try to do it the non cheating way. 

  31. The analogy could have been extended a bit further in the sense that it would be counter-productive for dating sites to match every person, as they themselves depend on repeated visits. If everyone gets matched at the first try, they will not return and that add/subscription money wouldn't come, but it still needs to be successful enough that people are willing to give it a try, try again if they fail, and recommend it to their friends. In a way, a dating app seems more akin to a coin arcade than to a more modern game: short, difficult, addictive and very rewarding if you put in the effort.

  32. Thank you for reminding me about how shallow and soul crushing the process of mating and dating is… I personally can't consider dating to be a game because games (from my perspective) are supposed to be fun, and there is nothing fun about dating. I would instead equate dating to a form of social capitalism– it's about increasing your (dating) market value and then using that value in order to get what you need to survive. 

  33. If you define "game" as an activity with a set of rules that point to a win state then many human activities can be defined as "games": working, cooking, dressing, walking and so on…. And i'm quite on board to this definition.

    The question is: what's the win state for online (and offline) dating? Finding a match or win over a suitor? Literature and arts long debated this and still haven't find a satisfing answer.

  34. I don't think we'd ever see a future where one could submit a photo and their SSN and get an exact match. The human condition is too opposed to being told something is perfect. Can you imagine the kind of pressure each individual would put on the relationship? Every time there was any kind of argument or disagreement, there would be this concern that they were only together because they were told to be.

  35. I met my wife on, but the instant gratification of Tinder would've probably driven me insane. Both my spouse and myself spent years 'leveling up' in our online dating skills before we met one another. Much of this was learning to ignore the chaff and focus on potential partners. I've always compared dating to an RPG with leveling up, skills, etc. There is certainly a gaming analogy to being successful socially, be it internet based or walking down the street.

  36. *facepalm* The difference between that and arranged marriages is that one require force and the other is voluntary. Its like saying whats the difference between a blind date and rape.

  37. Women using dating sites is like Playing Bayonetta 2 on easy Mode. Men on dating sites is like Playing Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 on Master ninja Mode. 

  38. Luxury goods occur within games. They are the hats and monocles that people pay money for, also the rare collectibles such as, in Eve Online, the limited edition ships given out for tournaments or events.

  39. The difference between vinyl and digital music is like board games vs video games. An install disc is still the same concept + physical box are, but a board game still entails the user experience similar to vinyl's lack of portability. It's localized, can't be transfered to other devices, and is tangible.

    That said, we're already in the 'vinyl age' of video games according to my observation. You can extend this to card games as well.

  40. Extortion is what Steam does to me in Australia.  "Oh look! Your in Australia! Here, have this $60 USD game for $90 AUD"  And that was when our currency was trading at above parity.
    I moved off Steam unless it's the only choice, if I have a choice it's GOG, because they at least don't rip me off.

  41. It is sad design (in games, dating, and many other aspects of modern life) are being distilled down to exploit the most shallow surface desires and gratifications.

    What we get lacks a lot of complexities and depth…but is MUCH easier to obtain. Why put in all the effort and money to get a fine cheese when you can just grab a can of cheesewiz from the store?

  42. If dating is a game, then the controller has too many buttons, I lost the manual, and all the dialogue and on-screen prompts are in Esperanto.

    In short, the whole thing confuses and frustrates me enough to quit before trying.

  43. I'm in a relationship going steady for nearly 4 years by now, but the game completionist inside of me, almost makes me want to make a tinder profile just for the heck of it.
    Does anyone know if Tinder has achievements?

  44. Jamon, what the hell.  It is not totally cool to be a pirate, if being a pirate also loses you the moral high ground.  It is not totally cool to lose the moral highground.

    So, one of your statements needs to be amended.  Either piracy does not automatically lose you the moral argument, or it is not totally cool.  That is, unless being totally cool means something waaay different to you than it does to me.

  45. Based on what you said at the end about not wanting our "soulmate" you should watch TiMER, a movie about a world in which everyone has the option to buy a timer that gets put on their arm and tells them how long till they meet "the one". It's pretty good!

  46. Two of my brothers started dating people they'd met on an online dating site. One of them even married his girlfriend within a year, the other one met her about 2 weeks ago so we'll about them. I myself have no experience with online dating since I'm too young to date, but I have at least seen it can bring people together and isn't just a bunch of hooey.
    I do play dating sims though like Rune Factory, those are fun, but I also just like farming and fighting monsters.

  47. Ok this is about your outro section. You really need to think of possible location when viewing piracy of digital content, as there are some places that won't be able to get a legal version of some games tell a year or more after it has been released due to the location's system for rating and saleing games, best example is with brazil and Extra Credit actually had brought this up.

  48. I refuse to bluff or play games to seem attractive, and I have no patience for other people playing games or bluffing for attraction. I'll be single as long as it takes.

  49. Pirating games and getting to play them within 1m vs. installing games and having to watch their bs. ads 10m before playing the bought game is a no-brainer to me. The same reason I don't go to the movies anymore, because they have the 20m mandatory commercials they impose. I don't buy them.

  50. +PBS Game/Show Response to your comment segment:

    Has there been any experiments done with the "Name your own Price" pricing model, i.e. Radiohead's In Rainbows, within the gaming community? Could the NYOP model work with a minimum threshold? In Rainbows was such a success the band pulled the NYOP model because the pricing was getting the media attention rather than their music. Some of that success was due the the threshold bonuses, ala Kickstarter funding levels, so listeners could pay more for things they cared about; could game makers do something similar, becoming more profitable since they would be getting the money directly and gamers could pay for the extras they want? In the end gamers would receive the content they want and game makers can see what content is possible and use that information towards future planning and pricing.

  51. +PBS Game/Show Response to your comment segment:

    Has there been any experiments done with the "Name your own Price" pricing model, i.e. Radiohead's In Rainbows, within the gaming community? Could the NYOP model work with a minimum threshold? In Rainbows was such a success the band pulled the NYOP model because the pricing was getting the media attention rather than their music. Some of that success was due the the threshold bonuses, ala Kickstarter funding levels, so listeners could pay more for things they cared about; could game makers do something similar, becoming more profitable since they would be getting the money directly and gamers could pay for the extras they want? In the end gamers would receive the content they want and game makers can see what content is possible and use that information towards future planning and pricing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2019 Explore Mellieha. All rights reserved.