Raph Koster is correct. Farmville is a game. In the same vein that Tamagotchi’s are a game. In many ways, Farmville is the Tamagotchi of the internet and online gaming. I stated as much in the comments.

I believe much of the resentment comes from the fact that the folks at Zynga are pretty arrogant, and somewhat boorish. I get a sense that many object to their success on the grounds of them somehow not yet “Paying their dues” in the game development world. All I can say to that is: game development is not about paying your dues, or seeking to be a rockstar in the field. For us here, it has always been about one thing: design. We are not interested in this “Rockstar celebrity” status that seems to be the goal of so many. We just want to make cool stuff. We here actually reject the celebrity and somewhat destructive star system that has grown out of the game industry.

Raph illustrates a very important point, that a rose by any other name will still smell as sweet. You can claim Farmville is not a game all you want, that don’t make it so. The issue with Farmville is not about whether or not it’s a game. It’s more about people’s perceptions of Zynga and it’s principles, and before you dismiss that let me just throw out there, the same argument could be made about:

  • World of Warcraft: All blizzard did was roll up and package stuff that worked from other games previous to WoW, like EQ and UO. They didnt really make a game so much as concatenate other games into some polished boxed product with a million dollar marketing campaign. Blizzard is not really a game company, just a sweatshop for coders tying stuff together.
  • Every Asian Free to Play MMORPG: All (fill in the blank with company of your choice) is take (X Feature(s)) and (Y Pricing model) or (Z cash shop) and put some new graphics on it. They are not a real game company.
  • etc etc etc.

This preoccupation with Farmville is nothing more than a beef with the owners, and not with the actual product. All it does it polarize people more. As Cuppy said awhile back, social is a mechanic, and its not about chat. I think that is also part of the issue, to be honest. Core game developers got their shorts pulled up over their head and tied in a knot by Zynga. I think there are some serious hard feelings over this. Zynga got to the trough first and it has a great many folks up in arms.

To help put this into a better context: I feel some of that resentment as well. When I heard Metaplace closed, and that their new focus was Facebook games…I was (and still am) quite upset by that. The Metaplace engine is capable of so much more than doling out (what I consider to be) mind numbing chore related games. I was disappointed, but at no time did I resort to retreating to an indefensible stance of “Metaplace does not make games”.

The game industry is at a crossroads. There have been many before, and there will be ever more in the future. Defining social is done. The major players are upset that the defining was done by someone other than them, and those people are not exactly always cool. So be it. But, now it’s time to incorporate this exciting new area into what’s being done in the here and now.

Recrimination does not make good games. Let’s move on.