Tuesday, September 24, 2013

The Unfulfilled Potential of Virtual Pet Games – Part 2

Recognizing a dearth of consumer software with characters that displayed emotions or personality, the startup company PF.Magic was formed in 1992 with the mission to “bring life to entertainment.”  We wanted to break out of the mold of traditional video games (e.g. flight simulators, sports games, running-jumping-climbing games, shooters, puzzle games) to create playful new interactive experiences with emotional, personality-rich characters.
- Andrew Stern

Dogz and Catz
What is a virtual pet? In 1995 a breeding game called Dogz, the first well known virtual pet,was released by the company PF Magic. Dogz (later also Catz, Petz and more) were independent creatures that lived on your desktop, and responded to the cursor as it if was your hand. Your Petz were autonomous characters that moved around, played with toys, and if you did not care for them, they could run off. This was a departure from first person games, where a character that represented the user was controlled by the player, like a puppet.

A virtual pet can also be a physical object, like Tamagotchi or AIBO (robot dogs made from 1999 to 2006). The Tamagotchi was first marketed in 1996, as a playful exercise in responsibility. If the pet wasn’t cared for regularly, it would die. It was aimed mostly at kids, although people of all ages got into the craze. But planning your life around the needs of a fake pet is not practical. Schools started to ban the pets, because students were taking care of their little plastic eggs instead of paying attention in class. So the product was forced to adapt, adding a pause button. In time, many pet games would drift from this idea of constant care, to make them more appealing and practical as games.

The idea of virtual pets gained ground, and expanded. Like the Petz games, some focused on breeding animals. Other games focused on decoration, like the popular SuperPoke Pets. You had one adorable pet that barely moved, centered in a scene that could be decorated with a wide variety of items. Many of these games came to focus on new decoration items released every week. Some virtual pets had the appearance of anthropomorphic cartoon characters who could wear clothing, adding costumes to the fun items you could enjoy. At the same time pet games were developing, some companies used the idea of autonomous characters in non-pet games, like the Sims.

In 2005 I fell in love with an innovative, client-based pet game called GoPets. The pets were very customizable. They were also very independent, and even visited other players on their own, both when their user was online, and when they were not. GoPets interacted with each other in various ways, sometimes playing rock-paper-scissors, other times confessing their love and being accepted or rejected, each with a charming animation! The game featured many activities, including designing your own clothing and furniture, which you could also sell or give to other players. The pets were 3 dimensional, initially on the desktop, then on a 2D background, and eventually in a 3D environment. We had a great community of players, and I made many friends all over the world. Sadly the game did not last, and closed near the end of 2009. One difficulty I found in convincing friends to play, had to do with their reluctance to download a client, rather than playing something like a flash game that requires no download. I think today people are more used to downloading games.

Losing GoPets was difficult for me, emotionally. But when I was ready for a new game, I asked my GoPets friends what they were playing.  They said the best pet game out there was Pet Society. I wasn't on Facebook, so I joined up just to play.
Sprite and Friends

Pet Society had such a wide range of activities, and kept adding more. You could play all day if you liked. Of course I’m preaching to the choir here! I quickly realized I loved my pet Sprite, as much as I did my GoPets. I love how she always rearranged her plush toys, she took after me in that, lol.  My family and friends started playing with me, as they had in GoPets. One of my funniest Pet Society memories is teaching my mother-in-law how to run the races in the stadium. We were both dying of laughter, as she tried to navigate the hurdles. I made many new friends in the Pet Society community. But as we all know, Pet Society closed, as well.

Today there’s a dizzying array of virtual pet and similar games. You can play with photorealistic dogs on your phone, with Dog Sweetie and other games. There is a gorgeous game for Xbox called Kinectimals, where you play with charming lifelike tiger cubs and other baby animals, using a motion sensor. You can play with 3D cartoon-like anthro characters in games like Animal Crossing and Happy Street. Almost every pet game today includes some mini games.

In spite of the many games currently on the market, I feel their is still a lot of unfulfilled potential. What’s missing?

Many players bond strongly with their first virtual pets, as I talked about in The Unfulfilled Potential of Virtual Pet Games – Part 1. People often name their virtual pets after real pets that passed away, thinking it will be a lasting tribute, and are terribly disappointed when the games close. Pet game players are among the most dedicated, for example, there is still an active community of ol' fashioned Petz players—people don’t want to let go of the very first virtual pets to exist! And yet game  companies view virtual pets as ephemeral, casual games. This is a disconnect between game makers and customers.

I'd also like to see a virtual pet game on a large scale, similar to a MMORPG, an idea Danine suggested in A New Gaming Model: in Star Wars? I realize many Pet Society players hate violent games, but if you can stomach some violence, and you want to get an idea how great a MMORPG-like anthro pet game could look, I suggest playing the Pandaren starting area in World of Warcraft, for free. You'll have to download the program, and you’ll need a fairly up to date computer to use it. On the character creation screen, choose the panda. You could try other races, but the Pandaren starting area has the newest graphics, and is breathtakingly beautiful!

Pandaren female in World of Warcraft
Also, the Pandaren is the newest and most detailed anthro race in the game. Sadly, to get to the most visually stunning parts of the starting area, you have to fight. But you can get a taste of it, just looking around in the training area where you first arrive, without fighting. Now imagine a world that lush to explore in a virtual pet style game, with only gentle game objectives. I know many people, including some who are non-gamers now, would be enthralled by an immersive game with peaceful, relaxed objectives.

Another thing I'd like to see are more cross-platform games. I'm currently playing a city building game on Facebook that a friend plays on her cell phone, and yet we are neighbors in the game. I hope gaming companies are working to make this kind of connection more common.

So I’ve been toying with these concepts, and I want to wrap them into a complete package. Many game companies today let you managed the games you play on one account. I'm envisioning an account for managing not only your virtual pet games, but also your virtual pets.

Different Versions of Your Pet
You could play with the same pet in multiple games. For some games, you may use exactly the same pet. But for others, you could design different versions of your pet, for different virtual environments–2D, 3D, different graphic styles, the designers would give you options to match the look and animations of each game. You could have multiple pets, and change the name and appearance of your pets. Let's say you have 3 favorite pets you view as brothers. In a game that allows multiple pets, you could play with all 3 brothers together. In single pet games, you'd swap in the one you want to play any given day.  Your account could manage phone games, flash games, client based games, and other platforms as well.

Most virtual pet games today include at least a few mini games. Perhaps the site could host a variety of mini games, and you could play the mini games you like most, then apply the currency won to whichever game you choose.

Your pets would always be available, ready to go into new games even if an old game closed, or the platform became outdated. Your pets would grow with you, and with current technology. But the actual games should also be designed for long term playability, with solid game design and a variety of activities. The goal is to keep them relevant, not yank each game after only a couple years.

How would the company make money? I think there are viable options. For example, some simple games could be free, several others could be covered under a $5 monthly fee, while a full blown adventure game (similar to a MMORPG) might require an extra fee of its own. All games would also have a cash shop. Some clothing or decorative items could have both 2D and 3D forms, and be used between games. You could buy, or perhaps even win, items that you'd be able to give to friends and relatives playing games you don't even play yourself. If the site became popular enough, perhaps they could even sell physical toys or figures customized to look like your pet.

It’s hard to imagine any of the current game companies buying into this, but it would be possible with today’s technology. I've believe the concept would be appealing to a broad audience of low-pressure gamers, and profitable. Grandparents could buy items for grandkids. People could play whichever games they liked best, while socializing with friends on the site. I wouldn’t want it on another platform, like Facebook, subject to their changing game terms. I’d rather see a website made specifically for these warmhearted games. Of course they’d have to start small, with just a few. I think you could get a foothold with a couple solid games and good pet design, if you respect the customers and sell them on the concept.

If they started with Pet Society, that would be icing on the cake. :0)

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Why Yes, We Have Lives

A common (and annoying) response to loyal Pet Society players who still miss the game shut down by Electronic Arts in June, is "Why don't you people get a life?"

My husband and I are not gamers. Pet Society came into our lives unexpectedly. It was as if a door had opened into some magical world out of childhood, like the wardrobe leading into Narnia. Pet Society was a place where our imaginations could run rampant, unfettered by practical considerations of time, budget, or physics.

We found ourselves seeing images out of Pet Society as we shopped, or observed store signage. Adorable children aged 2-3 have the proportions of a pet, with the large head, big eyes, and sturdy torso. We would smile at each other and murmur, "Pet," or "As Seen In Pet Society."

The bleed-through worked the other way as well. Our pets began to do "shout outs" to our friends and the events we attended with them. Even friends who did not play Pet Society got a kick out of the photos we shared on Facebook. Some of them wound up getting pets of their own!

We love going to Maker Faire,
and think Tizzy and Scoop would feel right at home.

After seeing a museum retrospective of designer Jean-Paul Gaultier, 
with real-life pal Agnes,
our pets paid tribute to the designer as well.
(If you saw that exhibit, these outfits are spot on.)

Scoop's tribute honoring the life of Lucille Bliss,
creator of Crusader Rabbit cartoons in the 1950s.
(A great childhood favorite of James.)

One of Scoop and Tizzy's first ventures "out" 
going to Kali's birthday party. (Kali got her own pet.)

We had tickets for a production of "Lady Be Good."
Tizzy was being a lady and Scoop was attempting to be good.

We've been putting on Regency era balls for over 25 years, 
so when Pet Society introduced Jane Austen style gowns, we were on it!
Fellow collaborator Christy's pet Chloe.

It was so convenient when everything went orange and black in October,
as the Giants won the World Series.

In real life I've helped put on many historic events.
The Art Deco Society's Gatsby Summer Afternoon is the biggest one,
with antique autos, a live band, and over 500 costumed revelers.
Tizzy naturally had to hold a Petsby Picnic each September. 
The vintage cars, the stage, and musical instruments the pets played
all cost real money but gave cute interactive animations.
The real money also bought a 7-day party with three different
pets showing up at each log-in.

Scoop set up a permanent gallery tribute to Phantom City,
 our friend Steven's rock band. 
Steven finally created his own pet, Mr. E, to come join the fun. 

We were heading out to a gala concert (Max Raabe)
and birthday celebration at the Paramount Theatre in Oakland.

Another Art Deco event, the Flying Down to Rio Ball,
which Scoop has taken perhaps too literally.
(Although that film is pretty wild!)

Of course there was a Titanic centennial dinner.

Our friend Chris set up this room,
so evocative of the hotels for many science fiction/fantasy conventions.
His pet Gustav wears the classic propeller beanie. 

Our life is not all champagne and balls. 
One year ago, James had emergency eye surgery for a detached retina.
He had to lie face down for a week, no computers,
but asked me to put Scoop in his PJs with bandages for company.

Our FB friends were happy when Scoop was up and visiting again!

Our pets also did things we will never do in real life,
like go to Burning Man. But that's another story.

Note: The photos were all taken within the game. The elements and backgrounds were available for purchase within the game. The creativity was in how you combined them. The animated pets had a mind of their own, and could not be posed. You had to wait for the right moment for a good shot.

Monday, July 15, 2013

The Unfulfilled Potential of Virtual Pet Games – Part 1

Pet Society was the best game on Facebook, beloved by players of all ages and descriptions. But it suffered from some of the same problems as other virtual pet games, the biggest problem, of course, being that it closed when many people still wanted to play. 

Can we keep him?
Virtual pets tap into our instincts. Human beings just love caring for little moving things! Toddlers worldwide, when they’ve encountered all manner of creatures, have uttered these words in all languages, “Can we keep him?”

Game companies want you to form an attachment, in the hopes you’ll spend more money. But when they close the game, they paradoxically don’t want you to protest. In an article by Brendan Sinclair called Perils of Whale Hunting, he talks about the effect of game closure on diehard fans, the ones who spend the most money and time on the game. When it comes to pet games, the backlash cannot be underestimated.

I’ve found the biggest virtual pet gamers, are often people who have little experience with games at all. They bond with their first virtual pet, and the community, in a very real way. When the game ends, these heavily invested players become jaded. I know many players who have vowed to never pay for Facebook games again, and stuck to it.

Game companies have also alienated these diehard customers while the games were still running. For example, sometimes stop gap measures meant to thwart hackers do more harm to legitimate big spenders, than they do to curb hacking. I’m talking about things like inventory limits, and gifting limits. And when I say big spenders, I mean not only those who spend a lot of money on the game, but those who spend a lot of time. People who recruit friends, write out information to help fellow players, and the like. Without that kind of community, games like this don’t catch on.

Virtual presents!
In the 2010 article How Social Games Ate Our Lunch, the writer Erin Hoffman touches on the ways generosity affects customers and game play, and helps you bond to fellow players. Personally I’ve found the big spenders are often the most generous players, but game mechanics may stop a grandmother from showering her grandchildren with virtual presents.

And rather than catering to the customers who actually pay the largest part of the profits, game companies may dismiss their concerns, because they are a small percentage of users. But this small percentage of users are the ones paying, and their enthusiasm for the game is the best form of advertising. Game companies are often at odds with their own customers, lowering their profits and upsetting their biggest fans.

There’s a disconnect between game designers and people who enjoy sweet, gentle games like Pet Society. These games are great for moms to play with their kids, for people with disabilities, and for older folks. They’re good for anyone looking for something to help you relax, instead of a fast paced, action packed, violent game. You could say these gentle pet games are video games, for people who don’t like video games. Most game companies don’t seem to understand this kind of customer, and it's hard to find game designers and companies that are willing to buy into something they don't understand, or just don't care about.

Of course companies make games to make money. Pet Society was still profitable, but it wasn’t profitable enough for EA. These huge corporations don’t care about customers or employees, they only care about lining the pockets of people at the top. This parody video called EA in a Nutshell is over the top, but not entirely inaccurate.

As someone who loves virtual pets and has played various games over the years, what I really want is a game company that will take a new direction, and move towards what the customers want, instead of fighting them. I know there's still an untapped audience out there, people who don't even know they'd love a game like Pet Society.

Danine contemplated the idea of a client based pet game, like a MMORPG, in the June 16 blog post A New Gaming Model: in Star Wars? In my next post in this series, I’d like to expand on that idea, talk about where virtual pet games have been, and where they are going.

Sunday, June 16, 2013

A New Gaming Model: in Star Wars?

Well, it's been an exciting week in Lake Wobegon, as Garrison Keillor's monologues always began.

Our computers began to crack last week under the strain of the impending closure of Pet Society that was scheduled for June 14. We were rushing to record videos of visits with our pets and their friends. We take a lot of photos within the game, but those don't capture the charming animations you see onscreen.

Tuesday night James' MacBook Pro developed the Blue Screen of Death. (I did not know Macs could do this, but Intel Inside may have its downside.) So we were off to the Apple store, moving his video efforts to my little MacBook Pro Retina. It would be several days before his logic board could be replaced.

It was time to call in reinforcements, so we made arrangements to meet up Wednesday evening with my son the software engineer to discuss our various problems. Food was brought in, problems were solved, and we still had time to admire his current video gaming setup.

My son was showing off what could be done in a game he has enjoyed playing for quite a while, the Star Wars: The Old Republic, a game now owned by Electronic Arts under license from Disney. Yes, this is one of the games that Pet Society players have vowed to boycott when Pet Society vanishes -- but hold your fire, and hear what I have to say.

Star Wars: The Old Republic may hold the key to a business model that would enable EA or some other company to make enough money off our little game to keep shareholders happy, let players who want to play for free, offer worthwhile perks to monthly subscribers, and provide a legal trading post for items you don't want.

(I loved Star Wars, by the way. I took the software engineer to see the original film when he was a mere moppet. I worked at LucasArts back when Industrial Light and Magic was suspending plastic models in front of blue screens. I did data entry on theater measurements that went into the design of the THX sound systems. I even dressed as Princess Leia from "Hardware Wars" complete with sticky buns on my ears at WorldCon 1984. But I digress.)

So there on my son's wide-screen tv, with personal computer power undreamed of in 1984, was the world of George Lucas' brilliant imagination, the back story. And as my son walked us through the features of the game, I realized: this is Pet Society in 3-D.

The basic elements of both games are the same. You have a character. You can customize your character as much as you wish. You can buy costumes and change their colors. Your character can go places and do things within the game. You earn points for playing the game and buy more cool stuff with it. Within the game you find a world of almost infinite variety. Surprise may lurk around any corner.

Bonus, the interface is not limited to your friends on Facebook. Once you are in the Old Republic game, you start seeing other characters who are all online at the same time. You can contact them within the game if you wish.

You can play the game for free, or you can buy a monthly subscription that gives you certain perks, like more money to spend within the game, and better things to buy with it. Both groups, the people who won't pay for games, and the people who don't mind paying if they get value for their money, are accommodated. (This game is not an X-box game but a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) -- do read the Wikipedia article if this is all Greek to you. It has some good info about the economics and logistics of the business of games.)

The scales fell from my eyes, so to speak. Once you get past the 2-D vs. 3-D issue, the common elements of the games are clear.

So Star Wars may not be our enemy -- but a friend in disguise! Click your heels together three times, EA: the solution may be there in your game portfolio. Knights of the Old Republic is a model of how Pet Society could continue, with some players gladly paying for bonus swag, and others playing for free. (We've wrangled about this on the Pet Society groups, free vs. subscription, and here you have the problem nicely solved. Offer both!)

My pet's notion of space garb.
Some company out there should be able to make money off this situation, with 32,000 avid players around the world who refuse to abandon their pets. As of last Friday, Pet Society was still ranked at over 1 million players per month, and over 100,000 players per day. We are still hoping for a resolution that will be a win for everyone, including the EA shareholders.

Just to be clear, I am happy with our childlike 2-D pets. I'm not sure I'd feel so engaged with a 3-D pet game. There is some psychological evidence that filling in the blanks (reading comics, or novels) engages our brains differently than watching a film, let alone a 3-D epic. Our impulse to complete the incomplete, to decipher the code, may lie underneath the way Pet Society players engage with the game. But that's a another post, for another day.

Two days past the scheduled closure, Pet Society is still online. We accept each day as a miracle. Now it's time to visit my pet, while I still can.

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

This Relationship Is Not Working

Yesterday I spent 90 minutes watching the Electronic Arts "press conference" at the G3 trade show in Los Angeles.

"Conference" is somewhat of a misnomer. This was an elaborate, carefully-scripted production that made the Academy Awards look spontaneous and unaffected. Like all game companies, EA was there to tout the forthcoming titles in its repertoire.

To be honest, I was looking for any rays of hope about the fate of Pet Society, the Playfish game for which EA paid $300+ million less than four years ago. But I also wanted to understand more about why a company would be so intransigent about selling an intellectual property, so eager to jettison the past and move on.

As I watched game after game highlighted on the vast convention stage, with thundering sound effects to match, I began to notice something. Where were all the women?

My son and his friends, now 40-somethings, have been gamers for the past 20+ years. The women in their circle, married or single, are just as into gaming as the men. But onstage, I saw only one woman operating a console, among several dozen men. There were two female figures onscreen: at least the fantasy woman of today is powerful and active, not a frail flower awaiting rescue.

Are women still invisible in this fantasy world for men who at heart are teenaged boys? Seriously. It's not 1980, when you expect the women to take notes and make coffee.

And the games themselves. Yes, they are brilliantly programmed with hyper-realism. They may be great fun for people who are just coming of age and don't have a lot of real life data to interfere with what they see onscreen.

For me, those shining towers crumbling will forever evoke the horror of watching the 9/11 attacks over and over, trying to grasp the terrible thing that was happening. The viewpoint of a character taking over a building somewhere in a desert climate: didn't I see that footage on news coverage from some intrepid photographer embedded with our troops?

And a game about wild driving. Oh please. Just get on the freeways in the Bay Area. Someone will inevitably whip in front of your car like a lane-splitting motorcycle because they've honed their driving skills on games like this. I had enough real-time driving adventure, thank you, hitting a metal object in the fast lane, shredding my tire, and driving on the rim across four lanes of traffic in Oakland. Real life delivers enough excitement for me. (But I'd gladly watch a program showing how their director made it happen; a short glimpse behind the scenes was quite interesting.)

Plants vs. Zombies is EA's idea of cute, which the plants are, in a perky, Pixar-like way. But when you've watched your loved ones turn into zombies, so to speak, under the depredations of advanced age, and dealt with their collapsing houses, zombies are hardly balm for the soul. Then there was a role-playing game set in the Inquisition. Torture and religious persecution, what's not to like! The irony of selling expensive games in which you fight for survival, running on equipment that many who struggle in life cannot afford, is not lost on me either.

It struck me, these dudes are stuck in their first chakra, so to speak. Where it's all about sex and survival. This is a normal place to be when you are a 15-year old guy. I've raised one, so I speak from experience. Those were the years when I often sighed that my son was going to wind up in M.I.T. or jail, and I wasn't sure which. Raising boys can be tough sledding. Kudos to both sides for surviving the teens.

There's nothing wrong with guys being guys, or loving sports, or honing your competitive skills. It's just that as humans, we are so much more than sex and survival.

In introducing a wrestling game, one presenter pontificated, "Fighting is the earliest universal sport." Historians and anthropologists might differ, with dice and early board games like Go, or throwing bones having a long pedigree. And what about the teamwork involved in taking down a hairy mammoth for dinner, or in discovering the ripest berries and herbs that won't poison the tribe? I suspect cooperation is even more essential than fighting for human survival, but we are stuck with the "fight" metaphor as a way of living.

Apparently EA has decided that only those who feed their inner 15-year-old boy are their target market. That's their call as a business, like Abercrombie and Fitch wanting to drive fat people out of their stores.   As a woman who derived so much joy from the fine product EA is now tossing out like old athletic shoes, I want to shout at them:

"There is so much more to human beings than the mere struggle for survival. Where are the games that stimulate other parts of your brain? That urge you to explore beauty and wonder and empathy? That let you express the odd mixture of love and frustration and play and exhaustion and loss and recovery that humans undergo every day, everywhere? Games that enhance our lives and increase our enjoyment of the world around us? Games that can appeal to people of any age, that transcend language? Games that don't need sex and violence and 3-D graphics to give enjoyment?"

Pet Society is one of the rare games that could be played with satisfaction by anyone, child or grandparent, sophisticate or rube, with people whose language you could not speak. I know I'm shouting into the wind here, but I don't care. I shout for those who have no language, no voice; for those who found refuge and hope in a simple game while recovering from illness. I shout for the small children who aren't really supposed to be on Facebook but who play with their relatives and are training to be the computer whizzes of the future. It's been a grand part of our lives, and we will stand by our pets as long as we are able.

Monday, June 10, 2013

Saving Gaming for the Rest of Us

"Anyone who can't make money off Sports Night doesn't deserve to be in the business of making money." —Aaron Sorkin, Sports Night

The game companies of the world are gathering this week in Los Angeles for E3 2013, a major conference in the world of game development. Electronic Arts will hold a press conference at 1:00 on Monday.

I am looking at the E3 site, and other sites about gaming, like AppData, which tracks numbers of users for all apps on Facebook.

I am trying to make sense of the larger world where it makes economic sense for a corporation to spend over $300 million buying a successful company and to throw that investment away less than four years later, as Electronic Arts is doing with Playfish and its products.

Pet Society is still up there on AppData, as EA's third most popular game, with over 100,000 individual players each day, and over 1 million players a month. Some companies should be very happy to have those numbers. Pet Society is still ranked 157 overall, in AppData's odd way of lumping online games in with Yahoo, Yahoo toolbar, Bing, and Pinterest as apps. This is technically correct, but in terms of how real people use computers, lumping apples with oranges.

And I'm thinking, EA, do you actually enjoy being named Worst Company in America for two years in a row by Consumerist? Are you going for three?

And what about you, game companies, and game analysts? I'm looking at the categories for games on the E3 site. Here's are the genres discussed on their forum:

First Person Shooter
Strategy, Real-Time Strategy
Rhythm and Music
Survival Horror 
Third-Person Shooter

I am not decrying other games. I merely note, there is almost no slot, no pigeonhole here for the sort of game that Pet Society is: a focusing, open-ended, noncompetitive experience where you can apply your natural creative impulse. Imagination. That what-if, let's-pretend capacity that's innate to small children, and gradually crushed out of us through rote schooling and formalized jobs. Creativity. Call it what you will. We value it at its highest flowering in art and literature, but don't know how to encourage the creativity that lies in everyone.

My husband loves comic books. Always had. Tried drawing his own. Not very well. In Pet Society he found a place where the brilliantly designed elements fell into place for him. He found an inner child in his pet Scoop, and created a brilliant little world for his pet. All the pet friends and their players could come and play with Scoop's toys, and wander through his house. 

What genre is there for the gentle games that soothe us, delight us, and awaken a sense of wonder? Can computers hone creativity as well as reaction times? Can we light up other areas of the brain besides puzzle solving or heroic rescue or quest retrieval? 

The players of Pet Society are making a stand. We want to be noticed. It's more than just losing our personal pet. Real life pets get old and die, we grieve, and go on. 

We protest the willful destruction of a beautiful, unique environment that encouraged creativity. That could be played with joy by people of any age, or any language. Where every pet and every room in every players house was as unique as a fingerprint. Standard-issue goods were combined in wonderful ways. 

Pet Society was a brilliant achievement in programming and in visual and sound design. Since it defied categories, and looked on the surface like Second Life for 3-year-olds, it may never have received the acclaim it deserved. It's been a marvelous experience that's held my attention for the past four years. One flick of the switch, and that world will be dark forever on Friday.

How someone can not make money off this intellectual property, with its devoted following of over a million fans? As Forbes wisely observed, social games should have a plan for the life of the game, including how it winds down. Can other companies make what they consider good money housing Facebook games? Is a subscription model possible? Mark Zuckerberg, don't you want happy customers  too? Does anyone at G3 see that there's an audience out there that is not being served? 

This sudden closure has won EA a new round of antagonists. Pet Society players are already boycotting EA products. Unless Monsanto somehow gets on the radar of Consumerist voters, that third year title could be already cinched.

Thursday, June 6, 2013

Why It Hurts To Say Goodbye

I'm using this blog as a "bully pulpit" to look into the phenomenon of Pet Society. We are now one week away from the scheduled shutdown of this very popular game. There are many groups on Facebook (one with over 32,000 members!) protesting this closure and searching for what can be done.
Even Forbes has taken notice of this intense international alliance of players who stand by their pets.

Art by Greta Crippa http://www.flickr.com/photos/gretacrippa/

This drawing captures the emotional bond so many players have found with their online pets. Some of us who pretend to be respectable adults have "come out" to speak about our support of this game, and inflict our tweets and postings upon the world at large. Our voice, what we have to say, may matter. It may register that something special was going on with this particular game; that Playfish managed to capture "lightning in a bottle." 

Whether artistically sophisticated or simply direct in message, many players share a bond with their particular pet. Some describe themselves as "pet parents".  Others, like this tweet, capture another facet: "I have loved her since the minute she was born. Please don't take her away."

Whether you are six or 70, no matter what language you speak, or how many college degrees you have, the feelings of love and anger and loss are much the same. My own sense is that through some magic, Pet Society was designed to create little creatures that are as individual as human beings, with the happy, creative, curious, and self-reliant attitude of well-behaved two- or three-year olds. (Minus the colds, whining, and temper tantrums.) 

The pets are naturally cheerful and self-reliant. They are not emotionally needy, pressing their face up against the screen from time to time, demanding your attention (as in another competing game, now gone). They do need to be fed and washed, like real toddlers and pets. In a properly set up room, with plushies to carry and objects to bounce on or ride, they can amuse themselves indefinitely. 

Whether you've done "inner child work" or not, playing Pet Society is likely to awaken memories of being young and innocent and full of creativity and fun. Being a grown-up all the time can be wearying. The financial responsibilities, the natural concerns for the well-being of those around you, the stress of illness and impending death, the very viability of the planet we live on: it's a sobering burden we confront each day. Many of us no longer have real children in our lives; they have this way of growing into responsible adults and taking a very long time to produce children of their own to be doted upon.

When we touch base with our "inner child" we remember why everything else we do matters. Deep inside, I still have the curiosity and love and joy and perplexity of my two-year-old self.  I experience this connection through playing with my pet, so losing my pet becomes like losing part of myself, part of who I am. That is my best intuition as to the dynamic that is going on here. When a game becomes more than just a game, it's worth taking notice. But that's another blog post.