Zynga Moves to Conquer Earth Through Asia

Zynga Moves to Conquer Earth Through Asia

image

Zynga's influence has spread into China, and the rest of the world can't be far behind.

Zynga made its first step into the Asian imaginary farm videogame market this week, announcing the acquisition of XPD Media, a game developer based in Beijing, China. XPD is known for creating games for social networks in Asia, a region where Zynga previously had no presence.

Zynga's Corporate Development VP Robert Goldberg said: "As the largest Internet market in the world, China is at the vanguard for virtual goods based gaming innovation. We expect our new office in Beijing and the incredible talent in the local market to play a strategic role in our mission to create the best social gaming experiences worldwide."

This is corporate talk for: "We're going to get a lot more money now and soon nobody will be able to stop us." Zynga currently does pretty well through offerings on Facebook such as FarmVille and Mafia Wars, so presumably the company will massively strengthen itself by expanding into the enormity of Asia. Zynga's new Bejing studio will be run by Andy Tian, co-founder of XPD Media.

Zynga and Facebook are like two peas in a pod, making up recently after a near split. The question is whether Zynga will be able to gain a similar foothold in the already established Asian social networks, or if it'll run out of dollars and not be able to purchase that limited-time only haunted house without completing some stupid offer. It's a FarmVille thing. If Zynga does do well, what could possibly stop it from next tunneling out a secret lair beneath a volcano and taking over the entire world?

Via: Gamasutra

Permalink

I have a feeling that the Asian approach to gaming (Especially in grindtastic games) Is going to make farmville a hit. And for multiple novels on the best farm-to-animal ratio and such. Farmville is going to GET SERIOUS!

Careful Zynga. Don't start a land war in Asia.

They're moving to Asia? Hoo boy, now they're going to rake in some serious profits due to China having a fuckton of grind-loving gamers. Which is most definetly not a good thing.

On the other hand, maybe they'll move to Asia entirely due to Facebook not bringing in enough profits when compared to Asian market. In such implausible situation, it'd be a good thing. But on the other other hand, the "volcano doom fortress" scenario is far more likely.

Deofuta:
....Is going to make farmville a hit.

..You mean it isn't already a hit?

Google will stop them. There can only be only ruler of the world. Hasn't anyone played Risk? Asia is too hard to hold. :| Too many bordering countries. Google just goes after everything...

*EDIT* Except China... Google hates them =P

I can only imagine they are now preparing to swim in cash...

Galaxy613:

Deofuta:
....Is going to make farmville a hit.

..You mean it isn't already a hit?

Even more of a Hit, in Asia

Crap!

Anti-Christ is already spreading it's false message towards the other continents. It's pagan ways is finally reaching the four corners of the world. The impending doom is near us.

Find salvation, chop of the head of the snake!

Oooooooooh boy, and I thought we'd beaten Zynga in March Mayhem... the battle was won but the war goes on...

(to those of you who would say that I'm being over dramatic and that MM defeat had no impact on Zynga whatsoever... Oh stop being boring and play along with it! XD

The question is: who will absorb who?

Deofuta:
I have a feeling that the Asian approach to gaming (Especially in grindtastic games) Is going to make farmville a hit. And for multiple novels on the best farm-to-animal ratio and such. Farmville is going to GET SERIOUS!

Can anyone say, Farmvile tournaments?

Has the world suddenly turned into i game of Axis & Allies or something?

Meh. Games like farmville exist in Asia already with outrageous popularity and we're not dead yet. Besides, all the secret caves underground base spots are already being used by Microsoft, Google, Nintendo, Dr. Evil, A bunch of guys with twirly mustaches, the Templars, McDonalds, A giant moleman, and so on. It's pretty crowded down there.

Well shit. That means Zynga can scam another ~2 billion children into racking up $14,000 in debt for FarmFuck tokens or whatever the hell they're called.

I disagree with the blatant bias against Zynga. It's one thing to have opinions on certain companies, but it isn't responsible reporting to add it into the mix. I might be incorrect in my idea that all forms of articles should be objective and unbiased as much as is possible. Though it never seems to be case when it comes to Zynga on these forums. Which as a respected hub of information concerning all things gaming related, would be expected. Putting Zynga in such a negative light detracts from the core information in the article, exceeding beyond what is necessary. Though this post will likely fall far from eyes of anyone who might be interested in such a concept.

I don't know, it just seems like there is a lot of unnecessary input of bias into something rather innocuous.

No.

AndyFromMonday:

Deofuta:
I have a feeling that the Asian approach to gaming (Especially in grindtastic games) Is going to make farmville a hit. And for multiple novels on the best farm-to-animal ratio and such. Farmville is going to GET SERIOUS!

Can anyone say, Farmvile tournaments?

One's that last for months? Yeah I'd rather not.

OT: well you'll have to get them off WoW and SC first.

Waif:
I disagree with the blatant bias against Zynga. It's one thing to have opinions on certain companies, but it isn't responsible reporting to add it into the mix. I might be incorrect in my idea that all forms of articles should be objective and unbiased as much as is possible. Though it never seems to be case when it comes to Zynga on these forums. Which as a respected hub of information concerning all things gaming related, would be expected. Putting Zynga in such a negative light detracts from the core information in the article, exceeding beyond what is necessary. Though this post will likely fall far from eyes of anyone who might be interested in such a concept.

I don't know, it just seems like there is a lot of unnecessary input of bias into something rather innocuous.

In zygna's case, this isn't so much bias as accuracy.

If zygna invented their business model (create threadbare "games" who's sole function is to turn your users into free advertising), that'd be fine. But they didn't. Which means their only success was due entirely to facebook being almost completely unmoderated and unregulated. Then facebook regulates an intensely slight amount, and zygna begins hemorrhaging customers. Not to mention the vp and ceo outright admitting to scamming the shit out of everyone they could.

I doubt they'll get much of a foothold in asia, though. Asians like eye candy with their grind. Which would require hiring at least a few competent employees. Be they artists or simply people with a knack for ripping off other game's assets.

Hopeless Bastard:

Waif:
I disagree with the blatant bias against Zynga. It's one thing to have opinions on certain companies, but it isn't responsible reporting to add it into the mix. I might be incorrect in my idea that all forms of articles should be objective and unbiased as much as is possible. Though it never seems to be case when it comes to Zynga on these forums. Which as a respected hub of information concerning all things gaming related, would be expected. Putting Zynga in such a negative light detracts from the core information in the article, exceeding beyond what is necessary. Though this post will likely fall far from eyes of anyone who might be interested in such a concept.

I don't know, it just seems like there is a lot of unnecessary input of bias into something rather innocuous.

In zygna's case, this isn't so much bias as accuracy.

If zygna invented their business model (create threadbare "games" who's sole function is to turn your users into free advertising), that'd be fine. But they didn't. Which means their only success was due entirely to facebook being almost completely unmoderated and unregulated. Then facebook regulates an intensely slight amount, and zygna begins hemorrhaging customers. Not to mention the vp and ceo outright admitting to scamming the shit out of everyone they could.

I doubt they'll get much of a foothold in asia, though. Asians like eye candy with their grind. Which would require hiring at least a few competent employees. Be they artists or simply people with a knack for ripping off other game's assets.

Well I can understand why some people would be critical of Zynga's past mistakes. Indeed, the usage of scammy ads did nothing for the company's image. Though to let that opinion interfere with the telling of the facts is really what I disagree with. It's fine that some people disagree with Zynga, after all I am sure every company has it's detractors. All of which have their reasons, but I do expect some impartiality with informative articles. Whether or not I error in doing so, is perhaps a question of the ages. There are a lot of people who prefer emotionally charged articles rife with opinion and bias. I just don't, I feel that opinions should be up to the reader, not the author. If people reading are in a negative view of the subject matter, then it is fine, because the author isn't promoting hatred on the subject.

I don't know, am I wrong in wanting impartiality in these articles?

Waif:
Well I can understand why some people would be critical of Zynga's past mistakes. Indeed, the usage of scammy ads did nothing for the company's image. Though to let that opinion interfere with the telling of the facts is really what I disagree with. It's fine that some people disagree with Zynga, after all I am sure every company has it's detractors. All of which have their reasons, but I do expect some impartiality with informative articles. Whether or not I error in doing so, is perhaps a question of the ages. There are a lot of people who prefer emotionally charged articles rife with opinion and bias. I just don't, I feel that opinions should be up to the reader, not the author. If people reading are in a negative view of the subject matter, then it is fine, because the author isn't promoting hatred on the subject.

I don't know, am I wrong in wanting impartiality in these articles?

You're not wrong in expecting objectivity from anything that presents itself as journalism. But when something's past actions, present situation, and future prospects are utterly identical, its pretty much impossible to not sound biased.

Its like a convicted con artist, who is currently engaged in a large con, releases a press release stating hes planning on conning more people. How do you report that in any way beyond exactly what it is?

Galaxy613:

Deofuta:
....Is going to make farmville a hit.

..You mean it isn't already a hit?

It made it into GamerInformer, they must be doing something right, no matter what it spells for the rest of the gaming industry.

You know, if you were able to go to different farms people made and start to make crop circles, I think I may put in a few minutes a day playing it

Hopeless Bastard:

Waif:
Well I can understand why some people would be critical of Zynga's past mistakes. Indeed, the usage of scammy ads did nothing for the company's image. Though to let that opinion interfere with the telling of the facts is really what I disagree with. It's fine that some people disagree with Zynga, after all I am sure every company has it's detractors. All of which have their reasons, but I do expect some impartiality with informative articles. Whether or not I error in doing so, is perhaps a question of the ages. There are a lot of people who prefer emotionally charged articles rife with opinion and bias. I just don't, I feel that opinions should be up to the reader, not the author. If people reading are in a negative view of the subject matter, then it is fine, because the author isn't promoting hatred on the subject.

I don't know, am I wrong in wanting impartiality in these articles?

You're not wrong in expecting objectivity from anything that presents itself as journalism. But when something's past actions, present situation, and future prospects are utterly identical, its pretty much impossible to not sound biased.

Its like a convicted con artist, who is currently engaged in a large con, releases a press release stating hes planning on conning more people. How do you report that in any way beyond exactly what it is?

It is true that the whole scammy ads thing does stick out in the minds of people. Though a con artist is someone who is a professional at what they do, but more importantly this stems from experience. What I am trying to say is, a con artist is someone who has made a job of it whereas Zynga had one run in with such a perception. They did use scammy ads, only once, and haven't done it since. It's like if I helped a person out of a burning car saving their life, that doesn't necessarily make me a good person. In the same way that if a person drinks a couple of beers, doesn't make them a drunk. If Zynga routinely scammed people I might be inclined to agree with the perceptions contained herein, but they haven't. Ever since they took down those scammy ads, they haven't been seen again. So yes, they do have a sordid past, but I don't see it in the present nor do I see it in the future (unless you have references I am not aware of )? So for me, it's like judging a person based on one action and deciding that's all they are. If someone did that to me, I would consider that unfair. Though we will have to wait and see what Zynga has planned, and go from there.

As it is corporations do what they must to grow and flourish as a company. I doubt Zynga will make the same mistake in Asia as it did with the scammy ads here in North America. They have a better platform to operate from than what they did a year ago.

I hope they move there and stay there. Let the asian markets enjoy those kinds of grindtastic games if they want, but i'll take the games of Valve, Blizzard, or Bethesda over those any day of the week.

Waif:
It is true that the whole scammy ads thing does stick out in the minds of people. Though a con artist is someone who is a professional at what they do, but more importantly this stems from experience. What I am trying to say is, a con artist is someone who has made a job of it whereas Zynga had one run in with such a perception. They did use scammy ads, only once, and haven't done it since. It's like if I helped a person out of a burning car saving their life, that doesn't necessarily make me a good person. In the same way that if a person drinks a couple of beers, doesn't make them a drunk. If Zynga routinely scammed people I might be inclined to agree with the perceptions contained herein, but they haven't. Ever since they took down those scammy ads, they haven't been seen again. So yes, they do have a sordid past, but I don't see it in the present nor do I see it in the future (unless you have references I am not aware of )? So for me, it's like judging a person based on one action and deciding that's all they are. If someone did that to me, I would consider that unfair. Though we will have to wait and see what Zynga has planned, and go from there.

As it is corporations do what they must to grow and flourish as a company. I doubt Zynga will make the same mistake in Asia as it did with the scammy ads here in North America. They have a better platform to operate from than what they did a year ago.

I see. Yes, if you're operating under the impression that zygna's reputation can be isolated to a single incidence, yes, its easy to see coverage as biased.

Cons/scams are all about convincing the mark that giving you money is not only a good idea, it was his/her idea. I compare zygna to con artists because what they produce are not games. They're presented as games. They have graphics and a basic design that resembles a game. But their only purpose is to lock their users into an ascending, self-contained cycle of work (in this case, spamming) for reward (virtual bullshit). They're essentially pyramid schemes with only two levels. At the bottom, the millions of users generating a river of upward flowing revenue and zygna.

Implying they're going use an identical business model in asia isn't bias, its accuracy.

Hopeless Bastard:

Waif:
It is true that the whole scammy ads thing does stick out in the minds of people. Though a con artist is someone who is a professional at what they do, but more importantly this stems from experience. What I am trying to say is, a con artist is someone who has made a job of it whereas Zynga had one run in with such a perception. They did use scammy ads, only once, and haven't done it since. It's like if I helped a person out of a burning car saving their life, that doesn't necessarily make me a good person. In the same way that if a person drinks a couple of beers, doesn't make them a drunk. If Zynga routinely scammed people I might be inclined to agree with the perceptions contained herein, but they haven't. Ever since they took down those scammy ads, they haven't been seen again. So yes, they do have a sordid past, but I don't see it in the present nor do I see it in the future (unless you have references I am not aware of )? So for me, it's like judging a person based on one action and deciding that's all they are. If someone did that to me, I would consider that unfair. Though we will have to wait and see what Zynga has planned, and go from there.

As it is corporations do what they must to grow and flourish as a company. I doubt Zynga will make the same mistake in Asia as it did with the scammy ads here in North America. They have a better platform to operate from than what they did a year ago.

I see. Yes, if you're operating under the impression that zygna's reputation can be isolated to a single incidence, yes, its easy to see coverage as biased.

Cons/scams are all about convincing the mark that giving you money is not only a good idea, it was his/her idea. I compare zygna to con artists because what they produce are not games. They're presented as games. They have graphics and a basic design that resembles a game. But their only purpose is to lock their users into an ascending, self-contained cycle of work (in this case, spamming) for reward (virtual bullshit). They're essentially pyramid schemes with only two levels. At the bottom, the millions of users generating a river of upward flowing revenue and zygna.

Implying they're going use an identical business model in asia isn't bias, its accuracy.

Okay, so do you have any references that shows that Zynga's negative reputation isn't confined to a single incident(remember that with the Haiti thing, they have long ago been exonerated for the accusations surrounding it).

Well, it may be that cons/scams are about giving money away, but so is anything that has to do with the economy/living. Advertising on the TV consistently moves to convince people to spend money on certain products. It's part of owning and operating a business. It may be true that most of such goods on the TV are real world stuff, we have to consider that not all things we can buy have to be real world stuff. Though just because the rewards are virtual, and therefore intangible, doesn't make them a con artist. I mean, WoW, is selling that one celestial horse through micro transactions. Not to mention the subscription fee for virtual rewards. All games have virtual rewards, from non-fiction games all the way up to complex RPGs. The only thing real world about any game, is the hard copy game itself, and the feelings we are left with.

Though when I referred to bias in the article I am referring to the "stupid offers" and the "secret lair beneath a Volcano" and the "taking over the world". The very picture itself that the author made. This kind of stuff gives me, the reader, the impression that the author of the article is biased. Not to mention that this particular author has also written other articles on Zynga with other biased words, most notably the article about Farmville Ice Cream. However, there really was no reference to the business model within this article, to which I am not debating against. It would make sense for Zynga to keep to it's business model as it has been incredibly successful. Though I think they will likely change something about it, but I can't say what exactly.

That being said I do know why some people don't think of flash games as games. From a core gamer standpoint, a game like Farmville isn't complex enough to be considered a game. Though strangely they would refer to a game like "Pong" and call it a game whereas they wouldn't with Farmville, even though it is more complex than Pong by far. Zynga games, are games, just they aren't really for the core gamer. They are for the super-casual, provided for free with option to invest money in the game to get ahead. I have one neighbor who has played Petville along side me since the beginning, and she has never had to buy Petcash once to enjoy the game (they give away Petcash on Petville through various means). If Zynga forced people to buy Petcash to play their games, then I could see your point. Though they don't, they offer their games to play for free. Sure they would want people to invest money in their games, they would need to if they want to flourish as a company. Without people investing money in your company, it would fail. The same is true for any company. Just because they try to to make money, doesn't make them con-artists. All hierarchies take the form of pyramids, no matter where you are in the world.

Waif:
-snip-

You're misunderstanding. There are a considerable amount of flash games that are better games than anything released by any big publisher in decades. Flash/console/tabletop/sex/whatever, the medium is irrelevant to a product's status as a "game."

Zygna's products are built entirely around rewarding "meta-game" actions. These actions are primary spamming. Theres no thought involved, just self-contained, valueless rewards for working for zygna. This is not a game, its a job that pays fake money.

Hopeless Bastard:

Waif:
-snip-

You're misunderstanding. There are a considerable amount of flash games that are better games than anything released by any big publisher in decades. Flash/console/tabletop/sex/whatever, the medium is irrelevant to a product's status as a "game."

Zygna's products are built entirely around rewarding "meta-game" actions. These actions are primary spamming. Theres no thought involved, just self-contained, valueless rewards for working for zygna. This is not a game, its a job that pays fake money.

Well, it's not so much a misunderstanding of the basis of Flash games. I only used the term "Flash Games" because these are what Zynga games are, therefore implying that there is an irony in not referring to them as games. I also intended to make a comparison to other flash games like Tower Defense, Robot Unicorn, and, well, pretty much any flash game that is popular. The idea of the comparison was that popular flash games in general are minimalistic, easy to understand, and offer virtual rewards. Zynga games, however, are social based. You play the same kind of games, but with other people and are rewarded by it. Virtual rewards yes, but it seems that 70 million daily players like that sort of thing. Then again as I previously stated all games offer primarily virtual rewards. Especially MMO's, more so MMO's that have cash shops like Gpotato, Wonderking, NCsoft, etc. "Value" is something that the individual user places on an item. I don't see much value in purchasing a virtual Neapolitan Cow for Farmville, but a lot of other people apparently do. While you and I might not see much value in such an item, others see much worth in owning a Neapolitan Cow. For them it is worth the effort, and I think they are more than welcome to it. They are free to have whatever fun they want, and they are free to seek whatever rewards they find value in. For this reason "Better" games are a matter of opinion. A game like Tower Defense, while fun and entertaining, may not appeal to a person who likes to play Farmville. To them, Farmville is better than Tower Defense.

I do, however, see what you are referring to when it comes to game mechanics and "working for Zynga". Especially where advertising is connected to rewards and posts. Though this is what has made them extremely popular. I don't see them changing this in the future. I am aware that whenever I post a lost toy to my Facebook Wall I am technically advertising for them. Though I feel it is a worthy trade. Zynga provides a game to play for free, and people advertise for them. So even if you don't want to invest some money in supporting the game you can still help support it by posting stuff on your wall which does help your fellow players.

I also see what you mean by referring to the game as "a job that pays fake money". That is to say that there is a repetitive element in game play. Some people may view it as a job, but I know I don't. I enjoy playing Petville, and it doesn't feel like a job to me. Mainly because, while the basic game play remains the same there are dynamic changes within the game itself. There are always updates and something new happening every week. Things that make you want to keep earning money to get the next new thing. Like: new rooms,new furniture collections, new clothing lines, variety in creativity, etc. Though what makes these games fun is the people that I play with. I have many friends who play Petville, many of which I have never met prior, but I would call friend all the same. These people are Zynga players, they are good people, and not the brain-washed sheep that some other people have claimed them to be( particularly during MM, and it is rare now). They are playing a game that gives them joy, and there is nothing wrong in that. The pursuit of happiness is part of the meaning of life.

Waif:
-snip-

You know, I knew MMOs would be your counter-point. I thought I headed it off at the pass.

MMOs don't compare to spam-your-friends social gaming. They may charge subscriptions and offer virtual items for real currency, but the ones that succeed in any real form are true games built primarily around in-game actions for in-game rewards. Even the free ones who make most their money off selling virtual items are still structured primarily around interacting with the game itself. Even if you think of mmos as "work simulators" they're still more a game than a zygna product, as you aren't actually working for the mmo's developer. You're working in a world they created.

As far as "its up to the individual whether s/hes getting scammed or not," No. Everything that costs real money in a zygna product simply provides more ways to spam people. Every bit of progress in a zygna game simply opens up more ways to spam people. Theres nothing wrong with paying money for virtual items, theres something wrong with giving money to zygna so you can work for zygna.

Back to con artistry, the inherent flaw of every con is that point where the mark realizes hes been conned, and his/her money is gone. Successful con artists are typically very far away at this point. Outwar (oldest social game I can think of) on the other hand, corrected this flaw. Most of their money comes from ad revenue, ad revenue pays by exposure, exposure is generated by spam, spam is generated by the users. No where in this basic model is "mark gives you money." Which means zygna products are the perfect con.

So, what I'm saying is just because you don't realize you're working for zygna or you don't care if you're working for zygna or you even feel good about working for zygna, it doesn't mean you're not getting conned. It also means any coverage concerning zygna must mention the fact they're well established con artists to remain unbiased.

Hopeless Bastard:

Waif:
-snip-

You know, I knew MMOs would be your counter-point. I thought I headed it off at the pass.

MMOs don't compare to spam-your-friends social gaming. They may charge subscriptions and offer virtual items for real currency, but the ones that succeed in any real form are true games built primarily around in-game actions for in-game rewards. Even the free ones who make most their money off selling virtual items are still structured primarily around interacting with the game itself. Even if you think of mmos as "work simulators" they're still more a game than a zygna product, as you aren't actually working for the mmo's developer. You're working in a world they created.

As far as "its up to the individual whether s/hes getting scammed or not," No. Everything that costs real money in a zygna product simply provides more ways to spam people. Every bit of progress in a zygna game simply opens up more ways to spam people. Theres nothing wrong with paying money for virtual items, theres something wrong with giving money to zygna so you can work for zygna.

Back to con artistry, the inherent flaw of every con is that point where the mark realizes hes been conned, and his/her money is gone. Successful con artists are typically very far away at this point. Outwar (oldest social game I can think of) on the other hand, corrected this flaw. Most of their money comes from ad revenue, ad revenue pays by exposure, exposure is generated by spam, spam is generated by the users. No where in this basic model is "mark gives you money." Which means zygna products are the perfect con.

So, what I'm saying is just because you don't realize you're working for zygna or you don't care if you're working for zygna or you even feel good about working for zygna, it doesn't mean you're not getting conned. It also means any coverage concerning zygna must mention the fact they're well established con artists to remain unbiased.

Ah, but therein lies the crux of the matter. I feel that Zynga isn't conning anyone, but you feel they are. Giving money to Zynga is optional and not forced. People make that decision themselves to give Zynga money, just as they make a decision to eat at Burger King or at a McDonalds. Therefore Zynga cannot be the con artist because they aren't forcing you to give up your money to play. They have incentives to do so, but it is never forced. Advertising is also optional, as you don't have to post anything to your wall. Everything that I post from Petville I have to give the okay. I have to make the decision myself, and it's not forced. Though there is incentive in doing so. However, if I was forced to post stuff to my wall, I could see why you would feel it to be a con. I wouldn't think of it to be a con in that sense, but I would think it to be poor business practice.

Also, as far as "spam" is concerned, every Facebook application does it. It's part of the business model with social gaming on Facebook. It is the best way to get yourself known as an application and it's no different than the commercials we are constantly bombarded by on the television. This is a difference between an MMO and a social gaming application. MMO's find must other ways of advertising as they don't have a social platform to go off of, while Facebook applications have evolved to advertise within their environment. It's a successful business strategy, and if a user doesn't want to see anything from Farmville they can simply hide it from their feed. Whereas a person watching TV can't block specific advertisements, they can change the channel, but there is no guarantee they will not see that commercial again. All the same I do understand why some people feel that the methods of advertising is less than flattering. I also understand why they would call it spam, but that is how a Facebook application must advertise to be successful. Just because it is successful, doesn't mean it is a con. It does, however, mean that it is the best way to get known and be successful on Facebook.

Also, any game can be looked at as a work simulator. As they make you do work and you get virtual rewards. In every case such work will benefit the developer. Whether you are playing an MMO or a Facebook application you will benefit the developers in doing so. In the case of MMO's there are subscription fees, gathering friends to play with you (as was the case with WoW in the early days), time spent there increases their member count which adds numerous benefits of appearing active or helping investors make a choice, etc. The only thing is, there is little to no advertising with MMO's, but the opposite is true with Facebook applications. Once again, it's because they have evolved differently. The real question is, whether or not you are deriving some enjoyment from this "work experience".

That being said, I had understood that much of Zynga's revenue comes from virtual currency and that it is Facebook that is the chief benefactor of ad space. This information came from an interview with Mark Pincus. Though I am wondering if you have any references that show that Zynga is the chief benefactor of ad space? I must admit I haven't fully done my research on this area of Zynga. I would be interested to know how much revenue is generated by ads and by virtual currency.

 

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.