A question to the SV hotshots on here: is there a social stigma in the valley around developing for companies like zynga? Or does nobody really care? When a load of devs meet each other in a bar, does one "admit" that one works for zynga, or simply say so?
There's a strong bully/prison experiment vibe to these companies. You get used to abusing people because all your friends are hi-fiving you about being good at abusing people.
The High Holy developers sit around thinking up ways of manipulating people into addiction. The developers and management get positive social reinforcement from co-workers and the board when they find another hook into people's brains ("Your character will DIE unless you come back RIGHT NOW!" "You haven't visited in 18 hours, VISIT NOW FOR FREE GIFT!").
Reinforcing shady practices of individuals ("It's not unethical, it's funethical!") over time makes developers and management banish any thought of wrongdoing. Users are just an abstract ID anyway -- an abstract ID with access to a credit card. If someone wants to spend $10,000 per day buying purple carrot pixels, why shouldn't we milk them dry?
Your entire comment is bullshit and it pisses me off.
You've never worked at Zynga, so to purport that you know exactly what it's like to work there is bullshit.
Your comment reflects exactly what Silicon Valley nerds think of Zynga externally. They think that Zynga is nothing but people refining skinner boxes for people to play in. You've probably seen one or two talks of Mark Pincus talking about "doing every dirty trick in the book" or something like that. Have you ever met him? Do you even know the last time he worked directly on a game? You're allowed to have whatever opinion you like, but this opinion is bullshit.
Your entire comment is ridiculously biased and unreflective of Zynga internally or externally.
------------------------------
So yes, JonnieCache, there is a stigma for working at these companies. reflected by the parent comment. Is that stigma justified? Absolutely not. There are plenty of other reasons not to like developing at Zynga most people don't talk about:
* Zynga is not a technology company first. This means that product & revenue decisions are always prioritized over innovating tech. Most developers aren't comfortable with companies like that.
* Zynga isn't accepted as a legit member of "games companies" circles. You can't tell your buddy who works building a PC MMO or console FPS that you're in games because you work at Zynga. You'll get laughed out of the room.
* Developers are not decision makers at Zynga. Product managers and game designers call all the shots. So if you're writing code, you're not really "making games" in the traditional sense, you're just implementing someone else's spec.
So is Zynga the best place for a dev to work in the valley? It isn't the worst. You'll make more money and get more perks than you would working at a startup, but it won't be personally fulfilling. Do you spend all day scheming ways to exploit people? Fuck no, get over it already.
Do you spend all day scheming ways to exploit people? Fuck no, get over it already.
This is true, but a bit misleading. As an engineer at Zynga, you spend your time developing to spec, not scheming. The game designers are the ones that actually spend all day scheming ways to exploit people.
I think the stigma mostly comes from the fact that so many of Zynga's users hate their products. It's not really because of the engineering talent there, it's just how the organization works, but still, it's a stigma that makes sense.
Do you spend all day scheming ways to exploit people? Fuck no, get over it already.
As a developer I certainly try to fight it. Day after day producers come up with a new game that follows the exact same formula of questing and doll housing and monetization and one day I would like to prove the BI numbers wrong with something refreshing.
Another thing Zynga is great at (and a business practice others follow) is the outright copying of other product's game mechanics and concepts. Hopeful coat tail riding doesn't always pay out. coughMinoMonsterGalaxycough
Yeah, really offensive how someone ripped off Monster Galaxy's completely original concept, which sprung fully-formed from the untainted mind of Mike Sego. (note: not ripping on Mike, he seems like a really nice, cool guy who's worked hard to build a successful business.)
When will this "rip-off" meme finally die? It's entirely absurd and usually reeks of sour grapes.
Was FarmVille a direct ripoff of FarmTown? Absolutely. Was CityVille a direct ripoff of the city games before it? Not even close.
The personal attack is hilarious. Mike Sego is a good friend and to think that I would outright copy his game is deplorable. When our product releases in the next few weeks, you'll see how different MinoMonsters is.
> You've probably seen one or two talks of Mark Pincus talking about "doing every dirty trick in the book" or something like that.
Is that not true? Didn't Zynga make a huge portion of their early money from SMS fraud? The kind of money that gave them a huge leg up over their competitors?
In my opinion, Zynga is an indictment of capitalism itself (and I say this as someone who likes capitalism). It's lowest-common-denominator, race-to-the-bottom, zero-ethics type stuff. Not just their products, but the way employees are treated there. It's no surprise that most developers find it revolting and wish it would just die.
In my experience, it's more like going to a bar and asking "where's so-and-so?" and hearing "oh, yeah, we never see them anymore after they started working for Zynga".
The reputation is: long hours, cut-throat environment, back-stabbing execs.
I imagine that would depend on your position in the company. If you're a product manager you might face some stigma but if you're a software engineer I doubt anything matters other than the technical challenges you face. (And Zynga operates at a scale that would definitely create technical challenges.)
I've just realised that my question was kind of ambiguous and could be interpreted to make me look like a dick.
As I can't edit it any longer, I'll clarify here: I was asking from an "I wonder if SV people have the balls to give the zynga lot flack for making those shitty games?" point of view, not an "I want to go and work for this company now it's worth $7B but I'm worried that nerds might be mean to me in bars" point of view.
I guess cIQ represents a greater potential for malpractice. I know pretty much exactly what happens at zynga, and while I don't like it, its no worse than many other unhappy commercial practices.
What happens with the cIQ data is hidden from our view, and there is great potential for really bad stuff. However, like you say, it's a closed box. It could all be utterly innocent. Somehow though, I doubt it.
Their brand of "psuedo-entertainment" is in the same category as telemarketing, spam email, infomercials. I can't imagine anybody who works there goes home at the end of the day being proud of finding a new way to rope people into clicking a button 700 times in a row.
