Facebook games are targeted towards a broad demographic, with
them being designed for the ‘everyday player’. This provides marketers and advertisers with a
big avenue for profit and a chance to gain loyal brand followers. One way this
has been achieved is through the use of making players feel good in order to increase
the likelihood that they’ll give back.
An example is the farming simulation game, Farmville. From
early on players are encouraged to grow their farms, initially this process is
quite easy and fun as rewards (coins) are given often for doing so. These
rewards can then be used to maintain and expand your farm through doing things
such as repairing dying crops. However, just like with many games, there comes
a point where the reward giving slows down and the game gets harder, where
instant gratification is felt less often if you are only doing the same actions
as before.
The game is purposely designed this way so that you are
encouraged to use other routes to get your rewards. This is done so that you
don’t stop playing and more importantly get other people to play and stick to
the game, which is the ultimate goal of the developers.
There comes a point where you are given the chance to send a gift to one of your Facebook friends. The
chosen friends receive a notification about this and accept the gift. It is
here where the reciprocity principle,
comes into play. The one receiving the gift then feels obliged to return the
favour, so they log in and send a gift back (e.g. fruit or livestock) which
will help the initial gift giver grow their farm.
Notification from Farmville on Facebook
The reciprocity principle states people give back to
those who have helped them, a norm that is considered universal [1]. Therefore,
if we receive a gift, in the future we feel like we should give a gift back
partially due to the feeling of obligation and indebtedness [2]. A study that explains this was conducted
by Regan in 1971 [3] . There were two conditions to the experiment
based on the idea that the participant and confederate rated the quality of
paintings. In one condition, the confederate left the room and came back with a
drink for themselves and the participant, without asking the participant if
they wanted one. This was an unsolicited favour. In the other condition, the
confederate only got a drink for themselves. After rating the paintings, the confederate
asked the participant for a small favour: if could they buy raffle tickets for 25
cents each because if the confederate sold most of the tickets, they would win
a $50 prize. If was found that if the confederate had done a favour for the
participant earlier i.e gotten them a drink without asking, the participant was
more likely to buy raffle tickets. This shows that reciprocity can be used for
profitability.
This idea can be seen with Farmville. The reciprocity effect
ensures you send a gift back, this creates a cycle of reciprocating gifts
(plants and fruit etc). If you don’t return the favour, you feel bad so you
continue to give back. The Facebook notification itself states you need to log back in,
so if you do, why not play for a bit anyways? This encourages both players to constantly
log back in and engage in using in game currency (coins) to buy more gifts for
your friend. Farmville has the option of sending gifts to someone who doesn’t
even play Farmville, however the reciprocity principle is still applicable
here. This is because the receiver feels like the giver put in the effort to ‘buy’
them a gift, therefore, surely they should give back? Of course, the only way
they can do this is signing up to play the game, and given that it doesn’t take
much effort, it’s not a problem. In turn, the game gets one new customer and each player profits as they receive gifts.
Overall, it’s a great marketing tactic, because you get existing
players to get new players through giving them gifts that can be used by the
new player to start off their game. Friends are essentially 'selling' the game to each other, using word of mouth and the reciprocity principle without even realising it.
[1] Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A
preliminary statement. American
Sociological Review, 25, 161-178.
[2] Cialdini, B. R. (1984). Influence: The Psychology of
Persuasion. (3rd Ed.)
New York: HarperCollins Publishers
[3] Regan, D. T. (1971). Effects of a favour and liking on
compliance. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 7, 627-639.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.