If you loved Flappy Bird so much that you wanted nothing more than to give your money to the person who gave you that joy, it was impossible to do so. It was completely free, no strings attached. Not free-to-play, not free*, not any other misleading nonsense. Flappy Bird's success is a good thing.įlappy Bird was free. Flappy Bird also defied many of the damaging trends in mobile by earning money through conventional means that didn't hurt the core experience or alienate the many people who loved the game. In fact, given that its biggest sin is how hard it is, that doesn't seem so bad at all. it shouldn't be the torchbearer for everything that's wrong with the mobile space. But the anger is disproportionate to what Flappy Bird actually did. People posted YouTube clips complaining about how difficult the game was. Allegations were made that he used bots to boost his popularity while other sites said that wasn't the case.

Obviously, this is terrible for everyone involved (except Nguyen), because nothing as simple as Flappy Bird should be bringing in truckloads of cash. Dong Nguyen, the developer behind the game, revealed that Flappy Bird was pulling in $50,000 a day from advertising. Is this just our unfettered disgust toward casual entertainment that has caused us to lose our senses? Candy Crush Saga and Flappy Bird aren't our games-they aren't for the hardcore-so when they prove popular or encroach upon a cherished property, we bare our fangs.įlappy Bird also had the gall to be hugely popular. But not enough to warrant the heated response it generated. Does it look a little like a Mario game? Sure. Now people are just as angry because someone dared to have pipes and a bird in a game, as if Nintendo somehow has a monopoly on those two aspects of video games. Remember, just a few weeks before this outrage, the Internet was up in arms when King tried to trademark the words Crush and Saga in order to stymie the horde of Candy Crush Saga imitators. There's an article on Kotaku (that they later apologized for) that accuses the developer of copying the artistic styling of Super Mario Bros. I am saddened that loud, angry voices prevailed over the calm, rational people who want nothing more than to have fun.Īnd yet, there are very strong feelings surrounding Flappy Bird, though most of them came from the negative attacks. And why would someone have strong emotions for Flappy Bird? It's utterly benign, something meant to be consumed and forgotten rather than dissected and dwelled upon by the gaming community. It's utterly harmless, something not worth the time and energy to be passionate about. People who wanted nothing more than a mild distraction flocked to Flappy Bird, comparing scores with friends while feeling slightly productive in the five minutes spent waiting for their bus to arrive. The biggest strength and most glaring weakness of Flappy Bird is that it takes only 72 words (and I was being verbose) to describe the entire experience. If you slam into one, your flight ends, and you start up again to try to best your previous high score. You tap the screen to make the titular bird flap its tiny wings, and you try to avoid green pipes by flying over or ducking underneath them. So what is Flappy Bird? It is (was?) a phenomenon that all too quickly ran its course. Not only is the art similar to Mario's, but the studio name is a shortened version of Gears of War! And after the developer closed the door on this high-score challenge over the weekend, I am saddened that loud, angry voices prevailed over the calm, rational people who want nothing more than to have fun. I cannot understand the hatred directed toward Flappy Bird.

This came to a head last week when the innocuous Flappy Bird was tarred and feathered.

Still, there have been so many insults flung at mobile games that echoes those angry thoughts, and it's really baffling. I recognize that mobile, just like consoles and handhelds, has issues, but also a lot of good elements. But such an extreme stance on the fastest-growing section of virtual entertainment doesn't mirror my own thoughts. And when you throw in the mound of soulless clones littering the marketplace, it's clear that the mobile market is a creatively bankrupt wasteland that's killing the entire industry.Īt least, that's what some people think. Shelling out cash for instant-win items? Pestering your friends to grant you more turns? It's all disgusting. The manipulative pricing practices prey on those too weak to fight against their addictive tendencies. There's no skill involved, no challenge, and without the elements inherent to a good video game, they're just time-wasters. Even calling them games doesn't feel right. Aren't mobile games the worst? They're so simple and forgettable, existing just to suck away money from people who don't realize there are far better ways to spend their time.

Flappy bird online server