Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Target To Sell Facebook "Credits" As Gift Cards

samzenpus posted about 4 years ago | from the a-bucks-worth-of-farmville dept.

Social Networks 96

Julie188 writes "Target will begin selling Facebook's virtual currency as gift cards on September 5, becoming the first brick-and-mortar retailer to do so. Facebook Credit gift cards will be available in $15, $25 and $50 denominations at the retailer's 1,750 stores. That's right, you can now spend real dollars to get fake ones so you can buy imaginary items for games like FarmVille, Bejeweled and 150 other FB games or apps. If that interests you, please contact me. I have some swamp land in Florida I'd like to show you."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

gay (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446412)

GAY

Re:gay (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446522)

Julie188, Tits or GTFO.

this is great news (4, Funny)

Trepidity (597) | about 4 years ago | (#33446416)

I have been saving up for new cows [kotaku.com] .

wrong category (4, Insightful)

chichilalescu (1647065) | about 4 years ago | (#33446434)

this is not about rights, it's about games. I remember seeing a lot of discussions about buying stuff for MMOGs and other tonguetwisters with real money.
facebook users should only be subject to the same amount of ridicule as other gamers.

Re:wrong category (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446544)

This is just samzenpus trying to justify his existence outside of Idle. Just like how kdawson spams the front page with one-sided sensationals.

The problem is that Facebook games are bad (3, Informative)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about 4 years ago | (#33446602)

Their quality is really, really poor. I suspect the only reason they are so popular is people playing them at work. Thus in my mind they, and the people who play them, deserve to take a bit of shit. If you spend a bunch of time at work playing games, when you ought to be doing something productive for most of it (I realize nobody is productive 100% of the time but people fuck around on Facebook too much) well you should catch from crap for that.

I respect games that are good quality, and I respect that people play them because they are quality entertainment. When you are choosing how to entertain yourself, quality counts. Most of us who work regular jobs only have so much time per day we can goof off. Thus you want to try and choose quality entertainment for those times.

If these were good games that just happened to be on FB, then ok. However they are crap games that only survive because people play them at work.

Re:The problem is that Facebook games are bad (1)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447696)

I am disgusted with the quality of facebook games.
Not all of us are boring click monkeys. Many of us are vibrant, fun-loving sex maniacs, who remember the good old days, when games were original and provocative.

Re:The problem is that Facebook games are bad (1)

Bigbutt (65939) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447836)

I block all the Facebook games so I don't see the "I have a cow for you" postings :rolleyes:

Fortunately work blocks Facebook (and thousands of other sites). We can still get ESPN but we can't get a stable long term connection for large downloads :more rolleyes:

[John]

Re:The problem is that Facebook games are bad (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448300)

The problem is that a lot of people don't have a whole lot to do at work. It's not their fault they company doesn't know how to make full use of their resources. This is how many large companies work. Each person has a small menial task that has to get done. When something comes into their queue, they need to complete the task. And then they are left sitting until another task comes into their queue. You might say the solution is to have less people working, so you can fill up the queue faster, less downtime. Maybe all the work that is being done by 10 people could get done by a single person. But here's the problem. You'd have to find a person who could be trained to do all 10 of those jobs. Many people have trouble just mastering the 1 thing they need to do all day long, try finding people who can do 10 things. And if that person ever leaves, you now have to find a replacement who can do all of those jobs. It's much easier to just hire 1 person for each task. Even if it's more expensive in the end, because it means easier training, and less risk to the company,and it's easier to find replacement workers. It's kind of sad the way these companies work. So inefficient. However, I can see the logic in it. There's a lot of people out there who have trouble doing things on their own, who can't do anything unless they have specific instructions on how to accomplish it.

Re:The problem is that Facebook games are bad (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448710)

The problem is that a lot of people don't have a whole lot to do at work. It's not their fault they company doesn't know how to make full use of their resources. This is how many large companies work. Each person has a small menial task that has to get done. When something comes into their queue, they need to complete the task. And then they are left sitting until another task comes into their queue. You might say the solution is to have less people working, so you can fill up the queue faster, less downtime. Maybe all the work that is being done by 10 people could get done by a single person. But here's the problem. You'd have to find a person who could be trained to do all 10 of those jobs.

Having every person doing only a few jobs assures you are not overworking people, which helps ensure they do their jobs properly.

If someone is physically working every single moment, they are going to get worn out quickly. People do need breaks.

The real question should be: Is the person playing the facebook game, getting all their work done?

And... is the amount of work they are assigned a reasonable amount, or their responsibility coverage a reasonable amount?

If they are spending over 10% of the workday playing around, and the quality of their work is poor, they are not getting a reasonable amount of work done, or they cannot take an urgent call because they are playing a game, then there is something to complain about, otherwise...

Re:The problem is that Facebook games are bad (1)

JonStewartMill (1463117) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448948)

I really don't think that's it. The more likely culprit is the fact that it's not enough to just do the task. You have to have meetings about it, endless meetings where each layer of management gets to show how indispensable it is by commenting and quibbling about every detail. You also have to complete documentation and timekeeping tasks, which usually have the sole purpose of giving upper management pretty charts and spreadsheets to look at. With all that, it's a wonder that anything ever gets done.

Re:The problem is that Facebook games are bad (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 3 years ago | (#33449962)

And, people put up with that nonsense? Sometimes, I'm overworked. Most times, I just stay busy. I just can't imagine sitting around with nothing to do while on company time. From time to time, I'll just sit on my butt and WASTE an entire half hour, in addition to my 30 minute lunch break. But, crap - after wasting that much time, I HAVE TO GET UP and find something to do. Tear something down to see what makes it tick, if nothing else. (hey now - this thing isn't SUPPOSED to tick!! TAKE COVER!!)

Re:The problem is that Facebook games are bad (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448610)

I don't doubt some of these games get played at work by some people.

But I would suggest the reason they are popular, as opposed to say random flash games out on the web, is instead because they are on a popular social networking website. And some of them have social elements where friends are encouraged to invite friends, and "help each other"

Just enough people have to be exposed to it and get addicted...

Re:wrong category (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33447554)

this is not about rights, it's about games.

But the cards have numbers on them and numbers can be tracked! ZOMG 1984 Book of Releva$ianz mark of the b345t, run, run to the hillz0rz!!!oneeleventyone!!!!

(theodp here; forgot my password. When I say forget my password, I mean my account has been disactivated by evil CIA commie UN aliens acting under orders from BP)

Re:wrong category (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33447822)

Tonguetwisters?

"She sells sea shells in Target for ten to twenty bucks."

Re:wrong category (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448004)

Indeed - Microsoft have had a system of "points" on their Live platform for years now, and for almost as long it's been possible to walk into a store, pay real money for a card with a scratch-off panel and use them to attain points which are spent on "imaginary items" like games, avatar accessories, desktop themes and such, and it was hardly the first system to do this (just one of the early ones to allow you to use the points across a range of games and purchase types under their umbrella platform). The "story" here is that Facebook are selling the credits, you'd get the impression from this that the story was the credit system itself (and if it was it would be a slightly more interesting story) - file this under "anything FB does has to be news".

Re:wrong chategory (1)

noshellswill (598066) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448024)

Snarky dork facebook pukers are worse-by-far than pure_play WOWers etc. Make's you want them to barf $$$ all over in public so people can laugh at them lots more.

Swamp? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446436)

I know people that pay for Windows...

They already do... (3, Interesting)

Manip (656104) | about 4 years ago | (#33446440)

Target already sell Farmville and Mafia Wars credit in individual cards and have for almost a year. The only difference here is that it is a general Facebook card so you can use it across all of the games (and Facebook get a much bigger cut). I don't play these games but I find it funny how hypocritical most gamers are about them, it is fine if you buy DLC for that retail game you spent 50 hours playing, but if someone buys virtual credit to buy DLC in Farmville they're just insane!

It is obviously just a lame bias against games that are Flash based (instead of C++) and have minimalistic graphics (like every game had fifteen years ago?).

Re:They already do... (1)

KenRH (265139) | about 4 years ago | (#33446494)

There is a difference between buying extra content for a game, and buying Items to give you a head start you could achieve by playing.

As games are for your own entertainment I am not implying one is better or worse than the other but it is different.

Re:They already do... (1, Redundant)

piraat (1772234) | about 4 years ago | (#33446580)

I want to imply one is worse then the other. I friggin' hate it when i play some online game, put some time in it, do well, and then get destroyed by some kid who bought all kinds of extra items. I don know many games on facebook, but the ones i do know give people who do not pay such a disadvantage, it's not funny anymore. It's even worse when the things you can buy with real money change after a few months. Giving the people with online money a bigger advantage.

Re:They already do... (1)

Homr Zodyssey (905161) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447616)

Darn those game developers, for wanting to get paid. Darn them to heck!

Re:They already do... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33447918)

I find your language offensive. Oh wait... Never mind.

Re:They already do... (1)

subanark (937286) | about 4 years ago | (#33446840)

One system that might make "ethical" sense when allowing the use of real currency to purchase items in game you can get though playing instead, is that the game is "grindware" where you can get many of the features of the game by doing less enjoyable activities to earn the right to sample the content you could purchase.

For example:
Lets say I make a game that is a collection of roguelike dungeons. Each one has different features and are short with various levels of difficulty.
Now, for free I put the basic dungeons to play free of charge, and I allow you to take out any money you find (plus a bonus for winning).
The more interesting dungeons I require an entrance free to enter. This entrance fee would require running the basic dungeons a few times, and while you do get more money if these advanced dungeons, it won't pay for the entrance fee. Spend some time and you can try any of the dungeons you like.

Now, lets say I offer a premium service, for 1$ you get 10 dungeon tickets. Each one gives you a 1 time no entrance fee into dungeon, lowers the entrance cost 10% for all future visits and rewards 5% of the money you have previously spent (less than 10 to discourage waiting on purchase, while making it more inciting to buy the longer you play). You can spend 10 tickets to reduce the cost to 0, which not only gives you the ability to do that dungeon when you want, but gives you a better way to make money to do other dungeons (assuming other even more interesting ones are much more expensive).

Under this system, I'm offering much of the content under a trial basis, which you can purchase. I think this system is more ethical than allowing the player to spend money on consumable items, but not as much as offering unobtainable content with money. One financial downside to this system, is there is a reasonable cap to how much a player can spend.

I haven't used facebook, so I don't know how close apps are to this kind of system.

Re:They already do... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446514)

It's a bias against nickel-and-diming money out of people.

Re:They already do... (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | about 4 years ago | (#33446704)

Frankly, i don't get it, if i've paid for the game i expect to have full functionality out of the box, paying afterwards for DLC is something i don't do. As for those FB games, do people actually enjoy those things? I tried a few of those in the past, and found them to be as amusing as a lobotomy.

Maybe it's nostalgia talking, but the average game 15 years ago were a lot more fun then the average game i see coming out these days, sure, the graphics of current games blow those old titles away, but i prefer playing Puzzle Bobble over Half Life any day.

Re:They already do... (3, Insightful)

dangitman (862676) | about 4 years ago | (#33446744)

Frankly, i don't get it, if i've paid for the game i expect to have full functionality out of the box, paying afterwards for DLC is something i don't do.

You do get full functionality out of the box (at least for the games with DLC that I've seen). If you buy something like Fallout 3, it is a fully functional, self-contained game. The game doesn't stop working when they release DLC, and you are not compelled to buy DLC. It's simply additional content.

Having said that, this Facebook stuff and buying in-game items or currency is quite a different beast.

Re:They already do... (0, Redundant)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#33449516)

You either pay for the DLC, or you get your ass handed to you on a platter by the people that have payed for the DLC, but either way, it's your choice!

Re:They already do... (1)

dangitman (862676) | more than 3 years ago | (#33449598)

You either pay for the DLC, or you get your ass handed to you on a platter by the people that have payed for the DLC, but either way, it's your choice!

Did you even bother to read my post? In the games I was talking about, the existence of DLC has no effect on your performance in the game.

Re:They already do... (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#33451900)

Wait... is reading before replying now required on slashdot? When did that start?

Re:They already do... (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448116)

Huh? You're comparing the graphics of "current" games to old titles by comparing Half Life to Puzzle Bobble? You do realise that Half Life was release over a decade ago? (In fact only four years atfer the arcade version of Puzzle Bobble).

Re:They already do... (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448190)

I didn't have my coffee yet, Half Life got stuck into my memory because of Black Mesa (read about that yesterday evening), and Puzzle Bobble because that's what i was playing on the train to work.

I actually meant Bubble Bobble [mobygames.com] from way, way back, feel free to replace Half Life with something else more recent, the chances of picking a recent game i'd actually like are slim :P

Re:They already do... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33447018)

it is fine if you buy DLC for that retail game

That depends on the person you ask. In my opinion, DLC is not fine. It's often just an excuse to reduce the size of the original game.

If a game comes with micro-transaction-sized DLC, it's a no-go.

Paying for entertainment (4, Insightful)

Custard (45810) | about 4 years ago | (#33446468)

I heard that people are selling these things called "movie tickets" that grant the bearer the right to sit in the dark with a bunch of strangers.

If that interests you, please contact me. I have some swamp land in Florida I'd like to show you.

Re:Paying for entertainment (1)

creat3d (1489345) | about 4 years ago | (#33446680)

I heard that people sometimes compare these things called "apples" to those other things called "oranges". If that interests you, please try harder next time.

Re:Paying for entertainment (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446812)

He's just trying to point out the idiocy in the summary: People who buy swamp land are conned -- they don't actually get what they think they're getting. The people who buy items in FB games get exactly what they want -- the poster doesn't seem to respect it but who cares what he thinks? There's no point in comparing these two or even implying that these would be the same people.

Re:Paying for entertainment (1)

plover (150551) | more than 3 years ago | (#33450832)

People who buy swamp land are conned -- they don't actually get what they think they're getting.

In reality, Disney conned the people around Orlando when they originally bought the swamp land. By having middlemen do the purchasing, and not announcing they were building a giant theme park, they were able to buy up miles of swamp land for about one percent of the price they would have had to pay if they had announced they were buying it all to build Disneyworld.

I believe the original poster should have used a different analogy, such as "I have a bridge I would like to sell you." At the dawn of the 20th century, many cons were run selling "shares" in the Brooklyn Bridge.

Of course if someone were trying to sell you swampland in Florida today, along with the rumor of "Disney is opening another theme park right here, and this land will be worth a million dollars an acre in a year" then you can be reasonably sure it's a con.

Re:Paying for entertainment (1)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458408)

In reality, Disney conned the people around Orlando when they originally bought the swamp land. By having middlemen do the purchasing, and not announcing they were building a giant theme park, they were able to buy up miles of swamp land for about one percent of the price they would have had to pay if they had announced they were buying it all to build Disneyworld.

How is that conning anyone? Sounds like a sound business (or personal) practice. Why pay more than you have to for any specific item you want? Most items are commodities, even a certain brand name something is a commodity, and one can get it cheaper somewhere else (e.g. Amazon -- though actually Amazon sometimes isn't the absolute cheapest, but has built up loyalty due to good customer service).

Re:Paying for entertainment (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 3 years ago | (#33454614)

Aren't half the condos in Naples built on reclaimed swamp land? Probably more than half by now...

I doubt the people who bought that land are crying themselves to sleep at night. Just saying.

Re:Paying for entertainment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33448916)

What's wrong with swamp land? The Disney corporation has made a rather decent return on their investment near Orlando. A large part of the Netherlands was under the sea and is now quite valuable, as is eastern England.

The Pinnacle of Human Achievement (3, Insightful)

MindlessAutomata (1282944) | about 4 years ago | (#33446478)

I, personally, feel that this is the very acme of human civilization. It's all downhill from here. We have achieved out existential duty, fulfilled the will of the universe in bringing about Facebook Credit Gift Cards. This is the Great Will of the Cosmos.

Re:The Pinnacle of Human Achievement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446604)

I, personally, feel that this is the very acme of human civilization. It's all downhill from here. We have achieved out existential duty, fulfilled the will of the universe in bringing about Facebook Credit Gift Cards. This is the Great Will of the Cosmos.

You infidel! Everyone knows that the real triumph of humanity is Twitter, as blessed by St-v- J-bs Himself! [apple.com] Everything else presented as "the pinnacle of human achievement" is the work of commie zombie idolaters!!!!!!!1

Re:The Pinnacle of Human Achievement (2, Funny)

clsours (1089711) | about 4 years ago | (#33446614)

Achievement Unlocked: "Its All Downhill From Here"

Re:The Pinnacle of Human Achievement (2, Funny)

dangitman (862676) | about 4 years ago | (#33446754)

I, personally, feel that this is the very acme of human civilization. It's all downhill from here.

That's exactly what they said when the film Ishtar was released.

Re:The Pinnacle of Human Achievement (1)

tsm_sf (545316) | about 4 years ago | (#33446962)

I saw that in the theater. For those of you fortunate enough to have missed it, it is every bit as bad as advertised. It's the worst movie I've ever seen.

Fantasy Worlds are Better than the Real World (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446486)

That's right, you can now spend real dollars to get fake ones so you can buy imaginary items for games like FarmVille, Bejeweled and 150 other FB games or apps. If that interests you, please contact me. I have some swamp land in Florida I'd like to show you."

If it's virtual swamp land then I'll buy it. I'll pay extra if it contains realistic sounding mosquitoes and alligators. Otherwise I would never want to live in Florida for real. Fantasy worlds are more fun. That's why I go to church every week, and pray for our greatest religious icon in the history of humanity: J. R. "Bob" Dobbs.

Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (5, Insightful)

PaganRitual (551879) | about 4 years ago | (#33446512)

Opening admission: I'm coerced into playing Farmville and Fronterville by my Mother and a couple of friends who want me to send them gifts and occasionally do crap on their farms. Also, I willingly play the D&D Adventures FB game, and I've tried the 'just barely a game' type stuff like Mafia Wars.

To my knowledge, all the Facebook games are free. Lets assume that Farmville was an 'indie' game. If the game provides you with some level of enjoyment, how is dropping $15 once off for some extra game content any different from paying $15 for some indie game that you might play for a week or two on and off before finishing it or being done with it. I suppose once you start to spend a substantial amount of money it's a different issue, but then that's not specific to Facebook games. It does make me wonder if anyone I know has spent money on these games, I must admit.

Is the fact that the goods are 'virtual' such an issue? This will start an argument, but how tangible are any of the mp3s that you purchase from say, iTunes, or books via Kindle? Yes, it's an mp3 or a glorified text file, that provides entertainment, or whatever you want to define it as, but it's still entertainment in virtual form. Really, how different is it to purchasing goods for some subjectively entertaining virtual farm; at the end of the day is it still not simply entertainment in an intangible form? How is this not just a digital way of buying extra dolls for a dollhouse or some other real world to virtual comparison that might have not implied that I own dolls?

Each to their own, seriously.

Also, you can walk in and touch swampland in Florida. That's way more effort than dragging some fences and cows into a virtual lot on my PC. It's a totally different market ;)

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (2, Insightful)

Custard Horse (1527495) | about 4 years ago | (#33446650)

It really is a matter of semantics.

I personally think people who spend all of their time playing World of Warcraft need to get a life - this being compounded by monthly fees - but they enjoy it so what's the harm?

Better than car-jacking and/or popping caps in innocent bystanders' collective asses.

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (2, Interesting)

ZaSz-RH (923115) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448108)

There was a criminology teacher that wanted to create a program that gives free XBoxes to low revenue families, so that they play XBox instead of wandering outside looking for not that good things to do.
Seemed like a good idea to me.

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 3 years ago | (#33459806)

Sounds like the classic "Keeps them off the streets" argument. :)

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (5, Funny)

noidentity (188756) | about 4 years ago | (#33446992)

I'll stick with Codeville, where one spends enormous amounts of time writing code. Costs almost no money, and the virtual goods work quite well in the real world. Also highly addictive (hmmm, who should I sue for it being too addictive? K&R?).

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (3, Funny)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447904)

How about slashdotville, where you get points for being informative or snarky or snarkily informative? Best free MMORPG ever.

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33447110)

No, actually the Florida swampland is for Farmville.

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447588)

Buying extra content - new levels and the like - makes sense. Buying virtual stuff rather than "earning" it through the mechanism of the game - skipping some of the game, really - is like using cheat codes in a previous generation of games: lame. Only you also pay for the privilege.

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (2, Insightful)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448268)

Even then I don't think it's so clear cut. If it's a case of buying stuff that's obtainable by playing the game normally, that's wholly different to buying stuff that requires endless grinding. A lot of people are cash rich and time poor, I wouldn't give up my job so I could grind in my favourite game, but if I could divert some of the proceeds of one to the other I might consider it, if it lets me get on with enjoying the parts of the game that are not so time intensive. Imagine a quest in a game that takes an hour or so and the upshot is you get a magical sword. Buying the sword outright seems lame, you entirely negate the need to run what might be a fun little quest. On the other hand, an hour long question with a 1% chance of getting the same magic sword is likely to be a maddening time sink - once you've run the quest once and seen the content, I don't think it would be unreasonable to be able to say I don't want to invest all this time farming a sword, I've already invested the time elsewhere and now I want to trade the proceeds of that time for this item so I can get on with the next quest. I actually think that kind of system is pretty fair as it lets the people with little money but lots of spare time (kids, students) participate, but it doesn't unfairly punish those with jobs who just want a fun game to play in their leisure time. Of course, it's also possibly a slippery slope because if it works, every game where you would automatically get the sword after the quest will move to the model where you get a % chance of getting the sword with an option to buy...

Re:Yes, Facebook games suck, but seriously ... (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#33449572)

I... occasionally do crap on their farms. Well, I guess it's good fertilizer, but it does seem a bit rude.

Two things. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446560)

One, how the hell is this "your rights online"?

Two, my Target already had these up on Monday. It's not like they were street-dated.

Re:Two things. (1)

sarysa (1089739) | more than 3 years ago | (#33454418)

Not to mention, Zynga points have been sold at GameStop and other venues for months now...

The real problem with FB games (5, Insightful)

clsours (1089711) | about 4 years ago | (#33446570)

Most (almost all) FB games are not actually games. They are a series of clicks with no challenge, no particular set of strategy, no real difference between levels. There exist no actual gameplay elements. I say this as someone who has played everything from MMOGs to NetHack clones to Text-Based Adventures (Zork and the like) to Flash style games (N - Way of the Ninja) to artsy games (Braid) to Triple-A shooters (Halo 3) and more (a tribute to a life well spent).

If Facebook games offered some gameplay (which some do, ie Bejewelled, Desktop Defender) and not just a blatant and sickening attempt to grab eyeballs and personal information, it would be harder for me to hate them and their creators.

Re:The real problem with FB games (5, Funny)

PuercoPop (1007467) | about 4 years ago | (#33446658)

After reading your post I instantly tried to click the 'like it' button.

Re:The real problem with FB games (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 3 years ago | (#33450852)

Milton Bradley would disagree with you.

Re:The real problem with FB games (1)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 3 years ago | (#33456008)

Most (almost all) FB games are not actually games. They are a series of clicks with no challenge, no particular set of strategy, no real difference between levels. There exist no actual gameplay elements.

That's why I prefer Progress Quest [progressquest.com] . It gets rid of all that unnecessary clicking (carpal tunnel risk).
Sweet! I just leveled up while I was writing this post!

There is no more buildable swampland in Florida (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446590)

Really, Im being serious, it's all been drained and clones of strip malls and suburbia has been put in place. It's almost as if Florida is a real life sim-city, except the land in sim-city will be worth more soon.

Get free Farmville crap from 7-Eleven (1)

grag (597728) | about 4 years ago | (#33446618)

I stopped at my local 7-Eleven two nights ago and noticed that some items have small prize stickers on them. Lo and behold, the prize stickers are for items in Facebook games. I don't know what range of games the stickers apply to, but I did receive a prize for Farmville and another prize for Mafia Wars.

I think I'll save these for my nieces and nephews as gifts for Christmas.

Re:Get free Farmville crap from 7-Eleven (2, Funny)

dangitman (862676) | about 4 years ago | (#33446768)

I think I'll save these for my nieces and nephews as gifts for Christmas.

You shouldn't admit to child-abuse in public.

cheap replica handbag (-1, Troll)

didtrade (1884658) | about 4 years ago | (#33446632)

Online sell fashion goods,Accept PayPal.cheap replica fashion goods for sale from china free shipping Cheap replica handbag [didtrade.com]
Purse handbags [didtrade.com]
wholesale handbags [didtrade.com]
Handbags wholesale [didtrade.com]
Cheap Replica watches [didtrade.com]
Cheap LV handbag [didtrade.com]
Cheap Replica Jeans [didtrade.com]
Wholesale Replica Jewelry [didtrade.com]
Cheap replica handbag [didtrade.com]
wholesale fashion handbags [tradeshown.com]
cheap coach handbags [tradeshown.com]
replica designer handbag [tradeshown.com]
replica handbag free shipping [tradeshown.com]
replica handbag accept paypal [tradeshown.com]
We do cheap replica wholesale and retail. Fashion goods, Such as Handbags Clothing Shoes Sunglasses Jewelry Hat Blet Watches etc . Brand :Coach Chanel LV Prada Juicy Gucci UGG Rolex A&F etc Very good quality and very cheap price. Handbags $26---$30 T-shirt $14---$18 Sunglasses $12---$18 Hat $6----$8 UGG-boots $88---$112 Watches $88 Jeans $25----$28 All products are free shipping (zone 1---zone 6 country) We can accept Paypal, Western Union and Moneygram, and T/T payment . If you have any need, you can visit our website www.didtrade.com Contact E-mail: popularbag@live.com

Gaia Online since 2007 (1)

ConaxConax (1886430) | about 4 years ago | (#33446774)

Gaia Online has sold "Gaia Cash" cards at Target for nearly three years now - which are used exclusively to buy low-res pixel items for your low-res avatar, for up tp $10 (1000 Gaia Cash) an item. The Facebook games seem like a good deal in comparison. http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/featured-announcements/gaia-cash-cards-at-target-stores/t.33551403/ [gaiaonline.com]

Wait, what? (2, Insightful)

Alarindris (1253418) | about 4 years ago | (#33446792)

Isn't this the same as buying tokens to play arcade games? The currency isn't "fake", it still has value.

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33450318)

Fail

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#33450718)

Isn't this the same as buying tokens to play arcade games? The currency isn't "fake", it still has value.

Yes, it is the same as buying tokens to play arcade games and no, the "currency" is actually fake. You can't buy goods (I use the term loosely here) or services with arcade tokens or farmville credits outside their respective mediums, currency can be used anywhere in the country.

You can also spend real dollars on real crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33446850)

What do you care where people spend their money on? I find an iphone, going to a casino, a keyboard with a pause/break key and toiletpaper a waste of money too.

Micro Transactions and Add-Ons (2, Insightful)

DavidD_CA (750156) | about 4 years ago | (#33446936)

How is this any different from all of the games (PS3, X-Box, and PC) that let you use real dollars to purchase avatars, skins, and other in-game add-ons?

I'm also fairly sure that some simulation games let you put real money in for game money, though their names don't come to mind.

So the only news here is that Target is becoming a middle-man. Oh, and we get to ridicule FarmVille.

Re:Micro Transactions and Add-Ons (2, Funny)

tttonyyy (726776) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447414)

Spot on. And for those that haven't seen the Farmville parody ad, here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odBDAcOEKuI [youtube.com]

Its only funny because its true...

Re:Micro Transactions and Add-Ons (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#33449128)

Or, if we're being honest, buying players in Fantasy Football, which many people around me spend good money to "buy" a team whilst simultaneously laughing their asses off at Facebook gamers?

You're buying entertainment. Facebook games are not my chosen form of entertainment. Neither is fantasy football. Neither is cable television. Nor NASCAR or any form of televised sport. And I could just as easily laugh at the person who spends $20/month to buy premium sports or movies channels as I could someone who spends $20/month on WoW or Facebook credits to receive their entertainment, or someone who spends $100/year to buy a fantasy league.

But I understand that I do enjoy leisure activities where I am spending money and getting nothing but intangible amusement in return. Just because my chosen activities are different doesn't make them any more or less valuable.

I'm a paying member of Geocaching, which is about as pointless as you can get, but I happily drop $40/year to them because when I do it, I have fun.

I spend probably an average of about $600 a year on kayaking and camping gear, fuel, etc and countless hours practicing rescue and emergency techniques so I can take a piece of plastic, put it on my car, drive it to the ocean, and go out camping on an island a few nights a year, and go for some short paddles where we just paddle up and down a river for a couple of hours and have a beer, and do a little Appalachian Trail maintenance with the camping gear.

I worked really hard and spent thousands of dollars to get a pilot's license so I can buzz around and look at the scenery to no useful purpose. I have several hundred dollars worth of knives and Dremels so I can carve little wooden animals to entertain my daughter and give as gifts to her friends. I go to the occasional movie and spend $10 to put my ass in a seat for two hours (at best) and watch a film that has no purpose other than to entertain.

It's all leisure time, and we all choose different things to do with it. If a $5 Facebook card can buy you two hours' worth of enjoyable (to you) entertainment, then it's a damned good value compared to spending $20 on a 2-hour WWE pay-per-view, or $10 + gas + popcorn to go see a movie.

Gift cards (1)

kill-1 (36256) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447220)

You don't seem to understand the concept of a gift card. They have always been fake dollars.

Re:Gift cards (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448434)

Not to mention that the notes we now consider "real money" began life in exactly the same way - they relied on someone giving something of established value to a banker or such in return for a token promising [wikipedia.org] to pay the bearer an equal value. I'm sure back then they were equally ridiculed, "Look, Jebediah is giving up a real cow in return for a note saying he is oweth'd a cow! Methinks I have some Floridian swampland he may wish to barter items of worth for!"

We've lost employees to FarmVille... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33447248)

My company has had some real problems with absenteeism due to Farmville and other social networking applications. When we blocked them at our firewall, we saw a mysterious rise in people electing to "work at home," and others taking long lunches and even going so far as to bring in their personal laptops with a cellular modem (not realizing that the point of blocking them was not necessarily network security).

We even had to let some people go a while back when we sent them to a client site and the (angry) client reported back that they had been playing Farmville during a series of important meetings.

It's frustrating to think it, but I have to wonder if we'd be in a better recovery if so much productivity were not lost to these distractions.

Re:We've lost employees to FarmVille... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33449794)

Admit it. You posted this message to Slashdot from work after reading this article on Slashdot at work, right?

Does this provide any more value to your employer than Farmville?

Or is it just less risky because it's text-based and therefore looks a little less like a productivity sink than Farmville does?

Don't knock the swamp! (1)

scrib (1277042) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447494)

Florida swampland is real property. I grow cypress trees and blueberries on mine! (As well as pine, turkey, deer, wild pigs...)

A closer comparison would be "I have a star to sell you," but even that, at some level, involves a real, physical thing.

"I have some beach-front property in Atlantis you might be interested in."

Re:Don't knock the swamp! (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 3 years ago | (#33450994)

Yeah. Look what Roy Disney did with his swampland (well, and a pile of cash).

You could already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33447734)

You could already spend real dollars in exchange for those things. You just needed a credit card.

No different than any other vice. (1)

liposuction (176349) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447810)

This is no different than spending money on movies or booze or enjoyment in general. What do you get when you pay $15 to go see a movie? Typically sticky shoes and the memory of a lousy movie. What do you get when you buy a $15 bottle of booze? Frequent trips to the bathroom?

It's all about what you find enjoyable. Spend money on entertainment any way you wish, IMO. It all costs real money, and is worth what you feel it to be worth.

Economics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33447896)

Company creates a platform while another company creates a game. People find that game/platform valuable. People willingly pay for certain things within that game/platform. Companies have more money to employ more developers and create more games/platforms....News at 11

paper money has been fake for some time now (1)

doug141 (863552) | more than 3 years ago | (#33447908)

it's not backed by anything.

Re:paper money has been fake for some time now (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#33449622)

Paper money is backed by "The full faith and credit of the US government." It may not be much, but it is backed by something!

Vanity of existence (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33447960)

"That human life must be some kind of mistake is sufficiently proved by the simple observation that man is a compound of needs which are hard to satisfy; that their satisfaction achieves nothing but a painless condition in which he is only given over to boredom; and that boredom is a direct proof that existence is in itself valueless, for boredom is nothing other than the sensation of the emptiness of existence." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re:Vanity of existence (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448512)

Of course he saw boredom as the end point of the fulfilment of all a man's needs. They didn't have Farmville in Schopenhauer's day!

Forget Target (1)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448286)

Until Target stops dumping huge sums of money into the coffers of rabidly anti-gay politicians like Tom Emmer ($150,000), I won't be shopping there, assuming that I'd have a need for virtual merchandise, which I do not.

Swamp land? (1)

Java Pimp (98454) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448524)

I seem to remember hearing of this one guy who bought up a bunch of swamp land in Florida and made a butt load of money... Count me in!!

Re:Swamp land? (1)

neminem (561346) | more than 3 years ago | (#33465464)

Yeah... just need to buy swamp lands that's sufficiently close to Disney World for next time they feel like expanding, right?

You can already buy them at 7-11 (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#33448880)

And yes, seeing the ability to buy Farmville and Mafia Wars things in the real world was dreadfully disturbing.

A week late. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33449056)

This is old, they were in my target last weekend...

Target? (1)

The Ice Queen (109734) | more than 3 years ago | (#33450408)

I'm surprised SusanExpress didn't get in on this action first.

That's not swampland! (1)

woboyle (1044168) | more than 3 years ago | (#33450456)

It's just adequately irrigated, endowed with sufficient moisture, doesn't require over-watering of your roses...

How about the reverse? (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 3 years ago | (#33451320)

I have 30 godfather points and I need new jeans. :-P

Re:How about the reverse? (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 3 years ago | (#33459856)

sounds like the gold-seller side of the equation.
Do Facebook games allow transfer mechanisms like those used by the MMORPG gold-sellers?

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>