Why do Fads Fade? The Inevitable Death of Flappy Bird-Nir&Far

Hi, I'm Nir Eyal and this is the near and Far Podcast. This podcast is about business, behavior and the brain. On this show, I do a few things. I read quick articles I've written about topics shaping your behavior. I interview authors of books I enjoy, and from time to time I devote episodes to answering your questions. If you want to ask me a question, visit the podcast page on itunes, go to Ratings and Reviews and ask me a question. By leaving a review, I promise to read it and possibly include your question of future episodes. So please ask me anything now. Enjoy the episode and for more, you can always Visit me@nearandfar.com.

Why do fads Fade? The Inevitable Death of Flappy Bird by nir Eyal On February 8, 2014, an app called Flappy Bird held the coveted number one spot in the Apple App Store. The app's 29 year old creator, Dongwyn, reported earning $50,000 a day from the game. Then the Vietnamese developer sent a shocking message. In a tweet many discussed as a publicity stunt, Nguyen wrote, I am sorry, flappy bird users. 22 hours from now, I will take the Flappy Bird down. I cannot take this anymore. And as promised, Flappy Bird disappeared the next day. This is not the way success typically ends. Flappy Bird was downloaded over 50 million times and unleashed a digital tsunami of players and pundits dissecting what turned into a global fixation. The player's only goal in the game was to pilot a pixelated bird through gaps and pipes. Yet Flappy Bird seemed to have a mysteriously seductive power. In a TED Crunch article titled Confessions of a Flappy Bird Addiction, josh Constein wrote, it humiliates me, but I like it. It's a dominatrix of mobile games. What is at the heart of today's digital juggernauts, and why do they seem to disappear as quickly as they rise? What is it about the things that capture our attention in a mental vice grip, only to be ridiculed as faddish whims later? Given the brief success and subsequent decline of other games like Candy Crush Saga Angry Birds in farmville, perhaps the death of Flappy Bird was more than a rash decision. Perhaps it was a mercy killing. Why we get hooked in 2008, a television series called Breaking Bad began receiving unprecedented critical and popular acclaim. The show followed the life of Walter White, a high school chemist teacher who transforms himself into a crystal meth cooking drug lord. As the body count on the show piles up season after season, so did its viewership. The first episode of the final season in 2013 attracted 5.9 million viewers, and by the end of the series, Guinness World Records dubbed it the highest rated TV series of all time. Though Breaking Bad owes a great deal of success to its talented cast and crew, fundamentally the program utilized a simple formula to keep people tuning in. At the heart of every episode, and also across each season's narrative arc, is a problem the characters must resolve. For example, during an episode in the first season, Walter White must find a way to dispose of the bodies of two rival drug dealers. Next, challenges prevent the resolution of the conflict, and suspense is created as the audience awaits to find out how the storyline ends. In this particular episode, White discovers one of the drug dealers is still alive and is faced with the dilemma of having to kill someone he thought was already dead. Invariably, each episode's central conflict is resolved near the end of the show, at which time a new challenge arises to pique the viewer's curiosity. By design, the only way to know how Walter gets out of the mess he's in at the end of the latest episode is to watch the next episode. The cycle of conflict, mystery, and resolution is as old as storytelling itself, and at the heart of every good tale is uncertainty. The unknown is fascinating, and the strong stories hold our attention by waiting to reveal what happens next. In a phenomenon called experience taking, researchers have shown that people who read a story about a character actually feel what the protagonist is feeling. As we step into the character's shoes, we experience his or her motivations. We empathize with the characters because they are driven by the same things that drive us. But if the search to resolve uncertainty is such a powerful tool of engagement, why do we even lose interest in the things that once riveted us? Many people have experienced the intense focus of being hooked on a TV series, a great book, a new video game, or even the latest gadget. Yet most of us lose interest in a few days or weeks. Why does the power of these variable rewards seem to fade away? The finite and the infinite? Perhaps no company in recent memory epitomizes the mercurial nature of variable rewards, quite like Zyga, makers of the hit Facebook game FarmVille. In 2009, FarmVille became an unmissable part of the global zeitgeist. The game smashed records as it quickly reached over 83 million monthly active users by leveraging the Facebook platform to acquire new players. In 2010, as farmers tended to their digital crops while paying real money for virtual goods and levels, the company seemed invincible and set a course for growth by cloning its FarmVille success into a franchise, Zyga soon released CityVille, Sheffieldville, FrontierVille, and several more Ville titles using familiar game mechanics in hope that people would enjoy them as voraciously as they had with FarmVille. By March 2012, Zyga's stock was flying high and the company was valued over 10 billion. But by November of the same year, the stock was down over 80%. It turned out that Zigga's new games were not really new at all. The company had simply reskinned FarmVille, and soon players lost interest and investors followed suit. What was more novel and intriguing was became rote and boring. The vils had lost their variability and with it their viability. As the Zyga story demonstrates, an element of mystery is an important component of continued user interest. Online games like FarmVille suffer from what I call finite variability, an experience that becomes predictable with use while Breaking Bad built suspense over time as the audience wondered how the series would end. Eventually, interest in the show waned as it finally concluded. The series enthralled viewers with each episode, but now that it is all over, how many people who saw it once will watch it again? With the plotlines known and the central mysteries revealed, the show just wouldn't seem as interesting the second time around. Perhaps the show might resurrect interest with a new episode in the future, but viewership for old episodes people have already seen will never peak as it did when they were new. Experience with finite variability become less engaging because they eventually become predictable. Businesses with finite variability are not inferior per se, they just operate under different constraints. They must constantly churn out new content and experiences to cater to their consumers. Insatiable desire for novelty it is no coincidence that both Hollywood and the video gaming industry operate under what is called the studio model, whereby a deep pocketed company provides backing and distribution to a portfolio of movies or games, uncertain which one will become the next mega hit. This is in contrast with companies making products exhibiting infinite variability experience, which maintain user interest by sustaining variability with use. For example, games played to completion offer finite variability, while those played with other people have higher degrees of infinite variability because the players themselves alter the gameplay. Throughout. World of Warcraft, the world's most popular multiplayer online role playing game, still captured the attention of more than 10 million active users eight years after its first release. While Farmville is played mostly in solitude, World of Warcraft it's played with teams and it is hard to predict the behavior of other people. It keeps a game interesting while content consumption, like watching TV shows is an example of finite variability. Content creation is infinitely variable. Platforms like YouTube, Facebook, Pinterest and Twitter all leverage user generated content to provide visitors with a never ending stream of newness. Of course, even sites utilizing infinite variability are not guaranteed to hold onto users attention forever. Eventually, to borrow from Michael Lewis book title, the new new thing comes along and consumers migrate to it. However, products utilizing infinite variability stand a better chance of holding onto users attention, while those with finite variability must constantly reinvent themselves just to keep pace. Dong Wing, the Flappy Bird creator, has largely avoided media attention related to the spectacular success of Flappy Bird. However, Wing told Forbes he decided to take down Flappy Bird because it had become an addictive product. While smoking several cigarettes during the interview, Wing told the reporter, I think it's become a problem. To solve that problem, it's best to take down Flappy Bird. It's gone forever. So far, Wing's goal of helping players break bad habits seems to have fallen short. Phones with the app installed were listed for sale on ebay within hours of the game's demise. In Flappy Bird's absence, a wave of clones appeared, hopping on to siphon off of Wing's success. However, as inevitably as the world discarded the fads that came before it, the finite variability of a game where a bird flies through gaps of pipe will soon be forgotten. Nostalgia of a time when a young man in Vietnam could get rich quick and become Internet famous. Had Wing wanted to see Flappy Bird go away, all he had to do was wait.

Thanks for listening to this episode of the near and Far Podcast. You can always find more at my blog, nearandfar.com and don't forget, if you have a question you'd like me to explore in a future episode, leave me your question. The former review for the podcast on itunes.