kev/null: Iminlikewithyou and Game Design in the Web
fling93
· 2 years ago
Wow, excellent post. And I'll attest that you got your economics right.
I would add that point sinks aren't the only option for iilwy. They can also simply award fewer points for things to reduce the growth in their "money supply," so to speak (aka better central bank policy). But better yet, they could set up a real economy and experiment with several alternatives to central banking, such free banking.
Well, probably a bit off track from their goal, but an econ geek can drool at the possibilities.
And another solution to Match.com's problem is to make the points into true currency, allowing people to accumulate them (and perhaps earn interest), and also allowing people to set the price of points it takes to message them (don't these places hire economists? sheesh).
Coley
· 2 years ago
I'm in like with YOU, Kevin : P (Great post ;)
Dan Lurie
· 2 years ago
I've been looking for this kind of analysis of IILWY for a while now, and this article nails it. Great post.
My beef with IILWY isn't the concept– I think the idea behind it is novel and interesting– but the execution.
The site is horrifically schlow, uses all custom widgets, and breaks some fundamental interface rules. Why is it beeping at me? Oh, because its switching pictures... Isn't beeping supposed to be saved for times when I actually need to be alerted of something? Beyond the obvious gripes, the site is still pretty darn buggy.
Its come to the point where I've stopped using the site. Maybe if they get their act together in the future, I'll re-consider.
Dan Lurie
· 2 years ago
Whoa... gSpell really screwed with my comment there...
Charles Forman
· 2 years ago
Hi Kevin,
Excellent post. You are most absolutely correct.
We are actually in the process of revising our image. We are trying to shed the whole "dating" take on things and broaden the service to apply to everyone. Since the beginning, we never wanted to be a "dating" site. We've been been extremely happy with the way the system has been used so far. We are working very hard to accommodate everyone on the site.
I'minlikewithyou is for everyone. Obviously, at least for now, the games are the centerpiece on the site. However, many of our users just want to browse around and look at the interesting games and the responses by other people. Its quite fun just to sit back and to watch people.
We will be adding a good set of new features that include: much better, more interesting messaging between your friends // privacy controls for media // much better usability // as well as some other bells and whistle type features.
Regarding inflation: you are also very correct. To be totally honest, the original design of the economy is not in place now. We thought that having too many point "sinks" or costs would be too restrictive and discourage activity, especially given the fact that we didn't know exactly how people would use the site. Now, we have a much better idea of how the economy needs to be revised.
For example, in the very near future, when a game winner is chosen, points will be awarded to both the host and the winner. Non-winning bidders will only get a % of their bids back (though a high percentage), and the difference will be split between the host and the winner. Therefore, the winner and host are incentivized, and non-winning bidder's payed a small cost.
Our primary objective is to make a really fun and engaging way for people to interact with each other. We are 5 people (all developers) in a small office in New York with very limited resources. Because we are small, we can adapt and make changes to iilwy as we hear feedback, which is really gratifying. We are pretty proud of what we've created so far. However, we are nowhere near our vision, and we have a lot of work to do!
Thanks for the thoughtful post on us. We appreciate it.
Charles Forman iminlikewithyou // founder
Kevin Cheng
· 2 years ago
Charles,
Thanks for your very detailed and thoughtful response. I'm looking forward to seeing some of the changes you mention. I'm not sure if you would want to shed the dating aspect entirely, but one thing I didn't mention was that the visual design of the site, while fun and pleasing, made me think it was targeted at teenagers and was a big reason why it took me a few weeks before I joined. Numerous others I've invited have said the same, "I don't think this site is for me."
In any case, I could go on and on but for now, looking forward to seeing some of the changes you mentioned.
sean savage
· 2 years ago
Great analysis. I also was a tad turned off by the name but after reading this I'm gonna go try it out.
I especially appreciate your observation that there can be great value in imposing barriers in social contact. A huge hole in the vision behind almost every social Web site has been this extremist "walls=bad" assumption – The unexamined conclusion that because digital networked services -can- operate without such barriers, they always -should- operate that way. But that flies in the face of the way most humans operate in the offline world.
I think barriers to social contact were core to what (semi-accidentally) drove Facebook's early success, and I'm interested to see what happens now that they've thrown them away...
(Funny to think of the parallel universe of video games, whose creators have chugged along all these years embracing barriers and inventing challenges, seeing that's what players want.)
I -still- think there's phenomenal unexplored opportunity in combining the benefits of offline barriers we all use everyday, with online social networking services... There's gold in those hills.
Anyway I'm intrigued to hear about iilwy and look forward to checking it out. Thanks for the writeup.
barce
· 2 years ago
Just like Sean, I was kinda turned off when I first got invites to IILWY. I can no longer keep track of all the Internet social networks I belong to. However, your description about effort in IILWY sounds great. I'll give it a try the next invite I get.
Thanks!
mini games
· 11 months ago
I'm a bit annoyed by the social networks but this one seems great. I'll give it a try too :D
Naye
· 2 years ago
I was reading this and immediately wondered, why've I not been invited?!?! Am I not likeable?!?!
Jesse Thomas
· 2 years ago
great post! I recently joined imlwy and im really enjoying it.. that full screen photo slideshow deal is sweet!
reiner
· 2 years ago
very nice post! thank you. but i have one complaint. you're links are soo hard to spot, couldn't you use another colour? cheers
Lane
· 6 months ago
I like the idea of using some type of a competition to filter out people because dating sites are indeed mostly full of people that are not at all serious about looking for a committed relationship.
Free Online Dating
· 5 months ago
I totally agree with you about Match. I think the paid dating moguls are beginning to catch on that they have to come up with creative ways to earn money(becoming free) and to keep their members happy.
All Comments
I would add that point sinks aren't the only option for iilwy. They can also simply award fewer points for things to reduce the growth in their "money supply," so to speak (aka better central bank policy). But better yet, they could set up a real economy and experiment with several alternatives to central banking, such free banking.
Well, probably a bit off track from their goal, but an econ geek can drool at the possibilities.
And another solution to Match.com's problem is to make the points into true currency, allowing people to accumulate them (and perhaps earn interest), and also allowing people to set the price of points it takes to message them (don't these places hire economists? sheesh).
My beef with IILWY isn't the concept– I think the idea behind it is novel and interesting– but the execution.
The site is horrifically schlow, uses all custom widgets, and breaks some fundamental interface rules. Why is it beeping at me? Oh, because its switching pictures... Isn't beeping supposed to be saved for times when I actually need to be alerted of something? Beyond the obvious gripes, the site is still pretty darn buggy.
Its come to the point where I've stopped using the site. Maybe if they get their act together in the future, I'll re-consider.
Excellent post. You are most absolutely correct.
We are actually in the process of revising our image. We are trying to shed the whole "dating" take on things and broaden the service to apply to everyone. Since the beginning, we never wanted to be a "dating" site. We've been been extremely happy with the way the system has been used so far. We are working very hard to accommodate everyone on the site.
I'minlikewithyou is for everyone. Obviously, at least for now, the games are the centerpiece on the site. However, many of our users just want to browse around and look at the interesting games and the responses by other people. Its quite fun just to sit back and to watch people.
We will be adding a good set of new features that include: much better, more interesting messaging between your friends // privacy controls for media // much better usability // as well as some other bells and whistle type features.
Regarding inflation: you are also very correct. To be totally honest, the original design of the economy is not in place now. We thought that having too many point "sinks" or costs would be too restrictive and discourage activity, especially given the fact that we didn't know exactly how people would use the site. Now, we have a much better idea of how the economy needs to be revised.
For example, in the very near future, when a game winner is chosen, points will be awarded to both the host and the winner. Non-winning bidders will only get a % of their bids back (though a high percentage), and the difference will be split between the host and the winner. Therefore, the winner and host are incentivized, and non-winning bidder's payed a small cost.
Our primary objective is to make a really fun and engaging way for people to interact with each other. We are 5 people (all developers) in a small office in New York with very limited resources. Because we are small, we can adapt and make changes to iilwy as we hear feedback, which is really gratifying. We are pretty proud of what we've created so far. However, we are nowhere near our vision, and we have a lot of work to do!
Thanks for the thoughtful post on us. We appreciate it.
Charles Forman
iminlikewithyou // founder
Thanks for your very detailed and thoughtful response. I'm looking forward to seeing some of the changes you mention. I'm not sure if you would want to shed the dating aspect entirely, but one thing I didn't mention was that the visual design of the site, while fun and pleasing, made me think it was targeted at teenagers and was a big reason why it took me a few weeks before I joined. Numerous others I've invited have said the same, "I don't think this site is for me."
In any case, I could go on and on but for now, looking forward to seeing some of the changes you mentioned.
I especially appreciate your observation that there can be great value in imposing barriers in social contact. A huge hole in the vision behind almost every social Web site has been this extremist "walls=bad" assumption – The unexamined conclusion that because digital networked services -can- operate without such barriers, they always -should- operate that way. But that flies in the face of the way most humans operate in the offline world.
I think barriers to social contact were core to what (semi-accidentally) drove Facebook's early success, and I'm interested to see what happens now that they've thrown them away...
(Funny to think of the parallel universe of video games, whose creators have chugged along all these years embracing barriers and inventing challenges, seeing that's what players want.)
I -still- think there's phenomenal unexplored opportunity in combining the benefits of offline barriers we all use everyday, with online social networking services... There's gold in those hills.
Anyway I'm intrigued to hear about iilwy and look forward to checking it out. Thanks for the writeup.
Thanks!
but i have one complaint. you're links are soo hard to spot, couldn't you use another colour?
cheers