> " I don't understand why people on Reddit and HN love to demonize the employees of Zynga."
I apologize if I give offense while attempting to shed some light on why people have a problem with your company (and those who choose to work there). It's difficult to be honest about this question without coming across as mean, but I will try.
2) The game mechanics of Zynga games often hinge on what might be viewed as "bad" use of psychology -- manipulative, addictive, and in a sense abusive of the friends functionality of facebook. It's hard to respect someone who knowingly treats people so callously.
3) Common opinion is that the games themselves range from mildly awful to completely terrible, and are successful almost entirely due to the "bad" psychology above. It's easy to respect someone like notch, who got rich making an awesome game. It's hard to respect people like Pincus, who got rich by making games that are fundamentally lame.
Again, no offense meant to you or your friends. Maybe you're on a team that doesn't do any of the above bad stuff. But the parts of Zynga most of us are familiar with do all of that bad stuff. I hope this helps clarify why you might see so much hate directed that way.
1. The vast majority of the games industry borrows heavily from titles which have come before, so Zynga isn't unique in this regard, nor should it be singled out.
2. The establishment of addiction-creating feedback loops is practically a games industry science. Again, this is hardly unique to Zynga.
3. Subjective statements about quality aside, I think it's safe to say that Minecraft has highly addictive qualities, and therefore Notch can't really be put on a pedestal here in the context of your second assertion.
Your points stick for a subset of games, but I don't think bringing Minecraft into the mix makes sense.
Other "addicting" games that Zynga can be compared to are things that have been in the casual space for years, or a decade-plus. Things like Bejeweled and the casual flash-game portals that (used to be) everywhere.
Zynga is in the business of shallow gaming experiences that focus on extracting money from users. I think when most people think of good game companies, they are thinking of companies that make games with depth that don't require a refill (via money) to keep having "fun" or progressing.
1. Many games have identifiable influences from other games, but what Zynga does is far beyond "borrowing heavily". Read the legal doc I linked to above. They are completely unique in terms of how far they take copying.
2. We call this fallacy "Tu quoque". Yes, other games also have feedback loops. People have been criticizing Everquest and WoW for ages. Zynga has all of the same negatives, but in higher proportion to the total game (ie, there's very little "game" and very much "addictive loop".)
3. Yes, plenty of other games have addictive qualities. But those are typically minor components that go along with excellent gameplay. When notch (and now jeb) make changes to Minecraft, they're not about trying to strengthen addictive feedback loops; they're about trying to put in new cool stuff.
Yes, this is a subjective take. No, this doesn't make it any less valid.
I apologize if I give offense while attempting to shed some light on why people have a problem with your company (and those who choose to work there). It's difficult to be honest about this question without coming across as mean, but I will try.
1) wholesale copying other companies' games (see http://www.scribd.com/doc/101954002/EA-v-Zynga-Complaint-Fin... for a legal complaint and http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4335287 for discussion.) From that thread: "they must realize that every day they go to work and rip off someone's original work." It's hard to respect someone who knowingly makes their living this way.
2) The game mechanics of Zynga games often hinge on what might be viewed as "bad" use of psychology -- manipulative, addictive, and in a sense abusive of the friends functionality of facebook. It's hard to respect someone who knowingly treats people so callously.
3) Common opinion is that the games themselves range from mildly awful to completely terrible, and are successful almost entirely due to the "bad" psychology above. It's easy to respect someone like notch, who got rich making an awesome game. It's hard to respect people like Pincus, who got rich by making games that are fundamentally lame.
Again, no offense meant to you or your friends. Maybe you're on a team that doesn't do any of the above bad stuff. But the parts of Zynga most of us are familiar with do all of that bad stuff. I hope this helps clarify why you might see so much hate directed that way.