Separator

Social Network Gaming Inaction: FIFA SuperStars on Facebook

Andrewh
Wednesday, June 09, 2010

Everywhere you look, you see someone else talking about social-network gaming -- and they haven't been using very kind words. I usually ignore these discussions, much like I block every single game invite that pops up on Facebook.

I'm not interested in plants, towns, or islands. My Facebook gaming ended with the death of Scrabulous. I do play the occasional game of Lexulous, Scrabulous' successor, with my mother, but otherwise, I steer clear of all Facebook games.

Then I came across EA Sports' FIFA Superstars. I'm a huge soccer fan, and I hoped that this game might excite me where others had failed to capture my interest. The World Cup starts this week, so my soccer interest is at a fever pitch.

The game is a management simulation that offers no direct control over the action. I like this type of game. I love fantasy sports, and Superstars isn't far removed from that particular hobby.


This is probably the game's most action packed moment.

After a brief tutorial, you face a variety of options, all of which reek of deliberate "social gaminess" and microtransactions. The elements that optimize the game for social networking ruin it.

Let me explain.

 

Nothing for you to do

Initially, your team consists of C league players who aren't household names in their own homes. From the outset, I didn't have many ways to use this team of rag-tag misfits. You can predict World Cup results, which has no bearing on the rest of the game; you can play English Premiership teams once you rank up to level 5; you can play friendly matches with your friends; or you can join the Juniors C League and start playing matches with other teams created by, presumably, other Facebook users.


The world's most boring mode -- and it's time-locked.

Since I was the first person in my group of friends to play, I really only have one option: play in the Juniors C League. This group consisted of three opponents, and as soon as I beat all three, my team can move up to the Juniors B League. Every aspect of the game has some form of level progression, so theoretically you always have something to do -- if tokens, credits, and wait times didn't restrict everything.

It gave me a limited amount of match credits, the sole function of which is to spend on the privilege of playing a game. After beating my first two opponents, I spent the rest on trying to beat my third opponent. I was unsuccessful, and once I had extinguished my coins (used for upgrading), my match credits, and World Cup predictions, the game had absolutely nothing for me to do except wait for more match credits.

Soccer is a slow game -- FIFA Superstars is slower

I enjoy the pace of soccer. Although nothing can stop the clock, it has a lack of urgency, and the execution of each play comes with deliberation, if not success.

This game, however, is on a whole new level of slow. Bitmob's own Demian Linn has made multiple complaints on the Mobcast that Lord of Ultima offers speed akin to the movement of tectonic plates. FIFA Superstars is exactly the same.

The game hands out a limited number of matches up front and grants an additional match credit every 6 hours. Training programs range from 5 minutes to 24 hours. In the early stages of the game, players earn between 500-1000 coins, but the purchase of five randomly selected players -- who may or may not be better than members of your current squad -- starts at 10,000 coins and goes up from there.


My very labor-intensive but mediocre team.

After calculating a few figures, I predict I'll die of natural causes before I'll be able to see everything that is in the game, should I choose not to spend real currency. It has so much level progression -- but so little reward -- that it's inconceivable that anyone will attain any level of success in the game.

Let me give you an example: The game rewards players with 30 coins every time they play a friendly with a Facebook friend, which can happen only once a day for each opponent. This sum is 0.1% of the total needed (25,000 coins) for a group of five randomly selected Silver Tier players, the level I require to improve my team -- even at the current Level 3 rank.

Even if this speeds up as the game progresses, why would they design something that takes two weeks to really get going?

Hit page two for the world's worst microtransactions.

 
1 2 Nextarrow
Problem? Report this post
ANDREW HISCOCK'S SPONSOR
Comments (7)
Jason_wilson
June 09, 2010

This sounds horrible. Andrew: You say you won't try future Facebook games. What about Civilization: Network?

Default_picture
June 09, 2010

My experience with the game is quite contrasting in comparison to yours. I will admit, this is a very hands-off soccer management title. Outside of getting to adjust your line-up and selecting a few different exercises, the game is largely an imaginary game of dice-rolling. But even with the limited control, I am actually enjoying myself and I haven't had to spend a single penny to have that fun.

At this moment, I've played for about two weeks and currently, I am a Level 10 manager with my team FK Bruka in the Amateur A Division. 

There are ways of improving your team, cash and experience without having to shell out real dollars. I would strongly recommend instead of buying players first, improve your stadium. The better your stadium is the more money and experience you get after each match. Even if I lose a game, I still net a good amount of cash against AI competitors and I think that is what you're lacking, and why you're still stuck at level three. I only have 4 other people playing with me on my Facebook (and two of which work for EA Sports) so I don't rely on the friends bonuses to improve that much.

I see this as a work in progress that will get better over time, it won't replace the real FIFA Manager game but when you just want to waste a few minutes on Facebook, it does what it has to do.

Default_picture
June 09, 2010

One more tip, get your friends to send you gifts. Gifts include players, money and match credits; there are so many options at having fun without spending the cash. If you want, add me on Facebook and I'll send you a gift.

Andrewh
June 09, 2010

@jason: I was excited for Civ: Network, but after I read your GamePro article, I began to get worried. I wasn't impressed with Civ Revolution for the DS, which was Meier-led, and I imagine that Civ: Network will be similarly underwhelming. With all this talk of social media, and how this game was an express example of a lot of what you hear through panels, I can only imagine Civ: Network will be the same. Unless the game changes the social network gaming landscape, I'll avoid it.

@Marko: I'm not sure if its imaginary dice-rolling. I have my team maxed out in training, but has very little talent. My scores do compare, often higher, than my opponents, but I still can't win. They have more talent than I, so I assume the game skew towards talent over training, which makes me wonder what the combined score is for in the first place.

My problem is that I can't waste a few minutes on Facebook, because the timelines are too long and they are very few options. For the past two days, I have logged on, lost a couple games and that's it. I will continue with the game, because I do want my $10 worth, come hell or high water, but I have very little hope. I'll try the stadium upgrades, but at my current pace, it will be 2 days before I can upgrade that, and honestly I'd rather the players instead of some abstracted bonus. That's what the game should be about...it is called Superstars. But thanks for the advice, we'll see if it works. If it does, I still stand behind my article :)

Img_20100902_162803
June 09, 2010
I rather play the original FIFA than the this travesty on Facebook or a phone.
Demian_-_bitmobbio
June 09, 2010

Oh man, sound grueling. I may need to try it.

Default_picture
June 09, 2010

Simililarly to you I'm not too big on Facebook games and I decided to give this one a shot because the World Cup has me very excited.

The game does not allow you to do much, as you explain, but the point of it is not managing much yet. It's just getting your friends to play it. In order to win the different leagues, get coins and XP and be able to improve your team you just need to log in everyday and the more friends playing it you have, the more matches you'll play. Playing them does not give you much money or XP but beating them occasionally gives you more match credits, which is why you will want to have a good enough team and more and more friends playing the game.

I guess that's what they call "social gaming" which is not very similar to gaming as we knew it, but attracts many people. I have to say I'm still playing it and for some reason want to get some gold players. Maybe after that it will bore me.

The World Cup addition is somewhat a good idea though. The WC credits will grant you coins and players (click on its icon to see the rewards), and I'm curious how well I can guess the results (compared to my friends) and what else they implement to get those coins.

Additionally, Playfish-addicted colleagues have told me that the games are in constant evolution and are totally different a month after launch so stuff like trading and many other additions might make it more enjoyable in the end. I'm giving it a shot, maybe it will disencourage me for good for future games of this type, but I will be able to say I tried!

Oh, and spending money I think is not the point of it. It's the point of it for Playfish, of course, that some players spend money, but not if you just want to try and get to know if social gaming's for  you. Just play it a bit everyday, try to get 10-15 friends do the same and the 5-10 mins you dedicate to it each day should suffice.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.