Our Fun Future

I called this 'Parallel Concept' - fun with game mechanics but not games, or 'Funware'. Funware applications are not games, but they are interesting to game professionals in three critical ways:

1. They were designed without game designers. Because many of the start-up CEOs and user experience champions behind these products grew up around games, it's been easier than ever for them to build these game-like experiences. As Ian Bogost frequently points out, games are interesting because consumers have to figure the mechanics and underlying system to win.

While I don't agree with 100 per cent of this worldview, it's readily apparent that for this first generation of Funware applications, formal game skills have not been necessary. The intellectual strategic advantage of game developers and publishers may not be as substantial as we believe.

2. They exist in the context of an increasingly gamey consumer. Even the idea of applying points, status and challenges to simple activities (like checking in at a bar) wouldn't be possible unless consumers were comfortable with the mechanics. This is something the games industry can certainly take credit for, but consumer appetite can be monstrous.

If what our customers want is even more, broad games that are all encompassing, the games industry is not making much of an effort to sate this demand. In other words, casual games may not be casual enough, and social games may not be social enough.

3. They solve a real problem for their creators. Beyond just making money, the purveyors of Funware applications typically come to the table with a defined business problem they are trying to solve. In the case of Foursquare, it was getting people to check into a mobile social network (without which they have no business).

In the case of Chase Bank, it's about getting consumers to use debit instead of credit (and plastic more, overall) thereby shifting millions of dollars in incremental fees revenue to their bottom line. Without a doubt, these companies are equally - if not more - motivated than any game company to engage consumers.

4. They are both shallower and more engaging than 'games'. Routinely dismissed by game developers for their lack of depth and sophistication, Funware apps aren't getting much respect in the industry. But it's precisely this lack of pretense and complexity that is helping propel these everyday games into the public consciousness.

Consumers feel no guilt when they check in using Foursquare, they simply find the experience fun and satisfying and leave it at that. No conscious decision to play a game was required, and so the Funware movement is more insidious and easier to sell to a cynical public. In a nutshell, Funware fits people's busy lives better than games do, and by pairing themselves with another activity, they form a more seamless kind of entertainment.