RockYou's Jonathan Knight

Yes, there's totally that danger. 3D can be a third rail, it can definitely hurt as much as it can help. The Facebook audience doesn't want to feel like it's playing a computer game, that's clear. If they see a polygonal thing that looks like something computer game nerds play or is slow and clunky, they are going to reject it. There's no question.

The Facebook audience wants speed and accessibility. But any audience in the world wants believability, they want stuff to be emotionally compelling. Cute animals on a Facebook game have been successful, so if you were to apply 3D techniques on those assets to make the game more emotionally compelling, more cute, without it coming across like a nerdy, clunky thing, that would be good for the product. We just have to be careful.

But look at a Pixar movie - it doesn't look computer nerdy or like an MMO from 2005, it looks spectacular, it's as 3D as it gets, it's the most sophisticated technology in the games business. We're not obviously going to make Pixar-quality animals in our Facebook games yet... but you've always got to keep your eyes on the ball.

Tablets. I read the other day that in five years, 25 per cent of all computers sold in the US will be tablets. And that's not all mobile devices, that's all computers, period. That's a powerful statistic and when the tablets have cameras on them mounted on the front, as a game maker these devices are going to be initiating a lot of interesting development around augmented reality.

These little Samsung phones that have little cameras on, it's a little tiny screen and you see an augmented reality tech demo, it looks cool, but that's not really a mass-market appeal. But with something like a tablet that acts as a window to a room, with such a big screen, that's going to be important. It may be way off but the technology is ready.

But the tablet in general is a great gaming device. It brings a couple of things together and the power is definitely there to do engaging things. The touch screen brings a great interface for games. The reason Angry Birds is so successful is because it's designed for a touch screen. It combines physics with the screen in an elegant way.

I've got a three year-old and he can play Angry Birds before he can tie his shoes, before he can count. The real estate is a great size and of course it's connected. As we get out beyond 2012 I think what we're going to see is a revolution in casual, social table gaming. Connected games that are very accessible on the go.

I'd be reaching if I was to presume to speak for hardware manufacturers. If I put myself in their shoes it seems to be working pretty well. Games are taking off like crazy on these platforms. Whatever they are doing is working. I guess they would want to stick to their principles of elegance and accessibility.

The other thing about these devices is that although games are dominating on them, they aren't just for games, they're for social networking and browsing, or taking pictures or watching Netflix. Despite the fact that it's a good piece of their business, they can't tailor to it at the cost of other functions.

The problem is it takes such a long time for those companies to react and create new hardware, peripherals and such. Sony and Microsoft are still catching up to what the Wii did a few years ago with motion sensors. They got caught with their pants down with the Wiimote. To put a bunch of stuff into R&D, it just takes time to get out.

And all the while they were doing that these other revolutions started happening. Again, I don't want to speak for those very successful companies but I can only imagine it's difficult to react quickly to some of these trends for some of these successful devices. Apple has had the fortune and foresight to be out on the front of the ship saying "this is what people really want". There's few companies that can do that.