Ypulse Guest Post: The Death of the Infinite Facebook App
Posted by anastasia on 09-17-2008
Today's Ypulse Guest Post is from Kristen Olson, who is a 24-year-old advertising account coordinator for The Cimarron Group. Kristen has worked in Hollywood for three years and has moonlighted as: a film reviewer, director of development, journalist, copywriter, poet, agency receptionist, story editor/analyst, production assistant, and blogger. Her first collection of poetry will be available on Amazon early December, and her book on Interactive Advertising Strategy will be published mid-2008. If you are interested in writing a Ypulse Guest Post, just email me.
The Death of the Infinite App
The problem with most current Facebook applications (apps) is that they provide an infinite, on-demand experience. Even for an obsessive user, this can be overwhelming. It's like trying to keep up with fashion trends…. at some point, everyone who doesn't have an on-call stylist gives up. How many times can you throw a sheep at someone before you start to feel that it's pointless? How many new plants can you unlock before you think "I can't believe I've dedicated my life to sending 25 plants a day, just to unlock better plants?"
While we like to believe that users want to continually use our apps, the rational app designer has to consider a new problem: The satisfaction in completion. What does this mean – particularly in designing a marketing app?
We can easily recognize that there is a rise in popularity, and longer staying power in apps that offer a sense of completion. Contrary to the idea that an app should be open-ended, it seems that endable apps actually retain a larger percentage of their audience for a longer period of time. I'd like to suggest that the satisfaction and relief of finishing something makes the app more attractive to users.
Similarly to the way that users prefer the regularity of a TV series to arbitrary video "pods," we can observe that users prefer a closed app to an open one. I've removed apps like "Vampires vs. Werewolves" long ago, but "Bumper Sticker" and "Text Twist" have easily claimed more permanent space on my profile. Why? Because they're not "always on." They're there for me when I want them, not when someone else wants me to play them, or when the app itself grows lonely. I can play a game and easily finish.
I started playing the new Dungeons and Dragons app a few weeks ago, and shot my character through the end with ease. But despite the length of time I spent on it, I find that I am eager to continue using it – precisely because the designers have forced me to retire my character and create a new one to start from the bottom with. This is good design.
Now that apps have been relegated their own separate page in Facebook's redesign, I expect apps to overall become a more private affair. It changes the nature of their use – they're no longer an additional way to display information, but a substitute or catalyst for interaction when your friends aren't providing much Feed fodder.
What are your thoughts on infinite apps vs. closed apps you can easily finish?
Categorized under: Web