Gamers redux

For the last few weeks now, I have been tucking myself in bed to the sound of ecstatic birds and the crash of strategically placed pieces of glass, wood and concrete. There is also the intermittent mutter of disgust, disappointment and occasionally grunt of grim satisfaction. In case you have not figured it out yet, the wife has fallen for the latest mobile game craze - angry birds.

Just so we are clear, my wife is no gamer. But for some reason angry birds has awakened her hidden urge to destroy egg-stealing hogs. So what is it that causes a person, who otherwise has disdain for all forms of gaming, to actually be addicted to one themselves?

There obviously is no formula, otherwise I'd be rich now, but I'd argue that we are now in a position where it is actually possible to create these mass-market game hits. There have been a lot of people making numerous breakthroughs before my wife could take immense pleasure in hurling birds at remorselessly idle pigs.

Availability: In the beginning gaming required that you have a desktop and no human friends. Or have a Playstation and know other people that had no friends. With the smart phone, now having a life is not detrimental to imaginary achievements. Zynga discovered this and has been unbelievably successful (hint Farmville). Mobile games take accessibility to a whole new level.

Believability: "Here, see this triangle - imagine that is a inter-Galactic fighter". Luckily we don't have to do that anymore. There is no need to appeal to the inner child - things in games look as they are supposed to. This isn't photo realism, and it is not expected to be. When the inexplicably flightless birds are raring to hurl themselves, you almost want to help them out. And that has involved a vast number of improvements - experience in making games to enough processing power to support it. Without the 1GHz processors in our mobiles, games would still be leaving a lot to the imagination.

Relateable: Getting things to seem natural is a very difficult task. Cause and effect, it seems, is not that easy with bits and bytes. Early games had to invent arcane rules to compensate. And keeping track of those rules led to the creation of the stereotypical nerd with his glasses and rule books. Angry birds is quite different. It has a flawlessly simple, natural physics engine that responds differently to even minute differences in action. That suddenly makes the game an extension of what people recognize otherwise - making it vastly more relateable.

"I finally understand Civil engineering ... and where to hit to cause the most damage" - this from my wife getting more proficient with her birds. And that is the crux of a good game. All she cares about are the birds, the physics and the app. Hiding the simple fact from my wife, that she is playing a game, has been the biggest success of angry birds. There is a lot that needs to happen, technologically, to be able to achieve that sleight of hand. I think we are there now. Which is why as I am writing this, it still sounds like a war zone in the next seat.