Talking about Angry Birds is taking us back to another era, close in time but very, very distant, if we talk about the consideration that game developers (and more and more of those of other types of applications) have with their users. A time when the most important thing about games was that they were fun, that users felt attracted by their proposal, decided to go through the box to get hold of them and, from there, simply enjoyed them.
It was the year 2009, a time when smartphones were beginning to gain traction and positions thanks to the enormous potential of apps, when a game appeared in the Apple App Store (later it would also reach Android and many other platforms) in which you had to shoot birds at structures built by malevolent pigs, in order to recover the eggs that the latter had stolen from the birds’ nests. Fourteen years later, the concept still sounds just as weird, but the premise is still fun and the game continues to engage just as it did on the first day.
Because of the virality, and because the game was really fun, it took a short time to rise to the top of the sales charts and all kinds of mobile game rankings. Rovio, the small studio behind Angry Birds, began to pour in a lot more money than they ever dreamed of, and as is often the case, new versions of the game soon began to roll out, some of which were really good.
Everything went wrong, however, at some point between that stellar beginning and the current moment, and this is something that we cannot blame exclusively on Angry Birds or Rovio, since it is an endemic evil in the sector. I’m talking, of course, about microtransactions, the games free to play which are actually more play to win and how investors and shareholders have managed to turn videogames into casinos and/or Persian bazaars, where the only thing that matters is that the user pays, pays, pays and pays again.
A little less than a year ago, in April 2022 and in a move that could be interpreted as going against that trend, Rovio “resurrected” the classic Angry Birds, which had previously been removed from the Android and iOS stores. A game that, for 1.19 euros (current price in the App Store) offers you hours and hours of fun without having to checkout or endure advertising impacts every few seconds.
But they say that good things don’t last, and in this case they are not wrong, since Rovio has announced that it will remove Angry Birds from both stores, so it will no longer be possible to buy it. Well, read the official statement about it in this tweet:
Please read below for an important announcement regarding the availability of Rovio Classics: Angry Birds. pic.twitter.com/a4n4bU5gQJ
—Rovio (@Rovio) February 21, 2023
We have evaluated the business model for Rovio Classics: Angry Birds and its impact on the rest of our catalog and have therefore decided to remove it. Or, if you allow me to translate it into human, “It turns out that people would rather pay for a game than be bombarded with ads and microtransactions. Rovio Classics: Angry Birds has made our titles with all that pay to win crap earn less and, since we don’t really give a damn about the players, we have decided to eliminate the one that has been shown to be the preferred option for them. I think it’s a little longer, but it’s better understood that way.
The impact of Angry Birds on the rest of our catalogue, they say, because of course, it would be worse to say that pay-to-wins bill less since users can make a single payment to enjoy the gaming experience. Because, of course, that would mean recognizing that for them, for a long time, we stop being players to become wallets, purses, wallets with legs.
Which leads me to take a look at the cynicism with which they close the statement, stating that they want to make the best possible experience for the players… Is there anyone who believes such a fallacy? Unless, of course, when talking about players they are actually referring to their shareholders and investors, in such a case it is clear that they are not their first, no, they are their only priority.
