why is flappy bird so hard

I have to write something about Flappy Bird to make sure that Frank (@fnoschese) doesn’t get too far ahead. Oh, you should go read his awesome analysis of Flappy Bird. It was very impressive.

I can’t imagine that you have no idea about Flappy Bird – but here is a brief description just in case. The game is simple. Tap the screen to make a little bird “flap” and have some vertical velocity. After that, the bird falls (accelerates down). The goal is to get the bird to “fly-fall” through some openings in pipes. Seems like a simple game but it is surprisingly difficult to get very far.

Probability of Getting Through a Pipe

Let’s approach this from statistical view. What would happen if I had a 20%50% chance of making it through a pipe? What chance would I have of making it through two pipes? Well, that would be 20%50. 5*0. 5 = 0. 25. Yes, there are some assumptions here. Two presumptions exist: first, that my ability does not increase with time (which is fairly evident so far), and second, that my ability to pass the second pipe will not depend on my ability to pass the previous one.

There is one other problem. In the Flappy Bird game, I get points even if I only get halfway through a pipe. This implies that if I collide with the second pipe, I might receive a score of 1. If I hit the first pipe’s end, I could receive the same score. Most Popular.

Here is a histogram of all my scores.

Now it’s time to build a model. I can use this little Python code to find out how far I can go with a 0 587 probability of getting though each pipe. That produces a scatter plot output that ought to resemble my plot from above. The comparison of the histogram with the real data is what’s interesting.

Using the simulation, how about I calculate how many tries I’ll need to get each score? Here’s what I’ll do. After running the simulation until I receive a score of 1, I’ll tally the number of times I need to run it. I’ll repeat this 100 times to determine the average (as well as the standard deviation) quantity of tries. Sure, it may seem like a lot of work, but fortunately, computers can handle it for us.

The average number of attempts for each score is plotted here.

This is the homework assignment: Create a program that is similar, but after every 10,000 games, increase the probability of success by a certain amount.

Does My Performance Improve?

I chose to do more than just play this game; I also decided to gather some data. I would keep score as a function of trial number while I played. Here is a plot of score vs. trial.

However, let’s act as though this fit is tolerable. You can see that my score does appear to be slightly improving over time. Additionally, it states that I would receive a score of 0 if I never played. 7004. This fit also indicates that my score increases by 0 every time I play. 005028.

How many times around would I have to play this ridiculous game before I could match my daughter’s score of 39? All I have to do is solve for the trial number (which I called n) using a score of 39 in the function.

This is the part of many posts where I would say that because of my fictitious linear fit, this seems like an unreasonable value. However, I think 7617 trials might be appropriate for me. It just so happens that I recorded the time each time I started playing the game (along with the score), so I wonder how long this would take. Based on the data, it appears that each trial takes roughly 12 seconds. This means that 7617 tries would take 25. 57 hours to get this score.

Is it possible to “win” at Flappy Bird, or does the game just never end?

Although I believe it is becoming more difficult these days to support yourself through the App Store, it is still possible. Take me as an example. Due to my day job and limited development time, I had to create a very short and straightforward game. Because I lack the resources to produce continuous content like the major game companies, I also had to make the game extremely difficult in order to extend its lifespan. Even if my games don’t work out, I still have a great day job, so all is well. The most challenging aspect is that in order to make any sense, something has to change. I’m trying to make something different. Advertisement.

Naturally, this doesn’t address the issue of why a man would rather stick to his day job than the game’s alleged daily earnings of $50,000.

But even though it looks so easy, why is the game, in which your goal is to guide a little yellow bird between gaps in a series of green pipes, so incredibly difficult to master?

Turns out, its a deliberate choice by Nguyen, according to this interview with ITA, an app trade publication. Nguyen didnt want to make new, extra levels of gameplay for players who advance quickly because his day job didnt give him enough time:

Dong Nguyen, the creator of the game, removed Flappy Bird from the App Store over the weekend due to his inability to cope with the pressure and attention that came with being the No. 1 most downloaded game on iPhone.

FAQ

Is Flappy Bird the hardest game in the world?

As for the Flappy Bird game, its deceptively simple appearance with graphics that harken back to the era of 8-bit gaming, is actually one of the hardest games you’ll ever play.

What is the trick to Flappy Bird?

Slower is Better Flappy Bird is all about finding the right rhythm, so get used to a slower pace. This is especially true for the critical moment when you pass between pipes and score points. You move upward so quickly in this game that it’s better to aim low and give yourself room to rise.

Why is Flappy Bird banned?

Flappy Bird was removed from both the App Store and Google Play on February 10, 2014, with Nguyen claiming that he felt guilty over what he considered to be the game’s addictive nature and overusage.

Why is Flappy Bird so addictive?

Physiologically, games like Flappy Bird are likely to increase dopamine levels when people are doing well and noradrenaline when they fail. The interaction of two competing neurotransmitter systems is likely to keep players engaged in the game for periods longer than they originally intended.