Unity's David Helgason

With the social stuff, it's happening with Unity but it's at an early stage. We have a few games with significant numbers, around 500,000 to a million monthly actives. If you can maintain that and monetise it, it's healthy. Paradise Paintball is growing, not like a rocket as we saw on Facebook last year. But those types of growth aren't really happening anymore either because of the new rules. And the other is Superstar City, which has been out for less than a year. And they are the two biggest games we know of on Facebook.

I don't think social has played itself out at all and with the new rules it becomes about different things. It's now more about building a sustainable product. The rules for new entrants is changing. My sense is that the bar is higher for quality and lower for entry. What I do know is the Unity web player has held people back. On Facebook you would be getting 60 per cent success rate for installs. Of course that's painful because you have to a have a bloody good viral product to improve and combat that. We're just about to launch a new installer that we think should improve that to 90 per cent.

There's not that much to say - Unity will run natively in Chrome when there stuff is ready and our stuff is ready.

No. Because Chrome has such a low penetration that it only nudges the margins a little bit. Let's say Chrome has 10 per cent of the market, which it doesn't, but they go to 10 per cent in six months. That doesn't really change your outcome if you plug-in with a 90 per cent success rate, with Unity in Chrome we only go to a 91 or 92 per cent success rate. It doesn't change the final numbers, really.

Now of course they are also doing the Webstore, and if they execute that well it becomes really exciting. Then we can talk about a game changer.

You really need to lure content in and with 5 per cent it becomes more like a transaction fee. I wouldn't be surprised that most people with web properties are spending around 5 per cent on payment and other infrastructures. It's almost like Google might not make a lot of money from it. They're supposed to not be making money off the Android market at all. The Android marketplace takes 30 per cent, however Google is only supposedly taking a few per cent of that and they carry the transactions charges and costs like that so I suspect they are losing money.

If they get the Webstore right, and it's kind of a bold statement, but what may happen - and I'm not completely bullshitting - but it may for the first time ever create a browser with a strong business model, a real business model, like an ARPU (average revenue per user) browser. Firefox with 400 million users has an annual revenue supposedly of around $100 million, which is actually a 25 cent ARPU, which isn't bad. But if you can go from a 25 cent ARPU to a $2 ARPU then suddenly that changes the economics because you can't really acquire users aggressively at 25 cents per year, but at $2 then you can acquire users and hire a guy to knock on doors with a USB stick an install it.