[casual_games] Gameplay patents

[Hal Barwood]

This doesn't resemble any design doc I've ever seen, unless subsections 
5.5 and 5.6 are the bulk of the pages.  It looks more like a pitch doc.

John Viguerie wrote:

> Sorry I got lost and didn't answer the question:

> structure of a game design doc.

> 

> I start with the following sections:

> AUDIENCE: Who am I building this game for?  If the

> answer is "everybody" then your work is not done.  We

> live in a demographically and psychographically

> fragmented world (500 channels on cable).  Its not the

> 1950's (three channels) or even the 1980's (13

> channels)anymore.  Today's entertainment enterprises

> build products from the audience to the studio, not

> the other way around.

> 

> TEAM: Does the team have enough representation from or

> specific knowledge/experience relevant to the audience

> to be successful, besides the tech or creative skills?

>  This part is upfront because ideas without execution

> are worthless.  The audience reading this document

> want to know about the capacity to execute, not a

> pie-in-the-sky.

> 

> MARKET: The most extensive section of the document,

> because, well, building a great marketing plan is as

> important as building a great game, unless you're

> building it for yourself and then you can ignore the

> market.

> 

> STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION: This part is the WHY?'s

> as opposed to the previous sections (the WHAT?'s). 

> There are decisions and rationales about the marketing

> approach in this part.  Possibly contains launch,

> customer acquisition, and promotion strategies based

> on the previous sections.

> 

> PRODUCT:  As a matter of discipline, this goes last. 

> The exercise of completing the sections in this order

> is meant to refine the product spec and identify any

> mis-matches between the audience, their behavior

> patterns, the distribution channels, the technology,

> the ecosystem partners, the team and the product.  BTW

> this is not "we are using XXXX engine" which would be

> putting the cart before the horse.  I would save that

> for a "Detailed Physical Architecture and Tools"

> document which, for me, is separate, distinct, and

> subsequent exercise.

> 

> 1.0 AUDIENCE: Overview

> 1.1 AUDIENCE: Objectives

> 1.2 AUDIENCE: Mission

> 1.3 AUDIENCE: Keys to Success

> 

> 2.0 Production Team Summary

> 2.1 Production Team

> 2.3 Production Team Skills, Locations and Facilities

> 

> 3.0 Market Analysis Summary

> 3.1 Market Segmentation

> 3.2 Target Market Segment Strategy

> 3.2.1 Market Needs

> 3.2.2  Market Trends

> 3.2.3 Market Growth

> 3.2.4 Online Casual Gaming Statistics

> 3.3  Online Casual Market Analysis Summary

> 3.3.1  Online Casual Market Trends

> 3.3.2 Online Casual Market Growth

> 3.4 Online Casual Gaming Industry Analysis

> 3.4.2  Distribution Patterns

> 3.4.3  Competition and Buying Patterns

> 3.4.4  Main Competitors

> 

> 4.0 Strategy and Implementation Summary

> 4.1 Strategic Underpinning of the Game Concept

> 4.2 Value Proposition

> 4.3 Competitive Edge

> 4.4 Marketing Strategy

> 4.4.1 Positioning Statements

> 4.4.2 Pricing Strategy

> 4.4.3 Promotion Strategy

> 4.4.4 Distribution Patterns

> 4.4.5 Marketing Programs

> 4.5 Sales Strategy

> 4.5.1 Sales Forecast

> 4.5.2 Sales Programs

> 4.6 Strategic Alliances

> 

> 5.0 Flagship Product

> 5.1 Product Description

> 5.2  Competitive Comparison

> 5.2.1  Existing Comparable Online Casual Games

> 5.3  Pre-Production and Production Technology

> 5.4  Spinoffs - Future Products and Services

> 5.4.1 Other Brand Extension Possibilities

> 5.5 Graphic Design Treatments

> 5.6 Logical Game Architecture

> 

> Yeah, a lotta work and "marketing b.s." goes into

> this.  But once completed and fine-tuned, this

> structure provides a solid foundation for managing the

> execution of the development and marketing, and maybe

> even the financing and distribution agreeements.

> 

> Good Luck.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> --- Alex Amsel <tuna at tunatech.com> wrote:

> 

>> There is some confusion as to what is being patented

>> here. John is being 

>> careful not to refer to gameplay itself, but to

>> software algorithms 

>> ("black box"). With care, these can be worthwhile to

>> patent, although 

>> there is always the issue of defending them.

>>

>> John Viguerie wrote:

>>> At the end of the day its ink on paper.

>>>

>>> The submission I mentioned is for software

>> algorithms

>>> and innovative data structures that are the

>>> underpinning of the gameplay - not the gampelay or

>> the

>>> game itself - an important distinction...  It may

>> not

>>> even be new, but the application of it likely is

>> or at

>>> least seems to be after a yoeman investigation.

>>>

>>> Anything typically used in sw engineering specs

>> like

>>> Visio, CASE tools, DFDs(data flow diagram, showing

>> my

>>> age), etc. is appropriate.

>>>

>>> In this case I used Open Office-ODP (ironically, 

>> a

>>> powerpoint knockoff!): arrows, boxes, data

>> structure

>>> representations, jpg, gif, etc.

>>>

>>> Most of all what's required that's sorely

>> lacking...

>>> DISCIPLINE.  To take the time and effort to

>> completely

>>> think through and document an innovation and the

>>> technology landscape into which it applies.  Its

>>> always more fun to just jam code.

>>>

>>> Do as much as you can, read your own stuff as if

>>> you're seeing it for the first time, when your

>> idea

>>> seems like its been dumbed down such that a

>>> two-year-old can understand it, seek advice.

>>>

>>> Patent-hating for philosophical reasons is just

>>> irresponsible.  But then again there are many

>>> successful properties and personal fortunes built

>> on

>>> ip theft.  In the RIAA/MPAA major media world its

>> been

>>> pretty cut-and-dried until only the last few

>> years.

>>> Now we have the "Danger Mouse" and "YouTube"

>> models...

>>> if you've got enough VC cash to finance the safe

>>> harbor model, pay for the bandwidth while the wide

>>> world seeds your site with misappropriated

>> copyrighted

>>> material, OR your game is so hot that the

>> copyright

>>> owners are inclined to JOIN instead of SUE, you

>> just

>>> might get there and become a billionaire... no

>> patents

>>> required.

>>>

>>> A patent is simply a risk-mitigation tool, nothing

>>> more.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> --- Audry Taylor <talshannon at hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>   

>>>>> I just dropped off a sixty-one page game

>> technical

>>>>> design document to my patent attorney yesterday

>> -

>>>>>       

>>>> not

>>>>     

>>>>> a single line of code - not a single pixel or

>>>>>       

>>>> vector

>>>>     

>>>>> or even a formal graphic design treatment has

>> been

>>>>> performed... yet.

>>>>>       

>>>> What's the best resource for finding out how to

>>>> prepare a game design 

>>>> document for patent?  Does any website or book

>> offer

>>>> up a sample document 

>>>> that covers what sort of information needs to be

>>>> included?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>     

> _________________________________________________________________

>>>   

>>>> Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos,

>>>> recipes and more on your 

>>>> Live.com page. 

>>>>

>>>>     

> http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701

>>>   

>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>> Casual_Games mailing list

>>>> Casual_Games at igda.org

>>>>

>>>>     

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/casual_games

>>>   

>>>> Archive:

>>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/casual_games/

>>>> Archive Search:

>>>>

>>>>     

> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

>>>   

>>>> List FAQ:

>>>>

>>>>     

> http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Games_List_FAQ

>>>   

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Casual_Games mailing list

>>> Casual_Games at igda.org

>>>

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/casual_games

>>> Archive:

>> http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/casual_games/

>>> Archive Search:

> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

>>> List FAQ:

> http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Games_List_FAQ

>>>   

>> -- 

>>

>> Alex Amsel

>> Tuna Technologies Ltd (Sheffield, UK)

>> Cross Platform Game Development

>> Tel: +44 (0)114 266 2211  Mob: +44(0)7771 524 632

>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>> Casual_Games mailing list

>> Casual_Games at igda.org

>>

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/casual_games

>> Archive:

>> http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/casual_games/

>> Archive Search:

>>

> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

>> List FAQ:

>>

> http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Games_List_FAQ

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Casual_Games mailing list

> Casual_Games at igda.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/casual_games

> Archive: http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/casual_games/

> Archive Search: http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

> List FAQ: http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Games_List_FAQ

>