[casual_games] Gameplay patents

[Adultswim Games]

What you're saying potentially true, but it also relies on the idea that
innovation is a straight line from one idea to another.  Could Half-life
and Counterstrike have been made if we didn't have scores of Quake
clones in between?  The virtue of having those clones seems to me to be
less about direct innovation, but about letting more people play in the
space.  Maybe the person with the next innovative addition to the
gameplay didn't work at id.  But since he can't get his hands on it, he
can't figure out what to do next, so you're stuck with the same people
hacking away at the same problems and likely coming up with the same
solutions.  Innovation seems to me to be what occurs when you realize
what's wrong with thing in front of you.  If there's nothing in front of
you, or just one example of the thing, then it's going to be that much
harder to come by.

To me, the bottom line is that we all remember Quake.  We remember these
copycats as Quake Clones. If that's not strengthening the brand's
dominance over the genre, I don't know what is.  

Chris Pasley
AdultSwim.com
RunBinary.com

-----Original Message-----
From: casual_games-bounces at igda.org
[mailto:casual_games-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Tom Hubina
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 1:56 PM
To: 'IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [casual_games] Gameplay patents

Here's the deal ...

If id Software had wanted to croak everyone and not let anyone else make
a
new FPS, then that's their right. They INVENTED it!!!

Honestly, I'm glad games like Duke 3D and Unreal Tournament were made
but as
someone who is trying hard to come up with original game play designs I
don't like the idea that people can take what I've spent a ton of time
and
energy developing and slap some different graphics on it and release it
on
portals where it competes with my titles. What I really care about is
the
ability for the person who invents something to be able to say how that
invention can be exploited by others. In id's case, they were licensing
their technology and they were better at making that tech than anyone
else
for a very long time. They were smart enough to know that licensing that
tech was worth more money that preventing people from making competing
products.

In casual, there isn't any tech to speak of. It's 100% game play, and it
gets ripped off constantly without any improvements or changes. The
relatively low cost to create titles means that it's MUCH worse in
casual
than in the days of the FPS.

My question is, would we have gotten to Half-Life and Counterstrike
earlier
if people weren't so busy ripping off Doom / Quake / etc? Necessity is
the
mother of invention, and if just doing a copy isn't enough you have to
look
for something "more".

And how about this as a follow up question: If you can't make a copy of
what
someone else has done, you're going to need to make something new if you
want to make a game. Isn't it better that we have people focused on
making
things that no one has seen before, instead of focused on how to
reproduce
the last thing that was a hit so they can cash in for a quick buck?

How about if publishers couldn't fund that kind of stuff (unless they
want
to pay for a license), and instead the only thing they could put their
money
into was original/innovative content? How many great ideas that never
got
the chance to be made would suddenly find it possible to get funding?

Tom
(this is mostly a theoretical debate as it's based on the premise that
we
have a revised patent structure for gaming content)



> -----Original Message-----

> From: casual_games-bounces at igda.org 

> [mailto:casual_games-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Lennard Feddersen

> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 10:12 AM

> To: IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List

> Subject: Re: [casual_games] Gameplay patents

> 

> I don't agree with your last sentence Adam.  We got from Wolf 

> 3d to Unreal Tournament - IMHO pretty clearly a good thing as 

> far as FPS players are concerned - because id software did 

> not (in fact, quite likely Carmack created some of his 

> competitors with his amazing code release policy) stop future 

> innovation and enhancement upon which consumers got more and 

> better products that they seemed happy to purchase.  Many 

> people were employed and new and strong companies were built. 

> 

> IMHO this is the strength of capitalism - somebody makes 

> something that sticks so many people dive in and figure out 

> how to make a better mouse trap.  The very powerful computers 

> we are now all enjoying came about because of this very 

> marketplace mechanic - if early developers had been given 

> technology patents that were too broad then we most surely 

> would not be where we are today.

> 

> Lennard Feddersen

> CEO, Rusty Axe Games, Inc.

> www.RustyAxe.com

> 

> Lennard at RustyAxe.com

> P. 250-635-7623 F. 1-309-422-2466

> P. July & August 518-863-2317

> 5014 Walsh, Terrace, BC, Canada, V8G-4H2

> 

> 

> 

> Adam Martin wrote:

> > On 14/02/07, Tom Hubina <tomh at mofactor.com> wrote:

> >   

> >> We _should_ be able to patent UNIQUE game play. We 

> _should_ be able 

> >> to leverage some form of legal protection to stem the tide 

> of rampant 

> >> copycats that is absolutely destroying the casual games 

> industry (buy 

> >> me a drink at GDC and I'll talk your ear off about this topic). 

> >> However, the current

> >>     

> >

> > I'll bite. Where/when can I find you? :)

> >

> > I'll wager that the much faster and more appropriate 

> solution to the 

> > copycat problem is for the retail market to improve. My turn at a 

> > provocative statement until GDC: claiming that the ease of cloning 

> > games is destroying the casual games industry is like claiming that 

> > the second-hand games market is destroying the mainstream games 

> > industry - both are merely the customers showing that the 

> industry has 

> > fundamentally misunderstood what their market actually 

> wants, or has 

> > fundamentally failed to satisfy the needs effectively.

> >

> > Adam

> > _______________________________________________

> > Casual_Games mailing list

> > Casual_Games at igda.org

> > http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> > Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> > 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://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive Search: 

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

> List FAQ: 

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

> es_List_FAQ

> 


_______________________________________________
Casual_Games mailing list
Casual_Games at igda.org
http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe
Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe
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_FA
Q