You should focus on the economics of game development instead.
Why not ditch buying games from corporations with external shareholders instead?
Why not introduce a sustainable funding model for development work?
Why not introduce a sustainable feature/addon/DLC development model?
Why not introduce a sustainable server maintenance cost model?
Your bill will change nothing for AAA games because these game labels are what they are: labels, not studios. They buy stuff for cheap and sell it for a high price. They're like VCs giving game studios an advance funding model, but expect high returns of investment.
And that's the actual problem.
On the other hand, most indie studios I know usually have the right intentions but really really underestimate the costs for marketing, sales, store visibility (e.g. steam, appstore's 30% etc) and maintenance. You cannot hit all the costs when you don't even know how many players you are gonna have. And you don't know how expensive your game has to be when you don't even know how many players will _stay_ in your gameplay for the game shelf lifetime. If 10 players paid 10$ a couple years ago, how are you gonna fund necessary bugfixes for the servers?
It's impossible to fix the gaming industry because it's made up of consumers with low impulse control.
You can see evidence of that with the recent GPU crisis where even as prices go up, sales remain constant.
Then you have game development companies outright scamming people by releasing bug-ridden products. But gamers keep buying, which means that developers aren't being discouraged from such practices.
Basically, gamers remain in the market no matter how much they're mistreated because they'll do whatever to get the dopamine hit. There's no reason for anything to change.
This is not bill of rights, but a bill of musts. I do not play games, I use to read books but nothing from your 1-12 can make the market better. Imagine skyrocketing the prices for games because of game companies has to hire more layers each layer having expertise in different counries. Imagine having even more regulations than we have today in many many industries, how many industries left which do not require a layer eventually?
Laws and regulation would be much better if they were specific. It is just that people making laws and regulation are usually too lazy to do so or just want to be able to interpret them how ever they want afterwards.
A law should be broad, to be applicable for a long time and multiple situations, yet clear enough not to be misunderstood.
For example, once it is decided if conduct is deemed unfair or dangerous, there should be little interpretation on the consequences and they should differ.
Weirdly laws are usually very specific on what is deemed unfair, yet rarely on what is dangerous.
I would gamify workarounds for each of your points like it's a speedrun of Mario. These are typical low quality laws. You prohibit things randomly with good intentions and low focus on how this would be abused.
This just makes it way harder for small studios to operate, you tell them how to make business, you seem to know in advance what players want and what they don't.
1 - I would release a half baked game very early, then push basic content as DLCs for years and remake 2 years after "initial release". Or simply call it an Specific Hardware Targeted Port and release it 6 months after, by adding some crap like better accelerated shadows.
2 - as above. Original will be mostly useless.
5 - since the "initial release" is now just a random alpha demo, I have all the time I need to announce DLCs
6 - easy, my base prices will be 500 USD, I will aggressively discount. Like a Telco operator.
7 - I would make sure to break single-player game definition. Is Death Stranding single or multiplayer? I'd do something similar.
Let me briefly share some of my experiences and thoughts. I grew up playing games like The Legend of Zelda, Knights and Merchants, StarCraft. From a young age, I dreamed of creating a multiplayer Final Fantasy II. Continuously honed my skills and after graduating college in 2007, fulfilled my dream of becoming an MMORPG developer.
However, this marked the beginning of a long struggle. I wanted to create 'healing remedies' but the company demanded 'addictive drugs' designed to drain player's time and money. I realized the problem wasn't product design itself, but the business model shaping the product. So, I started my own venture.
I'm now trying to build a 'creator-consumer' ecosystem, similar to short-form video platforms. This involves developing a DSL to easily create narrative adventure game scripts (text and image based), performed by pre-made, standardized virtual characters. It will use a serialized release model, with artists and musicians sharing in the revenue.
Ultimately, the business model dictates the product. It doesn't matter who successfully builds this; success doesn't have to be mine. I just hope everyone can live a life without regrets.
I'm new here. Could any kind-hearted senior help me? I'm sharing a viewpoint with a different analytical perspective. I wonder where the issue lies in my speech. I sincerely seek guidance to better integrate into the community. Today, I received 8 downvotes, yet no one pointed out the flaws in my speech. I'm eager to accept criticism and learn from feedback. Thank you!
You should focus on the economics of game development instead.
Why not ditch buying games from corporations with external shareholders instead?
Why not introduce a sustainable funding model for development work?
Why not introduce a sustainable feature/addon/DLC development model?
Why not introduce a sustainable server maintenance cost model?
Your bill will change nothing for AAA games because these game labels are what they are: labels, not studios. They buy stuff for cheap and sell it for a high price. They're like VCs giving game studios an advance funding model, but expect high returns of investment.
And that's the actual problem.
On the other hand, most indie studios I know usually have the right intentions but really really underestimate the costs for marketing, sales, store visibility (e.g. steam, appstore's 30% etc) and maintenance. You cannot hit all the costs when you don't even know how many players you are gonna have. And you don't know how expensive your game has to be when you don't even know how many players will _stay_ in your gameplay for the game shelf lifetime. If 10 players paid 10$ a couple years ago, how are you gonna fund necessary bugfixes for the servers?
It's impossible to fix the gaming industry because it's made up of consumers with low impulse control.
You can see evidence of that with the recent GPU crisis where even as prices go up, sales remain constant.
Then you have game development companies outright scamming people by releasing bug-ridden products. But gamers keep buying, which means that developers aren't being discouraged from such practices.
Basically, gamers remain in the market no matter how much they're mistreated because they'll do whatever to get the dopamine hit. There's no reason for anything to change.
This is not bill of rights, but a bill of musts. I do not play games, I use to read books but nothing from your 1-12 can make the market better. Imagine skyrocketing the prices for games because of game companies has to hire more layers each layer having expertise in different counries. Imagine having even more regulations than we have today in many many industries, how many industries left which do not require a layer eventually?
Laws and regulation should never be to specific. You give very specific guidelines and times, such as 8 years, 50% of etc.
Principles would be formulated differently. I'd prefer something along the lines like:
Before remastering, let a game mature.
Cherish the initial release, archive it and keep it available.
Take care when remastering a game, to be true to the original, include a switch in the options if possible.
Etc.... maybe improved wording.
Laws and regulation would be much better if they were specific. It is just that people making laws and regulation are usually too lazy to do so or just want to be able to interpret them how ever they want afterwards.
A law should be broad, to be applicable for a long time and multiple situations, yet clear enough not to be misunderstood.
For example, once it is decided if conduct is deemed unfair or dangerous, there should be little interpretation on the consequences and they should differ.
Weirdly laws are usually very specific on what is deemed unfair, yet rarely on what is dangerous.
8 is becoming a law in more places already
9 & 10 can be applied to any non-game software service as well
11 is impossible because there's too much variation in consumer hardware, but some kind of formal performance standard would be nice
everything else is solved by "don't buy this game", but gamers don't like hearing they can just not play a game and instead they play and complain
I would gamify workarounds for each of your points like it's a speedrun of Mario. These are typical low quality laws. You prohibit things randomly with good intentions and low focus on how this would be abused.
This just makes it way harder for small studios to operate, you tell them how to make business, you seem to know in advance what players want and what they don't.
1 - I would release a half baked game very early, then push basic content as DLCs for years and remake 2 years after "initial release". Or simply call it an Specific Hardware Targeted Port and release it 6 months after, by adding some crap like better accelerated shadows.
2 - as above. Original will be mostly useless.
5 - since the "initial release" is now just a random alpha demo, I have all the time I need to announce DLCs
6 - easy, my base prices will be 500 USD, I will aggressively discount. Like a Telco operator.
7 - I would make sure to break single-player game definition. Is Death Stranding single or multiplayer? I'd do something similar.
...
Let me briefly share some of my experiences and thoughts. I grew up playing games like The Legend of Zelda, Knights and Merchants, StarCraft. From a young age, I dreamed of creating a multiplayer Final Fantasy II. Continuously honed my skills and after graduating college in 2007, fulfilled my dream of becoming an MMORPG developer.
However, this marked the beginning of a long struggle. I wanted to create 'healing remedies' but the company demanded 'addictive drugs' designed to drain player's time and money. I realized the problem wasn't product design itself, but the business model shaping the product. So, I started my own venture.
I'm now trying to build a 'creator-consumer' ecosystem, similar to short-form video platforms. This involves developing a DSL to easily create narrative adventure game scripts (text and image based), performed by pre-made, standardized virtual characters. It will use a serialized release model, with artists and musicians sharing in the revenue.
Ultimately, the business model dictates the product. It doesn't matter who successfully builds this; success doesn't have to be mine. I just hope everyone can live a life without regrets.
I'm new here. Could any kind-hearted senior help me? I'm sharing a viewpoint with a different analytical perspective. I wonder where the issue lies in my speech. I sincerely seek guidance to better integrate into the community. Today, I received 8 downvotes, yet no one pointed out the flaws in my speech. I'm eager to accept criticism and learn from feedback. Thank you!