Small nitpick: They aren’t really protected by copyright. Only the exact way mechanics are described are protected, you can describe any mechanic in your own words. This system was patented, though, which is what you need for a comprehensive state-granted monopoly on game mechanics. See Magic The gathering patenting its entire game mechanics (expired now): https://patents.google.com/patent/US5662332A/en
Fair enough; game mechanics really shouldn’t be patentable. Specifically / particularly video game mechanics; every video game uses concepts and ideas from other games - there’s nothing completely original anymore. Imagine if every game had patented all of its mechanics - there would be no new games, it’d be impossible to make something. Imagine if ID had patented the concept of a first person shooter, for instance.
I’d argue that the indie scene is already providing that; it’s really just the AAA studios that’re churning out cookie cutter garbage. However, if everyone had patented game mechanics, those indie studios wouldn’t be able to make those games. I’d challenge you to find a game that hasn’t borrowed something from another. I certainly can’t think of one.
Every game that has hit points and damage is stealing mechanics from historical war games in the 50s, which was then stolen by naval war games in the early 70s, which was then stolen by D&D in the late 70s, and has since been stolen to this very day haha
Yeah, I think the indie scene is more creative with all aspects. Art, mechanics, themes. However, they still follow previous work and develop on it. All games would be necessity be more creative if all parts were patentable.
I think there is a case to be made for parents as they protect innovation. However for software, which develops rapidly, it’s more a choke on innovation and development as innovation is more iterative.
It’s the same in all art. gaming just has mechanics and code that is more easy to fall within the patent system. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t support parents on game mechanics. However, I think for many games we are rewarding derivative dross rather than innovation and novelty. There is a middle ground.
Perhaps parents for a shorter period, maybe 10 years. With development lead time, this would actually be shorter in practice. However, the flip side would be that if you apply for a patent, your code becomes open source after the patent expires. For that game and all derivatives of the patent sold during the period. So make the option to patent something have an upside for consumers and other companies too.
This is a whole separate discussion; game mechanics really should not be copyrightable at all, IMO.
Small nitpick: They aren’t really protected by copyright. Only the exact way mechanics are described are protected, you can describe any mechanic in your own words. This system was patented, though, which is what you need for a comprehensive state-granted monopoly on game mechanics. See Magic The gathering patenting its entire game mechanics (expired now): https://patents.google.com/patent/US5662332A/en
Fair enough; game mechanics really shouldn’t be patentable. Specifically / particularly video game mechanics; every video game uses concepts and ideas from other games - there’s nothing completely original anymore. Imagine if every game had patented all of its mechanics - there would be no new games, it’d be impossible to make something. Imagine if ID had patented the concept of a first person shooter, for instance.
It’s odd that it takes in that direction, rather than going with trend of other patents, where the patent is for the implementation, not the idea.
Another great example of this is Bandi Namco’s loading screen minigame patent, which expired in 2015. The patent was incredibly broad.
Or we’d have a huge variety of different games that are more creative.
I’d argue that the indie scene is already providing that; it’s really just the AAA studios that’re churning out cookie cutter garbage. However, if everyone had patented game mechanics, those indie studios wouldn’t be able to make those games. I’d challenge you to find a game that hasn’t borrowed something from another. I certainly can’t think of one.
Every game that has hit points and damage is stealing mechanics from historical war games in the 50s, which was then stolen by naval war games in the early 70s, which was then stolen by D&D in the late 70s, and has since been stolen to this very day haha
Imagine hit points being patented…
Yeah, I think the indie scene is more creative with all aspects. Art, mechanics, themes. However, they still follow previous work and develop on it. All games would be necessity be more creative if all parts were patentable.
I think there is a case to be made for parents as they protect innovation. However for software, which develops rapidly, it’s more a choke on innovation and development as innovation is more iterative.
It’s the same in all art. gaming just has mechanics and code that is more easy to fall within the patent system. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t support parents on game mechanics. However, I think for many games we are rewarding derivative dross rather than innovation and novelty. There is a middle ground.
Perhaps parents for a shorter period, maybe 10 years. With development lead time, this would actually be shorter in practice. However, the flip side would be that if you apply for a patent, your code becomes open source after the patent expires. For that game and all derivatives of the patent sold during the period. So make the option to patent something have an upside for consumers and other companies too.