Just of note...
Doesn't enforcing that quoted clause ensure that there will be some level of obvious to the invention?
It seems to go against your first paragraph recommending the hire of a bunch of random people in the same field and seeing if they can come up with the solution. So to be granted a patent the solution has to be such a stroke of genious that given time to do nothing else, a team of experts can't come up with that solution, but not so obscure that anyone could make the invention?
My problem with your proposal is that the patent is supposed to reward the work put into the invention, thereby promoting progress. You propose hiring people for the task of working on the solution only to debunk the invention? Why so negative? I would definitely like the debunkers job much more than inventors job. Much more secure. Of course, they don't promote progress at all. Wait, thats exactly why patents exist, to encourage the inventors.
I agree with your overall comments, but object to the concept of submission to academia.
An individual who would be called an academic is an individual who would have a vested interested in eliminating all patents and no interest in perpetuating any. They would not be impartial.
They may be "qualified" to comment on government policy or economics, but that's only because that generally amounts to so much hot air. They should have no say on individual patents.
Good replies, here are some more brief retorts:
On cheap 3d engines: If they are so good, why isn't anyone using them? ATVI, EA, VU and the lot like to make the most money possible as well but they seem to stick to Quake3, Unreal, and to a lesser extent LithTech for FPS.
On user created content: Its easy to make one good mod in your entire life. There are many functional (you say good, thats an opinion that I don't care to debate here) mods out there, but thats because there are a thousand dev teams working a thousand hours. Creating a good game on-time, on-budget is a totally different matter. I would be more interested in seeing what they come up with presented with nothing (presented with nothing? that doesn't make sense)and starting from scrath. No dis to any mod makers out there, but my guess is nothing. To sum it up, if they were that good they would be professionals.
On QA: I gotta tell ya you are mostly still wrong about publisher QA. Most games are NOT farmed out completely. The only game I ever heard of that was got ruled a disaster and they vowed never to do that again. Yes testers are often temps, and yes sometimes some work is sent to external labs, but its all run by a professional within corporate guidlines. And thats the difference. You still didn't address who was going to PAY for this QA though, regardless of who would perform it.
On Steam: I do have significant beef with Steam, but that is mostly another topic. In brief with steam it not just about having the CD, its about being able to play the game I purchased without being online. Steam streams the content, I want it all at once.
Also on Steam that you ignored (good choice): If this change is almost here, why did Valve invent steam, THEN sign a multi-title deal with publisher Activision. It doesn't seem to me like they believe in it yet themselves. And even if multi-title means two, thats what...10 years at Valves pace after HL2.
On money without money: You didn't state that explicitly, but that's exactly what we are talking about when we talk about ditching the publisher. The record label example is close, but a bit flawed. To create a professional quality game, it has to be your full time job. These people need to get paid for what they are doing while they are doing it, not at the end. An indie musician can work at Subway (Eat Fresh!) and just do the music thing at night and still cut a record. The publisher does play the role of the major record label in terms of providing the upfront funding, but thats where the similarity ends. I would laugh quite hard if I ever found out an indie game studio released a game and got the pants sued off of them because one of the developers had been using a stolen copy of photoshop, got caught, and cost the company the paltry revenue it had generated.
The other point we haven't touched on that the publisher takes care of is PR and advertising. Is an indie developer supposed to pay for that too?
I didn't actually expect you to respond to the financial bit, I was just snapping back in I guess a less than humurous way.:(
I'll just reply in brief since you post is so full of fallacy it defeats itself...
On the CS issue: That did not begin as a retail product. If they had to license the engine in the first place it would never have gotten off the ground. And you are right, hobbyists can't make a game of as high quality as professionals. CS is an inferior product. It was REALLY inferior UNTIL THE TEAM BECAME, AND WORKED WITH, PROFESSIONALS. Heh, look at an early version. Truly inferior.
On the QA issue: You are just incorrect about this. Entertainment software publishers all have in-house QA. Just look at the credits. Um, duh?
On the Steam issue: I posted in another thread that Steam has even more questions that this method. To play you have to be online. The whole game is never on your system. Is that a good thing? And if Steam is ready, then why isn't it out yet? Valve hasn't released a product since 1999(?). If it was such a positive venture then you think they would have been on the stick and gotten it out there. And didn't Valve just announce a multi-title publishing agreement with Activision? Doesn't sound like they believe in their own technology. *cough*
I know you WANT to believe you can make money without money, and in the linux world, maybe you can(?). But its not there yet for entertainment software. And when it is, the big publishers will just run to the consoles anyway.;)
Hey, what financial company do you work for? That hasn't been my experience with my investments, but I would definitely like to avoid you and your operations negative vibes.
Well, I'll reply.
If a book had several words speled wrang and several grammaticalation errors on the cover, I would judge it based on that, and fairly. Having a poor design does suggest that their design skills may be lacking.
No, without publishers, games would never come out at all. The developers would just work on adding features and fixing bugs until they ran out of money and were unemployed.
#1 VU does not own Valve so being bought out is already up to them.
#2. Yeah, who wants to wait for a patch when we can play the broken patch now. Test the game for free for them, and then test the next broken patch some more later? That does sounds like a good deal to me.
and the big #3 What if the Steam server is down? How will you play? I can play my current Steam-free version of Half-life without being connected to the internet! I think the whole offline thing might catch on some day.
Who do you think pays the developers while they make the game? Very few developers are in a position to publish a game without any outside funding. Web-based games are cheap to make, but does the world really need another Bejeweled rip-off? Who is going to pay for the 3 year development of a game and the engine license in the first place?
Then lets talk quality control. Its the publisher who does the QA. Now I know we all have different opinions about how well that works, but it is something. Along with quality control goes support. Who is to say there would even be a serious customer support webpage, let alone a call and email center?
Patches? See above for cash. Once the game is out the amount of money earned is basically set. The chance of extended support with patches is even more unlikely.
Broadband support is not ready. If you don't believe me, look how the Counter-strike population shot up once it became a retail product. That was a free game in the first place, but since it was a huge download it didn't REALLY blow up until someone could walk into a store and buy it at retail. Broadband is spreading but its just not there yet. Is a couple thousand units sold enough to justify making a top quality game in the first place? Enemy Territory was recently released and even at the delicious price of 0 it only has less than 8000 users online at a time. Assuming TEN times that many have downloaded it, that is eighty thousand units. 80k units at $50 each (yeah right for an online buy) = 4 Large. Blizzard (chosen because I could easily find the info) has about 150 employees. The sales from that game would earn each employee an average of 27k per year. For exactly one year. They definitely need a larger base than that, even given the well rounded up and generous numbers.
Then there is the physical product itself. There are so many questions there. Sure, I can make a backup copy once it is downloaded, but what if there is a problem with the download? Can I download it again for free? Do I have to buy it again because there was connection trouble. Don't have to worry about that if I walk into Best Buy. If the CD is defective they will exchange it for the same title. No thanks, I'll take the box, jewel case, and paper manual any day.
Don't even think about publishers going away just yet. Wallstreet analysts will be the first to correctly predict that one.
I don't know if you are guessing about the Xbox Live thing, but from what I hear you are right.
EA and M$ battled it out to see if 1. EA could charge like this (they can since PSO does) and 2. Shut down one year's game when the next year's came out. MS said no to 2.
Holy crap, MS fighting for the consumer! 5th sign of the apocalypse.
It is true you must remove the battery, but some information came across my ear (this happens to me with lots of game related information) that the single cart will hold MANY games. The number was >20, but that is not final. Do you have 20 GBA games?
In case you didn't see my other post, a game for this thing is going to be full fledged PS1 games. Like THPS1. The real thing, not the scaled back, isometric version on GBA. Music, 3D, and all.
Actually, only people who are still noobish think it is unbalanced. Once you understand the game, you thoughts might change. Or not. But either way, its the 3rd most popular online game at any given time, so despite your negativity, it seems to me they got alot right.
And just to demonstrate how absolutely wrong you are...
I just confirmed with a NGC man that PSO for the Gamecube has also release added content, therefore it is possible to patch games on that console as well.
Counter-terrorists win.
Flamebait?
Both PS2 (yes to a MC) and XBOX games have already been patched.
Just because you don't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist. In fact, acknowledging you don't know about them is really acknowledging that you are unqualified to post in the matter.
And if I say you have a Gamecube you should take that as an insult.;)
I fail to see how this post is insightful.
So because someone sometime somewhere did something wrong, that means nothing is ever wrong?
Because people will continue to get away with murder and rape we should consider it ok to murder and rape?
You need a little something called perspective. Stealing is wrong. Speeding is wrong. Murder is wrong. They hurt people in different amounts, but yes they are all wrong.
I think its cute that you can spew some basic philosophy 101 crap back in the thread and get modded up. We all have to make personal choices and live with them. Some people steal, some people speed, and some people kill, but they are still wrong for doing it and that does not in any way blur right from wrong.
Could someone point out the insightful part of his post? Especially the insult about the pizza. You know thats pizza for their families, and clothes, and shelter. They don't do this as a hobby; its their lives.
In case you are too dense to pick up on it...nowhere here did I try to defend my driving practices (though you ASSume alot, such as that I even have a car). The point is that right and wrong exists outside the individual.
You should keep up better with current events then. I will leave the discovery of the numerous titles that have been patched and that some even receive free added content as and exercise for the reader.
You can take your foot out of your mouth and admit you were wrong now.
Um, those are very simple games you name. Simple in terms of difficulty and simple in terms of design. Not that that is a bad thing necessarily, but there just isn't that much to do in those games. Why do you say they are "quite complex" then qualify it to say they are not complex?
If you don't believe that all Nintendo games are simple games, why did they make the controller have one main giant button? Again, not that simplicity is bad, but those are poor examples of complex games.
I don't happen to like Enter the Matrix, but the number of different things to do or that can happen at any given moment is gi-normous when compared to any Nintendo game.
Also, I have found bugs in those games. I am afraid of posting negative things about Nintendo because this guy Nintendoctor mods me down everytime I do. Suffice to say that the bugs exist, you just choose to let them slide because you like the game.
Well you can't actually take the car back because it has a defect. If a major defect is discovered, then a recall is issued. Wow, that sounds alot like a patch. Thanks for proving MY point.
There is no justification for stealing. It is just wrong.
This is not insightful, I'd prefer to mod it naive.
The complexity of modern games means there will be some bugs. Everyone here has been saying how great Blizzard is for waiting to release, but have any of their products not required a patch? I think they all have. Didn't Diablo II have a huge problem when it came out that had the potential to burn up a user's CD-ROM? I can quickly browse the Blizzard support pages and find lots of wonderful bugs that the game was shipped with including crashes, progression blocks, etc. There is one right now that states if your character dies while holding a throwing potion, the character file can become corrupted! Oh perfect Blizzard, we don't care because we follow you like sheep. What short and selective memories we have here!
In the particular cases of the games mentioned in the article, yes the movie deadline played a big role, but to think that postponing a game until all the "bugs" (which many times are features the user just doesn't understand) are worked out is a good idea or even possible, is naive.
Because someone obviously feels that theft is right. Nothing justifies stealing. Noone ever decided to start stealing software because of a bug. It may make someone not buy that companies products in the future, but not buying and stealing are quite different.
That flamebait is just someone fulfilling an agenda and should be removed.
Slashdot Mirror
Just of note... Doesn't enforcing that quoted clause ensure that there will be some level of obvious to the invention? It seems to go against your first paragraph recommending the hire of a bunch of random people in the same field and seeing if they can come up with the solution. So to be granted a patent the solution has to be such a stroke of genious that given time to do nothing else, a team of experts can't come up with that solution, but not so obscure that anyone could make the invention? My problem with your proposal is that the patent is supposed to reward the work put into the invention, thereby promoting progress. You propose hiring people for the task of working on the solution only to debunk the invention? Why so negative? I would definitely like the debunkers job much more than inventors job. Much more secure. Of course, they don't promote progress at all. Wait, thats exactly why patents exist, to encourage the inventors.
I agree with your overall comments, but object to the concept of submission to academia.
An individual who would be called an academic is an individual who would have a vested interested in eliminating all patents and no interest in perpetuating any. They would not be impartial.
They may be "qualified" to comment on government policy or economics, but that's only because that generally amounts to so much hot air. They should have no say on individual patents.
Good replies, here are some more brief retorts: On cheap 3d engines: If they are so good, why isn't anyone using them? ATVI, EA, VU and the lot like to make the most money possible as well but they seem to stick to Quake3, Unreal, and to a lesser extent LithTech for FPS. On user created content: Its easy to make one good mod in your entire life. There are many functional (you say good, thats an opinion that I don't care to debate here) mods out there, but thats because there are a thousand dev teams working a thousand hours. Creating a good game on-time, on-budget is a totally different matter. I would be more interested in seeing what they come up with presented with nothing (presented with nothing? that doesn't make sense)and starting from scrath. No dis to any mod makers out there, but my guess is nothing. To sum it up, if they were that good they would be professionals. On QA: I gotta tell ya you are mostly still wrong about publisher QA. Most games are NOT farmed out completely. The only game I ever heard of that was got ruled a disaster and they vowed never to do that again. Yes testers are often temps, and yes sometimes some work is sent to external labs, but its all run by a professional within corporate guidlines. And thats the difference. You still didn't address who was going to PAY for this QA though, regardless of who would perform it. On Steam: I do have significant beef with Steam, but that is mostly another topic. In brief with steam it not just about having the CD, its about being able to play the game I purchased without being online. Steam streams the content, I want it all at once. Also on Steam that you ignored (good choice): If this change is almost here, why did Valve invent steam, THEN sign a multi-title deal with publisher Activision. It doesn't seem to me like they believe in it yet themselves. And even if multi-title means two, thats what...10 years at Valves pace after HL2. On money without money: You didn't state that explicitly, but that's exactly what we are talking about when we talk about ditching the publisher. The record label example is close, but a bit flawed. To create a professional quality game, it has to be your full time job. These people need to get paid for what they are doing while they are doing it, not at the end. An indie musician can work at Subway (Eat Fresh!) and just do the music thing at night and still cut a record. The publisher does play the role of the major record label in terms of providing the upfront funding, but thats where the similarity ends. I would laugh quite hard if I ever found out an indie game studio released a game and got the pants sued off of them because one of the developers had been using a stolen copy of photoshop, got caught, and cost the company the paltry revenue it had generated. The other point we haven't touched on that the publisher takes care of is PR and advertising. Is an indie developer supposed to pay for that too? I didn't actually expect you to respond to the financial bit, I was just snapping back in I guess a less than humurous way. :(
I'll just reply in brief since you post is so full of fallacy it defeats itself... On the CS issue: That did not begin as a retail product. If they had to license the engine in the first place it would never have gotten off the ground. And you are right, hobbyists can't make a game of as high quality as professionals. CS is an inferior product. It was REALLY inferior UNTIL THE TEAM BECAME, AND WORKED WITH, PROFESSIONALS. Heh, look at an early version. Truly inferior. On the QA issue: You are just incorrect about this. Entertainment software publishers all have in-house QA. Just look at the credits. Um, duh? On the Steam issue: I posted in another thread that Steam has even more questions that this method. To play you have to be online. The whole game is never on your system. Is that a good thing? And if Steam is ready, then why isn't it out yet? Valve hasn't released a product since 1999(?). If it was such a positive venture then you think they would have been on the stick and gotten it out there. And didn't Valve just announce a multi-title publishing agreement with Activision? Doesn't sound like they believe in their own technology. *cough* I know you WANT to believe you can make money without money, and in the linux world, maybe you can(?). But its not there yet for entertainment software. And when it is, the big publishers will just run to the consoles anyway. ;)
Hey, what financial company do you work for? That hasn't been my experience with my investments, but I would definitely like to avoid you and your operations negative vibes.
Look at me! I'm going to make a big rant like I know what I talking about!
ET came out for the Atari 2600.
You sound pretty young kid. There were games before the NES you know...
4 Large is only 4,000 to you guys?
;)
Man I'm glad I'm not Italian.
Zing!
Well, I'll reply. If a book had several words speled wrang and several grammaticalation errors on the cover, I would judge it based on that, and fairly. Having a poor design does suggest that their design skills may be lacking.
Wow, you provided one example based on a wildly unpopular game. This, ladies and gentlemen, is the exception that proves the rule.
No, without publishers, games would never come out at all. The developers would just work on adding features and fixing bugs until they ran out of money and were unemployed.
#1 VU does not own Valve so being bought out is already up to them.
#2. Yeah, who wants to wait for a patch when we can play the broken patch now. Test the game for free for them, and then test the next broken patch some more later? That does sounds like a good deal to me.
and the big #3 What if the Steam server is down? How will you play? I can play my current Steam-free version of Half-life without being connected to the internet! I think the whole offline thing might catch on some day.
Thats a laugh.
Who do you think pays the developers while they make the game? Very few developers are in a position to publish a game without any outside funding. Web-based games are cheap to make, but does the world really need another Bejeweled rip-off? Who is going to pay for the 3 year development of a game and the engine license in the first place?
Then lets talk quality control. Its the publisher who does the QA. Now I know we all have different opinions about how well that works, but it is something. Along with quality control goes support. Who is to say there would even be a serious customer support webpage, let alone a call and email center?
Patches? See above for cash. Once the game is out the amount of money earned is basically set. The chance of extended support with patches is even more unlikely.
Broadband support is not ready. If you don't believe me, look how the Counter-strike population shot up once it became a retail product. That was a free game in the first place, but since it was a huge download it didn't REALLY blow up until someone could walk into a store and buy it at retail. Broadband is spreading but its just not there yet. Is a couple thousand units sold enough to justify making a top quality game in the first place? Enemy Territory was recently released and even at the delicious price of 0 it only has less than 8000 users online at a time. Assuming TEN times that many have downloaded it, that is eighty thousand units. 80k units at $50 each (yeah right for an online buy) = 4 Large. Blizzard (chosen because I could easily find the info) has about 150 employees. The sales from that game would earn each employee an average of 27k per year. For exactly one year. They definitely need a larger base than that, even given the well rounded up and generous numbers.
Then there is the physical product itself. There are so many questions there. Sure, I can make a backup copy once it is downloaded, but what if there is a problem with the download? Can I download it again for free? Do I have to buy it again because there was connection trouble. Don't have to worry about that if I walk into Best Buy. If the CD is defective they will exchange it for the same title. No thanks, I'll take the box, jewel case, and paper manual any day.
Don't even think about publishers going away just yet. Wallstreet analysts will be the first to correctly predict that one.
Hmmm, indeed.
ET was released by Activision. They just seem to be so generous lately.
Just make sure to give credit where credit is due.
I don't know if you are guessing about the Xbox Live thing, but from what I hear you are right.
EA and M$ battled it out to see if 1. EA could charge like this (they can since PSO does) and 2. Shut down one year's game when the next year's came out. MS said no to 2.
Holy crap, MS fighting for the consumer! 5th sign of the apocalypse.
It is true you must remove the battery, but some information came across my ear (this happens to me with lots of game related information) that the single cart will hold MANY games. The number was >20, but that is not final. Do you have 20 GBA games? In case you didn't see my other post, a game for this thing is going to be full fledged PS1 games. Like THPS1. The real thing, not the scaled back, isometric version on GBA. Music, 3D, and all.
Actually, only people who are still noobish think it is unbalanced. Once you understand the game, you thoughts might change. Or not. But either way, its the 3rd most popular online game at any given time, so despite your negativity, it seems to me they got alot right.
And just to demonstrate how absolutely wrong you are... I just confirmed with a NGC man that PSO for the Gamecube has also release added content, therefore it is possible to patch games on that console as well. Counter-terrorists win.
Flamebait? Both PS2 (yes to a MC) and XBOX games have already been patched. Just because you don't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist. In fact, acknowledging you don't know about them is really acknowledging that you are unqualified to post in the matter. And if I say you have a Gamecube you should take that as an insult. ;)
I fail to see how this post is insightful. So because someone sometime somewhere did something wrong, that means nothing is ever wrong? Because people will continue to get away with murder and rape we should consider it ok to murder and rape? You need a little something called perspective. Stealing is wrong. Speeding is wrong. Murder is wrong. They hurt people in different amounts, but yes they are all wrong. I think its cute that you can spew some basic philosophy 101 crap back in the thread and get modded up. We all have to make personal choices and live with them. Some people steal, some people speed, and some people kill, but they are still wrong for doing it and that does not in any way blur right from wrong. Could someone point out the insightful part of his post? Especially the insult about the pizza. You know thats pizza for their families, and clothes, and shelter. They don't do this as a hobby; its their lives. In case you are too dense to pick up on it...nowhere here did I try to defend my driving practices (though you ASSume alot, such as that I even have a car). The point is that right and wrong exists outside the individual.
Too bad you can't retract your entire statement. Console games can and have been patched. It is 2003 you know.
You should keep up better with current events then. I will leave the discovery of the numerous titles that have been patched and that some even receive free added content as and exercise for the reader. You can take your foot out of your mouth and admit you were wrong now.
Um, those are very simple games you name. Simple in terms of difficulty and simple in terms of design. Not that that is a bad thing necessarily, but there just isn't that much to do in those games. Why do you say they are "quite complex" then qualify it to say they are not complex?
If you don't believe that all Nintendo games are simple games, why did they make the controller have one main giant button? Again, not that simplicity is bad, but those are poor examples of complex games.
I don't happen to like Enter the Matrix, but the number of different things to do or that can happen at any given moment is gi-normous when compared to any Nintendo game.
Also, I have found bugs in those games. I am afraid of posting negative things about Nintendo because this guy Nintendoctor mods me down everytime I do. Suffice to say that the bugs exist, you just choose to let them slide because you like the game.
Well you can't actually take the car back because it has a defect. If a major defect is discovered, then a recall is issued. Wow, that sounds alot like a patch. Thanks for proving MY point. There is no justification for stealing. It is just wrong.
You didn't want to mention getting too many lives using the turtle shell exploit then dying results in a crash?
100% repeatable and with no saving, thats just brutal.
This is not insightful, I'd prefer to mod it naive. The complexity of modern games means there will be some bugs. Everyone here has been saying how great Blizzard is for waiting to release, but have any of their products not required a patch? I think they all have. Didn't Diablo II have a huge problem when it came out that had the potential to burn up a user's CD-ROM? I can quickly browse the Blizzard support pages and find lots of wonderful bugs that the game was shipped with including crashes, progression blocks, etc. There is one right now that states if your character dies while holding a throwing potion, the character file can become corrupted! Oh perfect Blizzard, we don't care because we follow you like sheep. What short and selective memories we have here! In the particular cases of the games mentioned in the article, yes the movie deadline played a big role, but to think that postponing a game until all the "bugs" (which many times are features the user just doesn't understand) are worked out is a good idea or even possible, is naive.
Because someone obviously feels that theft is right. Nothing justifies stealing. Noone ever decided to start stealing software because of a bug. It may make someone not buy that companies products in the future, but not buying and stealing are quite different.
That flamebait is just someone fulfilling an agenda and should be removed.