Stolen Idea

I can't speak directly to the policies of the Game Design Showdown, but I do facilitate the Game Design Workshop here, and I imagine the policies are similar. In the GDW, you're putting your game up in public view at your own risk. There is no guarantee that someone won't steal your design, and no special protection of your intellectual property that's guaranteed. The good news is that on a site of designers, everyone has plenty of their own ideas and doesn't need to steal from someone else. Of course, if you're uncomfortable with the risk, simply refrain from participating.

I'm not aware of a context in which this kind of transaction takes place. I don't think there is such a thing as a "game developer" per se. Generally, game designers develop their own games (where development means the process of taking a rough game idea and turning it into a working, publishable game). After that, designers may submit to a publisher, but no money changes hands. If the publisher wants to publish the game, they will offer the designer a contract. If they don't, they'll return the game. There aren't any cases that I'm aware of where a reputable publisher stole a design from a designer. Really, there's no reason for them to do so; if they like an idea, they'll pay for it. They have no shortage of great submissions, so stealing yours is not only poor business sense in a variety of ways, it's completely unnecessary. Moreover, it's very hard to even get your game looked at by a publisher in the first place, so there's pretty little risk of theft happening.

Obviously, do whatever you're comfortable with, but really, if you're new to the hobby, then I recommend focusing on learning how to design great games. Worrying about theft won't make you a better designer, but it may make you a worse one. I say that because it's just not possible to create a great game without talking to other people about it; at a minimum, you need playtesters to play your game. So being overly paranoid will only hinder your game's development.

That's how I see things, anyway. Best of luck.

-Jeff

I agree with Jeff!

The publishers arent in the business to steal ideas!
Check out their websites, they adress this issue and they take it seriously

I wouldnt worry!

I wouldnt give away the ideas, rulebook to everyone i meet though!

Good luck

The problem is the other way around. No publisher/designer wants to be accused of stealing games. The rumour will spread fast over internet and have a bad impact on the company.
Some do variants on games that are a hit will always be presented (for example, the number of Quiz games that showed up after Trivial...).
I have not heard of any pirate copying of games yet (not that much money involved).
The only example I know about is the persons that claims to have developed Monopoly (and that is nearly 100 years ago).

// Johan

The responses to this topic, was very informative to me, and I'm sure it is to a lot of people.
It should be stickied, or put in an FAQ.

I really did learn a lot about stealing and why I shouldn't be scared after reading this topic. :)

Zaiga -

I always get a chip on my shoulder (quite huge) when someone spouts that ideas are a dime a dozen.

Yeah, some ideas are. Others aren't.

Magic: TG wasn't. D&D wasn't. And, yes, ideas of this magnitude could make you millions. Granted, the vast majority aren't that innovative... but that's what makes us all different.

One should make money for the love of the game design and the love of games. No disagreement there.

As far as 50 cents on the $20 game goes though, you are getting hosed. That's 2.5 % of gross. One should rationally expect 10% - 15% of net which shouldn't come out to $.50/game unless you are dealing with a company lacking business sense. Atlas Games quoted 10% at GenCon last year at a seminar... the previous year Hasbro (not necessarily a subdivision thereof) said a toy will get 10-15% depending on factors, but that they expected a huge release because they are Hasbro.

Understandably, people produce the same old crap and call it original without being original.... this is why these companies are taking fewer pitches. The smart ones will still keep their ears open for the next Magic, but some are just being business saavy and sticking to a smart pattern (Fantasy Flight seems to be doing just fine without taking submissions). Their business models work and they aren't rolling the dice of a new person entering a risky venture into their plans or opening themselves for potential "THEY STOLE MY IDEA" lawsuits.

Both work as long as the company makes money and both are admirable in their own way.

I just can't stand it when the "haters" come out to play. Back off my new paradigm, Jackson.

What you have to understand is that zaiga's remarks aren't so much negativity as realism, or at least, the conventional wisdom of this site. The consensus opinion around here is that "no one wants to steal your idea" and "you're almost certainly not going to get rich designing game". You have to keep in mind the context to which zaiga's post was responding. Many new designers come in here saying, basically, this: "I have the best idea for a new game; how do I keep it from getting stolen, and how do I make money off of it?" Most are hyper-secretive about the design and most are shocked to learn that a few thousand dollars is a pretty good success.

I'll go one further. Every single first-design I've ever learned about, including my own, has not really been that great; certainly not great enough to spawn a whole new genre like Magic or D&D. Is it possible that some first time designer really does have that greatest idea ever, and really is going to get rich off of it? Of course. But experience suggests that it is extremely improbable, and in general, it seems that being hyper-secretive and money-hungry are counter-productive to designing great games and to succeeding as a game designer, so we encourage new designers to become more open and to design for the love of games. Making these changes in one's attitude probably won't hurt one's chances of making money, but they will make one's time spent designing a whole lot more fun and rewarding!

-Jeff

I thought you were referring to Steve Jackson stealing your ideas. :)

No kidding!

FastLearner and Jwarrend have already adressed most of the points, but there's one thing I wanted to add...

You see, this is exactly the point. You can have a great idea, but it's worth nothing if you don't do anything with it. What if Richard Garfield would have thought at some point: "Nice idea, but I don't have the time to come up with 300+ cards, let alone test them all in different combinations". What if Chris Haney and Scott Abott, of Trivial Pursuit fame, would have thought at some point: "Nice idea, but, man, coming up with all these questions and researching them costs a lot of time! Let's play Scrabble instead".

An idea for a game is worthless if you are not prepared to put in the time and effort and, sometimes, money to turn the idea into a complete, functional and fun game. That is why ideas are a dime a dozen. A great, working, fun game, however, is a rare and precious possession.

Game on.

Wow!

Look - got no probs with anybody. I encourage all people to make their games.

Some things require more than time. They require money. Some may be willing to sacrifice the wife and 3 kids futures to pursue a game design. Some aren't.

Paradigm shifts can be even huger costs. If your average CCG is now $100,000+, what will the new paradigm cost? Ideas are a dime a dozen? An insult at the very least. Richard Garfield should have given 11 more ideas for a dime, right?

I guess we can agree to disagree. If you can create the next paradigm, then you can say they are a dime a dozen. I mean there are alot of games that sell well that aren't that great. I hated every early Eagle Game because they never heard the word playtest. Yet I heard people like them because they basically filled the void of post Axis & Allies war board games. The bling of creating many plastic pieces eludes me.

Just trust me when I say I will not stop working on my designs and I will do due dilligence to get them to market. Sometimes things require more than money and time to be made, and some of us do not have a design team. ;)

I like well thought out games as much as the next man, but I am eager to see the new paradigm shifts because they will bring more people to the hobby so we all have more people to play those well thought out games.

Zaiga - I would love to play any game you put out there. Nothing personal on the idea disagreement. If you have something out there, let me know.

Shellhead - You are my favorite hero.... but I think that many are hungry for paradigms NOW that they have seen what Magic has wrought. I'm just not very trusting as a person. Got any games I can check out?

Willi,

Can I interject that I think you are misinterpreting the message that's being conveyed here?

Paradigm shifts can be even huger costs. If your average CCG is now $100,000+, what will the new paradigm cost? Ideas are a dime a dozen? An insult at the very least. Richard Garfield should have given 11 more ideas for a dime, right?

I don't see why you consider this an insult. Ideas *are* a dime a dozen. As Rene stated, it's what you *do* with those ideas that make the difference. And for the record, no one is implying that you *won't* do anything with the ideas, or that you won't be successful.

We are talking about games here right? I love games as much as the next guy, but they are *just* games. I don't think using confusing buzzwords like paradigm shift actually aid in conveying the message you're trying to get across.

I like well thought out games as much as the next man, but I am eager to see the new paradigm shifts because they will bring more people to the hobby so we all have more people to play those well thought out games.

Your passion is commendable, but please don't let it cloud your judgement as to the actual intentions of the people of this community. Most, if not all of us, are here to lift each other up and promote the hobby.

We all love to brag that Zaiga recently had his game Gheos picked up to be published by Z-man games. So you be able to play it within the year I believe!

-Darke

If I may tweak your clarification a bit...game ideas may not have intrinsic financial value, but they certainly have intrinsic aesthetic value to some. And all the money in the world won't buy inspiration.

Again, I just don't like the term 'dime a dozen'.

If you think it is still true, give me your 12 best game ideas and the complete and exclusive rights thereto and I will give you ten pennies....

see, not all that quick now are ya? Comedians pay for jokes, and, at this rate, I'll pay every designer on this site.

Ideas, whether acted upon or not, are valuable because they will help you shape other ideas, if for no other reason.

If I told you my two best games came from looking at a pile of cards and people arguing, would it mean anything... no. But the idea of the game holds tremendous value. If I simply gave the idea to a company they could make the game from the idea.

Let me give you an example. A patent is an idea made ownable, correct? Hasbro paid the owner of Dragon War for the rights to his patent. They aren't using the game. Just the idea. And he got more than a dime. Thousands more, I'm sure.

Value your ideas, paradigm or no. If they are paradigm shifting or look to have multiple uses, I would consider patenting them. Otherwise, just make the game and pat yourself on the back for being clever.

Congrats, Shellhead!

I love a success story!

I look forward to checking it out. Ditto on Gheos, Zaiga.

Okay. I think we said the same things in different ways.

The ownership of an idea has value. Or maybe not.

I understand that this is a 95% respectable industry where nothing like this occurs (theft of idea). And, yes, without the elbow grease it doesn't take shape.

However, I would suggest that we all look at the industry of reality TV. Two shows about amateur boxing came out... one got the drop on the other and hurt the market of the other. It was claimed that the earlier show stole the idea of the other show. However, there were no patents and no legal recourse.

While I cannot site such examples in our industry, I would say that such prudence is sometimes needed.

I can only once more point to the concepts patented in Dragon War. Again, no plans to use any part of the game beyond the patented mechanic in that game. Hasbro hasn't used the idea yet. If I were Hasbro, I would be very much engaged in the practice of seeking out unique and usable patents and trying to obtain the rights thereto. It really allows one more flexability in game design. Plus, they have the power to enforce such rights.

So, to sum up where I stand on this issue:

1) A completed game has value.
2) Ownership of a thought has value.
3) A mere thought doesn't.
4) I do not think anyone needs to worry about their idea being stolen in the hobby 99.99% of the time.
5) If you think it is an idea that could have wide application and/or is the next BIG thing, patent it.

Maybe, maybe not. Patenting isn't cheap and it isn't guaranteed to work, either. We looked into patenting some of the mechanics of Battleground and ultimately decided not to, in part because the cost was large and in part because we were only confident of success for a fairly narrow patent that would not have prevented someone from making a competitive product.

IMO you're usually better off just trying to be first with a novel idea rather than trying to protect yourself via patents. The patent route may increase your returns on a home run, but it may also reduce the chances of hitting one.