Do we need a new topic area for New Games and their designs?

Looking at the action from the Raving New table games area, I think we need a new topic area for this.

We can touch upon:
* Designing new games - the basic rules and objectives that make for better games
* Properly Naming your new beast (should be moderated by Eliot Jacobson !!!)
* The math Pros for your baby's math report - "The Big Five" (Shackleford, Ko, Jacobson, Mousseau and Liu. This cabal sounds like a law firm, but it's not!)
* The brainstorming process: how'd ya come up with it??!!
* The Patent Process nightmare! How to approach it, your options explained
* Getting investors - (is there one born every minute?)
* Preparing a good demo presentation without requiring valium.
* Preparing good documentation - writing the sale sheet, and the product description guide for casino usage
* Baby-sitting YOUR FIELD TRIAL
--- and ---
* The New games of 2008 to now:

- Bet Your Luck (BYL Enterprise)
- Three-Card-21 (Gaming Network)
- Wish-card Poker
- EZ Pai Gow (DEQ/Lubin-Jones, LLC)
- Rabbit Hunter 5-card Stud (Roger Snow/Shufflemaster)
- Hi-Low Pai Gow (Cary Lucier/Unlimited Concepts)
- Super-Bacc
- Moneysuit-31
- Two Cards High (This game has a REAL interesting story, and reveals the Dangers of a bad field trial!)
- FortuneTeller Blackjack
- Die Rich dice (or a die, actually)
- Pai Gow Express (Stanley Ko/Roy Ritner, 5-card Pai Gow with three card Poker down, and 2 cards up)

That is not a bad idea. Given the discussion about the Raving Table Games show, there seems to be sufficient interest in the topic. I'll ask JB to add a category.

Cool, Very Fine.
I think there'll be a lot of input, and a lot of industry guys would be trolling around, reviewing things and ideas. Sort of on on-going and on-line Raving table games conference.

There is a lot to this area in general terms that are completely safe to talk about, a la IP protection.

Would there be rules as to "specific brand-new game" postings?
I.e., Must be fleshed out, with a provisional or utility patent on file, or a math report, or a site? "Installs not necessary" but someone's ideas on new games should be protected before discussed.

And...constructive criticsm, yes - flaming NO!

If it becomes a portal for industry people to congregate and notice stuff that 'common folk' are working on, it sounds like a good idea. I.E. I'd love to have something that would attract movers and shakers to my www.hit-it-again-roulette.com website, or to the WoV Thread that discusses it.

For the record, I kinda think that there are currently too many sections and topics to the forum. I use a Recent Posts bookmark when I come here. The only time I ever look at the listing of sections and topics is when I create a new thread, so I file it in the right category.

But I voted 'Yes'.

Good for you voting yes.
I feel there should be a GO-TO PLACE just for this "New Game Design" area.

I would also... (pending the Wizard's input)

1. Put up an advisory notice: "If you came up with a SPECIFIC New Game idea that you wish to persue and discuss, you are advised to file a provisional or utility patent on your invention first, otherwise...don't give it away until you do this. Ideas are worth money - if they later come viable money-making games. You will need to pay your mathematicians and lawyers, etc. Now Link to www.USPTO.gov"

2. Otherwise, you can Review games without flaming, as factual criticism is valid. Inventors are hyper-sensitive about their creations...they're like their children. No ad hominen attax.

3. Topics like gaming math, choosing a distributor, reviews of New Game Field Trials, patent filing procedures, calculating a general game's house edge, what Casinos LOOK FOR in a new game, where to play a game, etc., are all fine and openly discussable. Also good is how to polish up your presentation, how to write product documentation, etc.

4. If your game is "IP protected" with a patent you are confident with, then you can discuss tweaking your game idea for house edge improvement, or its easy-of-play, simplification, or implimenting some change your distributor or customer wants. With all the game experience here, it could be a resource. But DON'T try to get a full math report for free (See the big Five, above).

I suggested that JB add a category titled "Game Inventors Corner" to the gambling section. If anyone has a better title, I'm all ears. I'm not big on lots of rules. Perhaps you can kick it off with a thread titled "advice for new game inventors."

On a separate note, I challenged PaiGowDan on his provisional patent advice at the show. While I'm not an attorney, I tend to favor splurging for a full blown patent. The reason is that if the provisional patent isn't written perfectly, then it won't hold up. It takes a good patent lawyer to write something that will hold water, and as long as you're splurging for that, you may as well pay the extra USPO fees, and go for the full patent. Here is a good article for more about it: Pitfalls of Provisional Patent Applications
By Jon H. Muskin.

Sounds Good!

And yes, I'd be happy to light the candle.

You are right, that ideally, the Utility patent is the way to go out of the gate. But Mike, the cost factor is Huge with a new game - and the additional $10K or so can mean the difference of a delay that allows another to get in the same idea first, and therfore having "no game," too.

IF money IS a problem (and it was for us starting out), then the provisional patent is the "necessary evil pill route" that we must take. It is perfectly acceptable, providing that (!!!):

1. it is written correctly, almost meticulously, in thoroughly describing the game idea.
2. It must be "enabable," that is, you can BUILD and OPERATE the game based on its description and instructions, using the patent as a viable blueprint.
3. You have formatted the document correctly, so that they can micro-fiche without failure.
4. THAT YOU HAVE ADDED CONDITIONS AND CLAIMS TO IT THAT CAN BLOCK OFF SOMEONE FROM COMING UP WITH A "VIABLE WORKAROUND" VERSION OF YOUR GAME - ALLOWING THEM TO WRITE OR CLONE A SEPARATE PATENT ON YOUR GAME IDEA, WHICH YOU HAVE NOT ANTICIPATED! (A "Self-limiting" patent error! Did you cover absolutely everything??!!)
5. You have included/filed all accompanying forms correctly.
6. You have received the filing number letter, - with the application number - indicating that your provisional patent application (PPA) has been accepted and filed.
7. And you now have one year to do the Utility patent anyway, essentially giving you one year to get about $10,000 to do the full utility patent.

The advantage is that you save $10,000 if you discover that you had a poor game idea that wasn't pursuable from the get go. I was begrungingly aware that - like all game inventors - that the real players might feel differently about my creation than how I see my own children. ("They're gorgeous" says their mother.) This was something I had to consider. Thankfully, the players really like it, and it gets big action with a solid table hold, with a dozen installs in six states. But I did not know this back then, when I had it up on only the design table.

Because it is SO HARD to write well, no less a patent, to do items 1..6 correctly is, for most people starting out, tricky on their first try. Even if they get accepted and filed, it might be semantically mis-written - that'll allow a competitor to write a similar patent on your game idea - to steal your game without infringing you. This is a BIG risk - a gamble that must be taken if we're broke.

The homework I had done in this area was actually the BULK of my game designing, and it also helped me to better understand the design end as a side effect. I had gotten good enough in writing patents that my lawyer okays this as a cost-effetive measure, even letting me draft the Utility patent, which he touches up/translates into legal language and format, - keeping the game description and "enabability" of it intact.

I ghost write game patents for my business partner (whose games are coming shortly). We would have had more games finished at this point - but not as well protected, and for a lot more money. It's a trade off. This is because the patent homework is necessary, to keep as intellectual property the good ideas you come up with.

While I would agree with the Wiz that a full-blown patent would be better, it's only better if the idea is good and is truly patentable.

Dan's points that a provisional allows the inventor to start talking publicly about it is key, but misses the most important points:

A provisional patent is written in more-or-less plain English, does not need a lawyer to be written, and costs only $110.

And that should be added to Dan's proposed Advisory Notice.

I don't think I could come up with a new casino game, but it's an interesting subject to read about. So I voted yes.

I'm a tad late to this party, but I'll vote yes too -- mostly because I've come up with several games over the years and have even gotten one of them on the floor. I'm very interested in a discussion with like-minded people.

The patent question is *very* difficult to answer succinctly. A great deal depends on context, like whether it's a felt table game, electronic device, slot game method, or something else entirely. I'm personally a named inventor on a dozen patents. The costs can be great, but the payoffs can be much greater. Patent strategy is a big part of game development, so I'll be glad to see a new games forum.