About the Explanation of Development Authorization for Star Keeper Branch Version

[Tulpa | 3,488]

Gloves speaks my mind.

In fact, I'm just going to subcontract him for every post from now on.

[zxdplay | 149]

18 minutes ago, Gloves said:

I can tell you with full confidence that people simply want to play the original Star Keeper game, one way or another. It may be exciting and appealing to make continuations, work on new stuff, etc., but what people already want is to play the game you already made.

It's a legit shame that doesn't seem to be something you're currently entertaining, and I personally would have no interest in playing sequels, off-shoots, or anything else in the "universe" without having access to that original experience.

I know， I've been working towards this, it's just that I've chosen a different route

I mean, I want more games to come out
If the NFT authorization is successful, I will get enough funds to support me to complete the development of the next game

Edited March 1, 2023 by zxdplay

[Rudybegga | 48]

20 hours ago, a3quit4s said:

Oddly enough it started out as I don’t want to do anything with the original game and just sell some weird NFT for whoever to create a new game based on the story and character. It like transitioned into talking re-release and weird NFT sales. I don’t get the impression that OP is interested in making anymore games which I get and it’s cool he wants to pass the torch. I get that Star Keeper is popular among us and the homebrew crowd but what does that really translate into sales numbers for someone investing in the IP and development time?

Its sure fun to talk about though and neatly different than the usual topics. 
 

@matthughson - would you be willing to let us know how many copies of witch n wiz sold through LRG? I’m generally curious what sort of sales numbers a NES homebrew can pull with LRG weight behind it. 

I bought a regular and limited edition copy, so there's that.

[a3quit4s | 4,091]

8 minutes ago, zxdplay said:

I know， I've been working towards this, it's just that I've chosen a different route

So, just to summarize, at this point you have no intention of re-releasing the original Star Keeper through any media and you are solely looking to authorize third parties to create new media based of the Star Keeper “brand” using NFTs which doesn’t grant the third parties any access to code or resources of the original game?

Just making sure I understand is all. Of course this can all change but is this a good summary of where you are at in this moment. 

[zxdplay | 149]

3 minutes ago, a3quit4s said:

So, just to summarize, at this point you have no intention of re-releasing the original Star Keeper through any media and you are solely looking to authorize third parties to create new media based of the Star Keeper “brand” using NFTs which doesn’t grant the third parties any access to code or resources of the original game?

Just making sure I understand is all. Of course this can all change but is this a good summary of where you are at in this moment. 

4. Ownership
You acknowledge and agree that 87Arts (or, as applicable, its licensors) owns all legal rights,
title, and interest in and to the Mainline Game（Star Keeper） , and all intellectual property
rights therein.
The rights that you have in and to the Branch Game are limited to those expressly described in
Section 2 of this Agreement. 87Arts (on behalf of itself and, as applicable, its licensors)
reserves all other rights in and to the Mainline Game, including all copyrights in and to the
Mainline Game (e.g., the right to prepare derivative works, to reproduce and make copies, to
distribute, sell, or transfer, to display, to perform, and to publicly display and publicly
perform).

[zxdplay | 149]

 For more details about authorization, please refer to the Commercial license for Star Keeper's Branch Game

https://arseed.web3infra.dev/FSVutr6wZSGnP-DMn6pbi9T3QfOMpuzJF1iQR0E8lnI

[Rudybegga | 48]

I feel like the growth of an IP shouldn't be hidden behind a trend.  I don't see how growth can happen by restricting content to a platform that people won't be able to access or want to jump through the hoops to figure out.

It seems like if you were to want it to be as big as possible, you should figure out how to get this game into the hands of as many people as possible.  I don't see NFTs being the solution, but that's just the opinion of a drying out crusty old fogey like myself.

[Link | 2,708]

11 minutes ago, zxdplay said:

 For more details about authorization, please refer to the Commercial license for Star Keeper's Branch Game

https://arseed.web3infra.dev/FSVutr6wZSGnP-DMn6pbi9T3QfOMpuzJF1iQR0E8lnI

I hope my questions below are taken as respectful and friendly constructive criticism, testing your idea. Please advise if I misunderstand your idea in any way.

From your description in earlier replies and reiterated by the document, my understanding is that you want to sell rights to create games that take place in the Star Keeper universe or involve Star Keeper characters.

Has anyone ever expressed interest in creating SK-related or SK-inspired games before? Who do you hope to sell such a license to or who would you expect to participate in this? 

And these games by others are to be spinoffs. That is, they are not in the main series. It would be similar to allowing another programmer or company to make up and create Super Mario Strikers games (branch games), while only you are allowed to make further Super Mario Bros. games (mainline series). You are offering franchises, but the partners have to create their own menu. 

Do you have any signs that anyone is interested in that, beyond the initial question of paying to use your created universe in any fashion? What considerations would you have about letting another party create a direct sequel? 

Do you have a direct sequel seriously planned that you can continue work on when you obtain funds through this scheme you have created involving the NFT-as-contract? 

 

[a3quit4s | 4,091]

36 minutes ago, zxdplay said:

4. Ownership
You acknowledge and agree that 87Arts (or, as applicable, its licensors) owns all legal rights,
title, and interest in and to the Mainline Game（Star Keeper） , and all intellectual property
rights therein.
The rights that you have in and to the Branch Game are limited to those expressly described in
Section 2 of this Agreement. 87Arts (on behalf of itself and, as applicable, its licensors)
reserves all other rights in and to the Mainline Game, including all copyrights in and to the
Mainline Game (e.g., the right to prepare derivative works, to reproduce and make copies, to
distribute, sell, or transfer, to display, to perform, and to publicly display and publicly
perform).

 Right no of course you retain ownership of the original and can do with it what you wish, but currently you have no intention of doing anything with it is what I am asking, which mostly stems from technical issues that would arise during the process 

Edited March 1, 2023 by a3quit4s

[zxdplay | 149]

Tomorrow to answer your questions, I fell asleep

[Tulpa | 3,488]

39 minutes ago, zxdplay said:

 For more details about authorization, please refer to the Commercial license for Star Keeper's Branch Game

https://arseed.web3infra.dev/FSVutr6wZSGnP-DMn6pbi9T3QfOMpuzJF1iQR0E8lnI

So to the developers here, would this license appeal to you?

[a3quit4s | 4,091]

23 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

So to the developers here, would this license appeal to you?

Is it just me or do NFT owners not actually own the branch games? In fact I can’t find anywhere specifying the owner of the nft as the owner of the branch game they create

Edited March 1, 2023 by a3quit4s

[Brickman | 3,978]

This is going to sound harsh but I think you really overestimate how much you think people want your Star Keeper IP. It’s literally a niche within a niche. The amount of people that know about this game is minimal.

People want to play the original game not buy Star Keeper RPG spin-off or Star Keeper Baseball edition. 

How much is the NFT?

[Gloves | 11,759]

1 hour ago, a3quit4s said:

Is it just me or do NFT owners not actually own the branch games? In fact I can’t find anywhere specifying the owner of the nft as the owner of the branch game they create

The NFT actually does nothing at all, the contract OP has written up which is not part of the NFT contains all of the rules of engagement, which itself is mutable and while perhaps legally binding, is not tied in any meaningful way to the NFTs proper (i.e. no smart contract in place or anything to speak of insofar as I can tell). 

The NFTs themselves are functionally JPG images which OP pinky promises gives you the "right" to make games in the universe of Star Keeper, a property for which they may or may not ACTUALLY hold any ACTUAL rights for. If OP is in China the laws there, while more and more resembling those of other nations, don't necessarily align 1:1 with those in the West. If I make a video game today called "Doug's Cool Quest", then I instantly own that property as a matter of simply having created it. I am not a lawyer, certainly not a Chinese lawyer, but their laws may not grant immediate copyright to IP in the same way as is done here.

Anyone "buying" these NFTs and/or entering into a contract with someone in a different nation would be well-advised to bring a lawyer with international experience into the mix to ensure that everything is copasetic.

[Tulpa | 3,488]

Thanks, Gloves. From my initial reading, the contract seemed heavily slanted in the OP's favor.

[Gloves | 11,759]

Something I'm not sure if the OP understands either is that the NFTs are themselves easily transferrable, and the 10% royalties built into the platform they're using doesn't mean they'll always get 10% of each transfer sale. There are ways to bypass that feature by passing the NFT to other systems and back and forth and all over. Further, if the contract isn't tied to the NFT itself, there are implications with regard to the written contract and its validity. There are so many legal issues that crypto enthusiasts like to just gloss over which makes this system incredibly unappealing.

You can also see everything that's happened within the collection and it's interesting to see these NFTs going through many iterations: 87Arts Star Keeper NFT - Collection | MintGarden

OP has minted and then burned multiple iterations of these NFTs over the past few days. That's not to say there's anything malicious happening, but it's a noteworthy happenstance - OP is clearly learning as they go as they did with the original creation of Star Keeper. Learning and trying new things is always commendable, but I honestly am not convinced that NFTs for "authorization" with the method being used here is an entirely valid approach. OP has used NFTs to represent authorization, while sticking to a traditional contract in written form with restrictions and caveats etc. all written down, and seems to be assuming that purchase or trade of one of the NFTs is itself legally binding a person to that contract (a'la "by using this site you agree to blah blah blah"), but the NFT itself contains no information whatsoever with regard to that legal tie.

It's all tenuous at best if I'm being totally honest.

Again, OP - do what you want, I wish you nothing but the best, but all people want is to play that original game. I'll eat my hat if anything at all comes from the approach being shown here, and if anything it's just kinda sad to me - people just want to enjoy the game you made, not some other iteration from someone else. And this thread may have gotten some hopes up that that will ever happen.

I'll reiterate as others have said - we (VGS) would be very happy to help you with making new editions of the original game. We have a partnership with Mega Cat Studios for doing exactly that - we'd handle everything and all you'd need to do really is to provide some direction with relation to the manufacturing process. We'd at the least be very willing to explore assisting to bring the game to people, it's our biggest passion to bring gaming to the community, and it would be a shame in my opinion not to share the game with as many people as possible.

[Khromak | 768]

I am not a lawyer either, but I've watched some YouTube videos by lawyers talking about NFTs, contracts, etc. and there are a LOT of legal problems with trying to enforce contracts on someone who bought/sold an NFT, not the least of which being that the secondary buyers are hard/impossible to hold to the terms of the contract, since they just bought a thing, and have absolutely no connection to the original seller of the NFT. If this thing goes through 100 people's hands, are they all going to read the contract and abide by the rules of it?

Even if everyone agrees to and follows the terms of the contract, the NFT has essentially done nothing to help with that process. Nobody signed anything, and it's highly unlikely they're legally responsible for doing anything by virtue of having purchased an NFT. This applies to both parties.

Add on to that all the problems I and others have mentioned, essentially boiling down to "nobody wants to play a Star Keeper universe game, they want to play the original, or another work by the original creator" and you have a real mess of a project here.

OP, I would strongly suggest you take the advice of people on this forum, it is really sound advice coming from a good place. If you need money, there are dozens/hundreds of people willing to give it to you, both for your original work and also for ANY project you create from here going forward. I'd be willing to bet a very large audience of people would be willing to pre-pay for a sequel or another game you create, there are people who would love to pre-pay for another run of original Star Keeper cartridges, and there are tons of companies willing to help you with the logistics of doing it yourself, if you'd like to.

Please consider one of these options, it would make a lot of people very happy and would certainly be profitable for you, and not nearly as much work as you think. I know I, for one, would love to support any new game you create or any release of Star Keeper you are involved with. I will not, however, have anything to do with supporting a licensing deal for someone else to create games with your IP. Nothing against you or the IP, I just don't think that's where the value of your original game comes from.

[Tanooki | 4,929]

3 hours ago, zxdplay said:

Yes, it is difficult to pirate, but if I give away the production method, it's hard to say.

I know this is my own selfish interests but also I am clearly not alone.

Yes.

 

Why?  Because it looks from playthrough on youtube to be a genuinely fun game and really worth playing which few homebrew sadly are.  Your game looks not only good, but smooth.  It does not appear to have some common problems many homebrew games have that make them annoying and feel like they are poor efforts.  I don't like homebrew mostly because of this.  I do like aftermarket games where clear solid well though out effort and design is put together to make a fantastic experience that doesn't feel poorly executed.  Starkeeper fits this.  KHAN Games titles feel this way.  Jim Power on the NES/FC also feels this way.  You have a game in a small group of good commercial quality releases made way after the NES was canceled for newer systems.

 

If you're willing to let a helpful person manufacture the carts letting them know your special process to handle the differences current pirate cart makers can not do it would be fantastic.

Remember my other posts?  Both I said you have a choice to make some money and make people happy at the same time without angering the original collectors.  Change the game slightly, or since it's guarded on the PCB, change the plastic shell, sticker, box and manual a bit so it's known as a second run.  Then someone like me can buy a game, or a complete game, enjoy it, and not tick off the investors with the original that's worth hundreds of dollars or more now.

Also a bonus, doing this, it's free advertising for your NFT.  You can sell the game, sell the game in a bundle with the NFT, or sell it in other bundles yet maybe with a book, poster, something.

[a3quit4s | 4,091]

I’m super happy that 87arts stopped by because he is a fucking legitimate legend, but super unhappy about his reasoning to do so. Make a new game or re-release the old one or just come by to reminisce and chat with us about the good ole days and what have you been up to for the last 10 years.
 

Don’t come by acting like the good guy slinging NFTs that are BS to re-monetize and tarnish the legacy of a great game. 
 

Im sorry if this is rude but f*ck

[Scrobins | 1,718]

My attitude is this: I like your game, I have your game, I am pro-other people being able to play, but this NFT idea sounds like you want to collect money without doing anything.

Your game is popular because it is well-executed and the story behind why it is rare is interesting. The story within the game however is not particularly innovative and the only reason anyone would license it would be to capitalize on the mystique behind your development and the game’s rarity, and that doesn’t interest me at all.

I am pro homebrew games, anti NFT, and anti opportunism because I would not be interested in other people effectively hacking the game to make their own Star Keeper clone. And as an attorney, nothing about your approach to NFTs or the contract sounds like something that would be appealing to a licensee.

[RetroX85 | 64]

@zxdplay Do what you please. I agree with many members on this forum. I know we can't convince you to not go the NFT route and we all enjoyed the great game you originally made. Your decision is yours and we respect that. Just know we care about the choice you make with Star Keeper.  And it is nice to see you back again!  We thought we lost you! haha

[fcgamer | 4,719]

8 hours ago, RegularGuyGamer said:

While it is possible, the community that buys homebrew game is not interested in buying pirate homebrews. Our interest is in supporting the developer and publisher of original material. 

I would go out of my way to not buy a pirate and publicly or personally call that person out for their wrongdoings.

Someone bought several of my games just to pirate, and one was a title I had only sold about five of.

A lot of homebrew collectors won't pirate, but there's definitely many who will. Even a quick look on AliExpress shows that.

[fcgamer | 4,719]

8 hours ago, Gloves said:

I can tell you with full confidence that people simply want to play the original Star Keeper game, one way or another. It may be exciting and appealing to make continuations, work on new stuff, etc., but what people already want is to play the game you already made.

It's a legit shame that doesn't seem to be something you're currently entertaining, and I personally would have no interest in playing sequels, off-shoots, or anything else in the "universe" without having access to that original experience.

Sorry man, gotta strongly disagree here. To say that you aren't interested in playing other (potentially kick ass) games just because you can't play the original just sounds extremely entitled. 

[fcgamer | 4,719]

5 hours ago, Gloves said:

I'll reiterate as others have said - we (VGS) would be very happy to help you with making new editions of the original game. We have a partnership with Mega Cat Studios for doing exactly that - we'd handle everything and all you'd need to do really is to provide some direction with relation to the manufacturing process. We'd at the least be very willing to explore assisting to bring the game to people, it's our biggest passion to bring gaming to the community, and it would be a shame in my opinion not to share the game with as many people as possible.

Does this offer extend to all developers here at VGS? 

On a different note, I personally am finding the ntf concept interesting, as I'd personally like to have a few of my own IPs expanded upon.

[Scrobins | 1,718]

12 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

Does this offer extend to all developers here at VGS? 

Anyone is welcome to PM me to inquire, but I need to feel that the game (and the developer) is something we think people would be interested in and is something we are comfortable outwardly associating VGS with.