I’m a long time fan of Don’t Starve Together and this news is just disappointing. What frustrates me most, though, is that China is able to operate here in the US independently whereas it’s much more likely it won’t be reciprocated.
True. I am a game developer in China. I can't afford those paperwork, both in terms of money and energy. I intend to publish my game in Western countries.
> There is no reciprocity with China on the game market.
True. Besides, china also has cheap labour in gaming industry, where employees are expected to work many hours.
I am guessing things did not change much since then.
It baffles me sometimes that while gaming industry is booming, create massive opportunities and tax revenue, and it is no way threatening the communist ideology, the government still treats it like a step child, shitting on it whenever it can.
Not mentioning the gaming ideology is naturally free and liberalism oriented. There were patriotic games commissioned by government, and have been very awkward. Totalitarian nation's government generally tolerate very little about ideologically different median or mass influence tools.
I bought a switch for my son, but I try to keep him away from mobile games, especially those advertise in apps.
If what you care about is to have your population be as productive as possible, you want to produce just enough of these entertainment avenues domestically as would be sustainable and not leading to large scale distraction, while still mainly exporting the product that has no such restraints.
I think that's actually the challenge at hand for China, and it's not unique to the country. Korea, Japan, and many others face the same issues while having different tools to deal with the phenomenon.
- Old Parents hate game. And old parents usually control the policy making and media.
- Rent Seeking. As many policies in China, no clear rule in terms of game regulation. You want to pass it? Money helps. Those who make such rules don't care about taxes loses. Different department, different incentives.
It's also a question you should ask whenever someone demands "reciprocity" by banning Chinese company X from Western markets because Western company Y is banned from China. If you ask "if Y were a Chinese company, would they be banned, too?" the answer is usually yes.
Google Search and Facebook aren't banned because of where they're from, but because of what they do, i.e. offering access to information the Chinese government wants censored. A Chinese company offering access to censored information would be shut down long before they got big enough to make international news.
There's no need for "reciprocity" by putting more severe restrictions on Chinese companies. Applying the same rules to everyone would be enough. (Requiring all companies listed on US stock exchanges to be audited by the SEC is an example of a step in that direction.)
There is no single word for reciprocity in Chinese. You can make do with phrases like "mutual benefit".
对等 duì deng: equal status/treatment, parity (under the law), equity, reciprocity
在对等的基础上 Zài duì děng de jīchǔ shàng on the basis of reciprocity; on a reciprocal basis
Source: plecodict
Could you help shedding light on how this myth spreads? Like, where did you read about this myth? I have seen it mentioned on HN/Reddit multiple times and can't find the source.
Generally if you want to publish in China I'd say either "don't" and just release a Chinese localization in global stores, if you think that you will have a target audience in China, or find a huge publisher that will help you out.
Not yet. Despite various sources saying it is "near", the separate "instance" has not been up for now.
The main Steam store works in China for the past few years, and it's what everyone uses. Yes, I mean I can buy a copy of Devotion on Steam with Alipay (or Wechat Pay) + RMB, download and play it without messing with anything. I have no idea why it hasn't been banned though.
The Steam Community pages did get GFW-ed, just as every other sites hosting UGC without censorship[1].
[1]: If it is not, it's usually just a "Five demands not one less" away from being banned. Even scratch.mit.edu.
What makes it disappointing? Do you mean Tencent will mess up the quality of the game, etc?
After they bought League of Legends, they "updated" several dozen paid skins, some worth significant money apparently without communicating to Riot Games (the company directly in control of LoL, or rather the one who once was) or the player base. The quality of the update was mediocre to laughable.
Reversion/Fixing took month and there was never any apology IIRC.
Also, putting money into an indie game dev vs. putting money into a CRP-controled conglomerate which is silently buying more and more media may or may not be a morally different endeavor for someone.
Also, what is CRP?
The move to open up their markets, and to allow majority-foreign ownership, began way before the trade war. It was already ongoing in 2014: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-25647808
China signed a major investment deal with the EU last month. China made major concessions. Unlike Trump, who with his "tough on China" tactics only managed to antagonize China and didn't get a proper trade deal, the EU got the sort of concessions that Trump was after, by being properly diplomatic.
This is the problem with the US attitude of treating China as an enemy. I also have no idea where all the "engaging with China is a failed strategy" and crowd comes from: the EU literally showed you that engagement works better than antagonization and coercion! Facts literally show you that China was already opening up before Trump!
Also, a cynical take. If Tesla has something worth copying, it might be easier as well.
Allowing majority foreign ownershipnis a process that has been ongoing for years. Every year, more parts of the Chinese economy open up.
It might even be profitable in the longer run as long as the brand image holds like it has been for Apple.