204A. Taking Responsibility for Burning the Gaming Industry to the Ground

Unlike the dozens of articles where I have correctly identified people or behaviors that would destroy AAA, here I turn my gaze inward and identify the stupid things I did that sped up the process.

Now that AAA is burning to the ground, perhaps even more spectacularly than in my various more dire predictions, I decided to take a month to meditate on the situation and determine what, if anything, I can do to make things better. That means less writing, but perhaps higher quality. My first reflections pointed to the elephant in the room that I either couldn’t see, or chose not to see:

That my attempts to avert the AAA meltdown likely accelerated it. I like to think that I am egoless, and do not suffer from self-interest. While I am capable of these traits, there were key moments where I was not operating from this lens. For the last 15 years I have written papers using various internal guidelines, such as:

1. Only publish the bottom 25% of what I know, so that I don’t make myself obsolete.

2. Write prediction papers to demonstrate that a science-based approach leads to reliable and reproducible results. If the science is understood we don’t have to waste time and resources with “shotgun” techniques or second guessing.

What was missing was a “Do no harm” objective.

Self Interest

You may have already identified that objective one has a distinct “self-interest” element. We live in a culture that glorifies self-interest, and makes it very difficult to avoid. I’ve been on the wrong end of self interest my whole life, so it has rubbed off on me. As an American, I know that if I don’t take care of myself, who will? Further, all of the main Western religions seem to selectively promote self-interest.

This is what really fascinated me with Buddhism, which I began officially learning about 5 years ago. Monks are required to NOT prepare their own food or even gather it. They are required to be completely dependent on the community they serve or they will die of starvation. This is an extreme but effective counter-solution to the self-interest paradox. If the community fails to support the monks, the teachings and religion itself will end. This was supposedly predicted to happen within 5000 years, or sooner if women were allowed to become monks. Which, in some cases, they are. This is very controversial.

From my observations, very few Buddhist follow the five basic precepts, so I think Buddhism is nearing its end. But the design solves many problems that I’m trying to find solutions for in the worlds that I create. This “need to feel needed” which is key to the human existence, and especially in social games, is fading away in default reality.

So I will hope you will understand why I had this self-interest. The one time I exceeded that 25% cap was when I published Supremacy Goods in 2012. I may not have published it if I hadn’t been captured and held hostage by UK authorities in Manchester earlier that year, after I agreed to help the UK with their game economics problems. They took that unpublished paper from me then flew me back (deported me) to the USA. Fearing that the paper would be misused, I published it soon after, perhaps the first paper I published at Gamasutra.

Supremacy Goods was accepted by AAA and led to the end of “Pay to Win” in mainstream Western gaming (with only a few holdouts). The “Battle Pass” games that came out the next year using the rules in that paper still capture 41% of player activity in the West over 12 years later. The three years from 2012 to 2015 were probably my most productive. So looking back, it didn’t hurt me to “over give” and go over that 25% cap. My giving was reciprocated without my asking for it or trying to compel it.

Do No Harm

I effectively and precisely detailed the collapse of AAA in two papers in 2017:

• Data Implosion where I explained that the misuse of data driven design, and a lack of understanding of data application itself, would cause a self-cannibalizing death spiral that was almost mathematically impossible to avoid.

• Force Wars where I predicted that the “winning” of anti consumer ideology in the AAA leadership club would cause gamers and regulators to organise against and reject AAA products. I also pointed out that because this was ideological, it would be almost impossible for leadership to change course.

There was nothing wrong with the accuracy or precision of these predictions. Either one would have taken out AAA. Combined, it was essentially certain. The only question was how many years could they cover up the decline before they tried to unload their companies on unsuspecting investors. The problem here wasn’t the truth of my papers.

The problem with those papers is that they backed the targets of those papers into a corner with no escape exit. Under those conditions, it was actually advantageous to ride their companies into the ground, as long as possible. I could have provided these groups with blueprints on how to escape their Fate, like I did with Supremacy Goods. I didn’t because my relationship with the industry had turned a bit antagonistic after I helped international regulators in 2013, to write what would eventually become the Digital Fairness Act. The DFA is expected to be deployed this year (2026). Helping AAA also would have required I go well past 25%, like I did with Supremacy Goods.

Due to the sour relationship, I wasn’t feeling that generous at the time. But the consequences harmed all of us. Including me (if I am to be self-interested. I’m trying very hard to escape that trap). If 2026 Ramin could go back and tell “Know it all” 2017 Ramin to take a chill pill and be more generous/patient, I would. When the collapse got so obvious that I could say “I was right”, it didn’t feel good. It wasn’t a win, it was a loss. For all of us.

New Vows and Guidelines

My quest to decide how I can help the industry that I vowed to serve since 2005 is only starting. I will be in Thailand for four more weeks. I am, as always, appreciative of any feedback or insights from the community. The first steps for me are to change my operating instructions, my internal programming, and my rules of engagement.

1. Be more generous: Like the monks I increasingly hang out with, I will be much less concerned about the value of what I’m giving away and trust that if my services are valuable, they will be utilized. Like all of us, I’m not entitled to anything. If my service is not useful, it shouldn’t be used. So I will be raising my cap to ~50%, which I think is fair. If I go higher, there will be no reward to anyone for hiring me as all their competitors will have access to the same information (for free) that they are paying for.

2. Do No Harm: This is a tough one, because if I try to protect children or any other vulnerable population, someone who feels entitled to harm others is going to complain that I am harming them. So the best I can do is to try harder to serve the Common Good and be more gentle as I go about that duty. Even someone doing harm may be capable of doing good if I can provide them with enough information that they believe it is in their self-interest to help others.

3. Explain how to Multiply GaaS revenue: In Supremacy Goods I gave an actionable blueprint for how to make profitable GaaS. It was adopted, and AAA started making a lot more money. In Data Implosion and Force Wars, I pointed my finger but didn’t provide an actionable blueprint for redemption. My next paper will explain, at the detail level of Supremacy Goods, how GaaS works (or doesn’t work) and provide a detailed blueprint for how to double GaaS revenue. I’m confident (since at this point I have overwhelming supporting data) that my participation on a full sized GaaS will reduce production time by 1 year, and triple GaaS revenue. So aiming for a blueprint that will provide 2X revenue and no production speed up seems like something I can safely do in one (long) paper. If studios follow the paper, this should accelerate the rebuilding of AAA and cause a lot of my fellow developers to be rehired.

I think this is a good plan. Supremacy Goods was 14 years ago, so it’s time. I feel inspired. If it doesn’t work, I don’t think I’m too old to officially become a monk. This next paper might take a while to write since it’s a very complicated project. I’m writing from a farm in rural Thailand, so I have few distractions other than all the animals that want to hang out with me, and all the temples I am visiting.