Brexit - Likely to Impact Gaming Industry

I guess the article is an example of how someone wants to try their hardest to connect two things that have hardly any contact points. The Brexit will certainly give us a period of uncertainty about many future regulations, but there's no reason to expect any substantial changes to the gaming industry. Buying games in the UK may be affected, but I even doubt that, because both sides cannot really afford any trade blocks.

And there's no expectation that Turkey will join the EU in the foreseeable future. If they keep up their speed with fulfilling the requirements, they may be on target for 2070.

Regarding immigration, the majority of immigrants to the UK is from outside the EU, not inside. They already have to jump through a few hoops, but it's not that difficult to get in if you have some qualification.

RogueCat said:

I think the doom and gloom is over the top .It is not as though independent nations have never negotiated advantageous trade deals before the EU existed.

Click to expand...

This kind of doom and gloom is used as a screen of smoke to avoid speculating about things that are going to happen. It is not over the top, it is misplaced.
Speculating that the Brexit is going to lead to an invasion of the Earth by aliens is the same category: it wont happen for sure and still serve as it is intended: sidetracking.

On the trade deals: it depends on the situation and the balance of power.

The EU is a club. Usually, in a club, club members benefit from advantages. Advantages that usually are funded by deals the club gets from non club members.
Hence an incentive to be a member of the club.

As Tchatcher put it back in the days, when she spoke about the EU club, it is either sit at the table or be on the menu.

UK decided to leave the EU club. If the deal made over their leave ends as advantageous to UK, this will dissolve the incentive of being a member of the club.
At the current time when the existence of the EU club is questioned, it is not the kind of signal the EU club want to send.

Even more, if indeed UK gets an advantageous deal, one could wonder how this advantageous deal is funded. In a kind of amiable bargain, the deal could be funded by non EU club members (excluding UK) Except that the potential is nearing extinction right now as they are already funding the current EU club members.
Or the advantages might be funded by EU members. Which could turn as an imperative to leave the EU club. To get advantages, better to be out than in.

Get some like Turkey in the club, negociate a leave at the expense of those who stay.

I'm perhaps too much in this thread so I'll leave one more question before I leave it acidifying for a while.

UK gaming industry postbrexit we said what we think.
What about the rest of EU gaming industry? Any impact or untouched? Will UK developers open studios elsewhere in EU?

I mean it's not car industry where Nissan's 40K employed people factory will most surely move from Sunderland to another EU country (because 70% cars from it are exported to other EU countries).

EU is a piece of shit but it is still not worse than any other politics and for UK they gained a ton more money back from EU than they paid in. So for rest of EU this is actually pretty good deal while for UK it will be bad at best.

As for games it will pretty much just hit indies and those with passion get things done without governmental support anyhow.
Researchers on the other hand will likely flee the country as a large majority of their grants come from EU and there is just no way UK can afford to put up those sums themselves.

I know one thing... Looking at that dollars to pounds rate, my vacation plans are taking a left turn to London now. And Scotland, before they go all Braveheart again.

Here in the US our media presents these two sides to explain Brexit.

Liberal Media: The people in the UK voting to exit the EU are racist and xenophobic.

Conservative Media: The people in the UK voting to exit the EU are tired of out of control immigration and paying high taxes for other struggling EU countries.

That said, since the media in the USA is largely nothing more than a propaganda machine and my understanding of European politics is limited, I'd love to hear what people think about this who live in the UK or in Europe because we're not going to get a proper understanding of this from our media, that's for sure.

RogueCat said:

I think the doom and gloom is over the top .It is not as though independent nations have never negotiated advantageous trade deals before the EU existed.

Click to expand...

It would help if you had a clue just what are talking about.. Give couple of example of such a "advantageous trade deals"? Norway? They still have to pay EU dues AND obey EU rules but without any say so in EU affairs. Their sovereignty is illusory. And Norway never was in EU to begin with.
UK will not get any kind of preferential treatment. In fact EU might want to use UK as an example to show others why it's a bad idea to leave the union to discourage might be waverers.

As long as PB and CDP are untouched, it's all good..

TheMadGamer said:

That said, since the media in the USA is largely nothing more than a propaganda machine and my understanding of European politics is limited, I'd love to hear what people think about this who live in the UK or in Europe because we're not going to get a proper understanding of this from our media, that's for sure.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sorry that "P,R&oC" is gone for that very reason.

TheMadGamer said:

Here in the US our media presents these two sides to explain Brexit.

Liberal Media: The people in the UK voting to exit the EU are racist and xenophobic.

Conservative Media: The people in the UK voting to exit the EU are tired of out of control immigration and paying high taxes for other struggling EU countries.

That said, since the media in the USA is largely nothing more than a propaganda machine and my understanding of European politics is limited, I'd love to hear what people think about this who live in the UK or in Europe because we're not going to get a proper understanding of this from our media, that's for sure.

Click to expand...

Both are overdone and oversimplified.

17m people in the UK are not racist and xenophobic. There were many other arguments which were important.

The top three were Immigration, Sovereignty and EU is a mess and we shouldn't send money there, we need to get out.

Immigration has a few dimensions:

1. Oversimplified: Everyone is racist

2. Simplified:
a. EU is letting a lot of refugees in who could easily come into the UK in a couple of years. These people could be terrorists.
b. EU grew too fast and all the Eastern European countries are sending their unskilled workers into the UK, reducing wages in the UK for UK citizens
c. Allowing so many people from the EU come in may actually reduce the amount of top-skilled people coming in from other countries as businesses would go for the easy option.

3. Complex:
Read a few articles from the FT, Economist, Sun, Daily Mail, Guardian, ...

Need to work now, but that's a good start I guess.

EDIT: Pladio put it better.

Pladio said:

17m people in the UK are not racist and xenophobic.

Click to expand...

17 millions certainly aren't but there seems to be enough racists and xenophobes out there to cause concern... "Cameron condemns post-Brexit xenophobic and racist abuse"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...council-britain-warning-of-post-brexit-racism

RogueCat said:

I expect the British will be just fine after the adjustment period is over. It is not as though they won't give out work visas for skilled workers such as programmers and graphic artists. In the long run they will probably be better off without having to deal with the unaccountable, beauracratic monster that the EU has become.

Click to expand...

This.

Yeah, dream on.

@Pladio

Thanks for the post and the links I will definitely check those out. Your post is clear and concise and gives a good starting point. Our media here is a miserable failure wish I could fly to London and talk with regular people there to really understand this better. I'll never get that kind of understanding from the news.

Eh, to me it's all overblown. Things will settle down, trade will continue, and businesses will thrive or fail based on their individual merits.

As I see it the EU has three choices. Either they will make an example out of the UK to try to scare other countries from leaving, or they will try to reform so that anti-EU parties have less complaints, or the EU will dissolve. Sadly the EU has a terrible image, and many countries have been scared to leave because of the unknown and potentially disadvantageous economic repercussions. Should the UK do well outside the EU, I predict that many of the smaller wealthier EU countries will also leave.

joxer said:

But what immigration is that supposed to be? If it's about people moving in from India and South Africa, ah, well, it's not EU's fault, it's late effect of Commonwealth or whatchamacallit,

Click to expand...

Actually, that is the EU"s fault for not screening out those people instead of it being UK responsibility.

If the EU had taken charge, this would have relieved UK from having to justify it.

UK could have said that considering the past ties, they would have welcomed the immigration from their commonwealth holdings, but the EU barred them from doing it.

Time will tell.

Of course, not the kind of speculation that is serving the purpose of sidetracking.

Pladio said:

Both are overdone and oversimplified.

17m people in the UK are not racist and xenophobic. There were many other arguments which were important.

The top three were Immigration, Sovereignty and EU is a mess and we shouldn't send money there, we need to get out.

Immigration has a few dimensions:

1. Oversimplified: Everyone is racist

2. Simplified:
a. EU is letting a lot of refugees in who could easily come into the UK in a couple of years. These people could be terrorists.
b. EU grew too fast and all the Eastern European countries are sending their unskilled workers into the UK, reducing wages in the UK for UK citizens
c. Allowing so many people from the EU come in may actually reduce the amount of top-skilled people coming in from other countries as businesses would go for the easy option.

3. Complex:
Read a few articles from the FT, Economist, Sun, Daily Mail, Guardian, …

Need to work now, but that's a good start I guess.

Click to expand...

Usually, when a conclusion cant be accepted even before the question is asked, it is better to leave that conclusion out, whether it is valid or not.

The conclusion that 17M people are racist and xenophobic is one of this kind of conclusion.

These days, apart people who are victims of racism, there are not that many people who are racist.

The referendum was planned before the refugee events. The idea of a referendum is way anterior to the refugee events.
UK have their hands full with triggering the refugee events with their push against Libya and their commitment against Syria.

Yeah, the referung was initiated a while ago. But now it was mainly about immigration and money and "taking back control" nevertheless because times changes.

The english prime minister initially just wanted to do it, to finally stop all the crticism about him and let him do his job. Now it backfired.

The problem with the EU is probably that everyone thinks that it's some magical creature which should make everything better if you give it something to eat.
The problem is, that the EU cannot do anything if the members refuse to cooperate.
The best chance was the refugee problem, where they couldn't find any plan to distribute them fairly. Instead they all came to Italy and Greece and Germany tried to soak some of them as well until it became obvious that nobody joins and all most of them would end up in Germany if they just continued. This was a situation where the EU should have helped. Which is impossible if some of them refuse. And it's also impossible because states don't want to give the EU itself some control. I mean in the USA the president can decide what the USA does and what they don't (well, of course there is parlement and whatnot, but you get what I mean) in the EU the president hardly have a function and power.

But even that was too much power for the English people. But you cannot expect that someone with no power is able to take any relevant actions.

The other Problem with the EU is - and this is really my personal opinion - that it grew too fast. It was all about getting new members and growth.
It's like if you found a company, release a incredibly successful product and you have to expand and recruit 100 people within a year. You cannot expect that all of the 100 people share the same vision for the company as the founders.
The growth was so fast, that they had to bend rules more and more. And instead of becoming more equal like integrating 1 new employee at a time into your company which becomes "family" after a while, you end up with a cluster of 20 employees which spread bad vibes, and at some point break lose.
And one of this problematic children was actually great britian with all their special contracts and exceptions. So it might actually be a good thing that they are out now as it spares the effort to somehow try to remove the priviliges. Imho a community like the EU can only work if everyone has to follow the same rules.