I would suggest a more pragmatic attitude. UK Interactive Entertainment is perfectly acceptable as the new name. UKIE? People will get used to it.
After all, we dealt with Nintendo choosing Wii as a console name and that was proper mental.
There are a variety of very good reasons for the games trade body to switch its name.
Strategically, the powers behind the ELSPA throne realise that the games business is changing. Lines between development and publishing are blurring and routes to market are widening. Now is the perfect time for a re-think.
Practically, a change is needed to aid universal representation to Government and basic funding.
Post-Byron Review, we are firmly on Westminster’s radar. I was wedged between Culture, Media and Sport secretary Ben Bradshaw’s longtime political advisor and a trusted DCMS worker bee at the BAFTAs last week.
It used to be a pissed-up PR and a bored finance director. Things have changed.
Whoever wins the next election, Government is clearly prepared to get a lot closer to games and, if it can, even help the industry.
But it would prefer one trade body, and is a little uncomfortable that ELSPA, whilst being efficient and intelligent, would appear to only have a remit to serve the interests of traditional publishers.
A more inclusive UKIE could also see off the threat of companies from the app or social media space setting up their own body. It’s frustrating enough that TIGA likes to paddle its own canoe.
And if a single trade body is going to provide the services required by a £4 billion sector (such as research and training, let alone political liaison) then it needs more cash, which means more members.
Studios, retailers, services, media, distributors and hardware makers… your voice may be about to get a little louder in the corridors of power.