“This non-profit will be the ‘voice of the gamers'” – Former Disco Elysium devs break new ground with player- and developer-owned studio structure
Former Disco Elysium developers at Summer Eternal are giving players a formal role in the studio’s governance through a non-profit organisation that owns a share of the company. The model is intended to let the community raise concerns and influence discussion about game development, making it an unusual experiment in shared ownership.
The Players Non-Profit owns 5 per cent of Summer Eternal; the remaining 95 per cent is divided among workers, freelancers and investors. Members can call a general assembly, which may decide how the non-profit uses game revenue, including for events or union support. Buying the studio’s 500-page Anthology also grants membership; it costs €69 for the Standard edition or €99 for a Deluxe bundle.
- Players will have a formal voice in Summer Eternal’s governance.
- The non-profit owns 5 per cent of the studio.
- Buying the Anthology includes membership.
New here? Start with this
Summer Eternal is a games studio founded by former developers of Disco Elysium, a role-playing game. Its ownership is split between workers, freelancers and investors, with a non-profit organisation called the Players Non-Profit holding a smaller share.
The non-profit is meant to give players a formal way to raise concerns and take part in discussions about how games are made. Its members can call a general assembly, which may decide how the organisation uses its share of game revenue.
This arrangement gives players a role in the studio’s governance, alongside the people who make and finance its games. It is an unusual approach to ownership in an industry where players generally have no formal say in how a studio is run.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Giving players a formal voice could make a studio more accountable to the people who play its games, while creating a channel for concerns that ordinary feedback systems may not capture. Supporters may see the non-profit’s ownership stake and member assemblies as a practical experiment in sharing influence, with revenue also able to support community events or union efforts.
The case against
A player body with only a 5 per cent stake may have limited power over decisions, so the arrangement could promise more influence than it delivers. Critics may also worry that tying membership to a €69 or €99 purchase makes participation less accessible, and that involving a community organisation in governance could complicate decisions for workers, freelancers and investors who bear much of the studio’s responsibility.