> SKG wants games to be "playable" and doesn't define what playable is.

Which is completely fine since they're not a legislative body. Instead of settling on a hard line, they're leaving this part open to be defined in collaboration with lawmakers and the industry. Isn't that exactly what so many detractors are asking for?

Let's be honest, SKG wouldn't have fewer critics if they chose a specific definition of "playable". I'd even argue that the industry would be opposed far more strongly.