Gamezebo - The End of Cloning

[DFG]

Joel doesn't declare the death of cloning but makes some good observations why cloning will be more difficult as well as identifying the emerging casual adventure genre:

http://www.gamezebo.com/2007/08/the_end_of_cloning.html

[Bmc]

I wouldn't agree that he identified adventure games as the next trend, we all already know this. Even then I called this quite awhile back way before Azada and Dream Chronicles was released. :)

[Pyabo]

And it's certainly more of a resurgence than a new trend... remember, Myst is one of the top selling games of all time.

[papillon]

... and if I'm very unlucky the trend will have died out again before I even manage to FINISH my adventure game... it's been a long road... :)

[Bmc]

And it's certainly more of a resurgence than a new trend... remember, Myst is one of the top selling games of all time.

it is a new trend in the casual market

[Qitsune]

I'd say Myst was the mother of all casual games, even if it was not a small online game, it was the first non-hardcore game played by a mature audience of absolute non gamers.

[papillon]

define absolute non-gamers? :)

The adventure game market has been more diverse than the traditional hardcore game market possibly from the beginning - the games just weren't all quite as high-selling as Myst.

[Pkeod]

I don't agree with Joel with the idea that not anyone can create a time management game or a hidden object game :) I could seriously whip out a basic hidden object game engine in only a few minutes. The time management game would take longer but even then it would only take a day to create a working engine. I've done both of these (made these engines), and I'm sure anyone who knows what they're doing could do the same. I think the thing that makes the difference is the quality of the clone... not everyone can make great art, but it's certainly not going to stop someone from going out and paying someone to do it... and even though some of the devs I know pay their artists way more than I would, the prices are still reasonable for developer who wants to succeeded. Also, even though quality may be a big limiting factor to some, quality isn't actually everything. I know of developers who are selling games that have mediocre graphics and are still doing fairly well.

And don't forget that this market is GROWING REALLY, REALLY FAST. More people are playing casual games (even people who break the stereotype of a casual gamer) and more developers are going to want to start up and try making a game, and I'll bet that some of their first games will be clones. Some match three clones. Others hidden object clones. So, no, I don't think cloning will die out any time soon.

Virtual Villagers is not the only hit casual game to not be cloned. I know of a few good games that maybe are a little under the radar of most of the market but did well or are doing well :rolleyes: I don't agree with the game engine being hard in the case of VV either... (for this one it's content)

If Joel's future prevails, and the entire casual market (portals) are totally saturated by corporate backed games, then it will be the guys who keep their games off the portals who keep on going as they are the smart ones.

[electronicStar]

As an oldschool hardcore gamer I would like to pass a motion against the use of the term "adventure game" for those "find the object" games and other glorified collections of casual mechanisms. Let's not start to categorize a game "adventure" just because of the scenario it comes bundled with. And we are still a long way from Myst, let's not use its name in vain.
(I think I just made the thread awesome X10 :p Flame On)

[Bmc]

As an oldschool hardcore gamer I would like to pass a motion against the use of the term "adventure game" for those "find the object" games and other glorified collections of casual mechanisms. Let's not start to categorize a game "adventure" just because of the scenario it comes bundled with. And we are still a long way from Myst, let's not use its name in vain.
(I think I just made the thread awesome X10 :p Flame On)

no one is referring to the hidden object games as adventure games. you're obviously not up to date with where the casual market is currently at ... and I'm sure your fine with that so no need to comment further except to say that Azada and Dream Chronicles are indeed true adventure games, and that there is an onslaught of them coming

[stanchat]

Virtual Villagers is not the only hit casual game to not be cloned. I know of a few good games that maybe are a little under the radar of most of the market but did well or are doing well :rolleyes: I don't agree with the game engine being hard in the case of VV either... (for this one it's content)


I agree with you about the VV game engines. There seems to be this myth floating around that these types of game are HARD and COMPLEX to program or else they would be be cloned more. IMHO opinion the reason the Casual Sim line is not cloned is because most developers would find these games boring, monotunous and mundane to program, test and debug. Don't get me wrong, the end products are really good just the process is tedious.

Also Joes's article left out the BreakOut genre altogether. Games like Richochet, BreakQuest and the Bricks Of XX series. With the release of the latest Richochet game my bet is that the BreakOut genre will rise once again.

I still don't think the mainstream casual gamers are ready for a true adventure game in the likes of Full Throttle and Liesure Suit Larry (my favorite). In order for an adventure game to be effective it must immerse you into an interesting story. This immersion breaks the basic tenets of what most casual gamers like about casual games. Easy to learn, instant gratification etc.. I think casual gamers are a ways away from embracing a serious adventure game. Just my opinion.

[papillon]

Big Fish Games has been selling mainstream downloadable adventure games for ages - the Nancy Drew games, the Law and Order games. They seem to sell okay, but none have been huge splash hits.

[Bmc]

Big Fish Games has been selling mainstream downloadable adventure games for ages - the Nancy Drew games, the Law and Order games. They seem to sell okay, but none have been huge splash hits.

I think a lot of that has to do with their huge file sizes, and in a lot of cases no free trial.

[stanchat]

Big Fish Games has been selling mainstream downloadable adventure games for ages - the Nancy Drew games, the Law and Order games. They seem to sell okay, but none have been huge splash hits.

True, however both of those games benefit from their popularity from non-game venues. For Law and Order, the original series has been on NBC for 17yrs and they are still making current episodes the same for Nancy Drew with the huge popularity of the Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys books have been around for over 30 years. So I do not know if they really could be considered adventure games in the classic sense.

[papillon]

They definitely are adventure games - not the same kind as the way-back-when Sierra Quest games, but in the adventure genre. I'll grant that the licensing may affect their popularity (and probably helps compensate for the lack of demo and huge size).

Otherwise all I can say is - wait and see, I'm *trying* to get mine finished... :) (It's not a Quest game either, it's something rather new.)

[Qitsune]

define absolute non-gamers? :)

The adventure game market has been more diverse than the traditional hardcore game market possibly from the beginning - the games just weren't all quite as high-selling as Myst.

Even if other games before had similar mechanics, Myst became such a household name that it pushed people who thought games were for kids to try it. People like my coworkers who came to play Popcap games because of Myst. It had an aura of respectability to it, no guns or dragons and nothing moving too quick. It wasn't especially easy however.

[bvanevery]

Myst was bundled with many computers and rode the wave of newfangled full color monitors and CD-ROMs. Lots of people bought Myst to demonstrate that their computer could actually do something. Not so many people actually finished the game or played it very long. It had all the pitfalls of classic adventure game design, namely, puzzles that were way too friggin' hard and/or tedious.

The adventure segment of the game industry tanked because the perceived need for production values escalated, while the paying audience did not grow correspondingly. Macs aside, early PCs were not the easiest beasts to work with and selected for people with above average intelligence, curiosity, and tenacity. Ergo, people willing to beat their heads into walls to solve ridiculous adventure game problems. As Windows 95 became mainstream, all the dummies could use computers too. The dummies saw most of these adventure game mechanics for what they were: boring crap. RTS and FPS games were far more accessible. The rest is marketing history.

So if there's to be some newfangled Casual Adventure Game segment, I'm really curious to see the attention paid to the classic brick wall problem.

[bvanevery]

I don't agree with the game engine being hard in the case of VV either... (for this one it's content)

Yeah what crack was that guy smoking? That kind of engine was trivial a decade ago.

[Matthew]

Yeah what crack was that guy smoking? That kind of engine was trivial a decade ago.

I think the point is that the AI and real-time gameplay aspects of VV are difficult to clone, not the graphics engine. If you haven't played VV "real-time" means that calendar time affects the game regardless of how long you actually play. You could play five minutes a day or two hours a day, but the in-game time will pass at a constant speed regardless. If you go on vacation everyone in-game will be dead by the time you get back...

VV has an edge in the same way that the Sims does. There aren't any Sims clones, despite the fact that the art/graphics engine/etc are easily reproduced. In VV's case balancing artificial life games are much more difficult than, say, cranking out another match-3 or hidden object title.

[Amirai]

So if there's to be some newfangled Casual Adventure Game segment, I'm really curious to see the attention paid to the classic brick wall problem.

I believe the best way to look at it is: why did people like those games? I don't think it was for the head-banging hard brick walls that you speak of, and I doubt anyone else does either. In fact, I think that's the most annoying aspect about the genre.

So if you rip that out, you have an exploration game with a whole lot of plot, dialouge, and cinemas. Not really much gameplay. But those aspects that are left are what I think made them so enjoyable. They were incredibly immersive, written well and had actual story (well, some of them). It was as close as you could get to reading a good book.

What I think adventure games need to do is ditch the 'guess what you're supposed to do' mechanic - which is really bad design - and replace it with something fun.

[bvanevery]

I think the point is that the AI and real-time gameplay aspects of VV are difficult to clone, not the graphics engine.

What AI? I judged VV in full in the IGF. There is no AI. There are some scripted behaviors, big deal.

If you haven't played VV "real-time" means that calendar time affects the game regardless of how long you actually play. You could play five minutes a day or two hours a day, but the in-game time will pass at a constant speed regardless. If you go on vacation everyone in-game will be dead by the time you get back...

This is trivial. I've not met a programmer so stupid that they couldn't implement this.

VV has an edge in the same way that the Sims does. There aren't any Sims clones, despite the fact that the art/graphics engine/etc are easily reproduced.

The art of the Sims is not easily reproduced. The real advantage of the Sims is that EA produces tons of art assets for it. No indies in the casual space are pursuing art budgets of that magnitude.

In VV's case balancing artificial life games are much more difficult than, say, cranking out another match-3 or hidden object title.

Bullshit. I'd be prepared to accept "slightly more difficult."

Cloning VV is technically straightforward. You'd need to do some decent art assets, but lotsa casual games manage that. I'm inclined to say that not enough game developers currently want to write this kind of game. That could change, if people smell money.

[bvanevery]

What I think adventure games need to do is ditch the 'guess what you're supposed to do' mechanic - which is really bad design - and replace it with something fun.

Yep. I said that almost a decade ago. Still waiting.

Why didn't I solve the problem myself, meanwhile? Because I realized that my own visions, "The Game Of Mallor" and "The Game Of Immortals," would need an art production budget way in advance of anything I could afford at the time. I may yet attempt the "puzzleless adventure game" problem, but right now I'm setting my sights on bleeding edge 3d shader code because that's guaranteed to make me contracting $$$$$$. With a proper war chest, maybe I can do what I had in mind.

There's the low tech version of those game ideas, using mostly text. Sort of the King Of Dragon Pass (http://a-sharp.com/kodp/) approach.

Or I could write a few novels. Puzzles don't get in the way when you're just reading about them.

[Amirai]

Or I could write a few novels. Puzzles don't get in the way when you're just reading about them.

Yeah, it's like trying to read a book that continually hides the next paragraph from you until you guess what's on it.

[Musenik]

Dangerous High School Girls in Trouble attacks the 'brick wall' issue with a variety of solutions. Because 'brick wall' arises from several different problems.

Problem 1 - Where am I?
Players get lost, easily. Adventure games, RPGs, whatever. Moving around open ground is as bad as a maze. Hell, I got lost in a train cabin in 'The Last Express'. (btw Best Adventure Game EVER!) And that cabin was where you start the game!

Problem 2 - What clue?
Player uncovers a clue. The clue is meant to guide the player to the next challenge or reward. Most players won't remember the clue. Casual gamers will probably never look up what they've found, given a journal or even inventory.

Problem 3 - It's too hard!
Player encounters a puzzle or encounter that stops his/her progress.

There are more...


Here's how we attempted to solve the three mentioned.

1. Our world is a game board, one screen window onto single bitmap. (okay, actually there's four game boards, but the story mostly keeps one of them at a time.) Player's learn the layout pretty quickly and they learn that they can't 'fall over the edge'. Any one board isn't very big, nor does it take long to scroll from end to end.


2. Clues display in the main 'info' box on the interface. Multiple clues cycle over time. They are worded as commands: Do this. Go here. Find 'somebody'. Later on, the clue/commands become less instructional. 'Florence needs a man!'. (but there may be sub-clues that are instructional)


3. Graduated solutions to same challenge. Some are hard. Some are trivial. Sometimes we start with the hardest one, and upon failure we direct player to simpler solutions. Sometimes we offer simultaneous solutions. And of those, sometimes two are three out of five or seven challenges must be won to proceed. However, over the course of the game, the easiest options get somewhat harder.

[Arthur]

What AI? I judged VV in full in the IGF. There is no AI. There are some scripted behaviors, big deal.

...

This is trivial. I've not met a programmer so stupid that they couldn't implement this.

...

Bullshit. I'd be prepared to accept "slightly more difficult."

...


Hm we got anonymous feedback just like this each time we have entered a game in the IGF. We were starting to think someone there just doesn't like us. I am relieved to see that is clearly not the case. :) We'll probably put our plant breeding sim/game into the spanking-machine this year, so get ready.

Just wanted to add my two cents, which is that the VV games, while I do enjoy making them, are much much harder and time consuming for me than the tycoon games or other projects I have worked on. I cannot say how much harder than a 'traditional' puzzle game as I've not done one of those.

[Jack Norton]

Is amazing to read how people think that programming a VV game is trivial... I still remember when years ago I said that making a game like USM was a very hard task and got bashed with the usual "what are you saying fool I can make a soccer manager simulation in 2 months of my spare time". After 4 years have still to see a USM clone and in the meanwhile I made USM2 to... :D

[Pkeod]

Is amazing to read how people think that programming a VV game is trivial...

Not trivial... just not impossible to replicate. Kudos to Arthur for developing a great game, but I just don't think that what Joel said in his article about game engines being too hard to create would be the reason why people would stop cloning.

[mooktown]

Is amazing to read how people think that programming a VV game is trivial... :D

I find the arrogance even more amazing

[Pkeod]

Who's being arrogant here? Is it arrogant or wrong to think that good programmers should be given some credit for what they can do? The measure of difficulty is different for different people, but that's not to say that cloning will end because of everyone's incompetence.

[Jack Norton]

Ok then, you're right, creating a VV clone is trivial.
VV is probably one of the top casual best seller games ever created. How comes that there aren't already 100 clones out like happened with match3? and remember VV is 2 years old - plenty of time to clone a trivial game code, don't you think?

Please explain.

[Emmanuel]

The article doesn't talk about the difficulty of making a game engine for a MCF of a VV like game, but of the difficulty of making a game like MCF or VV.

There's a lot more that goes into making such a game than the engine, and when making an open-ended game like VV, giving the players clear goals and puzzles and keeping them interested all the way through requires a lot of creativity. Arthur is an incredibly talented designer in that respect. The programming difficulty may not scale much from a jewel quest type game to MCF, Azada or VV, but the quantity of hand-made content, goals etc. as well as the playtesting and weeding out what doesn't work, improving on what works, etc. is where the difficulty is. The article nicely articulates one of our main reasons for getting acquired by BFG, besides the financials.

Best regards,
Emmanuel

[Pkeod]

"Not because of lack of demand; rather, it's much more difficult to create a game engine that runs in real-time as Virtual Villagers does than to develop a Mystery Case Files or Diner Dash knock-off."

You're right on target about everything else though.

[mooktown]

Who's being arrogant here? Is it arrogant or wrong to think that good programmers should be given some credit for what they can do? Dude, that was so not aimed at you! :D

I was talking about the guy who was being super-flippant about VV

[HairyTroll]

the spanking-machine.

Forget games. Just release the machine and you'll make a fortune.

[bvanevery]

Hm we got anonymous feedback just like this each time we have entered a game in the IGF. We were starting to think someone there just doesn't like us. I am relieved to see that is clearly not the case. :) We'll probably put our plant breeding sim/game into the spanking-machine this year, so get ready.

My comments above are directed at the technical exercise of cloning VV. It's not tough. The cloner would have to come up with their own story line, art assets, and a few specific behavioral mechanics (i.e. chasing butterflies). Whether they did all of that well is a completely different issue, but from a technical standpoint, there's nothing stopping anyone.

How I judged VV in the IGF is another separate issue. I remember giving pretty high marks for excellence in art, but only medium marks for the game design. The design is somewhat innovative if one doesn't look too closely at the history of "personal pet" AIlife games. There is a history there, and we can't fairly say that VV has defined some new genre. I appreciated the crossover of some Civ-style mechanics to the AIlife realm. That's somewhat novel.

I did not appreciate getting stuck. I was persistent in trying to solve the game on my own, but ultimately I resorted to a walkthrough. The VV I judged suffered from a "brick wall" adventure game problem and didn't do anything about it, so I deducted design points for that. I liked the game enough to play it a fair amount and to be interested in the fate of my villagers. But getting stuck made me lose interest, and I think I also started to find the basic mechanics repetitive.

I did not feel the sense of "WOW I really like playing this one!" which is one way to win Innovation In Game Design. Nor did I feel a sense of "WOW this is the most original thing I've ever seen!" which is the other way to win Innovation In Game Design. (Decently innovative, really fun to play) or (really innovative, decent to play) are what you need to win that category.

Or so I feel. "Everyday Shooter" actually won Innovation In Design, and for the life of me I can't see why. I chalk it up to more judges who can't tell the difference between art assets and game design. I will be sure to torpedo any game like that this time around. Although, I think I did at the time and look what good it did?

As for VV, I recall giving it a midrange score for Game Design that could get it into the finals in that category, if a lot of other judges saw merit in it. It didn't, so I guess they didn't. Refer to those other anonymous comments I suppose.

Yet another issue is what the public will buy. People bought Myst, doesn't mean they finished it, or liked it longer than X hours of play time. Probably only means they were pleasantly spellbound enough to make the initial purchase. There's no shame in getting that far with a buying public. You have to be doing something right if people aren't trying to return your game and they keep buying more of it. But it's not the same thing as winning a Cannes Film Festival award, which is what the IGF aspires to be.

[cliffski]

Ok then, you're right, creating a VV clone is trivial.
VV is probably one of the top casual best seller games ever created. How comes that there aren't already 100 clones out like happened with match3? and remember VV is 2 years old - plenty of time to clone a trivial game code, don't you think?

Please explain.

Because it's actually VERY hard. I write games in this genre (Kudos, Rock Legend, Democracy), and previously I was the AI guy on the movies for Lionhead, and also worked at elixir, who were very ai-heavy. I also did contract work for MAXIS, doing blue-sky research code for their sims franchise.

I've never met a coder who didn't think they knew how to write life sim code, but only ever met one who was really good at it (hi james!). Its one of those things that seems really obvious, until you sit and write it. And then balance it. and then debug it.

I'm good at writing sim code, and crap at polishing games and getting consistantly good artwork and qa sorted. I'm sure if I got the hang of that, I'd be doing much better, hopefully virtual villagers style.

There is nothing trivial about coding a game like virtual villagers, and definitely nothing trivial about code for games like the sims. Despite most game coders looking down their noses at the sims, it's pretty complex code.

[bvanevery]

Is amazing to read how people think that programming a VV game is trivial...

Quote properly. I said the realtime game mechanic is trivial to implement.

When your low end machine is 1 GHz you just run the whole sim as the user is starting the game. If there were anything remotely resource hungry about the sim, you'd just cheat. How the hell would the user know what's happened with her villagers in the intervening 8 hours she's been asleep? She wouldn't. Any reasonably approximate sim would do. You could bound the sim to an error metric that only the most anal of Grognards would object to.

Making an entire VV game is as difficult as coming up with a storyline, art assets, and some behavioral mechanics. Shipping a commercial game on a PC is not a trivial undertaking no matter what you're working on. But that hardly means it's insurmountable, uncloneable, or exceptionally difficult as per the original article. There's no technical challenge to cloning VV. It's only a matter of labor and desire.

[bvanevery]

There's a lot more that goes into making such a game than the engine, and when making an open-ended game like VV, giving the players clear goals and puzzles and keeping them interested all the way through requires a lot of creativity.

But that's not even what's required. When I judged VV in the IGF, it failed to keep me interested all the way through. At several points it exhibited the classic adventure game problem: "This puzzle is too hard." All you really have to do is get someone to like it enough to buy it. Then if the charm wears off, you want them to feel they got enough out of it that they're not going to grouse to people who matter. I mean, who cares what comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical thinks about casual games, they're irrelevant. Long as casual game forums that have buyers aren't trashing it.

I'm not going to run around trashing VV to ruin their sales. There was nothing about the game that was that objectionable.

I just don't think it's worthy of an IGF Innovation In Game Design award. That's a very high standard as far as I'm concerned, even if the other IGF judges don't take the standard seriously enough. I think almost every year I've had a reason to complain about the Innovation In Game Design results. But every year we've also modified something about the category or how we judge, so I think the situation gradually improves. I'm still waiting for this to become a reliable prize though.

Anyways, it's not that technically difficult to clone VV, and it's not that difficult from a design standpoint either. Joel Brodie is really overstating the case. You can put people together who can do a good job at something like this. There are soloists out there with the skills to do it all by themselves. But that's probably the real issue: the organizational dynamics of conflicting desire. How many soloists want to spend their finely honed skills on this? How many teams out there can agree to get behind a VV style title? Apparently not many. I guess the money isn't good enough when weighed against their game developer desires.

Do you folks all remember when Deer Hunter was a big hit? Lotsa mainstream publishers wanted to clone that pronto. Lotsa game developers simply refused to work on such a banal title, no matter how much money was involved. I think Activision had to contract the work out IIRC, none of their in-house people would touch it. Maybe it wasn't Activision but it was some similarly big outfit whose rank and file howled and wouldn't take orders.

I suppose it's a lot easier to agree on match-3 games. Maybe since they're not terribly creative, and people still believe they're profitable (whether they are or not in any given case), you can get people to agree to work on them. And you need fewer people to agree, because they are somewhat less involved than VV.

I remember a would-be business partner of mine. He was a great 3d artist, and had excellent business acumen as far as "the gift of gab" and "pressing the flesh" were concerned. But we argued about what game design we were going to work on for 3 months before I finally gave up on him. He also had an aversion to getting his hands dirty and working on something concrete, unless he was already getting money for it somehow. He wanted to go chase big $$$$$$$ funding for a big project, whereas I had a $$ bootstrapping mentality.

Last we talked, I had pushed him towards working on 5 minute art asset and technology demo. I let him pick the subject matter, so that we wouldn't have to debate what kind of art he wanted to make. I said, "Ok, you go make some roughs of that. Give 'em to me and I'll stick 'em in a 3d engine." And then he didn't do anything. I wasn't interested in managing a business partner, partners have to pull their own weight and manage themselves.

Perhaps the more creative the work, the more people have to argue about it. So the less likely the team will form and get anything done.

[bvanevery]

Perhaps the more creative the work, the more people have to argue about it. So the less likely the team will form and get anything done.

It also occurs to me, that if a "clone" requires creativity to do well, then you're talking about having creative people work on it. And creative people do not like cloning things. They like working on their own original ideas. I mean, why am I not going to run out and do a VV style game, if it's selling so well? Because I have my own ideas about what would sell well, that for me personally would be a lot more interesting to do.

I think you have to get a creative person in a position of artistic compromise to get "clone" stuff out of them. Like, they make some concession to Commercial Art so that they can be left alone in their free time. Maybe indie artists are not where you'd look to get this kind of clone done. Maybe as Casual Games go big publisher, the in-house art teams who have already compromised are going to produce the VV clones.

[bvanevery]

Because it's actually VERY hard. I write games in this genre (Kudos, Rock Legend, Democracy), and previously I was the AI guy on the movies for Lionhead, and also worked at elixir, who were very ai-heavy. I also did contract work for MAXIS, doing blue-sky research code for their sims franchise.

Possibly you've spent too much time on high flying stuff to see the simple stuff for what it really is.

Go tell the Digipen students who wrote Kisses (http://downloads.zdnet.com/download.aspx?docid=205080) how hard sim code is. They did it; anyone can do it. Judged that one in the IGF also, before Virtual Villagers. They're at exactly the same level of sim complexity, i.e. not very. Digipen students aren't any kind of genius miracle workers. They simply have a tough curriculum and are expected to think, not make excuses.

[soniCron]

Are we arguing sims are hard to write or sims are hard to balance?

[bvanevery]

Are we arguing sims are hard to write or sims are hard to balance?

Exactly, that's the crux and they shouldn't be confused.

I say they are not hard to write. No technical barrier to a VV-style game.

Balancing them isn't easy. But it is not as hard as the article is going on about. The idea that everything has to be perfectly balanced and absolutely excellent in every respect to make a salable product is a false standard. VV itself doesn't meet that standard, and it sells great. VV cloners don't have to meet this huge perceived quality metric. They would simply have to shove a product out the door and see if it sells. How do you think all those match-3 games got cloned, endless angst about whether they were meeting the oh-so-intricate quality bars?

There have been sim clones. There have been sim-style games. My favorite was GhostMaster (http://www.ghostmaster.com/). As far as I'm concerned it was an excellent title. I got full play and replay value out of it, and I'm not easy to please. It didn't last very long in the marketplace though. Chalk that up to marketing clout I think. "There are no sim games as popular as The Sims" is also a false standard. Nobody else has got an entire division of EA behind them, so sim-like products come and go.

There have been plenty of ALife games. They were all the rage sometime in the 90s. Just because there aren't a lot of them in the Casual Games space, doesn't mean there hasn't been a lot of 'em, or that they're hard to make.

If people don't want to make these games, we need to look for reasons other than the difficulty of making them.

[bvanevery]

How do you think all those match-3 games got cloned, endless angst about whether they were meeting the oh-so-intricate quality bars?

That could be another theory on why there aren't so many VV or sim clones out there. The people who want to write that kind of stuff, overthink, try to implement way more of a sim than is needed for a Casual Game product, and never finish.