Game ripoffs?: Snood/Puzzle-Bobble, Zuma/Luxor, etc

[GemuhDesayinah]

Feel free to correct any of my assertions, but it seems to me that:

(1) Indie game hit Snood looks like a ripoff of the Japanese arcade game Puzzle Bobble/Bust a Move, yet it's made decent money.

(2) Both Zuma (Popcap games) and Luxor (BigFish Games) employ the same gameplay mechanisms, just different ambience (Inca vs Egyptian), level designs and powerups. Are they ripping off each other? Even more interestingly, both seem like clones of an earlier playstation game I remember called "Ballistic".

Did the game makers obtain the intellectual property rights from the original producers? And if not, why aren't there any lawsuits regarding situations like this? And if such lawsuits are pretty hard to win, what's to stop other people from ripping off OUR game ideas and implementing clones of them?

Maybe I should make a Ballsitic/Zuma/Luxor clone, call it "Alexandria" and give it an ancient Greek ambience? :D

[Jim Buck]

You can't patent gameplay.. only the content.. it's a Good Thing(tm). There was a very recent thread on this.

Anyway, regarding the games you mention, search these forums since this topic has been discussed at length with respect to those games.

[Bmc]

Did the game makers obtain the intellectual property rights from the original producers? And if not, why aren't there any lawsuits regarding situations like this? And if such lawsuits are pretty hard to win, what's to stop other people from ripping off OUR game ideas and implementing clones of them?

You can't copyright a game mechanic... and I wouldn't waste anytime worrying about people stealing your ideas.

[Uhfgood]

So why don't I clone popular games, and see if I can make some money off the backs of others? :-)

[svero]

Actually zuma ballistic and luxor are all based on Puzz Loop. I've not played ballistic, but it's fair to say that none of them are exactly like puzz loop while sharing the basic gameplay mechanism to some level. Zuma for instance adds many different subtleties and levels. But basically it comes down to this. You can protect your particular implementation of a game, but not the "idea" of how the game works. If you prevent people from using the idea of a game then there's very few titles on the market today that don't use the ideas from some other game to some extent. The thing about small games like Tetris, or Puzz-Loop is that they're so defined by the "idea" of the game (and less so by say particular level design) that they're immediately and easily compared to the games that came before them. At what point do you call something a derivitive work and not merely a clone? At what point is it another cowboy movie and not fist full of dollars? That's a blurry line. Is it changing one element? Two? For everyone it will be a different.

[z3lda]

This topic keeps comming up :). I'm sure at some point all the games will feature something similar if not the same of another game.

[Hamumu]

You're welcome to try to succeed cloning other games... but it's a lot harder to write a complete, polished game than it is to come up with an original idea!

[vjvj]

So why don't I clone popular games, and see if I can make some money off the backs of others? :-)

Because you'll be competing with EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Sony, etc etc etc. :D

I agree with Jim that it's a good thing (though probably not in the way he intended it to be interpreted). Ripping off ideas is a low hanging fruit and I'd rather the big companies spend their time there. Could you imagine if EA spent several billion dollars next year actually innovating games? We'd all be screwed.

[Anthony Flack]

You're welcome to try to succeed cloning other games... but it's a lot harder to write a complete, polished game than it is to come up with an original idea!

True, but an original idea isn't the same thing as an original game. I find polishing and tweaking to be fairly foolproof, compared to the endless trial-and-error of getting the structure and mechanics right. Given a rock-solid game design, everything else will fall into place - providing you are a competent game developer in the first place, of course.

[Jim Buck]

I heard a funny, but illuminating quote once.. I can't remember quite exactly how it goes but something like: "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If they are any good, you'll have to shove them down theirs throats anyway."

[Matthew]

...Luxor (BigFish Games)...

As a quick correction: Luxor was developed by Mumbo Jumbo.

The casual market has a lot of other arcade clones; not just the above mentioned. It's a lot harder than it might seem at first to take a concept and produce it to the point of casual accessibility, though.

[baegsi]

Forget that ideas are worth anything. It's always what you make out of them.

I remember something in literature that only a dozen or so plots exist and all other stories are based on them. I guess one can find something similar for games. Anyone working on game theory?

In fact, it's not possible to not clone a game, or at least some parts of it, because whenever you play something it will affect what you will create on your own. As already mentioned: it's a blurry line.

[sparkyboy]

You can't patent gameplay.. only the content.. it's a Good Thing(tm).
Good job no one thought of patenting "sprites",hey guys :D

[Nexic]

My game Xeno Assault, it quite obviously very similar to old games such as space invaders and galaga. But just imagine if copying those games and changing a few things around was illegal? There would be almost NO shooters!

Infact if using someone elses ideas was illegal, then there would be very few games at all. Infact, even galaga and galaxian copied space invaders, so they probably wouldn't even exsist.

If I came up with a mega idea, I wouldn't mind people copying it, because unless I completely messed up in making the game, my game would almost certainly be the more successful title. And, if I did mess up on the creation of the game, they wouldn't want to copy me anyway!

[Robert Cummings]

Maybe I should make a Ballsitic/Zuma/Luxor clone, call it "Alexandria" and give it an ancient Greek ambience?

Sure,

Can you do it in less than 6 months and still be better?

[BongPig]

Its easy to sit on this side of the fence. As ive said a few times before : I doubt none of us here have ever been seriously ripped off, so its easy for us to say ripping/borrowing/stealing ideas is a *good* thing.

Let me put it this way... if any of *you* were the developers of Puzz Loop or Bust a Move how would *you* have felt when Snood & Zuma got released?

I know I would have been pissed!
Im not saying it shouldnt be done... It should. Thats life.
What I object ever so slightly to is people sayng its a *good* thing!?
Like I said, if it was you, would you say it was good?

[Savant]

But isn't the real problem that someone came along and made a better game than you did? If the original author of Puzz Loop did a bang up amazing job and it looked/played better than Zuma, he wouldn't have anything to worry about. Nobody would care about the clone. Even if he didn't look/play better, he could release an updated version and trump Zuma.

Whining about someone stealing your gameplay idea is just an excuse for laziness. The world owes you nothing. Fight or flight, your choice. :)

[Ricardo C]

It's not so much a good thing as it is a necessary one, at least as far as recycling and building on existing gamplay concepts is concerned.

Imagine if the creators of every early videogame that broke new ground (Defender, Pac-Man, Pitfall, etc.) had been as litigious as some people are today. Some argue that if it was legally harder to "clone" gameplay, we might see more innovation. I don't think so. I think we would have an industry full of clones, except that they would all be brought to us by the companies currently owning the rights to the "pioneer" games. Keeping gameplay legally unrestricted leads to lots of uninspired clones, sure. But also to games that build so much on a "borrowed" concept that they end up breaking new ground in their own right.

I do think wholesale ripoffs (i.e. not only borrowing from another game's gameplay, but the theme, as well) is wrong. Go figure. I don't mind Snood, but I think Zuma is a bit too much, in that Puzz Loop also had an "ancient civilization" theme to it. I still bought Zuma, though. Sssssh ;)

*goes back to working on Bomberman-style game* :D

*no, really, I AM working on one. And the "cloners are c**ts" contingent can kiss my ass.*

[svero]

>Its easy to sit on this side of the fence. As ive said a few times before : I
>doubt none of us here have ever been seriously ripped off

I've had my game Aargon copied three times now. One time was a web game called reflections by some german company. They used all the piece designs, used similar graphics and used my exact level designs. That was not ok.

The 2nd time I noticed was a game call chromatron. Chromatron actually credits reflections as it's inspiration. In that case the fellow created his own ruleset (similar but not same), and designed his own levels and graphics. I've never had any problem with chromatron. In a way I'd rather my game were completely unique, but I wasn't upset about it. My games are all derivitive works. Why should I hold a grudge if someone derives from what I wrote in an ethical way? That would be hypocritical.

The 3rd time was a game called Aargon Professional by some chinese fellow. In that case he made an interface that could play my levels and the chromatron levels and was selling my work. Not ok. Had he designed his own levels and not re-used my title I would have been ok with it. I sent him a letter and he kindly took it down.

>Let me put it this way... if any of *you* were the developers of Puzz Loop,
>how would *you* have felt when Snood & Zuma got released?

If I had developed puzz loop and zuma came out I wouldn't have minded, because zuma really took the game to a whole new level. To me Zuma is to Puzz Loop as mutant storm or space tripper are to robotron and defender. The games are night and day. Zuma is a little more identifiable because it's in the category of games that are more defined by their gameplay mechanic, but none the less they really did take the game well well beyond what puzz loop provided. There basics are there, but it's just not the same game. In fact it's far improved game. That's my guess about how I would have felt.

>What I object ever so slightly to is people sayng its a *good* thing!?
>Like I said, if it was you, would you say it was good?

I think it is good in the sense that we need the freedom to build on the games that came before. I think we all understand the legal mess it would be if we could copyright or patent game ideas like walking to a bonus to collect it or something of that nature. From a developers standpoint I dont want to be ripped off as in the 2 examples I gave above, but I don't think I really have much to complain about if someone makes their own thing using elements from my work. There is a certain level of shamelessness that I don't like and I can't call good that some companies engage in (like quickly releasing puck man after pacman is a hit) but I think that overall we're better off if we allow the creation of derivitive work. A better asteroids, a better defender, a tetris with a new twist, a puzzloop game with many paths and intricate scoring mechanisms and so on. I think the world is richer with zuma that it would be with only puzz loop and nothing similar ever being released again.

[BongPig]

Good points Steve, and an opinion I can trust due to you having been photocopied yourself. Fair enough that you would be able to accept games that clone your own ( assuming its not a total rip-off ). To be honest, I dont really have a problem. I just wanted to make the point that the big majority of posters here have no experience in thier work cloned/copied. ( and you would hope, enhanced. ) Opinions are vapor if not backed up with experience.

I guess me using the Zuma example isnt a fair one. Im an artist, so I see the very obvious similarities visually. If you say there are big differences in gameplay then I can accept that that would justify Zuma existing... I still wish they did something a bit more different with the visuals. Popcap generally produce awesome graphics, so they must have some talented artists working with them. Why not re-skin Zuma, so it can shake off its *clone* tag once and for all?
Now, what a game that would be! :)

[svero]

Is zuma similar graphically to puzz loop? I personally dont think so. I do find Luxor is very similar graphically to zuma though. (a little too much for my tastes)

Of course now im releasing Beetle Bomp, which is very similar to luxor but was developed in parallel. I'm quite annoyed as I know the game will be received as a luxor rip off, but not much I can do about it. I didn't know about luxor till it was too late.

I will add that I would be chagrined if someone made a copy of aargon that turned out to be a big hit. But I would be angry or annoyed because they released something I could of or should have released. Not because I was copied. To me its a little like ford wanting to be the only company allowed to sell cars. If a 2nd car manufacturor shows up they wont like it. Why should they? But I don't see it as particularly unethical.

[svero]

Fair enough that you would be able to accept games that clone your own ( assuming its not a total rip-off ).

My main objection to the two games that I didnt like was that they had used my actual level designs rather than designing their own. Most of the work in Aargon was in the level designs. It took literally months to develop all those levels and they're all crafted quite carefully. It's not very easy to make a good aargon level. They're far from random. In that case it's like lifting the exact text from a novel. It is a copyright violation when you do that.

[BongPig]

... But I would be angry or annoyed because they released something I could of or should have released. Not because I was copied.

But sometimes Steve, you have no choice.
If my website already pulls 100 times more traffic then yours, any clone I make of your game will sell better from my site. Theres nothing you can do about that. Even if your version is better, you still would lose out sales wise.

Thats the reason I generally think the portals are not that bad. If they wanted to, rather then chase down developers to sign up, they could simply re-make everybody elses games, and use thier huge traffic to outsell any original. Generally, they dont do that, although they easily could. If they see a game they like, they do the propper thing and sign up the dev.
I think they should be commended for that.

[baegsi]

If they wanted to, rather then chase down developers to sign up, they could simply re-make everybody elses games, and use thier huge traffic to outsell any original. That wouldn't make sense. It's much easier for a big company to buy what they need instead of creating it on their own. This is not an ethical question, it's just a sound business decision.

[DangerCode]

Let me put it this way... if any of *you* were the developers of Puzz Loop or Bust a Move how would *you* have felt when Snood & Zuma got released?

I'd feel stupid for ignoring the casual game shareware market!

:D

[Robert Cummings]

Well then, no hard feelings if anyone rips anyone else off right lads?

Time for us to compete healthily.

[Jim Buck]

Btw, Snood actually filled a need that existed that other similar games did not provide. (The fact that there was nothing on the Mac for this type of game.)

I think I summed it up in my first posting, but I'll elaborate. Gameplay ideas are worth a dime a dozen. It's all about how it's executed. Gameplay is such a vague thing anyway, how could such a protection on it be defined? Sure, there are blatant ripoffs, and most thinking people would not defend such actions, but games that are derivatives and, perhaps, only 1% different - why should it be "punished" to not see the lights of day? This is how games evolve over time.

I am sure there is a game that came out pretty recently that, at its fundamental core of gameplay, could be considered a Pac-Man or Space Invaders clone.. but of course, by today's standards, I would think most people couldn't classify it as a true rip-off unless it had really lame bit-mapped graphics with a black background and 3 sound effects.

[Abscissa]

Gameplay ideas are worth a dime a dozen. It's all about how it's executed.
That's exactly it.

I know I have about a million ideas that I'll probably never get around to actually implementing...