Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Worst of the Retro Rip-Offs

Posted by Zonk on from the mining-the-past dept.

1up has a piece looking at some of the worst blatant rip-offs of classic games. By retooling old ideas and putting new labels on them, a developer can make a pretty penny at the cost of our childhood memories. From the article: "Space Invaders, right? Nope -- it's actually Space Fever, one of the first arcade games produced by Nintendo. Lest certain internet forums break out into a rash of OMG TAITO COPIED NINTENDO threads, I'll be very clear: it was Space Fever that was the ripoff. Much like how America was taken over by Pong and clones in the 1970s, a few years later, you couldn't swing a dead neko in Japan without hitting a Space Invaders machine. The fad was so prevalent that all sorts of imitation machines sprouted up."

109 comments

  1. Thank god Tetris is sacred! by evil-osm · · Score: 5, Funny

    If someone was to copy/redo that, I'd just die!

    --


    E.

    Never rub another man's rhubarb - The Joker
    1. Re:Thank god Tetris is sacred! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's pretty funny considering the legal history of tetris

      here's the relative wiki article...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetris#History_and_le gal_issues

    2. Re:Thank god Tetris is sacred! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know, jokes become less funny the more you explain them.

    3. Re:Thank god Tetris is sacred! by eurenix · · Score: 2, Funny

      Then I would suggest you never, ever take cs107 at Stanford.

    4. Re:Thank god Tetris is sacred! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and slightly less for every time you point something else out about it afterwards.

    5. Re:Thank god Tetris is sacred! by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure this thread has hit anti-humor levels. The only hope is to bring it back through the other side.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  2. First Psot!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    (This is actually a bad rip off of the now famous "First Post!')

    1. Re:First Psot!!! by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1, Insightful

      (This is actually a bad rip off of the now famous "First Post!')

      Actually, from the place of your posting, I think the full name would be "First Psot from the Second Place" :P

  3. How about the *best* of the retro rip-offs by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How about a list of the best video game rip-offs ? Some ripoffs improved on the original considerably. For example, Tengen's unlicensed NES Tetris is much better than the official Nintendo version. Pole Position was copied endlessly, eventually spawning an entire genre of games. There were various ripoffs of Pac-Man, some inspired by the "Pac-Man is drugs craze", where Power pellets and "fruit" (now mostly mushrooms) produced strange side-effects in Pac-Man. Last but not least are all those hacked Street Fighter 2 arcade machines. Eventually you started seeing entirely new graphics added to the ROM, with bizarre new characters and moves, and many of these were way more fun to play than the original because you never knew what the hell was going to happen.

    --

    In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    1. Re:How about the *best* of the retro rip-offs by MMaestro · · Score: 1

      Rip-offs are generally meant to classify something as an almost exact copy of a previous model with no improvements or changes and often with nothing more than a name change.

    2. Re:How about the *best* of the retro rip-offs by tepples · · Score: 1

      Would this "rip-off" category include open-source video games with the same rules as a proprietary game but different graphics and a more community-friendly license?

    3. Re:How about the *best* of the retro rip-offs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      C'mon now, this is /. - that falls squarely in the 'homage' category here.

  4. One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Everyone in the art and fashion world seems to run around with their hair on fire whenever someone's work resembles someone else's. The game world seems to work similarly. Here's my two cents:

    First of all, EVERYTHING is based on EVERYTHING ELSE. Each of us creates new things by assimilating and processing all the old things that surround us. Our culture is a huge collaborative thing, and anyone who tries to tell you they've come up with something entirely new with no basis in anything that exists already is lying to you (or to themselves).

    Second, THIS IS A GOOD THING. I don't want every new first person shooter that comes out to have some new and unusual control scheme. I don't want grenades to work totally differently in every game. I don't want to have to read a fucking book before I can start playing. I WANT and EXPECT my games to follow some sort of reasonable conventions. This goes for storyline elements, too. I want a plot with a beginning, middle, and end. I want a game that places me in the middle of some sort of interesting situation and allows me to be, for at least a little while, right in the middle of things. In other words, I want game companies to figure out what is fun, and what works well, and produce it dependably. This means studying what already works, which means duplicating to some extent the gameplay of other games. AND THIS IS GOOD.

    Third, since when did everything have to be brand new and different to be valid? We don't suddenly decide that cars are "so last century" and begin driving 10 foot hamster wheels, do we? NO. We stick with the tried and true, with old reliable. Cars haven't been new and different for a hundred years; every car is totally derivative, a "ripoff" of the very first car. SO WHAT? It drives, it's nice, I like it.

    Anyway, that's my piece. People who use the term "ripoff" as though it's some kind of sin need to get over themselves.

    1. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by mctk · · Score: 5, Funny
      Hey guys, I just thought you might like to read my personal opinion. I'll take full credit for it, thanks:

      First of all, EVERYTHING is based on EVERYTHING ELSE. Each of us creates new things by assimilating and processing all the old things that surround us. Our culture is a huge collaborative thing, and anyone who tries to tell you they've come up with something entirely new with no basis in anything that exists already is lying to you (or to themselves).

      Second, THIS IS A GOOD THING. I don't want every new first person shooter that comes out to have some new and unusual control scheme. I don't want grenades to work totally differently in every game. I don't want to have to read a fucking book before I can start playing. I WANT and EXPECT my games to follow some sort of reasonable conventions. This goes for storyline elements, too. I want a plot with a beginning, middle, and end. I want a game that places me in the middle of some sort of interesting situation and allows me to be, for at least a little while, right in the middle of things. In other words, I want game companies to figure out what is fun, and what works well, and produce it dependably. This means studying what already works, which means duplicating to some extent the gameplay of other games. AND THIS IS GOOD.

      Third, since when did everything have to be brand new and different to be valid? We don't suddenly decide that cars are "so last century" and begin driving 10 foot hamster wheels, do we? NO. We stick with the tried and true, with old reliable. Cars haven't been new and different for a hundred years; every car is totally derivative, a "ripoff" of the very first car. SO WHAT? It drives, it's nice, I like it.

      Anyway, that's my piece. People who use the term "ripoff" as though it's some kind of sin need to get over themselves.

      --
      Paul Grosfield - the quicker picker upper.
    2. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks like you didn't even read the article at all. All the characteristics you describe can indeed be good things.

      The article is not about those things. It is about games that put in zero effort to create anything new whatsoever. That's what a rip-off is.

      I'd suggest you read the article, especially the descriptions of the games.

    3. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Taking an existing idea and improving it is a good thing, and is what drives innovation. Changing a few surface details and slapping a new name on it is intellectual theft. There's a huge difference, and you'd be wise to understand it.

      Most of what you're talking about is the former, and the article (which you obviously didn't read) is about the latter.

    4. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by tmossman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Third, since when did everything have to be brand new and different to be valid? We don't suddenly decide that cars are "so last century" and begin driving 10 foot hamster wheels, do we?

      Clearly you've never travelled in the comfort, style, and security that only a giant hamster wheel can provide. I'd be happy to give you a ride some time in my 9-foot wheel. It's not quite as large as the 10-foot model, but I think that's just a little too 'flashy'. I drive one for the gas mileage, not to make a spectacle of myself.

    5. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 4, Funny

      Good thing you don't care, 'cause that TechieHermit guy totally ripped you off.

      --
      ± 29 dB
    6. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by GeekyMike · · Score: 1

      First of all, EVERYTHING is based on EVERYTHING ELSE

      Two words, Katamari Damacy. Actually, thats's based on some odd drug trip

      --
      Beware the fury of a patient man
      - John Dryden
    7. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by db32 · · Score: 1

      I agree with you for the most part, but if you go through the article "ripoff" is a pretty accurate term. There is a difference between similar games and ripoffs. Some of the games mentioned in that article are clearly ripoffs meant to steal profit by producing a nearly identical replica, not on any similarities. Look at the Super Mario Bro vs Great Giana Sisters vs Commander Keen. The sisters game is clearly a ripoff and the Keen games are clearly based on, yet original. Hell the screenshots of half of the games in the articles are pretty damning evidence. Lets not try to cover ripoff artists under a broad blanket of protection with this. There is a difference in your cars argument as well. Compare the Ford Mustang with the Chevy Camaro...two very different designs, yet both based on being a 4 wheeled vehicle...Now compare the Chevy El Camino with the Ford Ranchero... There will always be things based on original works that are indeed original...and there will always be ripoffs trying to copy the success of the original. Lets not mix the two into being the same thing...a ripoff is a ripoff.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    8. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but what's the difference, really? If two games are very similar, and one is technically a "ripoff" of the other, who cares, as long as they're both fun? A while back, I played though Psy-Ops, and then later, I played through Second Sight. Initially, people thought one was a ripoff of the other, but it turned out they were developed at the same time (And, how did THAT happen? Interesting).

      It didn't matter, though. I didn't care if one was a ripoff of the other. I had a ball playing BOTH of them. I wish they'd made MORE of them. Hell, give me a ripoff of one of those games. Give me a dozen! As long as you don't screw it up and make a crappy game, I'll buy 'em. The trick, here, is to make your ripoff a GOOD GAME. If it's good, it's A-OK. If it's bad, well, we're not going to buy it just because it looks like game X. It has to be good.

      A ripoff may be a ripoff, but if it's a GOOD ripoff, what's the big deal? As long as you're not trying to pass it off as the original you're not breaking any laws and you're not hurting anyone. In fact, you're making things more interesting by giving people options. Nothing wrong with that...

    9. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Ha! Good one! Well done. And very funny.

    10. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Ah. Well. Yeah, ok, that's pretty weird and original. Still, whoever wrote that bit of madness drew on his experiences in writing it, as odd as those must have been (makes you wonder, though, doesn't it?).

      I like your drug trip theory; that WOULD explain it. :)

    11. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by db32 · · Score: 1

      The situation changes a great deal with the type of game involved. A game that you play through the story line is a bit different there are lots more things you can change so its not just a ripoff. A Pacman or Super Mario Bros ripoff is more of a direct competition, copied graphics and all. In more modern complex games I think the ripoff thing has mostly gone away, and it really is just variant games. In the early games it was a bit of a different situation. Imagine if all of the wall textures and enemys looked identical in your two games. Look at Resident Evil and Silent Hill series, both are very similar, but to compare them like the ripoffs in the article would be like Silent Hill having a secret company called Raincoat and they produced a Z virus that turned everyone in Silent Hill into zombies, and the main char would be a member of an elite police team CIRCLES. I don't think it is the same problem to day as it was back then, some of those games are clearly copies done by ripoff artists, not someone elses take on the same game. To me this falls under copyright. I shouldn't be able to take Frank Herbert's Dune to Kinkos and just have them replace a few names and sell it as my own. Sure people would enjoy it, its the same story they enjoyed in Dune, that doesn't mean I have any right to claim it as mine.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    12. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      First of all, EVERYTHING is based on EVERYTHING ELSE. Each of us creates new things by assimilating and processing all the old things that surround us.

      Of course, this is correct. But the actual combination of parts into a new synthesis, that's where creativity lies. Do not discount the importance of this! In a way, the degree of separation from an included idea from that expected is a measure of the creativty inherent in the inclusion.

      Our culture is a huge collaborative thing, and anyone who tries to tell you they've come up with something entirely new with no basis in anything that exists already is lying to you (or to themselves).

      It is unfortunate that our legal system does not recognize this....

      Second, THIS IS A GOOD THING. I don't want every new first person shooter that comes out to have some new and unusual control scheme. I don't want grenades to work totally differently in every game. I don't want to have to read a fucking book before I can start playing. I WANT and EXPECT my games to follow some sort of reasonable conventions.

      You were doing well up to this point. I would say that most games are far too insular, instead of looking outside gaming to find their new ideas, they are, more and more often, looking at other games for inspiration.

      Of course, it's possible to be too creative. It's possible to be so creative that no one understands you, which is a good working definition of madness. Pure randomness is infinitely creative, but is also meaningless. I think that's the core of your idea, really, but I think you examples don't push it far enough.

      My own examples:
      A game set in a garden with little plant-monsters terrorizing the local wildlife, now that's creative. A game that's like Goldeneye with more guns and different missions, that's not so creative.

      A game that's just a series of giant boss battles, which play like "vertical dungeons," and no low-level monsters at all, now that's creative. Yet another Madden game, that's SO not creative.

      This goes for storyline elements, too. I want a plot with a beginning, middle, and end.

      Oh, do you? And what does that mean? The best stories play around with those conventions instead of following them unquestioningly. They may have false climaxes, jumping into the middle of the story from the beginning and saving exposition for later, or bitter-sweet endings. Rather, I would say you enjoy a story for its telling, and not because of those structural elements, which may be conducive to a good story but are not its cause.

      Cars haven't been new and different for a hundred years; every car is totally derivative, a "ripoff" of the very first car. SO WHAT? It drives, it's nice, I like it.

      One could argue that we need a new kind of car. We've been promised flying vehicles in the near-to-mid future since the fifties, and wouldn't it be cool to have one? There's not a tremendous need for one, but wouldn't you just *love* to tool around in a flying car?

      That sense of coolness, that spark of novelty, is what drives videogaming, and the greatest danger to the health of gaming is the possibility that this spark is being lost. That's the entire reason so many people can't shut up about Katamari Damacy -- I can't think of another game that has that spark to greater degree.

    13. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      I see where you're coming from; you might have a point about the old games. Maybe, being so simple, they were easy to copy without doing anything innovative or interesting.

      You see what I'm saying about modern games -- the graphics are so good that when you create a game, you're really writing something more akin to a movie, so when people produce similar games it's more like their "take" on the subject matter. This is where I was going when I said that the "ripoff" term was unfair... I see lots of people applying it to similar games, and I don't understand why they're getting all heated up over it, you know?

      Anyway, I think I agree with you overall. And direct-copy ripoffs like the ones you describe are already illegal, I think the FTC investigates them, and Treasury? Although I'm thinking more about DVD bootlegs and knockoff Prada bags, here... :)

    14. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Fair points, fair points... I'd like to offer these in return (things I didn't comment on, I agree with):

      As far as games being too insular, I wasn't talking about storyline. I was talking about the controls, and the dynamics of gameplay (i.e. there's a button for crouching and for jumping, some sort of inventory system, at least some kind of boss battle here and there, some puzzles, etc -- user interface elements and gameplay elements). My point is that there is already a relatively "perfect" interface and general approach used in videogames. Since this is just a framework that lets the player have an adventure, why not stick to the standards and not gum up the works with some new and bizarre control scheme, or random, potentially boring game dynamics?

      Within that framework, you can do ANYTHING. If you want to be innovative, do it in the writing and the art design, NOT the game mechanics. Of course, adding something interesting (like a new type of puzzle or something) is just fine. Adding a new ability that nobody's seen before (the psychokinesis of Psi-Ops and Second Sight, for example) is tremendously fun. But fit it into a standard framework, so gamers can get into the story without fighting the console, you know? You shouldn't even NOTICE the control scheme if it's designed well. Everything should just flow.

      I suppose what I'm describing is an engineering principle: standardize your user interface and game dynamics and innovate in the game itself. Not all companies have the common sense to do this.

      "Beginning, Middle, and End" -- What do you mean, "what does this mean"? It means the story should begin in a way that lures you in, EASES you in, and gets you interested and involved, while sort of sneaking up on you; it should provide you with some sort of conflict that requires tremendous efforts on your part, something appropriately heroic and challenging (the middle); and it should ultimately bring you to some sort of satisfying conclusion or closure. Just like any sort of narrative. I wasn't being cryptic. These are the three parts of just about ANY story. They're why plays generally have three acts, right?

      As far as playing around with narrative, that's fine, but if you pay attention you'll notice that THOSE stories have a beginning, a middle, and an end ALSO. What they're changing is the order in which things are revealed to you. So I have to disagree with this criticism.

      Look, it's like this: a story is not good just because it has the proper structural elements. However, if it doesn't have them, it's VERY DIFFICULT for it to be good. They're a required element, but not a sufficient one.

      Consider my "pancake analogy". You want to make some delicious pancakes for your new girlfriend, who is sleeping naked in the other room. It's very important for you to please her. So, you're in the kitchen. What do you do? You pull out the pancake mix, you prepare the batter, and you make the pancakes. Then you apply the syrup.

      Now, you can make pancakes in a variety of ways. You can use milk and eggs, you can use butter, you can use something else... But you will ALWAYS use pancake batter and syrup, because otherwise, they're not pancakes and your naked girlfriend will put her clothes on and go to Denny's, which is not an optimal outcome. So you use the proper batter and the syrup, and maybe you spend Saturday with her in bed.

      Now, pancake batter and syrup are NECESSARY, but not SUFFICIENT. Because maybe you're really bad at making pancakes, and even if you use the right stuff, you screw it up. There's no help for that. But if you start out without batter and syrup, you're already done for.

      See what I mean?

      ON FLYING CARS: Oh, HELL no! The day they let everyone drive a flying car is the day I build my house underground and telecommute to work. I believe this will never, ever happen for the following reasons (described as types of flying car mishap):

      FLYING CAR MISHAPS:

      * While yakking on his cell phone, an executive of some sort doesn't p

    15. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 1

      You do realize that Katamari Damacy is pac-man with a twist right?

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    16. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      My point is that there is already a relatively "perfect" interface and general approach used in videogames. Since this is just a framework that lets the player have an adventure, why not stick to the standards and not gum up the works with some new and bizarre control scheme, or random, potentially boring game dynamics?

      Because what is often forgotten in game design is that controls can be part of the fun. That's a large part of the fun of Robotron 2084, of Katamari Damacy, of Dance Dance Revolution, and will be a lot of the fun, Nintendo hopes, of Revolution. Your reductionist approach to controls would ignore that.

      Within that framework, you can do ANYTHING. If you want to be innovative, do it in the writing and the art design, NOT the game mechanics.

      No, I do not accept this. A game IS its mechanics, that's what a video game brings to the table that cannot be done in another medium.

      It means the story should begin in a way that lures you in, EASES you in, and gets you interested and involved, while sort of sneaking up on you; it should provide you with some sort of conflict that requires tremendous efforts on your part, something appropriately heroic and challenging (the middle); and it should ultimately bring you to some sort of satisfying conclusion or closure. Just like any sort of narrative. I wasn't being cryptic. These are the three parts of just about ANY story.

      But the key here is that a story does not HAVE to be like that in order to be good. Beginnings, middles and ends are tools for the writer, not mandates that must be in a story to make it good. But I think you can be forgiven for that confusion, since so many other people are also confused on the issue these days: you don't enjoy something because of how it's made, instead its construction aids you in enjoying it. There must be something else there, however, or the effort is wasted. I make no attempt to prove this: it is an axiom.

      They're why plays generally have three acts, right?

      No, many plays, including all of Shakespeare's, have five acts. Some have just one.

      As far as playing around with narrative, that's fine, but if you pay attention you'll notice that THOSE stories have a beginning, a middle, and an end ALSO. What they're changing is the order in which things are revealed to you. So I have to disagree with this criticism.

      Then once again I must ask, what do you mean by a "beginning, middle and end?" If you're merely talking about the chronological progress of the story then your statement is trivial to the point of meaninglessness. Obviously, you mean there's something special that must be in a beginning, something special that must be in middles, and something special that must be in endings. There are lots of things that SHOULD be in those sections of a story, but I can think of counter examples for all of the "shoulds" I can think of, while your statements are proscriptive in a way Plato would be proud of. The danger with making those kinds of statements, of course, is that they are destroyed if someone can come up with even one good counter-example.

      However, if it doesn't have them, it's VERY DIFFICULT for it to be good. They're a required element, but not a sufficient one.

      Okay, let's break it down into four possible states:
      1. Has structure, is good.
      2. Has no structure, is good.
      3. Has structure, is not good.
      4. Has no structure, is not good.

      Now, you can make pancakes in a variety of ways. You can use milk and eggs, you can use butter, you can use something else... But you will ALWAYS use pancake batter and syrup, because otherwise, they're not pancakes and your naked girlfriend will put her clothes on and go to Denny's, which is not an optimal outcome.

      Unless I make scrambled eggs and bacon instead. You might say, "Ah-ha, but that wouldn't be pancakes, now would it?" And I'd respond that it's always the person who gets the question wrong, or thinks about it from a different

    17. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by db32 · · Score: 1

      Many modern games use the same game engines with different graphics and plotlines. To me that just seems efficient, no use reinventing the wheel. My only concern with that as far as ripoffs go is when the engine is copied almost exactly without credit or licensing. To me ripoff has more to do with the stolen idea part, rather than the copying part.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    18. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Ok; on narrative, we'll have to agree to disagree. I find your "axiom" to be a matter of opinion (and wrong, but that's MY opinion, equally valid as yours). There's no point in us restating our sides over and over again.

      On game engines being part of the benefit of games, I disagree. Like all software (I'm a software engineer) games should adhere to common industry UI conventions and test for usability. It's simply good practice. Most games actually do. Virtually all shooters use the standard in which the left thumbstick sidesteps and moves forward and back, and the right thumbstick orients the point of view. This is an excellent example of standardization of UI. Most shooters also make this configurable for the user, which is another good standard. But again, we'll probably have to agree to disagree, while noting that the industry seems to agree with ME on this one (katamari damarcy notwithstanding).

      On flying cars, when it comes to your comment about how the same problems exist with normal cars, you MUST be insane. Normal cars have nowhere NEAR the kinetic energy a flying car would have, especially after it had fallen two to three hundred feet. The amount of damage a flying car crash would cause would be astronomically higher than that caused by an ordinary car. You aren't thinking the issue through.

      But my reply was really only a gentle mocking of your flying car analogy. It was funny; laugh. ;)

    19. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by cableshaft · · Score: 1

      Damancy is also like the web game 'Fishy' with a twist also. (Fishy is also a clone of an old... I want to say Commodore 64 game, also, but I can't remember the name of it. I want to say Fishin' Frenzy, but I can't find it on a google search).

      --
      Creator of the popular web game Proximity
    20. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by servognome · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Two words, Katamari Damacy. Actually, thats's based on some odd drug trip

      It's a lot like Super Monkey Ball (which in turn was a lot like Marble Madness), but focusing on the collection aspect rather than the maze solving. In fact the "designers must be on drugs" idea was also mentioned in SMB reviews

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    21. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      First, I have to apologize for my previous comment, I included an imcomplete section that I had intended to remove, but I forgot to take it out completely when I hit the Submit button, sorry if it was confusing.

      Ok; on narrative, we'll have to agree to disagree. I find your "axiom" to be a matter of opinion (and wrong, but that's MY opinion, equally valid as yours). There's no point in us restating our sides over and over again.

      Except, are we really at that point? I do sometimes have to "agree to disagree," but I never like it.

      But the thing about my statement is that I consider it to be obvious. I don't see how anyone could not see it. Yet, I cannot come up with a good counter-example to your premise because of the vagueness of your claim. Again, what does having a beginning, middle and end really mean? I consider you to mean the classical model, containing setting, complication, climax and resolution. To that, I can respond - and did, if I remember correctly.

      Like all software (I'm a software engineer) games should adhere to common industry UI conventions and test for usability. It's simply good practice.

      Except entertainment software is a lot more difficult to define than applications software. As I said before, there are games where a large portion of the fun comes from its control scheme. Arcade driving games use real steering wheels. Marble Madness had perhaps the all-time best use of a trackball. Your arguement that games would benefit from having standardized controls actually seems to be an arguement that first-person shooters would benefit from having them. But concerning that....

      Virtually all shooters use the standard in which the left thumbstick sidesteps and moves forward and back, and the right thumbstick orients the point of view. This is an excellent example of standardization of UI.

      Yeah, but first-person shooters suck. I so hate them! And I happen to know that I am not alone in this opinion. The last FPS I could bring myself to spend any time with is Metroid Prime 2 (which doesn't completely qualify), and the one before that was Serious Sam (which was fairly cool for what it was). Lots of people may like them, but it is a grevious mistake to think they are the only gamers who matter.

      And it's interesting to note the reason we hate FPSes: it's BECAUSE they've become so standardized! Not just in controls, but in just about every other aspect of their being. They all literally *are* the same game with different maps and minor rule changes. A FPS with a goofy control scheme (like Revolution has) might actually be enough to get me to play another one, if just because of the novelty factor, but I'm not going to posit the revival of the genre based on that.

      Ultimately, the core of entertainment is in novelty, and I am loathe to banish any potential source of innovation from gaming because of that.

      But again, we'll probably have to agree to disagree, while noting that the industry seems to agree with ME on this one (katamari damarcy notwithstanding).

      I'd say the industry agrees with you because the industry sucks. I know a lot of gamers -- and at least a couple of developers -- who agree with me on that issue. They ain't all Nintendo fanboys.

      And Katamari Damacy is a very instructive example, enough that I would hardly say it is not withstanding. Even game industry wonks seem to recognize there's something of value there....

      On flying cars, when it comes to your comment about how the same problems exist with normal cars, you MUST be insane. Normal cars have nowhere NEAR the kinetic energy a flying car would have, especially after it had fallen two to three hundred feet. The amount of damage a flying car crash would cause would be astronomically higher than that caused by an ordinary car. You aren't thinking the issue through.

      My observation is that dangers inherent in ground vehicles and flying vehicles are different primarily in matters

    22. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Oh, man, you've got it bad. The mental image I'm forming of you is an angry, disappointed starbucks cashier who went to a community college to learn how to "write games for a living", was shot down in his first round of resume submissions, and now rants for 45 minutes about how "the gaming industry SUCKS" whenever anyone mentions anything even remotely computer related. Such bitterness! If you happen to have blue hair and piercings, that would really perfect the mental picture... Do you?

      Heh heh heh... Let us continue our discussion.

      First of all, I wasn't focusing on first-person shooters, I just used them as a useful and instructive example. The control scheme I mentioned works well for ANY sort of game in which you are inhabiting a human-like character in a world you can explore. For games in which you are piloting a human-type person, whether you're in first person or third person, the control scheme I described is nearly PERFECT. And it arrived at its form through a vicious type of darwinian selection -- first person shooters with klunky control schemes were rejected by gamers as "unplayable", and ultimately, the most easily playable, perfect control scheme arose from this. Note that this has been in progress since Doom 1, and I've been there as a gamer the whole way. So it's not just a matter of opinion, it's a matter of 12 years of experience playing almost every single shooter, adventure, or platforming game that's come out with a 3D, realistic environment.

      I disagree with you VEHEMENTLY that all first person shooters are "the same, but with different maps". I think that's the point of view of a gamer who dislikes first person shooters, and can't be bothered to learn anything about them. What do you play, RPG's? I bet you play World of Warcraft as some kind of female elf. Ooh -- a "Dark Elf"? Yeah... It's always the RPG players who get angriest about first person shooters. You'd think we were stealing your women or something.

      Anyway, modern first person shooters (and third person shooters, and adventure games like Prince of Persia) share very similar game dynamics and control schemes because that general paradigm has evolved to be the PERFECT paradigm for this kind of story. The game environment, really, is just a delivery mechanism. Not unlike a DVD player. You are using the game environment to experience an adventure. The innovation comes from the adventure ITSELF. It's about writing, and art, and level design. Over the past several years, games have become more and more cinematic and plot-driven, and this has been WONDERFUL for those of us who enjoy these games.

      Some very interesting concepts have come about. But they're generally about narrative and story, NOT weird, freaky controls. It's rare game that doesn't conform to standards, control-wise, Thank GOD.

      Finally, who cares whether people think flying cars around would be fun? They're barely competent driving the cars they've got NOW, nobody's going to let those goobers FLY! The whole idea is ridiculous. No government is EVER going to be dumb enough to let anyone fly a car hundreds of feet in the air over a populated area. It just isn't EVER going to happen. And I think that's a GOOD thing.

    23. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      Oh, man, you've got it bad. The mental image I'm forming of you is an angry, disappointed starbucks cashier who went to a community college (etc etc)

      Ah, because if you can't respond logically to someone the best thing to do is stereotype them? No I don't work for Starbucks no I don't have blue hair and piercings no I don't rant for hours about Evangelion no etcetera. On the other hand, you are fulfilling more than one stereotype of your own -- AND you are resorting to ad hominem attacks, and are verging on trolling.

      The person I was referring to who thinks the industry sucks, by the way, is Chris Crawford, who is one of the most brilliant game designers I can think of off the top of my head. He *is* somewhat embittered, but I just happen to think he has very good reasons!

      The control scheme I mentioned works well for ANY sort of game in which you are inhabiting a human-like character in a world you can explore.

      I do not accept the assertion. The controls to the original Legend of Zelda are completely different from Quake.

      For games in which you are piloting a human-type person, whether you're in first person or third person, the control scheme I described is nearly PERFECT.

      I do not accept this assertion either, a perfect control scheme would be virtual reality, which would have no truck with mice, buttons or joypads.

      And it arrived at its form through a vicious type of darwinian selection -- first person shooters with klunky control schemes were rejected by gamers as "unplayable", and ultimately, the most easily playable, perfect control scheme arose from this.

      I reject this assertion as well, Darwininan-style, "genetic" algorithms can produce startlingly ingenious results, but they do not create perfection, by definition, unless run over an infinite time frame, and they also rely on chance providing the mutation factor, not human cunning.

      Note that this has been in progress since Doom 1, and I've been there as a gamer the whole way.

      I've been a gamer since Combat. And you forgot about Wolfenstein 3D, Catacombs and MIDImaze. Anyway, your point?

      So it's not just a matter of opinion, it's a matter of 12 years of experience playing almost every single shooter, adventure, or platforming game that's come out with a 3D, realistic environment.

      That's Argument From Authority, the second logical fallacy I've spotted in this message alone, and considering that I've played a fair number of games myself (embarassingly many, in fact) it's not even a particularly good authority relative to your opponent. Meanwhile you have yet to respond to my counter-examples from prior messages.

      I disagree with you VEHEMENTLY that all first person shooters are "the same, but with different maps".

      They are. I don't think someone can argue against this point. Whether I like FPSes or not is beside the point.

      They are games in which you have a character, virtually represented by the camera, who launches missile weapons of various ranges (including melee range) at other foes, who have similar abilities although typically much less stamina, in real-time. If you have a sufficently broad definition of game, then indeed, all FPSes are the same game. You could not confuse a FPS with MULE, Parappa, Rogue, Zelda, Mario, *Wars, Wizardry, SimCity, The Sims, Zork, Starflight, Everquest, Civilization, Pirates, Rampart, 720 Degrees, Marble Madness, Robotron, Katamari Damacy or Final Fantasy, or for that matter Monopoly, Scrabble, Risk, Clue, Settlers of Catan, Puerto Rico, Dungeons & Dragons, Boggle, Bridge, Poker, Magic, or Go Fish. However, you could easily confuse Halo with Unreal.

      I think that's the point of view of a gamer who dislikes first person shooters, and can't be bothered to learn anything about them.

      Well I do know something about them, I *have* played some FPSes before (which I think I mentioned, Serious Sam sure isn't a board game). But although there may be s

    24. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Oh, blah blah blah. Mr. Ad Hominem himself now wants to complain that I saw his ad hominem and raised him an appeal to authority? Bullshit. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, kiddo.

      And, yes, your unfounded assertions that the gaming industry sucks, that my choice in games sucks, etc, etc, are all ad hominem arguments. I was kind enough to have a sense of humor about yours.

      Now, as far as your "arguments" go, you're not providing ANY as far as I can tell. At best, all you've done is make blanket, unsupported assertions and assume I'll play ball. But I don't, because I disagree with you on almost every point. I think you are ranting on about your unfounded opinions and therefore your point of view is entirely unsupported. EVERYTHING we've been discussing is entirely subjective, so you're lying to yourself if you think ANYTHING you've said is "provable".

      But you keep going, I'm enjoying watching you spin your wheels.

    25. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      Oh, blah blah blah. Mr. Ad Hominem himself now wants to complain that I saw his ad hominem and raised him an appeal to authority? Bullshit. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, kiddo.

      Then, if you please, give me your example of my using an Ad Hominem.

      And, yes, your unfounded assertions that the gaming industry sucks, that my choice in games sucks, etc, etc, are all ad hominem arguments. I was kind enough to have a sense of humor about yours.

      Oh for the love of....

      The game industry DOES suck, and first-person shooters DO suck, all according to my opinion of course but it is MY opinion after all, but it should not be any skin off your bones for me to say these things. I did not call *you* any names. On the contrary, I've tried to keep things fairly civil in speaking with you. Don't take these things so seriously, dude.

      But I don't, because I disagree with you on almost every point. I think you are ranting on about your unfounded opinions and therefore your point of view is entirely unsupported. EVERYTHING we've been discussing is entirely subjective, so you're lying to yourself if you think ANYTHING you've said is "provable".

      Yep, you're trolling.

    26. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Thank you for your delicious last post! First you challenge me to show you where you use ad hominem, then you provide me with several examples! Amazing. But, my dear conversational partner, I am not trolling. I am DISAGREEING, which you seem to have some difficulty with. You're too persnickety for my tastes.

      I shall hereby banish you with Godwin's Incantation: "You know who ELSE doesn't like disagreement? The NAZIS, that's who! Yeah, boy, if you said a NAZI gaming industry sucked, they'da nailed yer thumbs to yer XBox controller..."

      I believe that's killed the thread... Hmm... If you reply we could consider that a disproof by counterexample of Godwin's law. I wonder if Slashdot would implode if that were to happen?

    27. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      I am DISAGREEING, which you seem to have some difficulty with.

      If you were just disagreeing, you'd respond to my points instead of ignoring them when convenient. That, and your absurd hyperbole, are why I say you're trolling.

      I not only say you're doing it, but you probably know you are, and are just trying to get a rise out of me.

    28. Re:One man's ripoff is another man's homage. by TechieHermit · · Score: 1

      Huh. Godwin's incantation bounced right off you. So much for Godwin.

      Anyway, No, I'm not trolling; I think you're a putz and I'm disagreeing with you. Now, go ahead and reaffirm your incorrect assumption again. It's all in good fun, here on Slashdot.

  5. Yeah, Nintendo's Guilty Too... by macserv · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Lest certain internet forums break out into a rash of OMG TAITO COPIED NINTENDO threads, I'll be very clear: it was Space Fever that was the ripoff


    Most of that article, however, is about Nintendo getting ripped off, way bigger than Space Invaders. In its early days in the video game business, Nintendo did indeed make clones of Space Invaders (Nintendo's had COLOR!) and Joust. However, after Shigeru Miyamoto joined the Big N, they became the company to rip off: Super Mario Bros., The Legend of Zelda, Super Metroid, and Donkey Kong are all mentioned.
    1. Re:Yeah, Nintendo's Guilty Too... by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

      :(

      I hope Nintendo's still good when people like Miyamoto retires. Luckily Iwata should be heading the company for a while.

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    2. Re:Yeah, Nintendo's Guilty Too... by Bega · · Score: 1

      What?? So you mean that the Great Giana Sisters was a ripoff of Super Mario Brothers?!?!

      --

      THIS IS THE INTERNET. PLEASE PICK UP YOUR SERIOUS BUSINESS SUIT AT THE FRONT COUNTER.
    3. Re:Yeah, Nintendo's Guilty Too... by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 1

      There was a program over here in the UK about nintendo a while back, and although the presenter is TERRIBLE (I want to lock her in a cupboard and leave her to rot), it was quite interesting to see just how humble Miyamoto is... to the extent that I do worry that one day he'll wander off in a "I'm not really that useful anyway" sort of way. I hope not.

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2687866789 001698114

  6. Pot, meet Kettle by The-Bus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find it funny that this is a front-page article that appears a few days after the article praising Geometry Wars to no end.

    --

    Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    1. Re:Pot, meet Kettle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I find it funny that this is a front-page article that appears a few days after the article praising Geometry Wars to no end.
      It's not a "real" front-page article, it's a stub. And please don't make the mistake of thinking that Slashdot, or even the Slashdot editors, speak with one voice. You're implying there is some sort of hypocracy evident when that is not even possible.
  7. it's ksirtet, so what? by twitter · · Score: 3, Insightful
    this is about serious plagiarism, the sort of copyright-infringement stuff that makes the lawyers come running. Half of these games spawned court cases; the other half by all rights should have.

    The author likes lawyers?

    Three cheers for Namco for not bothering with them for Pacman clones. Some ideas are so obvious and have so much non computer prior art that anything but a direct copy is hard to call plagiarism. It would suck if you could not borrow bitmaps for parody. I'm glad big dumb companies can't claim the IDEA for a game and that clones can be made. Sure, those clones might not have the genius the "original" creator did, but that's not always the big dumb company anyway.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:it's ksirtet, so what? by Ponzicar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree that most of the time lawyers shouldn't become involved, but I think that a lawsuit would have been perfectly justified when it came to stuff like "Hangly Man."

    2. Re:it's ksirtet, so what? by despisethesun · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nah, the "Hangly Man" people should be given a free pass here just for the name, which might be one of the funniest names in video game history.

      --
      This poo is cold.
    3. Re:it's ksirtet, so what? by amliebsch · · Score: 1
      Some ideas are so obvious and have so much non computer prior art that anything but a direct copy is hard to call plagiarism.

      I'm curious what the "non-computer prior art" is for Pac-Man. In any case, prior art applies to patents, not copyright.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    4. Re:it's ksirtet, so what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how about rats in a maze? its kinda the same. throw in a few cats and steriod pills.. wala pac man

    5. Re:it's ksirtet, so what? by way2trivial · · Score: 1

      apparently eating pizza
      to wit
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pac_man
      receiving inspiration from a pizza with one slice missing [1], game designer Iwatani spent approximately seventeen months on a game that revolved around eating

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    6. Re:it's ksirtet, so what? by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      It's worth noting that Namco, themselves, never really ripped off the original Pac-Man in the classic era.

      The most popular sequel, Ms. Pac-Man, was actually originally a Pac-Man rip-off that Midway bought from General Computer Corporation. Both of Namco's direct sequels, Super Pac-Man and Pac 'n Pal, while having a similar theme and graphics, had substantial gameplay differences from the original game.

  8. Speaking of Pac-Man by garrett714 · · Score: 1

    The worse re-use of a video game character is when they made that Pac-Man 2d side scroller for SNES. From what I remember the game played horribly and didn't offer nearly as much fun as the original.

    Found an image: Pac-Man's Hizzle

  9. Angband - Diablo by Tet · · Score: 1

    One of the things that pisses me off is people raving about Diablo and its sequels. It's a blatant rip off of Angband, but with all the gameplay removed, and dumbed down to make it appeal to the masses. But no one ever acknowledges the fact (in fact, few are even aware of it in the first place). Sigh.

    --
    "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
    1. Re:Angband - Diablo by GammaKitsune · · Score: 2, Funny

      ...This is a joke, right? Is there another Angband game that I'm not aware of, because the only Angband I know is a bit different from Diablo. That's the joke, right? Right?

      --
      Gamertag: WyleType
    2. Re:Angband - Diablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well diablo is basically a graphically enhanced angband. But angband is basically moria enhanced with some ideas from nethack and moria is basically rouge with a tolkien justification grafted on.

      So diablo clearly benefited from the tradition of rougelike games they also had original ideas and made a unique/new game from them.

    3. Re:Angband - Diablo by lustforlike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have friends who play Diablo. I've introduced them to Nethack, etc. They keep playing Diablo. Obviously, Diablo added something important.

    4. Re:Angband - Diablo by gpw213 · · Score: 5, Informative
      And Angband, of course, was a rip-off of rogue, which is about 10 years older. In fact, hack, nethack, moria, angband, etc are collectively referred to as "roguelikes".

      You might take a look at Wikipedia's article

      --
      However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. -- Winston Churchill
    5. Re:Angband - Diablo by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Which one of those was realtime?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    6. Re:Angband - Diablo by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Funny, I always considered Diablo a ripoff of Nethack. But the more I think about it, Diablo had more of the mindless charging ahead of Angband (which is a ripoff of Moria, which I played a lot of in the 80s). It's much more of the "slot machine" feel of work/reward than Nethack's more refined, thoughtful gameplay.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    7. Re:Angband - Diablo by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Diablo is real time, not turn based so can't be a rip off. It has some roguelike ancestry, but games like Gauntlet are also in it's pedigree.

    8. Re:Angband - Diablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Actually, one of the developers mentioned "Nethack" as an inspiration, rather than Angband, in an interview I saw ages ago about Diablo I.
        In response to the guy who considered Diablo innovative because it's real-time -- that's nothing original, there have been real-time roguelikes going back at least as far as this old VIC-20 cassette tape of Epyx's "Star Quest I - Rescue at Rigel" I've got, and it was printed in 1980.
        (By the way, just to taunt those who know what I'm talking about -- I also have the original cassette of "Ultima -- Escape from Mt. Drash." The image doesn't seem to work in Vice's Vic-20 emulator, though.)
        -- mantar

    9. Re:Angband - Diablo by arcum42 · · Score: 1

      I don't know that I'd call Angband a ripoff of Moria. It actually is based off of the Moria source code, though it's gone through radical code rewrites on major sections of it since then. As such, I believe it would be considered more of a fork then anything else. Of course, being roguelike games, you could consider Moria, Angband, Nethack, and Diablo all ripoffs of Rogue. I don't know that I'd really consider Angband slot-machinish, either. Both do require strategy. NetHack & Angband just have rather different styles & gameplay, and often poeple who like one dislike the other. But then, there have been more then enough flame wars on the subject in the past...

    10. Re:Angband - Diablo by Zentac · · Score: 0

      I have never heard anybody rave about inovation comming from Blizzard, I thought Blizzard is widely accepted as the company that perfects/polishes known game concepts.

    11. Re:Angband - Diablo by tepples · · Score: 1

      Which one of those was realtime?

      Zelda.

    12. Re:Angband - Diablo by Forbman · · Score: 1

      Angband is a derivative of Moria. Diablo is probably the ultimate realization of nethack/rogue/dungeon.

  10. Rip-offs in the Casual Game space by jchenx · · Score: 1

    Rip-offs are really common nowadays in the casual game space. I swear, at some point, it seems like all of Popcap and Gamehouse's games were rip-offs of each other. Popcap's Big Money and Gamehouse's Collapse are two obvious examples. (And I wouldn't be surprised if they're rip-offs of some other game as well).

    In general, the whole "match 3 or more colors" gameplay has been done many times over. Just take a look at Bejeweled, Zuma, and Hexic.

    --
    -- jchenx
    1. Re:Rip-offs in the Casual Game space by bVork · · Score: 3, Informative

      I find it rather amusing that you mention Zuma, which is itself a direct clone (gameplay-wise) of Puzz Loop, which already had home ports on Playstation and Nuon(!) as Ballistic, and a PC port under the original name.

  11. Retro? by Ekarderif · · Score: 1

    I was expecting a Metroid Prime clone in the article. I didn't know they made Pong and Donkey Kong too.

    1. Re:Retro? by yanos · · Score: 1

      There is mention of Metroid clones in the article. At one point, he said that all the recent game in the Castlevania series are somewhat a ripoff of that game. My opinion is that this is true since now in a Castlevania game, you have a map, partly hidden at first and to go to one of those hidden area you must somehow upgrade your character with things like items to jump higher, go into water, make your way into little passage...etc.

    2. Re:Retro? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      My opinion is that this is true since now in a Castlevania game, you have a map, partly hidden at first and to go to one of those hidden area you must somehow upgrade your character with things like items to jump higher, go into water, make your way into little passage...etc.

      That's a bit thin. By that reasoning, "Resident Evil" is "Metroid, in 3rd Person cinematic[0], without the map." "Ratchet and Clank" could be "Pac man in 3rd person following, with offensive capabilities and increased variety of enemies."

      And, of course, "Vollyball" is "Ping pong played with an inflatable ball and a raised net, while standing on the table." [1]

      [0] I don't know what the actual term is for a camera that changes location depending on the room, but this one seemed to work.

      [1] Credit to George Carlin.

    3. Re:Retro? by Kredal · · Score: 1

      Well, I got the joke. Dunno why nobody else did. (:

      For everyone else: Retro Studios developed Metroid Prime, the 3d first person version of Metroid for the Gamecube. So based on the title of the article, the parent was looking for Metroid Prime rip-offs.

      I'd give you mod points, but I had to respond instead. Sorry!

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
    4. Re:Retro? by hal2814 · · Score: 1

      Just to be thorough, Carlin says that volleyball is actually "racketless team ping pong played with an inflatable ball and a raised net, while standing on the table." Take it with a grain of salt though. This is the same guy that says gymnastics isn't a sport because Romainians are good at it.

    5. Re:Retro? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      That was it. It's been a while since I heard that bit. :)

      This is the same guy that says gymnastics isn't a sport because Romainians are good at it.

      Though, IIRC, he does admit that one took him some work to come up with.

  12. Rip-offs? by cgenman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You know, that's very hypocritical of him to write: plagiarism has long been the foundation of the writer's humble craft. (For example, that last sentence was stolen from somewhere.)

    --
    The ______ Agenda
  13. Castlevania ripped off Super Metroid? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    OK, I RTFA, and there's something I don't get. Can somebody point to me the similarities between Castlevania and Super Metroid, besides the obvious "metroid syndrome" in SOTN?

    I enjoyed both SuperCastlevania IV and SuperMetroid, the gameplay was very different. The only similarity between those two are the grappling hook / whip balancing. So, I really don't know which Castlevania they're talking about. I actually have the suspicion that the author only said it to look cool and have us all startled wondering "WTF?"

    1. Re:Castlevania ripped off Super Metroid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it's more like every 2D Castlevania game starting with SoTN has been a Metroid Syndrome.

    2. Re:Castlevania ripped off Super Metroid? by despisethesun · · Score: 2, Informative

      Do you really need everything spelled out for you? SoTN and every 2D Castlevania since were the games he was referring to.

      --
      This poo is cold.
    3. Re:Castlevania ripped off Super Metroid? by MortimerV · · Score: 1

      They made a few big stretches there. Balloon Fight and Joust? I'm surprised they didn't list Final Fantasy I and Dragon Warrior.

    4. Re:Castlevania ripped off Super Metroid? by Hellad · · Score: 1

      Errr, Ballon Fight and Joust were near the exact same game. Same play mechanics and layout, only real difference was you were on birds in Joust and floating on ballons in the other...

    5. Re:Castlevania ripped off Super Metroid? by MortimerV · · Score: 1

      I just tried out Balloon Fight to refresh my memory. I wouldn't say they were exactly the same. Joust has one level, with minor variations. It's single player only. There are variations in how the enemies spawn. There are no "bonus stages". You ride an ostrich. I'm not denying that Balloon Fight is based upon Joust. But while the basics may be quite similar, the details are significantly different. Drawing a comparison between games that have ripped off sprites or specific gameplay mechanics to one that's revamped the entire experience? That's just silly.

    6. Re:Castlevania ripped off Super Metroid? by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      http://www.gamespot.com/ps/adventure/castlevaniasy mphonyoftn/review.htmlI

      Perhaps the most important new feature added to Castlevania is its map system. Extremely similar to the one in Super Metroid, the map (which can be viewed at any time by pressing the Select button)

      It's quite well known and accepted. The first thing that springs to mind is the map menu, which is almost an exact copy.

      And this reflects important aspects of the gameplay of the two games. Until SOTN, Castlevania was a level-by-level game, with fairly linear paths.

      In SOTN, you had a huge castle, interconnected areas, and lots of hidden passages that you could only access by learning new abilities

      Not to say that's a bad thing though. I sure as hell wish Konami had tried to borrow from Metroid Prime when working on their PS2-Castlevanias.

  14. Rainbow Arts by Perseid · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm sure nobody cares, but the company that made Giana Sisters was not a "tiny shareware outfit." They were a moderately sized, commercial game company in the early 90s, making mostly C-64 and Amiga games.

    http://www.the-underdogs.org/company.php?name=Rain bow+Arts/

    1. Re:Rainbow Arts by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Your link doesn't work but the team behind Giana Sisters was known for Turrican, Katakis/Denaris (blatant R-Type ripoff that got them a lawsuit from Irem) and the R-Type port to the C64 (which Irem let them do after the lawsuit was settled). Most of the team is part of Factor 5 these days, known for great looking but buggy and mediocre Star Wars games and various tools for consoles (divx for GC and XB, dolby pro logic for GC, etc).

      If Chris Hülsbeck doesn't ring a name, I don't know what.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    2. Re:Rainbow Arts by antime · · Score: 1

      At the time they wrote GGS they were, though. It was one of their first (if not the first) retail games.

    3. Re:Rainbow Arts by antime · · Score: 1

      Nitpicking, but it wasn't Irem who sued Rainbow Arts but Activision, who held the home computer license for R-Type. It was also Activision who then hired RA for the official port after they ran into problems with their own port.

    4. Re:Rainbow Arts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      making mostly C-64 and Amiga games

      Ah, so when that died out, they BECAME a tiny shareware outfit.

  15. Not-retro: Tattoo Assassins by British · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It was a blatant Mortal Kombat ripoff. But it is oh so bad it's good. You play a round if it and can easily count the similiarities to it and MK, but it copies it badly.

  16. Gaiden != Castlevania by Taulin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sorry...no relationship between Gaiden and Castlevania. Very lame. Everything else in the article was Ok.

    1. Re:Gaiden != Castlevania by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      There are actually many substantial simularities. Not enough that I'd say that Ninja Gaiden ripped off Castlevania, but enough that I've noted them long before the article was written.

      Where I differ with the author is in his assertion Castlevania was a bad game. On the contrary, it has excellent design and "flows" well, while Ninja Gaiden seems twitchy and stuttery to me, and is a lot more annoying than Castlevania. Both games are fairly difficult, though.

  17. "Inspired by" and rip-off aren't the same things by DeadScreenSky · · Score: 1

    Have you actually played Geometry Wars?

    --
    There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
  18. Frozen Bubble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Let us not forget the flagship of open source gaming which is a rip-off (or homage if you like) of Puzzle Bobble / Bust-a-Move.

  19. Re:"Inspired by" and rip-off aren't the same thing by derrickh · · Score: 1

    Robotron 2084 and Lllamatron both say 'Hi'.

    D

    --
    The first, last, and only tech news site on the net
  20. Re:"Inspired by" and rip-off aren't the same thing by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 0

    Hehe, so does Sinistar and Smash TV :) I'd still buy an XB360 just to play it though!

    --
    Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
  21. "New and improved" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    since when did everything have to be brand new and different to be valid?

    Since people have started buying products based on looks. New iterations of products would have new looks and people would think this was a reflection of an improvement in the product. People also think that if software is rewritten from scratch it will somehow be better, but that is not necessarily true. The prase "New and improved" explains everything. It is a totally "new" product, to the consumer, yet in reality it's something that was improved, and then superficially re-presented in a new way.

    We have to strike a balance between improving but not changing what is fundamental and recreating what is superficial.

  22. Great Giana Sisters by tao · · Score: 1

    Oh, indeed it was a ripoff, BUT: the intro music (no, not the loader music, although that one's great too) in Giana Sisters must make up for that. I mean, Chris Huelsbeck's music to that game is just soooo awesome.

  23. Tetris ... on DRUGS! by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If someone was to copy/redo that, I'd just die!

    Of a drug overdose?

    1. Re:Tetris ... on DRUGS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have mod points now, so thought I'd post. This game rocks - download it!

  24. Re:"Inspired by" and rip-off aren't the same thing by Peganthyrus · · Score: 1

    Minter seems to have enjoyed GW. No word on what Jarvis and DeMar thought of it.

    --
    egypt urnash minimal art.
  25. Hangly-Man Boneless Fried Chicken by tepples · · Score: 1

    the "Hangly Man" people should be given a free pass here just for the name, which might be one of the funniest names in video game history.

    Did Pac-Man ever have a line of frozen dinners? Hangly Man still does, although the transliteration has improved.

  26. Hmmm by Sv-Manowar · · Score: 1

    This still goes on a lot, the most popular arcade games now are simply adapted a bit and put out by other manufactures under a different brand. The fact is that there is only so many ways people want to play at arcades, so most shooting games will all seem similar after a while, it is very hard to be creative in a field that has been trying to do so for the last 30 years.

    --
    Business Voyeur
  27. What about EVERY FPS? by RyatNrrd · · Score: 1

    ...which are all rip-offs of Wolfenstein 3d?

    1. Re:What about EVERY FPS? by servognome · · Score: 1

      You mean the ripoff of Catacomb 3D, which was inspired by Ultima Underworld, which was similar to Bard's Tale...

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    2. Re:What about EVERY FPS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well you've obviously played ken's labrynth to death..

      and yeah, that's not to mention the other obvious (and less obvious) ones.. like catacombs, ultima underworld (which is a FAR superior game) and even (to a lesser extent) shadowcaster..

      some people get all the credit..

  28. pwned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL, you got so pwned there :D

  29. Not too thin by LKM · · Score: 1
    That's a bit thin.

    I don't think so. I've often seen the later 2D Castlevania games being refered to as "the Metroid-Style Castlevanias" or something similar, in order to distinguish them from the earlier, linear games. I think it's pretty much an accepted meme that these games borrowed quite a few concepts from the Metroid games. Konami took a lot from the Metroid series, and for what it's worth, it made the Castlevania series a whole lot better without blatantly ripping off Metroid, so I don't think anyone should or could blame them for this.

  30. I'm an FPS developer, you insensitive clod! by elrous0 · · Score: 1
    Do you realize how much hard work goes into adding new textures to the same tired old engines?

    -Eric

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.