Irony meter explodes: "Copycat game design is damaging casual market - PopCap"

[Farid]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=26096

Too many developers are making "cheap knock-offs" of successful games and holding back growth of the casual games market, according to Jason Kapalka, chief creative officer at PopCap Games.

With low development costs, studios are able to churn out copycat games in a short time, but these titles rarely make enough money for developers to grow past a hand-to-mouth existence, says the PopCap founder.

"Very few games are developed without reference to past games. There's always going to be titles that build on a previous mechanic or game. But there's a fine line between that and very bold-faced rip-offs that aren't adding anything to the game and are just trying to make a quick buck," said Kapalka, in an interview with GamesIndustry.biz.

I know it's a single example, but it is still worth a chuckle, if you ask me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuma_(computer_game)

The full interview can be found here, it can be interesting for those of you who keep track of the mobile/casual market.

 

[Zaphod]

No irony. He's saying theirs are: Bold-faced rip-offs that are adding something to the game and are [strike]just[/strike] trying to make some big bucks.

To some extent, I think he's kinda' right as well. There's a fine line between 'clever and addictive' and 'derivative and dull' for such games. With the threshold for entry lowered, it might be difficult for the clever ones (bold-faced rip-offs or not) to stand out and catch the eye of the audience if smothered between masses of their derivative brethren.

 

[cthellis42]

Actually, you're also forgetting Astropop/Magical Drop.

I'm not sure where on their development pipeline they appeared, but both seem to pretty much be "bold-faced rip-offs that aren't adding anything to the game and are just trying to make a quick buck."

 

[Inane_Dork]

I know it's a single example, but it is still worth a chuckle, if you ask me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuma_(computer_game)

I haven't seen or played Puzz Loop, but just because Mitchell threatened to sue for plagiarism doesn't mean Zuma is a innovation-starved knock off. Most casual games are clearly similar to other games. PopCap's Heavy Weapon, for instance, is pretty similar to Contra and the hundred other games of that ilk, but it's still a worthwhile game.

His point that there is a distinction between brainless clones and derivations is a good one. Whether PopCap follows that in every game they make, I can't say because I have not followed the market enough. If they fall short only every once in awhile, I'd say it's pretty reasonable to extend grace for that. If more, then there is definitely irony there.

 

[Nesh]

It does sound ironic the way it mentions it.

But then again there are two kind of "copy cat" games.

There are the craptastic copycat titles nobody cares about and the copycat titles casuals care about and aren't that "bad". The first type though are much more. And the craptastic titles would have been more anyways regardless whether they are copycats or not.

Also sequels themselves are copycats of their previous games, with developers highly relying on their past success repeating the same old ideas again and again and again under a different skin.

Some games ofcourse are naturally like that due to the genre and it is not the developers' fault (see GT and Forza, PES and other sports games).

But others are a disgrace, even mimicking positive elements from other games into their sequels, or with the appearance of another not much improved sequel every year or a super crap but successful sequel (see NFS, how Burnout ended up, DMC2, Nintendo's reusage of their characters and ideas into various genres, Wipeout Fusion, sports games that sell due to official licenses like Formula1 and FIFA, war games such as WW2 based or based on war against terrorism in some middle east country,and a few others I wouldnt want to mention because I wouldn't want to be slaughtered by fanboys)

 

[cthellis42]

You can watch Puzz Loop in action, if you want. (Or check out Magnetica, since it's the same developer and all. It's also been called "Ballistic" in previous releases on the GBC and PS1.) The gameplay pretty much exactly the same; Zuma mainly changed the setting, and had better graphics, smoother action, and created some more clever tracks. (That's more of an "updating the game" thing, though. Puzz Loop hadn't gotten a major update in a while, just ports to other systems.) It's not saying that Puzz Loop has the mostest amazing and unique-est gameplay evar, but Zuma is a pretty blatant lift.

The Astropop/Magical Drop link is a bit harder, as the style isn't nearly as unique as Puzz Loop's track-based gameplay, had a much zanier style, and had more of a fixation with versus play. (Astropop, to my knowledge, has no versus mode.)


Personally, I'd rather see a modern update to Buster Bros. Now THAT was a much more fun game! (And, as with Puzz Loop, be much more obviously ripped off to get it.)

 

[V3]

AFAIK Zuma isn't the only one that is derivative. All of their games are derivative of something. Some are games that are never released in the West. If you've played alot of games, none of their games are even remotely original.

But who cares, casual gamers won't know where they rip off their idea from. And they are raking in the dough.

 

[cthellis42]

Well most simple games tend to be "derivative" of something, but there are few that are as blatant a pull as Zuma. When your emphasis is on simple, addictive gameplay (rather than long, complex stuff) it's hard to not be a melding of what's already come out; the emphasis is on doing it well, which they certainly do.