Android games!

[Ded]

I don't care either way mate arguing over what's best is daft.

 

[Joy]

How is discussing what's best daft? It can help people who haven't decided <_<

Discussion about what color you like more, that is daft

 

[Galatea]

I Like Purple!

 

[Gombur]

I liek turtles!

 

[Ded]

How is discussing what's best daft? It can help people who haven't decided <_<

Discussion about what color you like more, that is daft

Arguing over what's best, I said.

I like green and black, but is black really a colour? Or is it a shade? It's considered the "absence of colour" I suppose..

So green.

 

[Joy]

Doesn't arguiing mean, giving arguments/reasons why something is better? Hence, a form of discussion, amma confused what the difference would be really <_<

Also, blue, and black!

 

[Bani]

If I made a guilde called Mini Mammae, copied all your website code, images and avatars, only adding cheap filters to make it slightly different, *BUT* did all this on a different server, thus not harming MM in any way, how'd that make you feel?

 

[Galatea]

If I made a guilde called Mini Mammae, copied all your website code, images and avatars, only adding cheap filters to make it slightly different, *BUT* did all this on a different server, thus not harming MM in any way, how'd that make you feel?

not quite the same tbh, with the amount of work that goes into a game, to have the design copied is harsh, its likely that when given time/tools, they'd do a port, as I am sure B would for syd sym if he had tools and time (sure simulators are good, but trust me, unless you test ON a device, lots of bugs/issues are missed).

 

[Galatea]

and no, I am not saying one platform is better than the other! My OPINION is that I prefer iPhones, but since I never tried android, I am aware that my opinion likely doesn't count

 

[Joy]

If I made a guilde called Mini Mammae, copied all your website code, images and avatars, only adding cheap filters to make it slightly different, *BUT* did all this on a different server, thus not harming MM in any way, how'd that make you feel?

Really don't think I'd care no <_< Well I'd care for someone copying Ded's art, but I doubt the Android game version copied the iPhone art.

But it's a bad example, since we're even running the default vb4 theme

 

[Bani]

I would care if someone did that and I don't even play

 

[Galatea]

Yes, sure you'd not care, but how long did it take to start the guild? 10 signatures.
How long does it take to make a game, and how many effort, energy and money goes into that? Well that varies, but surely you get the idea.....

If YOU spent 6 months designing and making something, and then someone rips off your idea, how would you feel THEN!

 

[Braque]

My comment about one game being a copy of another game wasn't in any way a comment about the platforms those games appear on.

PS: Green.
PPS: PURPLE TURTLE.

 

[Croga]

If YOU spent 6 months designing and making something, and then someone rips off your idea, how would you feel THEN!

You do realize that those are different things ey?
The designing and making is what one gets payed for. Ideas, especially ideas for those kinds of games, are rarely so unique that people will pay for them.
The "rip off" people still need to design and make their "rip off".

 

[Joy]

Croga makes a good point there. The idea of this game is pretty brilliant I say, but whether simple ideas like "oh a game where you can drag planes to airfields!" should be patentable is a whole different discussion.

 

[Braque]

You do realize that those are different things ey?
The designing and making is what one gets payed for. Ideas, especially ideas for those kinds of games, are rarely so unique that people will pay for them.
The "rip off" people still need to design and make their "rip off".

The key point here being that this particular game DID INTRODUCE A BRAND NEW AND UNIQUE GAME MECHANIC. That is a rare and amazing thing. Croga, you seem to be confusing GAME design with PROGRAM design, and assuming that it is the latter that is hard / valuable. It is true that a game design without code isn't something you can sell, but people who can code are easier to find than people who can genuinely come up with NEW and ORIGINAL game ideas that are FUN.

It is the rare spark of creativity of the game designers who came up with the Flight Control "line drawing / time management" concept that is grossly and unfairly undervalued when you defend clones of their game.

 

[Braque]

Croga makes a good point there. The idea of this game is pretty brilliant I say, but whether simple ideas like "oh a game where you can drag planes to airfields!" should be patentable is a whole different discussion.

Yeah, they ripped off (a) the core game mechanic, (b) the setting, (c) the art style, and, as far as I can see, (d) the level design. And they have added nothing new, that I can see, to the mix.

Taking one of those alone is pretty much fair game, two is cheap but tolerable, but all 4 is bullshit of the highest order.

 

[Ded]

Unfortunately brand new concepts for games can't be kept by the creators forever, you can't patent or copyright ideas..

Anyway, the makers of Flight Control probably knew it would happen eventually, it's hard to know if they consider it plagiarism or flattering. Or just don't care either way.

 

[Croga]

Croga, you seem to be confusing GAME design with PROGRAM design, and assuming that it is the latter that is hard / valuable.

Not at all. Seeing as I can do the latter, it can't be hard nor valuable (the "valuable" part being proven by the fact that my current job as a projectmanager pays more then my previous as software designer whilst as a project manager I really don't do anything at all).

The problem with game design is that its value is very relative. Yes, Flight Control has a pretty good game concept yet as said before, it's one of very few good, new, concepts. Most games are just itterations of existing concepts even though they claim to be completely original. Hence why it's impossible to keep an idea for yourself; there is no way to judge how original your concept is.

"An honest day's work for an honest day's pay" is easy to put into objective terms. An idea usually doesn't cost much time. The implementation of the idea does. Hence why people get payed for the implementation, not the idea.
A scientist doesn't get payed for his spark of creativity, he gets payed to prove that his idea is right by doing the research (the implementation).

 

[Chirrad]

An idea usually doesn't cost much time. The implementation of the idea does. Hence why people get payed for the implementation, not the idea.
A scientist doesn't get payed for his spark of creativity, he gets payed to prove that his idea is right by doing the research (the implementation).

There was an entire department at the University I went to that would disagree with you there. Most people coming up with new ideas for products/software/scientific methods are already being paid for their time, to come up with and prove those ideas. The bit you seem to be missing out completely is that once you've had your idea and proved it, you patent it and make yourself/your employer money from the licensing of the Intellectual Property associated with it.

While software IPR is still dodgy ground, using scientists as an example is definitely wrong. I know in certain places software is not patentable (e.g. New Zealand has been in the news for this recently), but in many places concepts from software ARE patentable (though hard to enforce).