[casual_games] Clones in casual

[Ricky Haggett]

> As for creating something that cannot be easily cloned - I haven't yet 

> seen

> an example. The only thing that I've seen suggested that would limit 

> cloning

> is inherently higher production costs.


Most clones so far have been of games which don't rely on a large amount of 
varying art assets, and where the levels can be generated programmatically 
with a simple algorithm.

There are a number of properties of a game that would make it considerably 
more difficult to clone, and while I agree that higher production costs are 
a factor, I don't think there's a direct relationship between the dev cost 
for a game and its cloneability. Creative developers should consider what it 
is they can do - relatively inexpensively - to give themselves a competitive 
advantage over uncreative developers seeking to piggyback their work.

Here are some of those properties off the top of my head:

- reliance on hand-designed levels, so the player feels like they are 
solving a problem that another person has designed for them.
- reliance on a large amount of high-quality artwork.
- inclusion of a well-written, well-presented story.
- inclusion of strong characters (and perhaps even their development).
- an online community providing social play.

I don't think that all of these properties necessarily imply spiralling 
production costs.

Ricky

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Hubina" <tomh at mofactor.com>
To: "'IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List'" <casual_games at igda.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: [casual_games] Clones in casual (was RE: Gameplay patents)



> Daniel,

>

> I do think that the portals ensure that each title they put up is of

> reasonable quality - sorry if I wasn't clear about that.

>

> As for creating something that cannot be easily cloned - I haven't yet 

> seen

> an example. The only thing that I've seen suggested that would limit 

> cloning

> is inherently higher production costs. While certain folks can do that, 

> it's

> far from an industry wide solution and one that I don't think is

> sustainable. Puzzle Pirates can be cloned - but the costs and perceived

> revenues prevent it. If Puzzle Pirates had made 15m instead 3m as of May

> 2006, I suspect we'd see one or two clones by now ;)

>

> (I just read the link and I couldn't agree with you more in your 

> assessment

> - and I will attempt to do a better job of distinguishing downloadable vs

> casual games. It's easy to fall into the trap.)

>

> Tom

>

>> -----Original Message-----

>> From: casual_games-bounces at igda.org

>> [mailto:casual_games-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Daniel James

>> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 2:04 PM

>> To: IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List

>> Subject: Re: [casual_games] Clones in casual (was RE:

>> Gameplay patents)

>>

>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Tom Hubina wrote:

>>

>> > The key point here is that developers make less money when

>> more games

>> > are being created and ... assuming ad prices hold ... portals make

>> > more money by releasing more games. The net result is that they're

>> > happy as pie to take everything we throw at them since it's

>> better for

>> > them. They don't care that it's worse for us.

>>

>> I don't think that this is true. Portals make more money by

>> delivering a satisfying experience to their users -- one that

>> gets them to play games, view ads, transact and *come back for more*.

>>

>> Now, given how some of the major players have been 'tithed'

>> their traffic by virtue of corporate parent portals, and the

>> somewhat remarkable lack of investment made in

>> differentiation and innovation, you might be forgiven for

>> thinking that portal managers are the kind of fools who will

>> just throw up any old crap. They're not. The portals all

>> manage their flow of new games carefully and I believe that

>> some of them are quite good at optimising (to which of the

>> above metrics is an interesting question).

>>

>> If the portals are pushing a particular PuzzLoop derivation

>> it's because that derivation is better at giving them what

>> they're looking for from their audience. They won't

>> arbitrarily throw up lots of crappy clones for giggles -- of

>> course lots of crappy clones may be what the audience

>> wants... and the way to change that is by making something

>> better and perhaps less amenable to simple cloning.

>>

>> Now, getting 'something better' distributed is another

>> question, and seems to require a different kind of fool...

>>

>> - Daniel, grinding his axe, just a little. More;

>>

>> http://thefloggingwillcontinue.com/?p=4

>> _______________________________________________

>> Casual_Games mailing list

>> Casual_Games at igda.org

>> http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

>> Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

>> Archive Search:

>> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

>> List FAQ:

>> http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Gam

>> es_List_FAQ

>>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Casual_Games mailing list

> Casual_Games at igda.org

> http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive Search: 

> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

> List FAQ: 

> http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Games_List_FAQ

>

>

>

> -- 

> No virus found in this incoming message.

> Checked by AVG Free Edition.

> Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.39/686 - Release Date: 

> 14/02/2007

>