• Hey Guest! Ever feel like entering a Game Jam, but the time limit is always too much pressure? We get it... You lead a hectic life and dedicating 3 whole days to make a game just doesn't work for you! So, why not enter the GMC SLOW JAM? Take your time! Kick back and make your game over 4 months! Interested? Then just click here!

Discussion My game already exists, what now?

W

Will

Guest
For the past months, I've been working on a single player turn-based action/adventure game. My design bible was looking solid, I'd gotten good feedback from my occasional playtests, and prototyping was going really well. It's a game I was (and still am) really excited about!

Well, last night I sort of hit a wall while brainstorming some features and started doing some research on games in the genre. As it turns out, one of the games I looked into is my game. Not literally, of course, but it follows the same structure and win conditions, by a big-name developer. It's definitely close enough to where my finished product could easily be considered a clone.

Needless to say, I'm a little discouraged. I'm not sure whether to continue development, put it on the shelf until I can really differentiate it or to just rework the game from the beginning.

Have any of you ran into this issue before? What did you do about it?
 

Gamer (ex-Cantavanda)

〜Flower Prince〜
Oh I'm sorry, that must feel terrible! If you're still passionate, you should keep the core of what makes your game you, but maybe put it in a different coat of paint, and come up with new ideas to add to the core gameplay mechanics, that should differentiate it enough. Nothing ever created in the history of humanity is truely original. Everything is a rework of previous ideas.
 

Bearman_18

Fruit Stand Deadbeat
I agree with @Cantavanda , I recommend reading a book called "Steal Like An Artist." It will answer all your problems about this kind of thing. I can't stress how important it is to read this book, actually. Let's just say that after I read it, any artist NOT reading it sounded like a bad idea. That's all the advice I have, sorry.
(This goes to all of you. Read this book!)
 
M

MishMash

Guest
As you may expect when you see my signature, my game is notorious for falling into clone territory, but i've significantly altered my perspective now. Back when Vitality was started, the idea behind it was much more like the ideas that went into starbound, random planets, randomly generated mobs however with a much stronger focus on technology and advancement, the initial concept was more about flying to planets, exploring and studying, finding resource and ultimately terraforming them.

Backstory and Personal experience
We had a similar smack in the face when back in 2012, we had began some very light prototyping and after about a month of playing around with ideas, we stumbled across starbound after telling a friend how excited we were about the idea. Naturally, he replied with the standard "oh, so just like Starbound?" response which any developer knows feels like a smack in the gut when you have a big-budget competitor who could easily smash you out of the park. Bear in mind, all of this was around a year and a half before any public version of SB was actually released.

In January 2013, we decided to start the project properly, and also agreed that with regard to both scope and feasibility that we would trim out a lot of the content that we didn't want, and alter the direction to focus more on the advancement and technology aspects, whilst focusing on a singular earth. It was a bit of an odd decision but ultimately, both of us were happy with the direction the game has taken. Ultimately, the vision of the game was changed, however it was more a thinning of scope than an outright complete change of direction. This was the point at which the vision for the game became well-cemented.

Throughout our process, there have naturally been countless times we have entered the clone debate and at this point, I see less and less similarities between "similar" games. I always choose to focus on the things that make the game unique, not the things that make it the same. Lots of games share similar mechanics, similar win conditions, similar objectives.. The truth is, players like this, having those expectations is often important for gamers, rather than trying to be niche or clever just for the sake of it. But ultimately, your game isn't any single mechanic, it is a soup of mechanics and also the result of different styles, both artistic and as a result of how the game was programmed. The "feel" and "vibe" are ultimately what define a game and these can be far more important than the types of mechanics that shape a game.

For us, the sandbox elements are the biggest key factor when drawing comparisons, however I always stand by the statement that in our game, the sandbox exists as a means of enabling the rest of the game to work. It doesn't define the gameplay but simply provides a framework and a grounding for everything else to be built upon.

Staying true to your original vision
I don't know enough about your game to be able to comment, but I would guess that it is perhaps not as similar as you let out. Every game has something unique, I would say that it is more important to stick to your vision rather than try and force change for the sake of it. Trying to be different for the means of trying to be different will just deviate your game from what you had intended it to be in the first place. I know I didn't necessarily abide by this early on, however it's been something i've stuck to for the last 4 years now that i'm invested, and i'm finally really happy with how the project has shaped up. Whilst there was a time when it was similar to all these other games, it has had time to evolve, get polished and ultimately get far closer to the vision in my mind than I had ever anticipated possible.

There is going to be a reason you chose to make the game you are making, in my opinion, it is more important for you to stay true to that original idea, the idea that inspired you, gets you excited and keeps you motivated, rather than to alter it to something else. If you do that, your own game will just end up feeling foreign to you, and that is a far worse feeling.


Regarding Release
Regarding competition and sales potential, I guess it really depends on a few things:
  • How much your audience overlaps, sometimes larger games fill a different category, perhaps if they had a different multiplayer community or a slightly different demographic, you may not actually have as much overlap as you may think.
  • What your aspirations for the game are. Ultimately, we all want to sell as many copies as possible, but lots of games don't do crazy well. Considering say 10,000+ sales can be a pretty decent achievement, when you look at 10,000 players out of a massive field of players, it's not that many, to the point where an audience overlap may not even make a conceivable difference. Then, once your game gets popular anyway, it doesn't really matter because you have players, and that organic growth drives more players. Think Paladins and Overwatch, huge controversy at the start, people expected paladins to crash and burn, yet it's doing pretty well.
  • Finally, release window, you are talking about prototyping. Knowing that games can take a bloody long time to make, the final release window may not even conflict. In the case of my own project, the original anticipated release was like 2-3 years ago, however given part-time work and other life commitments, it has taken a lot longer. One major benefit of that however is that it's opened up a bit of a hole in the market. The other big players have started to dwindle a bit more (and are no longer as actively popular as they were) so there is a good window of opportunity for our release, when in the past, that might not have been true. Whilst it may be naive of me to personally try and compete directly with the big dogs, one of the biggest potential scares we had was the release of Terraria: Otherworld, which had a massive following, however whilst it is a shame that the game has been cancelled, I can't help but feel that only improves our own standing :p

Edit: reformatted it a bit, because my classic waffle style is a bit OTT :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
W

Will

Guest
Oh I'm sorry, that must feel terrible! If you're still passionate, you should keep the core of what makes your game you, but maybe put it in a different coat of paint, and come up with new ideas to add to the core gameplay mechanics, that should differentiate it enough. Nothing ever created in the history of humanity is truely original. Everything is a rework of previous ideas.
You're right. I do want to expand on my game at its core, and I think in doing this it will feel fresh enough not only to me, but the player as well.

I agree with @Cantavanda , I recommend reading a book called "Steal Like An Artist." It will answer all your problems about this kind of thing. I can't stress how important it is to read this book, actually. Let's just say that after I read it, any artist NOT reading it sounded like a bad idea. That's all the advice I have, sorry.
(This goes to all of you. Read this book!)
I will have to look into it! Pretty cheap to pick it up on my kindle...

...It'd help if you posted your game and the one you're worried about...
I understand, but this thread is more about the idea that the games are the same, less about the game itself - I'm not ready to go public with this project.

As you may expect when you see my signature, my game is notorious for falling into clone territory, but i've significantly altered my perspective now. Back when Vitality was started, the idea behind it was much more like the ideas that went into starbound, random planets, randomly generated mobs however with a much stronger focus on technology and advancement, the initial concept was more about flying to planets, exploring and studying, finding resource and ultimately terraforming them...
This is... A lot! And this really helped. THANK YOU for the insightful response.

Thank you everyone for your replies!
 
T

Timze

Guest
Having a clone may seem bad but you really stumbled onto a golden opportunity, if the market isn't completly saturated with your shared angle.
Whatever big studio game this is, their user base has already been primed. Maybe some of those players are getting bored and looking for another game just like it. Maybe that game is missing something for them so they continue to search for a good fit. With the implementation of your new features (the bigname studio game doesn't have) you can take their player base.
When the studio sees you climbing the ranks they'll likely take from you and implement those features but that will take time. So bit by bit you can release new features and retain your audience until they're loyal to you.

If this is done correctly a year from now some players may even think BNS is the clone, not you. Lol

You can even take this a step further and check out the forums to said game and see what players want implemented the most, and be the first to act on it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
F

Famine

Guest
How many of us have worked on a product that has competition? Most of us.

It sounds like maybe this is just a hobby project. My advice would be to start being a bit more serious with looking at this game like your flagship product. Treat it as if Apple treats the iPhone knowing that Samsung is also out there. Do this even if you're a one-man shop without the millions/billions in the bank. That means if you find a clone, then your next move likely will need to be in the direction of separating your product from there's where you come out on top. If not, then who cares, it's just hobby project, why break your back?

Sounds a bit harsh I know, but even if there was not a clone right now, if you're game is good, someone is going to influence it eventually. I mean, look at most of the games out there, most are clones of something. Most are influencing someone. This is why I can't find a good game these days, I've likely played it already. The developer likely reskinned it.

Using my project as an example. It's surely influenced by many of the multiplayer RPG's I've played in the past. I know my target audience and I know they are looking for a specific type of game that no longer exists (i.e.: I have the answer to their problem). While my game may seem like other games on the market, it will hopefully separate itself because it's doing something the other games have stopped doing or would not dive into. If for some reason that changes, then guess what, I'm going to change too. No sweat.

As they say, you either adapt or you die.
 
W

Will

Guest
Having a clone may seem bad but you really stumbled onto a golden opportunity, if the market isn't completly saturated with your shared angle.
Whatever big studio game this is, their user base has already been primed. Maybe some of those players are getting bored and looking for another game just like it. Maybe that game is missing something for them so they continue to search for a good fit. With the implementation of your new features (the bigname studio game doesn't have) you can take their player base....
Hey, you're probably right! Having decided to push forward after seeing these replies, this helps a lot. Maybe I will snag some of their playerbase ;)

How many of us have worked on a product that has competition? Most of us.

It sounds like maybe this is just a hobby project. My advice would be to start being a bit more serious with looking at this game like your flagship product. Treat it as if Apple treats the iPhone knowing that Samsung is also out there. Do this even if you're a one-man shop without the millions/billions in the bank. That means if you find a clone, then your next move likely will need to be in the direction of separating your product from there's where you come out on top. If not, then who cares, it's just hobby project, why break your back?...
This is my first game that I probably wouldn't call a hobby project. I've got a large backlog of small games that I've made for me and friends, but this is my flagship product. My focus at this stage of development has shifted to discovering what separates my product. What you said is my worry,
This is why I can't find a good game these days, I've likely played it already. The developer likely reskinned it.
I don't want people thinking I just reskinned another game! But thinking more critically about my project, I don't believe it's a reskin at all. I share the core mechanics with a well-established game but that doesn't mean it's the same thing all over again.

Thank you everyone for the responses! You've all been very helpful.
 
I understand, but this thread is more about the idea that the games are the same, less about the game itself - I'm not ready to go public with this project.
But it's impossible to tell you whether or not there's a problem with your game without seeing it and its sister. Some games are "the same," and some games are the same. There's nothing wrong with the first, but there's a lot wrong with the second. Without knowing your game, it's impossible to know which situation you have on your hands, so it's impossible to give any meaningful advice beyond "don't make it *too* close," which everyone already knows.

Anyway, good luck. My advice without seeing your game is to can it if you're worried about it coming off as a ripoff. It's kind of empty advice though, like I just said. :')
 

Jabbers

Member
It is virtually impossible to create a truly original game. You can trace any idea back to other inspirations. There is nothing wrong with this. If anything, it is unrealistic to think that you could or should attempt to be completely original in your design. You should understand what ideas and mechanics work in other games, and try to build and evolve these concepts in your own way; being original for the sake of originality is not a good thing. Don't seek to reinvent the wheel.

No matter what you develop, there is a good chance that your customers will relate your product to another, even if the connection is tenuous. It is just what people do.

If you have a game that coincidentally resembles another, you should release it anyway. Customers who enjoy one game might also look for similar products. Starbound and Terraria both happily co-exist, and are appealing for different reasons. Likewise, there is room for MishMash's Vitality, too.
 

K12gamer

Member
All games seem to stem from the same basic concepts (Not sure if we'll ever see a completely original game again)

Imagine all the Match 3 games out there...They're all basically the same thing with different graphics...

 
For the past months, I've been working on a single player turn-based action/adventure game. My design bible was looking solid, I'd gotten good feedback from my occasional playtests, and prototyping was going really well. It's a game I was (and still am) really excited about!

Well, last night I sort of hit a wall while brainstorming some features and started doing some research on games in the genre. As it turns out, one of the games I looked into is my game. Not literally, of course, but it follows the same structure and win conditions, by a big-name developer. It's definitely close enough to where my finished product could easily be considered a clone.

Needless to say, I'm a little discouraged. I'm not sure whether to continue development, put it on the shelf until I can really differentiate it or to just rework the game from the beginning.

Have any of you ran into this issue before? What did you do about it?
Actually I have , long before I got into GMS, I was already working on the designs of a game that was similar to a game that I played ( long ago as a kid ) which inspired me into developing games. One of the things that I had to take into realization , is that if a feature or idea of a game already exists then it can be expressed and done again in a completely different way. Its the expression of a idea that makes a game distinguishable from other games. Dont worry about some other game developer that beat you to the punch in designing a game before you ( unless there is a good reason ).

A long time ago I did research on the the evolution of games.

Computer games go way back to the early 1960s using computer systems that don't exist anymore. For instance there is a game called Spacewar! by Steve Russell ( see : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacewar! ) on a PDP-1 , then later in 1977 someone by the name of Larry Rosenthal created the game as a stand up arcade machine , but titled as Space Wars ( see : https://www.pinterest.com/mellbarriesii/arcade-games-by-mel-space-war-1977-by-cinematronic/ ). This is the game that inspired the game called Asteroids, which evolved Space Wars. It uses the same set up, has the same feel, but a different scenario. The same game idea that Space Wars had, was used inspiration for ship to ship battles in a late 1980's game called Star Control ( and reused in Star Control 2 ) for the PC. Star Control 2 was rebuilt again and is now a GNU game under a similar game title ( see : http://sc2.sourceforge.net/ ) .

I can do this analogy with other games as well. So my study on the evolution of games led me to a conclusion.

The games that are designed today using whatever technology, are more likely to be inspirations by earlier game designs that existed before. It is very hard to come up with a game idea that someone has not already thought of before you. In order to develop really good games, you need to have previous experience from playing many many other games beforehand. Its that experience that motivates you, to believe that you can develop a game that is similar it, but different and better. So I can bet that you have played games that inspired you to create a game of your own.

The danger zone is when you reinvent someone elses game exactly as your own. For example, C.J. Pinder recreated a version of David Braben's 1980s game called Elite, via reverse engineering. Braben requested Pinder to take it down, but Ian Bell ( the other original author of Elite ) allowed the game to be put up on his own website for downloading ( see : https://www.giantbomb.com/elite-the-new-kind/3030-15779/ ) . This is the same game that has now evolved into the game called Elite Dangerous, by Braben. So don't do what Pinder did. The only way to use someone's elses game ideas is to have a legal permission. But even you if you do get permission , you loose all claims to your game being original . You can only state that your game is based on another game at this point.

Back to the previous train of thought....

I could argue that the 1980s Elite game ( or evolutions of it by Braben , such as the Frontier version ) became an inspiration source for the Microsoft game called Freelancer. There's nothing new about that game concept idea - except the expression, style, and invention of it. So while you may believe that your inventing something new, which it is - we who have not seen it, can argue that it's been done before in other games from the past.

And that's a good thing, because popular ideas survive only if many people like them in the first place.
 
Top