i don’t give a shit? doom had like a thousand clones; guess what, doom is still a household name and most of the clones are long forgotten. some good ones made their own name and following.
unless there’s outright stolen assets or code, or they’re using a deliberately confusing name, i don’t care. if it’s a slavish clone as you say, there’s nothing to worry about.
it would be one thing if horizon was this underdog game made by a couple people and has largely gone under the radar then yeah it would suck. but fuck me no one’s mistaking another game for horizon zero dawn.
You’re right. Us, the consumers, will only ever benefit from more competition for our money. Also, the people who wanted to buy Horizon already did, if they like the theme and playstyle they may also buy this other one, but it’s not like Horizon is losing buyers on this.
i don’t think you’re remembering things well or maybe you played the popular ones. there was a bunch of doom clones that barely tried to be something different. lots of w3d clones too. also this game isn’t called Orion: Null sunrise so your “HELL” example is a bit unwarranted.
this is coming from the genius who doesn’t get how name similarity is relevant in IP disputes… it’s not about being exact, Einstein, that’s a very specific issue that this game doesn’t engage in.
oh god please stop. now you’re saying words you don’t understand. and you’re doing it with dramatic pauses and shit. this is too much. please stop embarrassing yourself.
I think it’s because of the colors used, visual theme, mecha nature of the enemies, and character design of the protagonists - too many direct similarities to argue it’s just inspiration.
I am a huge fan of the original. It did not take long for the trailer to seem like a Horizon game, and then it was clear it was a watered down ripoff. Agreed the similarities are way too obvious.
In the trailer there’s clearly some new things and different creatures Horizon doesn’t have, but the stylistic nature of it all is so damn similar.
Eh, it’s unique but I don’t think that should give Sony the right to use the exclusively (looking at you Nintendo and Pokemon)
You could have the exact same game but with fleshy dinosaurs and all of a sudden it’s not a problem? And then a third company can come out with another copy with fleshy dinosaurs and there’s no issue because fleshy dinosaurs aren’t unique.
It’s not that they used animal mechs. It’s that the style of the mechs are very close to that of Horizon. Sony has copyright on the design, not on the idea.
Games are gonna copy major mechanics. Look at all the BOTW clones that came out after Breath of the Wild was successful. But you have to put a liiiittle effort into mixing up the art style and color palette.
Loved Horizon, so I clicked on an open world gameplay trailer and it’s just survivalslop, fiddling with some shit-producing hovels to get them upgraded to shit+1-producing hovels and hitting trees until they’re planks.
No, pointing out hypocrisy would be going “hey, didn’t you also blatantly rip off a popular product? Isn’t it hypocritical for you to criticize them for something you also have done?” What Aboutism is defined as: “the rhetorical practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation, by asking a different but related question, or by raising a different issue altogether. Whataboutism often serves to reduce the perceived plausibility or seriousness of the original accusation or question by suggesting that the person advancing it is hypocritical or that the responder’s misbehavior is not unique or unprecedented.” www.britannica.com/topic/whataboutism
It’s not redirecting the conversation to respond to your statement that whataboutism is when the hypocrisy is “unrelated”. Which conveniently lets you decide what is related or unrelated.
Oh, they wouldn’t happen to be calling them orks now, would they? That would be terrible.
Judging an ethnic group by their non-democratic government is prejudice, you are prejudiced. Now please continue to justify your racism like everyone else before you.
You’re citing examples from the 6th, 4th, and 18th centuries and arguably the last one isn’t even about intellectual property
Even ignoring the blatant “what aboutism” if your justification for why it’s ok to steal video game ideas is because some Byzantians were mean to you 1400 years ago just know that nobody is going to take you seriously
No, but this might shock you, other countries have different definitions of what theft is. Theft is taking something from someone.
The funny part being that it is literally enshrined in American law that game mechanics can’t be copyrighted, so its not even in the definition of theft in America either.
Game mechanics can be Patented in the US, just look at the Nemesis system.
Also, just because a country decides that their definition of a thing is different than everyone else’s, doesn’t make it correct. Just look at Russia, they have so many different forms of lying to justify lying in everyday life, but that doesn’t make corruption OK.
On top of that, you were the one who defended this fairly blatant plagiarism by pointing to examples of theft.
I have no issue with people going after China. I’m not a hexbear/ml stooge. It is possible for two things to be bad. It is possible for something about a bad entity to be neutral or at least unsurprising. Which is how I would describe China’s lack of real interest in engaging with, from their perspective, the global order’s new fad interest in intellectual property rights.
I would have thought this was obvious but forcing your rivals to abide by their own rules while flouting them yourself is not an endorsement of those rules, it’s a mockery of them.
Explaining means you actually explain your point instead of throwing out random examples of others doing something similar and then mockingly asking "I wonder why they wouldn't care".
You also seem to be moving the goal post with every post. You said China doesn't care to engage in IP fad, I showed China absolutely does engage in it. Now you're saying of course they do because they flount the rules themselves. Actually they don't. A few years ago Beijing IP court decided a Chinese artist had to pay around half a million to a Belgian artist for plagiarizing his work. I guess you're about to find another excuse to shift the goal post once again.
You think I’m going to shift the goalposts for one example? Ok, yeah that definitely overrules literally decades of behaviour. You win. Here’s your Internet reward for the best argument. ⭐️
I was expecting something where the Chinese IP courts rule in favor of breaking IP laws or at the very least turn a blind eye. This current article doesn't count because there's no resolution here. As for AliExpress, they have an entire process in place to handle IP infringement and they actually ban sellers off the platform if they continue infringing.
Most Links are portrayed as being either kids/teenagers or very young-looking adults, and Zelda is often portrayed as being a more experienced character, still young but often already embroiled in the politics or conflicts that are core to the story’s initial setup. Link usually shows character growth as he rises to the challenge, but Zelda is often a more static character, who starts the story fully fledged.
I’ve never heard of either actor, but a cursory Google to look at their various photos and I can see them working in the roles. Obviously assuming they can act, too.
Usually they reincarnate to be about the same age. Zelda does tend to be in leadership because she always reincarnates as the princess but link is always physically much stronger. Also his face is weirdly round for the character but that’s my own artsy opinion based on the main 3D games.
I was crossing my fingers for Hunter Schafer, but the casting they chose looks pretty decent. They’re a bit younger than I expected but I guess it’s lore accurate.
One should not make the mistake to just judge a single photograph, for a role in a film. Its also important how they move and talk, and what the perception of the person based on existing films is. I’m not in the position to judge about any of these castings or your suggestion, just wanted bring in this point into the discussion.
People have different preferences. It would be nicer to say “I don’t see it, I don’t think she would fit,” instead of “y’all are weird as fuck…” that’s kind of rude and weird to say.
I’m going to give coyotino the benefit of the doubt here and say that meant “Look at her, she already looks like Zelda” just based on the previous sentence
Is this a criticism of the quote, or a response to it?
Once again, you’re not actually just stating your issue, and your responses are ambiguous enough that they could be interpreted either as an objection to people treating Hunter Schafer in a way that you perceive as negative, or an objection to Hunter Schafer.
theverge.com
Najnowsze