Flappy Octopus, Flappy Jellfish, Flappy Whale, Flappy Fish, Flappy Wings

Wow.

couldn't he justify keeping it up by funding the development of something that people won't want to murder him for?

Quote from Pampers

he also retweeted this http://gandhirules.com/site/blog/game…opy-precisions/

Oh, i was in internship with that guy, small small world.

And i do hate myself for working in mobile "intertainment"...

Our first game wasn't the success my employeer expected, so he decided we had to make some shitty games in 1/2 months and gives them free with ads.

And my employer is a friends of octopus creator.

I think what Thrik said is spot on. Meanwhile my high score is 1. I gave up after that. Boring.

There are copies like this everywhere, i saw the same kind of game with voice sound in flash years before, i don't even understand what is all the fuss about it.

Apparently it's not so much of a big deal to make copies, everyone does, even what you could call "tributes to".(weirdly remakes or sequels aren't seen as copies???) But a copy not subtle enough to hide itself has success and starts to become a cashcow, the creator better have a way to back its legitimacy; or else(...)

Makes you think where the videogame industry place the symbolic meaning of success. Apparently the first condition starts with making money, then it's not so much about being original or creative, it's about being legitimate. Nobody cares if the game is a blatant copy, lacks originality if there is no public (or even if it's really original in that matter); but if there is one, and money on top of that, the greedy bastard have to be legitimate.

That's pretty much free bashing of "distinguished" videogame consumers if you ask me, a certain press filling its websites and frustrated game developers who wished to be able to make as much money with mspaint graphics.

The guy just had the luck to be the generic tap the screen game at the good moment (which i find to be an absurdly strange phenomena too i admit, maybe he was helped by companies for their advertisement ?)

If you want to have the biggest public possible, you can't be "original" or "pure". You can fake it though, because your consumers like to be seen as original and distinguished by their tastes (makes you wonder why there are so many hipsters when originality is their credo).

But in fine, it has to be something everyone is familiar with to be a plebiscite, which is something historically built up by games everyone played ( for example : mario pipes may have something to do with the game success ). Otherwise it's impossible to please as much tastes as possible.

Quote from Pampers

he also retweeted this http://gandhirules.com/site/blog/game…opy-precisions/

People confusing incremental innovation in the genre with copying

But I guess this can be discussed back and forth for ages

I actually agree with him, it's easy to go shit and hate on the dude because he made millions but truth is everything in this world that is created, and I mean everything is inspired in something else, there's no such thing as 100% originality and people who think there is never really tried to do anything creative.

Also, if the game sold like 100 copies no one would give a fuck where the guy took inspiration to make his art. SInce it made shitloads, everyone notices, everyone cares, everyone's jealous. lol

Damn, people being so jelly and taking this way too far and serious. It's just a simple bite-sized and fun game. HP ^ said pretty much what I wanted to say. Game content sometimes look alot like same, especially when it comes to pixel-art stuff and being inspired by something.

I'm glad Flappy Bird happened and showed those analyst noobs (I really hate when I read about somewhere how analysts are busy predicting next hits and all that bullshit) that even a simple game can be fun and it was the players who made it famous, the dev-guy didn't shove his game down anyone's throat as far as I know. Games just get so much easilly famous these days, because large amount of people have access to them very easily. Besides, Flappy Bird works techically very nicely, compared to Piou Piou which feels like you have no proper control in the game with the floaty feel.

To be clear i didn't hate on the guy. Just found it depressing that so much money can be made with something so simple and uncreative while talented guys/teams barely scrape by or break even. Old man yelling at clouds moment.

The whole mobile thing is a mystery to me anyway and the economy behind these games blows my mind. Still don't have a smart phone.

Went to a big family birthday party last night, my two nephews sit next to me, get out their smart phones and guess what they played... Flappybird. It's nuts.

Honestly if i was in Nguyen's shoes i wouldn't give a shit what the haters say. Jackpot. Enjoy it!

To be fair, it's not just a case of art. The whole game was essentially a clone, right down to the exact mechanics. And what unique art it did have was virtually directly ripped from Mario. In a world where Zynga is criticised for cloning games like Tiny Tower and countless others, why is it OK for an individual to do it? I'm not even an indie game developer and it seems very unsavoury to me.

The fact that he put the game through Apple's approval process, monetised it, and probably made quite a nice sum out of it made his intentions quite clear IMO. Sure developers often create little experimental games that are hugely derivative, but they don't put them on the equivalent of a high street game store shelf. I've designed UIs that are essentially complete copies of existing ones just to learn how to build such a thing, but I wouldn't then go and pitch/sell it as a product. If nothing else, I'd feel like a dick.

It's a matter of opinion, but I don't see him taking the game down as evidence of him being some totally innocent guy who's been inappropriately bashed. I see him more like someone who took a chance by releasing a one-evening project to see how it went, (allegedly) used 'score enhancing' services to get some initial traffic to his game, and then once the heat got too intense decided to preserve his reputation by cutting loose and taking his earnings (probably at least $500,000).

Personally, I think that this whole story has exploded so much because it's an extreme example of where the 'clone development' culture of mobile games can lead, and people are expressing their disapproval of the process much like they did with Zynga a year ago. There's been a lot of concern and discussion for a few years now about what constitutes a true clone and where should the line be drawn. IMO, this is a clear example of overstepping the line.

But at the same time, that shouldn't be confused for saying that it's not OK to be heavily inspired by or pay tribute to games. Of course it's OK to build upon existing games, that's what the industry has been doing for 30+ years. This is where human discretion comes in, to define the difference between 'Doom vs Duke Nukem' and 'Tiny Tower vs Dream Heights'. One is an example of building upon an already great foundation to create something new and unique, whereas the other is a shameless move-for-move copy that simply switches a few things up and markets it better. I'm not a fan of the latter.

It's probably worth highlighting (in case nobody's played them) that the traditional helicopter game is based around holding down the button to make the player vehicle go up, then when you release it drops. That was the only version of the concept I saw prior to Piou Piou, which introduced the idea of tapping instead. Flappy Birds takes that exact same mechanic, while also retaining Piou Piou's broad strokes in terms of art.

For me, Piou Piou is OK because despite being a clear derivative it introduced something new to the concept. Flappy Birds didn't introduce anything new at all that I've seen, in fact it implemented the concept worse than even the weakest of Flash versions I've seen over the years. Indeed, the only thing notable about Flappy Birds is the fact that its art is so blatantly straight from other games. When I kept seeing screenshots of it appearing on Facebook, I honestly thought that Nintendo must have released some mobile game.

It's only because of the game's success that we're discussing this at all, but my opinion would be the same even if Flappy Birds had never broken past the '10 downloads per week' threshold — it's just that if that were the case, nobody would ever have made this thread and I'd have never come across it. I'm just not into overly derivative works, especially when no effort is made to credit those the work was based upon.

Quote from Minos

I fucking hate this trend of the most popular games being so dumbed down that they boil down to just taping a screen on the right time to beat a high score.

These kind of games are very accessible to people who never played games, but to be honest they would be better off not playing games at all than playing crap like this. Example, I tried to download some cool games for my mom's tablet when I visited her last year but all I could find were those kind of games and to be honest she enjoyed the hell out of those. She and her husband were playing those games until 3 am every single day. I wish she would have the same interest and open-mindness to try simple DS games like Mario, Animal Crossing or anything else that's remotely mentally challenging, I dunno, maybe Sim City or even The Sims? But since those are on "game consoles" they automatically think it's a kids device and completely out of their reality. What good memories does one get from games like Angry Birds, Flappy whatever or fruit ninja? "Oh I remember that time when I beat my high score while I was masturbating" is the best one I could think of lol.

Just to make it clear, there's no problem with playing these games to relax a bit... I think the problem is when people (like my mother) only play those games and automatically shut their minds off to anything else.

maybe it's THESE games that are the pinnacle of art and all those other games (mario, zelda, animal crossing, half-life, cs, metroid, resident evil, duke nukem, street fighter, battlefield, call of duty, journey etc) are all wannabe art-shit games for losers who want to pretend that video games are actually worthy of anything other than taking a big shit right all over their pixelated faces?

Quote from Thrik

It's probably worth highlighting (in case nobody's played them) that the traditional helicopter game is based around holding down the button to make the player vehicle go up, then when you release it drops. That was the only version of the concept I saw prior to Piou Piou, which introduced the idea of tapping instead. Flappy Birds takes that exact same mechanic, while also retaining Piou Piou's broad strokes in terms of art.

For me, Piou Piou is OK because despite being a clear derivative it introduced something new to the concept. Flappy Birds didn't introduce anything new at all that I've seen, in fact it implemented the concept worse than even the weakest of Flash versions I've seen over the years. Indeed, the only thing notable about Flappy Birds is the fact that its art is so blatantly straight from other games. When I kept seeing screenshots of it appearing on Facebook, I honestly thought that Nintendo must have released some mobile game.

It's only because of the game's success that we're discussing this at all, but my opinion would be the same even if Flappy Birds had never broken past the '10 downloads per week' threshold — it's just that if that were the case, nobody would ever have made this thread and I'd have never come across it. I'm just not into overly derivative works, especially when no effort is made to credit those the work was based upon.

you're part of the problem

a guy makes a shitty game by some things he's inspired by, doesn't want to charge for it because of what it is so he dumps in some ads (common practice) and sets it free, just another turd floating in the cesspool of the marketplace.

a year later, and no doubt $5 made on adverts, something happens purely by chance - and the game blows up. this is way more coverage than he was ever expecting. i mean it's just a game he threw together over a couple of evenings for fun, some simple addictive gameplay that draws inspiration from things he likes and enjoys.

now the hate train is at full steam because people are angry that THEY didn't get lucky, or that he was inspired by some other gameplay or art. sure it's derivative, purile, pointless, etc - but who cares? it's a flash in the pan, and if it pisses you off so much maybe you should either lighten the fuck up, or go and try and emulate his success - if it's as simple as copying other games then anyone can do it, right?

Quote from Rick_D

you're part of the problem

a guy makes a shitty game by some things he's inspired by, doesn't want to charge for it because of what it is so he dumps in some ads (common practice) and sets it free, just another turd floating in the cesspool of the marketplace.

a year later, and no doubt $5 made on adverts, something happens purely by chance - and the game blows up. this is way more coverage than he was ever expecting. i mean it's just a game he threw together over a couple of evenings for fun, some simple addictive gameplay that draws inspiration from things he likes and enjoys.

now the hate train is at full steam because people are angry that THEY didn't get lucky, or that he was inspired by some other gameplay or art. sure it's derivative, purile, pointless, etc - but who cares? it's a flash in the pan, and if it pisses you off so much maybe you should either lighten the fuck up, or go and try and emulate his success - if it's as simple as copying other games then anyone can do it, right?

Display More

I can't speak for the rest of the internet but I'm not angry at all, as I said I'm no indie game developer. I'm just giving my opinion on the whole matter. This has been the talk of the game nerd internet for the past week so it's a great opportunity for some discussion of the whole cloning topic.

With that said, I don't know if it's some kind of underdog phenomenon but I'm finding it hard to see what you find so defensible about him. You're trying to make out he's some kind of poor mistreated developer when the reality is that he unashamedly cloned an existing game and — while this is impossible to prove, the evidence is almost indisputable — gamed the app store review system to get it to the top of the charts. This isn't some dude whose random project got lucky. It's a dude who somehow very cleverly manipulated the app store, which in all honesty he deserves credit but not admiration for.

Maybe that's the part that those of you defending him don't appreciate. You don't think this weak clone got to the top of the charts through luck and viral sharing alone, surely? As Rick rightly says, if it were that easy then there'd be countless such examples.

How exactly did he manipulate the app store?

Not that I want to do the same.. *cough*

There was a pretty in-depth article I saw somewhere at home yesterday that looked through all the reviews, and there was a very sudden surge of reviews about a month ago that didn't seem to make much sense (negative reviews all giving five stars, lots of positive reviews all using the same terms but in different combinations/variations, etc). It was that precise combination of downloads and reviews that caused the avalanche effect leading to the game's genuine success later during the month.

Basically, it very much looked like the work of either bots or lots of people working somewhere like India to write loads of reviews. I suspect the latter, as we've actually had a lot of those posting spam on MapCore at times — because they're human they can circumvent absolutely any anti-spam protection. I know that viral things can grow all by themselves, but this didn't look remotely natural to me.

I don't know what the Red Bull clone is, but it was definitely Flappy Bird that I've seen being accused of it.