

A recipe for App Store profit: Take game idea from small devs  iOS  profit. - doomlaser
http://www.next-gen.biz/features/friday-game-radical-fishing

======
doomlaser
The original eveloper response here:
<http://www.vlambeer.com/2011/08/08/encouragement/>

and there's a storm brewing about it on twitter if you look for Gamenauts
(<http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/%22gamenauts%22>)

or #NinjaFishing
(<http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/%22ninja%20fishing%22>).

------
stephth
_Certainly, Gamenauts gets a design that has already proved popular with
audiences, but is that really enough incentive to destroy your reputation?_

I think he's overestimating how much people in general care about clones.
Sure, in indie game developer circles, their reputation is stained. But most
people are not aware, and even if they are, most don't give a shit. Ninja
Fishing is now the top #13 paid app on the App Store.

That said, maybe with this backlash the press and distribution channels will
start giving a fuck.

~~~
doomlaser
It's actually #7 right now, ahead of Tiny Wings and one of the Angry Birds
variations.

------
wccrawford
There are so many games that wouldn't exist today if people couldn't use the
same idea... I just can't imagine ANY game developer getting their panties in
a wad over it. So long as you don't use any copyrighted materials, it's all
fair game. That's what competition is. Deal with it.

~~~
enjo
When does it cross a line? A certain IOS developer has made money hand over
first 100% copying Ragdoll Cannon
([http://www.kongregate.com/games/Johnny_K/ragdoll-cannon-
rema...](http://www.kongregate.com/games/Johnny_K/ragdoll-cannon-remake)) into
a game that was so popular, it spawned a sequel.

Is that ok?

The original developer saw $0 from that as far as I know.

~~~
AlfaWolph
Why didn't the original developer make his own iOS version? Can he really
complain?

~~~
enjo
This was pretty early on... 2008 I think.

------
wtvanhest
This type of activity occurs in physical products as well. If company A has
excellent distribution and company B has limited distribution, but a great
product, company A will replicate it and sell it across their distribution
network.

Engineers and shareholders at company B will have a similar reaction that we
do here in that it feels unconfortable, but it is legal (or at least no
financially feasibly legal to go after) and the practice will continue.

The lesson here is that there is a lot of value in your distribution network
and you should focus time there while innovating great games.

------
stephth
More coverage: [http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2011/07/21/radical-fishing-
an...](http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2011/07/21/radical-fishing-and-the-case-
of-the-app-store-clone/)

Quote: _Moral of the story: If you want to support creative, independent
developers, avoid "Ninja Fishing" and wait for "Ridiculous Fishing." The only
way to discourage this sort of action is to hurt copycats in the wallet, so
make your voice heard._

------
robterrell
I think the canonical example of this would be how Rovio found the inspiration
for "Angry Birds" in the flash game "Crush the Castle".

~~~
Terry_B
Meh, launching objects at structures to collapse them is a pretty common
concept. Catching fish, throwing them in the air and shooting them is a bit
different I guess.

I find it very strange that in this crazy age of software patent mutual
destruction, cloning games is such an open field.

~~~
groby_b
And vice versa, that the same crowd that is violently anti-patent (in the
majority) is also perpetually upset (in the majority) when a game of lovable
developer X,Y,Z gets copied.

~~~
Terry_B
Agreed. Although I have to admit, I also find the idea of someones creative
concept being copied far more offensive than setting out to solve a common
problem and adopting the same solution as someone else.

~~~
groby_b
How so? Game design is not inherently more creative than e.g. developing
algorithms.

~~~
Terry_B
I'd agree with you if it were a case of literally taking the source code from
someone else's creative algorithm and copying it. So in the same way people
find it offensive to copy someone else's fish shooting concept it would be
offensive to straight copy the RSA algorithm and claim it as your own.

But it seems like 99% of software patent issues are about two people sitting
down to solve the same common problem and independently writing their own
algorithms that achieve a similar solution.

A case of people simultaneously converging on the optimum solution to a
problem and implementing that solution themselves seems like a complete non-
issue and what progress looks like to me but that's what most the current fuss
seems to be about.

