3 ms·

I know people that work at small Bay Area gaming company, and their M.O. was to rip off every popular game that came online in the App Store. They have a few m

I know people that work at small Bay Area gaming company, and their M.O. was to rip off every popular game that came online in the App Store. They have a few million steady users for their games, and they use that as an ad network to advertise their new ripoffs. They said that by 2016, they couldn't find any new games to rip off so they started to try to make their own. Gaming is a terrible business to be in because of how the App Store allows these ripoffs to drown out any innovation.

chris_st 10y ago
What would you suggest as an alternative? I think in any market, copying is a thing...
clarry 10y ago
I fear gaming is a terrible business to be in (and I might find out sometime in the coming times..), but I'd at least get out of the App Stores and steer clear of cheaply produced mobile dirt. Blatant, obvious ripoffs aren't quite so common in the PC & console market and the players do a little more research than pull their phones to check what's popular before purchasing a game. I think that market is much more lucrative for people who want to innovate and try a new formula.
- namlem 10y ago
  IMO Steam needs to launch an Android store. If anyone can convince consumers that mobile games have the potential to be high quality and valuable, it's Valve. People who balk at the idea of paying 99 cents for a mobile app happily drop $20 on a game on Steam.
  - otakucode 10y ago
    It wouldn't be any better. Valve has had a strict policy of 'let the publisher do whatever it wants' since the inception of Steam. There have been one-off exceptions, but their general policy is to be a platform that facilitates publishers doing their thing, regardless of what that is. There are growing numbers of asset-swap games, and games slapped together in a minute with cheap asset packs. It's not like how Apple approached the music industry with iTunes, laying down ultimatums like '99 cents a song, individual purchases allowed, audio CD burning permitted' which forced music publishers to choose between their retail distribution agreements and iTunes. This would actually be OK if Steam provided any rudimentary filtering/personalization system at all. If they would just take a users activity and feed it into a Bayesian system with 'disliked' games considered 'spam' and purchased or 'wishlisted' items considered 'ham', then put that content on top for that user, it would be much less of a problem. But as it is, they provide nothing like this and don't seem to ever intend to.
otakucode 10y ago
Clearly, it is what the gaming audience wants. The saying 'you get what you pay for' doesn't just mean 'if you pay little, you get little'. It also means 'if you pay for something, the next thing on offer will be similar to, not different from, the thing you paid for.' In many industries the line between demand and profit can be pretty fuzzy (see all the iPhone 7 sales fueled by exploding Note 7s) but in gaming, it's quite clear. The games making a good return on investment are terrible in every way to every person except the publisher whom gamers choose to lavish with riches.

chris_st 10y ago

What would you suggest as an alternative? I think in any market, copying is a thing...

clarry 10y ago

I fear gaming is a terrible business to be in (and I might find out sometime in the coming times..), but I'd at least get out of the App Stores and steer clear of cheaply produced mobile dirt. Blatant, obvious ripoffs aren't quite so common in the PC & console market and the players do a little more research than pull their phones to check what's popular before purchasing a game. I think that market is much more lucrative for people who want to innovate and try a new formula.

namlem 10y ago
IMO Steam needs to launch an Android store. If anyone can convince consumers that mobile games have the potential to be high quality and valuable, it's Valve. People who balk at the idea of paying 99 cents for a mobile app happily drop $20 on a game on Steam.
- otakucode 10y ago
  It wouldn't be any better. Valve has had a strict policy of 'let the publisher do whatever it wants' since the inception of Steam. There have been one-off exceptions, but their general policy is to be a platform that facilitates publishers doing their thing, regardless of what that is. There are growing numbers of asset-swap games, and games slapped together in a minute with cheap asset packs. It's not like how Apple approached the music industry with iTunes, laying down ultimatums like '99 cents a song, individual purchases allowed, audio CD burning permitted' which forced music publishers to choose between their retail distribution agreements and iTunes. This would actually be OK if Steam provided any rudimentary filtering/personalization system at all. If they would just take a users activity and feed it into a Bayesian system with 'disliked' games considered 'spam' and purchased or 'wishlisted' items considered 'ham', then put that content on top for that user, it would be much less of a problem. But as it is, they provide nothing like this and don't seem to ever intend to.

otakucode 10y ago

Clearly, it is what the gaming audience wants. The saying 'you get what you pay for' doesn't just mean 'if you pay little, you get little'. It also means 'if you pay for something, the next thing on offer will be similar to, not different from, the thing you paid for.' In many industries the line between demand and profit can be pretty fuzzy (see all the iPhone 7 sales fueled by exploding Note 7s) but in gaming, it's quite clear. The games making a good return on investment are terrible in every way to every person except the publisher whom gamers choose to lavish with riches.