Cloning vs Re-skinning vs being inspired?

MillionairApps

Hello all,

This has been on my mind a lot and often wondered others thoughts about this.

I am against full on cloning a game. It's just wrong. I see so many exact same gameplay with the title changed.

I have half a mind about re-skinned games cause i feel that people copy a successful game, re skin it and sell it as a template so more people end up re skinning it ect.

Getting inspiration, if I love this game design, I get inspired so i make a game similar design. It's different but you can clearly tell its been inspired from another game.

What are your opinions about this, cause I have my own and I base development of these, but then I read many articles that think differently, but they are not developers.
Do you, would you or would never do any of the above?

Thanks

KevinCross

I'm not against cloning but I'd look at the original and all of its existing clones to see what's good and bad about each of those and would try to make one that had all if the good bits I liked, and less of the bad bits.

If while working on it I find something new that might be cool then that's a bonus.

I'm basing this on my current way of thinking and not so much on previous experiences.

MillionairApps

Some example,

Ridiculous fishing vs ninja fishing

Dots: a game about connecting vs Dot connect vs Loops

Flow free vs flow line vs number connect

Four pics one word vs all those clones

Temple run vs subway surf vs agent dash vs ect ect

BoomshackBarry

I don't know if you've seen any of my blog (check my signature if you're interested) but this is an issue I've been fighting with myself over recently. I intended to start building generic game mechanics that I could then re-skin over and over to maximise profits. The trouble is that I'm finding it hard to do that as I also want to be proud of my work, and re-skinning feels like a quick and easy way to make money rather than being truly creative.

I still haven't found an answer yet, I change my mind every day on what's the best path for me to take.

BoomshackBarry

On the theme of out-and-out cloning, I think perhaps it comes down to who's doing the cloning. When Zynga cloned Tiny Towers I think that was a bit unethical, because here was a huge company trying to capitalise on the success of a tiny startup. Zynga should have the resources to produce their own ideas, and not try to take money away from the little guys. However I think a small startup cloning a game from a larger company is less unethical, maybe still frowned upon, but small companies need to start somewhere. With that said I think a small company who focuses on cloning larger companies games might not do very well, as they'd appear to have no creativity of their own. I don't know if that's a general consensus but it feels like that to me.

MillionairApps

@BoomshackBarry
I do in fact read your blog, which added to my thoughts. It's a good read.

I don't know if you've seen any of my blog (check my signature if you're interested) but this is an issue I've been fighting with myself over recently. I intended to start building generic game mechanics that I could then re-skin over and over to maximise profits. The trouble is that I'm finding it hard to do that as I also want to be proud of my work, and re-skinning feels like a quick and easy way to make money rather than being truly creative.

I still haven't found an answer yet, I change my mind every day on what's the best path for me to take.

Well I think if you have a theme that you extend on, such as Christmas ect then that's not re skinning, feel free to disagree. But having, and an example I see a lot is templates, have one about a bug and then one about a ball.

On the theme of out-and-out cloning, I think perhaps it comes down to who's doing the cloning. When Zynga cloned Tiny Towers I think that was a bit unethical, because here was a huge company trying to capitalise on the success of a tiny startup. Zynga should have the resources to produce their own ideas, and not try to take money away from the little guys. However I think a small startup cloning a game from a larger company is less unethical, maybe still frowned upon, but small companies need to start somewhere. With that said I think a small company who focuses on cloning larger companies games might not do very well, as they'd appear to have no creativity of their own. I don't know if that's a general consensus but it feels like that to me.

Even this, nimblebit did a good job, but zynga did a better more polished game, they took a popular idea and added their own ideas and styles. It's like crush the castle and angry birds, one just added that winning new theme that everyone liked.
However words and pic games don't add anything new and are just plain stealing the initial popular idea.

What about a certain style of the app, the design, but a different gameplay?

BoomshackBarry

I can't claim to have played the Zynga tower game, but I thought the general opinion was that Zynga didn't add much to the original, and that the nimblebit game has more character, whereas the Zynga game feels like a soulless copy. Perhaps I have that wrong? That's what I get for trusting what I read on the internet

In honesty I don't seen anything truly wrong with cloning in the majority of cases. Unless your game is a copy/paste of another then it will always be different in some way. Back to the tiny tower example, even though Zynga got a lot of abuse for their game, it doesn't look the same as tiny tower, the graphical style is very different. As long as you're bringing something new to the table then it's just part of the evolution of game design. You could argue that Call of Duty started life as a Medal of Honor clone, etc, but that doesn't make it any less valid.

What about a certain style of the app, the design, but a different gameplay?

I guess from the tiny tower example that would be like Zynga releasing a totally unrelated game, but with the unique graphical style that nimblebit use in their games? I guess it's like most things related to cloning; frowned upon but not ultimately wrong. As soon as any creative idea out is out there it's fair game to be copied.

Interesting post topic, there's plenty to think about.

@BoomshackBarry
I do in fact read your blog, which added to my thoughts. It's a good read

Hehe awesome, thanks

The_Gamesalad_Guru

Actually this is the age old question and applies to all the creative genres. Hollywood is famous for copying. So all depends on who one wants to be. Do you want to be Walt Disney, a creative innovator, or do you want to be Michael Isner, a grab every dollar business man? It all comes down to who you want to be not who everyone else is.

MillionairApps

@FryingBaconStudios

Well, it all can boiled down to the core point, and put the decision of ones self. And that's what it really comes to down to. However on a more of a broad discussion, there is always a line between cloning and re skinning and being inspired.

For instance, Puck it, a common type game at heart, which means it comes down to that fact that some parts were copied. However judging from the game, its more likely to be inspired from another game or games. Which goes back to @BoomshackBarry discussion about adding new ideas and making it your own.

So how much does a game need to change for it not be considered a clone or a re skinned or even tell it had been inspired by it. I mean no offence to puck it at all.

Is like taking the gameplay of bejewelled and making a new game with it, most people will still see it as a clone of bejewelled. Do you think there is ever a point that the same game play ca be used and stand on its own two legs?

I am throwing ideas and thoughts as I feel most people have a lot of thoughts on this type of subject.

KevinCross

I intended to start building generic game mechanics that I could then re-skin over and over to maximise profits. The trouble is that I'm finding it hard to do that as I also want to be proud of my work, and re-skinning feels like a quick and easy way to make money rather than being truly creative.

I think re-skinning your own work is completely fine and acceptable. Don't look at it as a greed thing but look at it as a way to target and reach out to more people and their tastes with your original game idea using different themes/skins.

Although I'm a long way away from completing I could re-skin my project from cars, to boats, to spaceships and every one of those games even though they're based on one template would be different from each other in one way or another, not just visually.

KevinCross

Is like taking the gameplay of bejewelled and making a new game with it, most people will still see it as a clone of bejewelled.

I know developers get funny about clones, but does the average player really care? Generally? They'll still download the new version of bejewelled created by company/developer X if it looks good and plays as good if not better than the originals, or they were recommended it by a friend.

Take the best bits from all of the clones and the original (that means playing as many of them as you can), throw away as many of the bad bits and boom you've got a clone that's better than most.

BoomshackBarry

Is like taking the gameplay of bejewelled and making a new game with it, most people will still see it as a clone of bejewelled. Do you think there is ever a point that the same game play ca be used and stand on its own two legs?

I think the likelihood is that there won't be a clear answer for this, it depends on how much the game can disguise the fact that it is a clone. If you took a generic WWII first person shooter and completely re-skinned it in to a space shooter, but kept the identical gameplay and levels intact, I bet a lot of people wouldn't notice that it was exactly the same game, unless they played both games within a short space of time and remembered the level layouts, etc. Whereas your example of a bejewelled clone would be harder to disguise. I don't know what the formula might be that makes it easier to get away with some games?

Although I'm a long way away from completing I could re-skin my project from cars, to boats, to spaceships and every one of those games even though they're based on one template would be different from each other in one way or another, not just visually.

See I think that's a different thing. I see a re-skin as exactly the same game with only new graphics and sound. For example when I started designing my current WIP space game, I kept in mind that I also wanted to release it as an underwater version later on. This impacted the design, as I planned a particular power-up in my space game, but I didn't see how I could make it fit a water theme in the later re-skin. That was the problem, I was hindering my first game in order to keep it as generic as possible.

If I was to base the water game off of the same file as the space game, but then also make changes to the gameplay then I wouldn't consider that strictly a re-skin, more of a... well I don't know what you'd call that, sensible reuse of code perhaps?

The_Gamesalad_Guru

Puck was based off Air Hockey/pinball in mechanics the rest has no basis in other games. It was just crazy ideas we cobbled together in a fashion. This can apply to Walt as well. He built off of classic stories. As a famous quote "There is nothing new under the sun" As you describe it's a discussion, I get that, but still the point of a discussion is to influence people's thinking as well as ones own, is it not? So essentially its philosophy, which always falls back to Rene Decarte's observation " I think therefore I am" So essentially the discussion for each involved is who do I want to be? Once one figures out who they want to be they should proceed in that determination unaffected by the decisions of others. Walt had his critics who told him no one would ever watch a one hour cartoon but he knew who he wanted to be and stuck to it. If I decide to borrow from other ideas then that's who I want to be. If I want to copy copy then that's who I decide to be. If there are no moral implications to who I want to be then what should one care what others think? This then distracts me from my goal of being who I am and not what others say I should be.

To really understand the creative framework look to the masters. I suggest two reads.

Aristotle's "Poetics" which is still the fundamental breakdown of the essence and structure of storytelling used and taught in all english and film programs to all story writers and directors.

Leonardo da Vinci's book "Thoughts on Art and Life." The foundation for creative thought.

megapowerskills

Just do the re-skins under a different name. Maintain the integrity of your main brand by making your own original work and bang out some re-skins under a second brand to make some extra wonga.

The_Gamesalad_Guru

That would make one Michael Isner..lol Aka Disney Studios and Miramax Films.

UtopianGames

PopCap seem to have done pretty well with clones.

Zuma 2003



PuzzLoop 1993



Darren.

MillionairApps

Just do the re-skins under a different name. Maintain the integrity of your main brand by making your own original work and bang out some re-skins under a second brand to make some extra wonga.

So basically those guys who made temple run also made most of those other runners under a different name to fake a competition. Smart idea

@FryingBaconStudios that's a lot of people quoted, its fine that your view and that its being expressed cause that is the point of a discussion, I think you would see the same thing everywhere though, apple vs windows, apple vs Samsung, woolworths vs Coles but understand.

Now going back to game related, cloning does have its benifits, and when I mean cloning I do mean exact gameplay different style or added feature, as it can create competition. Or even if your going for the money side, its going to give you a lot of coverage, but in return a bad rep.

Re skinning the game in my personal opinion is sort of useless, players already have the game, whats the different of playing the same thing underwater, why not make it an update and expand the game instead of creating many separate games. Then again it depends on how you view things.

Well, @KevinCross that was what I was exploring about who actually gets offended or affected by clones. Developers, and very loyal fans, are the only ones that seem to make a big deal about. I download games cause i like the looks or sound of them. I really doesnt bother me personally if its a rip off of another game. That other game never made it onto my device so therefore it doesn't really exist to me. Even when things are pointed out, I tend to get the two, see the differences and you normally end up playing the better game, not which one game first.

BoomshackBarry

Re skinning the game in my personal opinion is sort of useless, players already have the game, whats the different of playing the same thing underwater, why not make it an update and expand the game instead of creating many separate games. Then again it depends on how you view things.

I disagree - the issue is the part "players already have the game" - but what if they don't? The idea behind my looking at re-skinning is to broaden market reach. Everyone knows it's getting really difficult to get noticed on the app store, so if I release the same game twice with a space and underwater theme, I have more chance of it being noticed by players. Player A might love space games, so types that term in to the app store and finds Game A. Even though the mechanics are the same player A might never find Game B because he's never searched for water games. He could search for endless runners and find both, but by having both versions released I'm covering twice as much ground with my app store keywords.

megapowerskills

I remember playing World Heroes in the arcade and noticing how every character was an exact duplicate of a character in StreetFighter 2. I didn't know what re-skinning was back then but the similarity didn't take anything from my enjoyment of the game. In-fact, I liked it because it meant that I didn't have to learn all the special moves again. I think as long as you add something to it, it's a good thing.

MillionairApps

Re skinning the game in my personal opinion is sort of useless, players already have the game, whats the different of playing the same thing underwater, why not make it an update and expand the game instead of creating many separate games. Then again it depends on how you view things.

I disagree - the issue is the part "players already have the game" - but what if they don't? The idea behind my looking at re-skinning is to broaden market reach. Everyone knows it's getting really difficult to get noticed on the app store, so if I release the same game twice with a space and underwater theme, I have more chance of it being noticed by players. Player A might love space games, so types that term in to the app store and finds Game A. Even though the mechanics are the same player A might never find Game B because he's never searched for water games. He could search for endless runners and find both, but by having both versions released I'm covering twice as much ground with my app store keywords.

Guess we need a dislike button then,

Fair point, I understand, I may not support that idea, but if it works then why not. But, I think, and nothing personal of course, but when one has to make two games to get a larger audience then one should have another look at ones game. I play subway surf, I don't like trains, I just like the gameplay and the challenges. Just cause a game is re skinned to a different theme won't make me won't to download it. But I see your point, ones going to love forest, ones going to love water, but why not put both into one so re skinning is not needed?

Isn't there a risk of hurting your brand image?

quantumsheep

There's been some history on this very site, and with this very software, with regard to plagiarism:

http://forums.gamesalad.com/discussion/37740/air-supply-rip-off-and-others/p1

http://forums.gamesalad.com/discussion/29419/the-secret-of-father-simons-live-on-app-store

In the first instance the guy somehow got a hold of my project file and released my game Air Supply as his own, called 'Air Attack'.

This wasn't just copying the gameplay/graphics. I want you to imagine the game that you're working on right now. The entire game. Imagine I took your actual project file and changed just the title and released it as my own.

That's exactly what this guy did. It was that blatant.

THIS kind of behaviour is basically stealing and inexcusable, and I would advise people not to go down this route. I'm lucky in that I have a family of lawyers on my side, and wouldn't think twice about taking legal action if possible.

Usually though you won't need to resort to legal action. All it takes is an email to Apple with as much evidence as possible to back your case and the offending apps will be taken down.

The second infraction basically did everything possible to ride the coat tails of Secret of Grisly Manor's success. Though the game used different graphics, and adventure games usually follow the same format, it did all it could to capitalise on FMG's success. I was personally particularly irked that the description was practically stolen, which I had written personally for the game for FMG.

So, those are extreme examples. Another might be The Semi-Secret guys giving away the code for Canabalt, so people could learn from it, adapt it maybe, make it their own.

Their intention was, perhaps naively, never to give con-artists an easy way to make money by just republishing the game, but it happened. To their credit, they have been very strict about it and contacted Apple and had the offending apps removed (one of the con apps was even titled 'Canabalt PRO').

So yeah, you could say I'm not a fan of people making money off the hard work of others with the least amount of effort on their part…

There are other considerations too. There are particularly well defined genres, that have many many games within them. Let's take infinite runners for example.

Now, infinite runners are, I feel, fun by their very nature. The main features are:

Enemies to jump over.
Stuff to collect.
Pits you can fall down.
Goes on forever.

There are variations within this of course. Some runners have a fixed jump. Some have a variable jump based on how long you keep your finger down. Some have double jumps. Some give you lives. Some kill you with one hit. Some let you shoot. Some don't. Some have different levels with different backgrounds. Some stick to just one background etc etc

So, while two games within the genre may share many of the same game mechanics, I believe it's *how* those games are executed, presented and points of difference to other games, which sets them apart. And this is true of many genre types.

Puzzle games, for example, encompass stuff like Tetris, Bejewelled, Angry Birds and Cut the rope to name a few. Each of those sits within the genre, but is unique thanks to its own particular game mechanic.

Even a different art style can make a big difference. I'm not a fan of 'cartoony' art you get a lot of on the app store because it just screams 'generic' to me. That's a personal thing though, as I'm a big fan of pixel art, and I'm sure there are (CRAZY!) people that don't like that

Again though, using the same game mechanic as someone else isn't a bad thing. It's how it's executed that will make it sink or swim.


Then there's people like Jeff Minter, a hero of mine.

He is influenced, sometimes, very obviously, by other games, yet adds enough to his own games to differentiate them from the inspiration.

Attack of the Mutant Camels plays like the Atari VCS version of Empire Strikes Back.
Minotaur Rescue looks very similar to the classic Asteroids.
Mionotron 2112 looks like Berzerk.
Space Giraffe looks like Tempest.

And yes, there's similarities at a glance. But there's enough difference, personal style and attention to detail in there to make these games unique in and of themselves.

I guess I'd like to fall into the Minter category myself.

I think the main problem really is that people do this for different reasons. A lot of people see their games as 'product to be sold'.

Personally, yes, I sell my games. And yes they're products. But they're also a very big part of me. I put a lot of myself into my games. My personality is hopefully in there. My interests, beliefs even. Sense of humour. Attention to detail.

I used to make games for other people for a wage. Games I wasn't particularly interested in, but I made the most of it. It was a job.

Now I make my own games. Now I make games I want to play.

To me, each game is a seperate statement, so for that reason I don't personally believe in simply re-skinning a game and selling it again with different graphics.

I could, for example, have tried to re-skin my own infinite runner, Air Supply. But that game was designed from the ground up around the style and the music and the genre. To replace the foundation of the game, therefore would be to utterly destroy what it actually was in my mind. I couldn't even contemplate doing it.

To me, personally, cloning your own games just feels like your original game wasn't good enough to stand on its own, or had no real 'vision' behind it - or severely dilutes that vision.

And that's fine. Like I said, some people are just in it for the money and will take every shortcut they can to try and get it. I wish I could say it's just the kids that use GameSalad, but some of the 'grown ups' are far worse.

Personally, I'd like to make money as ethically as possible by providing something of value to someone that I have made.

Do I make much money? No. Not at all. In fact I'd wager that those that do clone, those that do just release templates onto the app store, probably make more money than I ever have.

But I'd like to be remembered for making fun games. To have a solid reputation, so that people will want to play the next Quantum Sheep game.

I may be a total failure, business wise, in this quest to make games. People will no doubt not take me seriously based on how 'successful' I appear to be and their own definitions of 'success'.

But I make games because I love games, not the dollar. I care enough about games that I don't want to add to the downward spiral I personally see them going down as the industry changes.

I may be fighting against the tide. But hey, someone's got to, right?

QS =D

KevinCross

Someone released an app on the store yesterday with the same name as mine, minus the s on the end. Same style of game too, only a lot worse

quantumsheep

Someone released an app on the store yesterday with the same name as mine, minus the s on the end. Same style of game too, only a lot worse

Oh dear

It's a question of ethics really. I guess its definition is variable maybe?

QS

KevinCross

To be honest I only created a clone myself! And I'm not stupid enough to think that only I should use the word "Doodle" in the app names! I just found it interesting that someone copied the name and style, badly. I only looked because of this discussion and the links you provided from old posts.

The_Gamesalad_Guru

+1 @Quantumsheep. What you expressed is the difference between being an artist and being a business person. An artist values creative expression above profit, this doesn't mean the artist doesn't like profit, it means it's not first on his or her list. Same for the business person he values profit first, this doesn't mean he or she doesn't value art it's just not first on the list. Life isn't lived in a vacuum. You can't separate the person from the approach, it's all personal judgement. As to quotes wisdom is passed by those who have done and done well. Their works have stood for centuries must be value in that.

Here is the raw reality though. Only one percent of Game Makers earn a million or more. Only ten percent of Game Makers earn a living wage. This mostly lines up with income data as a whole. Only one percent of the worlds population makes more than a million dollars. Only ten percent of the worlds population makes $100,000 or more. Making money in any venture isn't easy as the numbers don't lie.

Riffel

I like the re-skinning with gameplay up-grade.
my first one endless runner was a template based, in the code is all most new.
we learn things and it is good.

endless runner I

https://itunes.apple.com/app/id415979971

endless runner II = more features (store)

https://itunes.apple.com/app/id643979414

endless runner III = more gameplay (shooting)

http://forums.gamesalad.com/discussion/59462/riffel-s-new-endless-game-wip

BoomshackBarry

Guess we need a dislike button then,

Fair point, I understand, I may not support that idea, but if it works then why not. But, I think, and nothing personal of course, but when one has to make two games to get a larger audience then one should have another look at ones game. I play subway surf, I don't like trains, I just like the gameplay and the challenges. Just cause a game is re skinned to a different theme won't make me won't to download it. But I see your point, ones going to love forest, ones going to love water, but why not put both into one so re skinning is not needed?

Isn't there a risk of hurting your brand image?

Nothing personal taken In fact on my blog I've already written a long post about the fact that I very likely won't be re-skinning my games like I'd originally planned, so I think we agree more than we disagree, I'm just seeing both sides of the debate equally, and I'm still undecided.

Although this part:

but when one has to make two games to get a larger audience then one should have another look at ones game

I'm not sure I agree with entirely. In an ideal World the game itself would dictate how successful it is, but in reailty plenty of good games go under the radar and earn little money. Sometimes it's more down to marketing, and maximising your presence in the app store, than the game itself.

And:

I play subway surf, I don't like trains, I just like the gameplay and the challenges. Just cause a game is re skinned to a different theme won't make me won't to download it.

I don't mean so much that a different theme will make somebody want to download the game more, simply that they might not even see the game if they're searching for a different theme entirely.

Reskinning can totally hurt brand image though I think. A lot of re-skinners have multiple app store accounts/brands to get around this issue.

@quantumsheep that's the single longest post I've ever read The debate I've been having with myself is that I fall in to both camps. I'm a very creative person who takes pride in my work. In that regard I want to only release games that are personal to me, and are an expression of myself. In an ideal World I'd be doing that without a doubt. However I really want to bring in a decent income from my games, so that I can hopefully quit the day job and spend more quality time at home with my wife and kids. In that regard it's best to play it safe and re-skin to maximise the potential profit from each game I build.

Ultimately, is it more noble to follow the artistic route, even though that's more unlikely to benefit my family, or to follow the 'app producer route' which is more business like, less creative and less enjoyable for me, but will offer a much better chance of providing for my family? In that regard going down the artistic route feels more selfish to me; I'd be doing it for my own benefit more than what my family needs me to do.

I realise everybody's situation is different, but it goes to show that taking the re-skinning route isn't necessarily the unethical choice that it appears on the surface, and isn't necessarily down to personality but situation.

@FryingBaconStudios you've hit the nail on the head when you say that artists aren't uninterested in business, and vice versa. Clearly artists can make it in to the ten percent who earn a decent living from the app store, but to maximse your chances of getting in to that group perhaps you have to consider the business before the art.

The_Gamesalad_Guru

To be honest if my real interest were money at this point there are far better things to do business wise that generate better profits faster and more consistantly than game making. For me it just happens to be a been there done that kind of a thing. If ones real interest is making money gamemaking really isn't the place to pursue that. The odds are akin to being a star actor et.. Realestate, banking, contracting et.. have higher profits and require less luck.

BoomshackBarry

The odds are of course stacked against you for having a mega hit game like Angry birds or Tiny wings that makes you a fotune, but I honestly do believe it's a pretty good and safe(ish) strategy for achieving decent revenue if you can get enough decent games released, each one adding another revenue stream that adds up to a whole. There's no doubt better methods out there for generating income, but with my skill set and a very low barrier to entry I think it's one of the most actionable options available to me.

But I don't want this thread to get derailed with my story, let's keep the interesting debate on re-skinning/cloning alive

VolontaArts

yea some people are just crowding the marketplace with clones... they need to understand if people dont take one look at your game and see something that stands out..there most likely just going to go look for one that does.

as long as u make it your own and actually make it unique then u gave it a real shot

MillionairApps

@DeepBlueApps

Good point out, the gameplay is clearly copied, but it goes above what the original was,

So basically, from what I have read, including the massive post , cloning seems to be a no from people cause they want to make their own ideas and their own mark in the gaming world.
These opinions are not actually my own, they are just to food for thoughts.

If people were against cloning, why make templates of full games exactly like successful games.
There are cut the rope templates, flight control templates, and they all have the exact same art. So in a sense, are they making money from prompting and supporting people to clone games?


@FryingBaconStudios
And here is where I disagree. It's a trend that I notice happens, if your here for the business path, then your the bad guy ect. Your not going to be successful by taking the artist path most likely. You need to take them both. If no one likes endless runners, and you spend your time creating one, no one is going to download, no matter how much time you spent in it.
However if everyone likes slot machine games, then you make your game, based on slots, then you have a more chance of getting more downloads.
When people say, I am making my own ideas up and one day I will strike it rich, I happen to disagree, unless your creating games like world of goo, I think it's just going to be lost in the crowd.
But of course, there is the greedy path, and the artist path, which normally get hired by the greedy people in the end


@BoomshackBarry Glad you disagree, however what I failed to take into consideration was the fact that your trying to go full time, and going the good artist way may not cut that for you. So yeah, two different apps could work, but really that is boarding on the artist and business way.

Anyway, one of the biggest things I noticed when games are cloned and resigned, and even inspired other games, is the negative reviews. Do people consider this, or know how to handle this type of situation, cause everyone and then I read about this and has negative effects on downloads.


I also disagree for the sake of disagreeing with a lot that's been said cause what I notice on the forums is people say, but can't really back it, but @FryingBaconStudios has done a good job backing it up and relating it.