Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

asherv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 218 posts

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#201

Post by clarky07 »

srik1234 wrote: post #116
clarky07 wrote: post #98

Rip-offs are sad, but the fact that you spent 14 months doesn't make it a better game. It means you took too long to make it. Threes is a great game that has done well, but the vast vast majority of mobile apps don't make enough money to justify spending 14 months on. I really hope that wasn't full time work. Also, time/effort/money spent developing a game does not make it better or worse than other games. Some dead…

Inventing a new game is a creative exercise. I see it like writing a book. iPhone development took years. This reminds me of all the evidence that is pouring from Apple these days on the conference rooms, sketches, mockups etc.

I agree, but comparing an app to the iPhone seems a bit silly to me. This "ripoff" was apparently done in a few weeks and is currently #1 free app in the store. While obviously the original is going to take longer, I'm not sure it has to take 30x longer. And if it really does have to take 30x longer, that's probably a good sign that it's a terrible business model and you should only do this in your spare time as a hobby.

Frankly, the ripoffs are getting the original more exposure, and are probably helping their sales.

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#202

Post by wtracy »

MBCook wrote: post #97
voltagex_ wrote: post #74

On Android, 2048 is 0.7mb. Threes is nearly 30! Surely that factors into some people's decisions.

Do you normally check the size of games? I wouldn't even think to check that. At 30mb, Threes isn't that big (Retina assets and all). I would certainly understand your point if it was 300, but that doesn't seem excessive. I can only think of a single game I've run into on my iPhone that surprised me with it's size. I'm not sure what it was (maybe an old version of Scrabble?), but it was a word game that was hundred o…

Well, my device has just over 40Mb of internal storage. So, unless the app allows you to install to an SD card, it matters a lot!

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#203

Post by RogerL »

petercooper wrote: post #184

Lots of discussion already but I wanted to throw "patents" out there as that's what it made me think of first. You can patent game mechanics to protect them (to a certain extent). Is it possible to be against patents (as many geeks seem to be) while also being against people ripping off game mechanics? If so, how?

I came in here post this point. I recognize HN isn't a single human, but the popular positions are somewhat incoherent.

It is exactly this that the patent system is designed to solve. You spend all your hard work, time, and money developing something, and somebody swoops in and appropriates it. If you don't want to be able to protect ideas, this sort of thing is going to happen. It's a tradeoff.

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#204

Post by anon4 »

alagappanr wrote: post #124
m3mnoch wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yup. making no money. and, as the threes guys point out, with no longevity. it won't be at the top of the heap for long. then, unlike threes, it will crash out the bottom instead of hanging around. so, again. meh.

Only the web version is ad-free. The iOS version has ads. Its longevity I believe will be greater compared to the Threes game. What makes you think otherwise - that Threes will stay on the top for longer than 2048?

2048 is Solitaire. It's exactly the same kind of game - the algorithm to beating it is dead simple and you win or lose by the whim of the RNG. As per the words of a person who plays Solitaire every day: "I don't play it because it's challenging, I play it because I need to play with something that requires no thinking for a while".

Also, I don't have an iDevice or a desire to pay for a simple puzzle game, so I have no idea what this "Threes" thing is, other than "kind of like 2048 but you can't win". I've played a lot of 2048 and friends, though. I really like the hexagonal variant.

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#205

Post by nicpottier »

evan_ wrote: post #174
nicpottier wrote: post #134

What the wha? Give me a break, this same diatribe could be spouted by anybody who has built anything of significance. Yes, if you build something great, people will copy it, just as your precious snowflake was inspired by others as well. This isn't anything unique to gaming, it isn't anything unique to 3s, it is an immovable fact of life. Are people copying the product we've poured the last 18 months into? Damn right…

Not sure if you've ever played it- it sounds like you maybe have not- but Flappy Bird is punishingly difficult, a fact which is commonly cited as part of its appeal.

No, I have played it far too much, high score of 111.

My point was just that the dynamic is simple, stupidly simple, but that doesn't make it unfun.

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#206

Post by transitionality »

gress wrote: post #195
gbhn wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've played both games. It's definitely true that 2048 appeared in a world where threes was popular. But it isn't the case that a bunch of effort improved threes over the simpler 2048. Yes, it is simpler, easier. Sometimes that's exactly why a game is better. I can appreciate that the threes creators spent months working on their game, presentation, etc. To my taste, the result is poorer than 2048. Another fun factor…

You are missing the point - 2048 was a clone that is free riding on the work done to design Threes.

And Threes is free riding on the work done to design the classical number sliding puzzle, Objective C, the iPhone, and tons of other inventions.

We all build upon others' work. As long as we do so legally, there is no room for complaint.

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#207

Post by thedudemabry »

GuiA wrote: post #46

Having a foot in the indie game developer community and another in startups, it's fascinating to see the HN comments in response to this post. The indie game developers care about originality, passion, the sweat and hard months of work, the dedication to the craft. I think the point of Asher's essay is to show how much love and effort went into it, and that they were indeed the first to ship a full, polished game wit…

I completely agree. To borrow a common refrain among my group of coworkers: presume goodwill. It's amazing to see the interactions of a group of very effective developers feeling out the finished product as they venture into interesting territory. I'm incredible happy that they posted this!

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#208

Post by rspeer »

moron4hire wrote: post #158
vacri wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't really true. There are tons of games out there that capture the imagination better than other clones, but have shallower gameplay. The initial 'demo' period might be fun, but it doesn't mean the game will last. The thing with 2048 is a bit different though. It wasn't just a game craze, it was people playing with algorithms. Making a funny/curious clone of the game had become the game for some.

Oh, I agree completely. Your last paragraph is exactly why this letter from the people who made Threes sound so particularly whiney. They have forgotten that they don't get to tell people how to enjoy themselves. Any parent who has watched their kids play with the cardboard box more than the toys that came in it will tell you that. I don't think we can know why 2048 became so popular and Threes fell in its own shadow…

I don't think the open-source aspect of it was the important difference. Rather, I think the thing that let 2048 become so huge, compared to Threes, is that you can show someone a link to 2048, and the moment they follow the link, they're playing it.

I think this is an important reason not to dismiss the Web as a platform.

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#209

Post by jtfrench »

GuiA wrote: post #46

Having a foot in the indie game developer community and another in startups, it's fascinating to see the HN comments in response to this post. The indie game developers care about originality, passion, the sweat and hard months of work, the dedication to the craft. I think the point of Asher's essay is to show how much love and effort went into it, and that they were indeed the first to ship a full, polished game wit…

As someone who has done plenty of indie game development, I understand their gripes, but also I know this is the "Game" we're playing here — anyone who makes any form of success should expect to be cloned. Period. So think about that from the get-go and come to peace with it in your strategy/set expectations accordingly. The second I put any app out there I assume it's out in the general "mindspace" and will probably manifest somewhere in another form at some point or another. The speed at which it manifests usually correlates to the popularity of the idea.

Re: Threes: The Rip-offs and Making Our Original Game

#210

Post by transitionality »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #106
vacri wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't really true. There are tons of games out there that capture the imagination better than other clones, but have shallower gameplay. The initial 'demo' period might be fun, but it doesn't mean the game will last. The thing with 2048 is a bit different though. It wasn't just a game craze, it was people playing with algorithms. Making a funny/curious clone of the game had become the game for some.

> The thing with 2048 is a bit different though. It wasn't just a game craze, it was people playing with algorithms. Making a funny/curious clone of the game had become the game for some. This is the critical point missed by calling 2048 a clone. Of course it's a clone, and that's what makes it so interesting. 2048, in isolation, isn't that much fun; it captured interest for a while, but what made it gain popularity…

2048 isn't a clone, it's a snowclone.
Post reply on HN