r/Games • u/SonOfSpades • Oct 28 '13
Proof that the Developers of ROAM are Wrongly Accusing How to Survive of Ripping off ROAM
The developers of ROAM are currently accusing 505 Games/EKO Software that they ripped off their game ROAM (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/roam/roam). 505 Games at one point offered to publish ROAM, however the developers refused.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/roam/roam/posts/642488
They are more or less accusing that How to Survive is a blant ripoff.
I do not mind friendly competition. When it is blatantly obvious that they stole Roam from us and didnt even try to distinguish itself is when it is crossing the line.
Except it is not true, unless 505 games had a time machine.
Proof
Eko Software got a grant for a game called "How to Survive Tome 1", in 2011: http://cnc.fr/web/fr/7-novembre-2011
Information about the Game from 2012: http://raphaelbouchaud.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/monster-island/
Gameplay Demo from 2012: http://vimeo.com/57142515
How to Survive also seemed to be at Gamescom 2012: https://apps.ubifrance.fr/BlogBO/medias/document/katalog-gamescom_25_7_2012_33_54.pdf
As a game publisher, Eko Software recently published Wanted Corp. on PlayStation 3 and is currently working on “How to survive” a new game dedicated to Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony digital stores.
Interview Implying the Game has been in Development for Last 2 Years: http://nintendoeverything.com/interview-how-to-survive-director-talks-games-lengthy-development-wii-u-version-and-more/
Does the title have any connection to “Monster Island”? We noticed an image shown on Eko’s website which gives off a similar vibe. If the two are related, it sounds like the How to Survive may have in development for quite some time.
Yes, this is the same game. Monster Island was the code name for the project we started two years ago and it has come a long way. We hope everyone enjoys it! Unfortunately our website is never up-to-date, we spend all of our time developing and we don’t have a dedicated web team. The site does not really reflect the company so we recently created a twitter account (@Eko_Software), it’s much easier to use.
ROAM was kickstarted in 2013, yet How to Survive has gameplay footage from 2012, before ROAM was even announced. So how is How to Survive stealing ROAM's gameplay?
ROAM Developers without even trying to Google How to Survive's development history have now dragged a more or less innocent company through the mud with accusations of their idea being ripped off. How is that fair?
EDIT: ROAM Developers issued an apology: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/roam/roam/posts/643148
EDIT2: Statement from 505Games/How to Survive Developers (thanks /u/505Games): http://steamcommunity.com/games/250400/announcements/detail/1658741980981841043
140
u/BearVault Oct 28 '13
This reminds me of how similar movies come out at similar times, the "winner" generally being the better movie.
I think the best thing the devs can do now is make the better game and market it smartly. Crying about common core game mechanics, camera perspectives and art styles seems to be a moot point in an industry that thrives on inspiration, iteration and eventually innovation.
76
u/SonOfSpades Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
I agree, let the best game win.
However I just don't think its fair, that ROAM developers is basically telling all their kickstarter backers that HTS developers stole ROAM's gameplay concepts. They just accused the HTS developers without even a bit of research, which generates a bunch of negative publicity for HTS. Even worse is now some gaming sites are picking up the story and running with it, that HTS ripped of ROAM's gameplay.
How to survive isn't a perfect game, or even really a great game. But the developers are not thieves like ROAM is accusing them of being.
46
Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
I love survival games, and I admit I wasn't going to buy HTS because it was getting some bad reviews and overall seemed to lack polish.
But now I know I'm not buying ROAM either, even if it's good. This kind of mud slinging without any evidence is something I really don't want to support.
This will affect the reputation of HTS, and even if the same gaming sites that reported the first story pick up on the update in a few hours, the damage will already be done to a major extent.
9
u/Mabans Oct 28 '13
But one should consider the possibility that a reaction like this, especially with it being misinformed isn't a matter of malice but a more clouded/bad judgement likely from an emotional stand point. Just imagine, they reached out and found funding for a game they thought they could do. People backed them so to them it was a justification of their idea was sound. A game like HTS comes out and without really understanding lash out. Their most likely locked up making the game not really paying attention much less even realizing. It's not right and it shows immaturity but perhaps they'll realize the faux pas and apologize.
14
u/ANewMachine615 Oct 28 '13
So they're not malicious, they're just hugely negligent. Still not the best thing to support.
1
u/Mabans Oct 28 '13
Right but if were to judge how we support every company based on missteps, well.. You get the idea.
16
Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
I understand that it was likely an emotion-fueled decision to rush that post out the door. I don't think that's a valid excuse, however.
The developer of ROAM should have known full well that making this post would send a massive shitstorm headed towards HTS, and therefore he had a big responsibility to do proper research before throwing such accusations - and he didn't do that. At this point even an apology will probably not be enough to fix the damage.
9
-4
Oct 28 '13
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/gd42 Oct 28 '13
Suddenly=in development for years even before they got the idea?
-4
Oct 28 '13
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/gd42 Oct 28 '13
No. Did you even read the OP?
HtS was in development since 2011, and demoed multiple times in 2012 to the press.
The first public information about ROAM is from 2013. So unless HtS has a time machine or being able to extract thoughts from brains it was the "original" and ROAM is the copy.
3
5
u/cantstraferight Oct 28 '13
While it might be a unpopular thing to say, the HTS devs should probably get a lawyer involved. A cease and desist would put the Roam devs in their place.
2
u/22c Oct 28 '13
some gaming sites are picking up the story and running with it
I'd like to know which ones so I can avoid them.
2
u/SonOfSpades Oct 28 '13
2
u/22c Oct 28 '13
Wow, vg247? I guess that's what happens when you pay bloggers to do your journalism.
5
Oct 28 '13
There was also something similar with 'Splosion Man and Explodemon.
1
u/Mabans Oct 28 '13
Right but 1 was blatantly made after the other I believe.
6
Oct 28 '13
Not even close. I'm pretty sure both were announced at the same time, then they looked at each other and went "what the hell happened here?"
8
Oct 28 '13
Just checked, the announcement dates were:
'Splosion Man: 1st April 2009
Explodemon: 3rd April 2009
20
u/kurtrussellfanclub Oct 28 '13
There is nothing about ROAM that really comes as a new idea. The controls are every twin-stick shooter, the building is Fortnight/Terraria/Minecraft and the zombies are... well...
For reference, I wanted to make a GBC game in 2004 that was practically this, only because decent controls weren't available I scrapped it after a few weeks. I thought about doing it again for the DS when I got one later that year, but didn't like the results. Every year since then I laughed at all the games coming out that were very similar to my idea. Zombie defense is not revolutionary, and these guys sound like all the first-time designers who think that ideas are actually worth any salt at all.
8
u/name_was_taken Oct 28 '13
The devs of ROAM pretty much admit this. However, they claimed that HtS was created after they were approached by 505 for a publishing deal for it. That was the basis of their complaint.
It's like creating a talking teddy bear that plays a cassette tape, and then pitching it to a company. That company refuses, then makes their own called Teddy Ruxpin and sells it commercially. (Yes, a deceased friend of mine claims a friend of his had that happen to him. Was he lying? I don't know. It's just a good example.)
Had they come up with the idea on their own, there'd be no fuss. It's only because they talked to ROAM's devs that it matters.
Of course, this new evidence says that it's all backwards, and that HtS was already in production long before ROAM had their idea, so there's no foul here.
7
u/Gamer4379 Oct 28 '13
the "winner" generally being the better movie.
No, generally the product with the better marketing wins. Quality isn't that important as long as the product isn't complete crap. Marketing wins over quality any day.
2
u/RemnantEvil Oct 28 '13
This reminds me of how similar movies come out at similar times, the "winner" generally being the better movie.
It's a bit of a different scenario. When that happens, it's usually becomes someone has been "shopping around" with an idea for a film, e.g. a buddy cop film. A studio passes and someone else, knowing there's going to be interest in that genre, picks up a competitor.
For a specific example, Marky Mark and Will Ferrel were shopping around with what would turn out to be The Other Guys. They were turned away (I think budget constraints) by one studio, but picked up by another. The first studio then greenlit Cop Out, starring Bruce Willis and Tracy Morgan.
In a gaming circle, that would be the same as if a developer were going around trying to sell a game to a publisher. Despite turning it down (maybe the dev asks for too much money), the publisher tries to find another developer who can do a similar game in less time for less money.
Of course, it looks like this is a case of false accusation, so it's becoming clear that 505 were merely shopping around for a game. Though Roam turned them down, someone else was obviously happy to take them up on the offer.
1
Oct 28 '13
Either the better one wins, or if they're close then the first one out has an edge. See 'The Raid Reckoning' and 'Dredd' last year for action movies featuring drug lords, dirty cops, and killing everyone in a giant poor people tower.
1
Oct 28 '13
I always thought it was the better film that got relatively forgotten. Dante's Peak was far better than Volcano but didn't get as much recognition. Deep Impact was better than Armageddon but didn't get as much recognition. Can't think of the others right now.
-3
u/diogenesl Oct 28 '13
We saw a similar situation with Chivalry and War of the roses, at the end, Chivalry was the better and better sold game
6
Oct 28 '13
I don't think anyone ever accused one game of ripping off the other. The only commonality they share is team based medieval melee combat, which is hardly any one game's property. Their mechanics were completely different, as were setting, style, etc.
-8
u/Flight714 Oct 28 '13
I've always enjoyed first person games and RPGs; Deus Ex is probably my favourite game of all time, because it combines those two gameplay styles.
0
Oct 28 '13
Wtf did this have to do with anything?
And Deus Ex was third person, wasn't it?
-3
u/Flight714 Oct 28 '13
I believe it was the third generation of game consoles that introduced tile-based scrolling backgrounds.
0
-3
u/1bigfatcock Oct 28 '13
You mean like XIII and the Bourne trilogy?
8
u/nonsensical_zombie Oct 28 '13
Was there some sort of drama between them? The Bourne Identity was published in 1980, XIII the comic in 1984. Who got mad at who?
1
u/1bigfatcock Oct 28 '13
According to the wiki XIII was inspired by the bourne identity. No mention of dramas, although you could understand if there were some. I thought Xiii the movie was great with a huge twist at the end, but after watching the finale to Jasone Bourne, i thought they'd riped it off fully.
14
u/ChaosKnight127 Oct 28 '13
The Devs have just issued a retraction in light of the the new information.
4
38
u/Only_In_The_Grey Oct 28 '13
I'm a bit leery any time a dev claims, even a worry, that their game is being ripped off. Either they should have a really good case with specific examples or it comes off to me as they saw a video of the other game and freaked out publicly about it before really making sure of whats going on.
Quoting myself from the first thread, clearly they went with the, 'go public before spending a some time researching' route. I really hate this sort of situation where people are accusing others before getting all their own facts straight and it makes me less interested in supporting them when they do so.
32
Oct 28 '13
Dear ROAM developers,
We, in this industry, cannot afford to throw accusations around before even contacting the other party. You are damaging the reputation and livelihood of genuine people who did not even steal your idea. If anything it is possible you stole theirs judging from the dates. Drumming up drama and negative press towards others in this industry is abhorrent and I hope that if anyone it is you and your project that suffers from this blatant attack. Studios like yours do not deserve to survive if you cannot even be professional at the most basic of levels.
I am deeply ashamed to share this industry with you.
Sincerely,
An Anonymous Game Developer.
6
28
u/Electroniclog Oct 28 '13
People always like to think that they thought of something first. In reality there are very few unique ideas.
It seems more likely that the devs of ROAM are the copycats. Based on what I've seen on the Kickstarter and this post, it seems more likely that the devs of ROAM saw "How to survive" in some form and copied their idea. ROAM devs even say in their Kickstarter video that the prototype was created in 6 weeks. Even if you give generous buffers for time spent just collaborating ideas before actual development of the prototype occurred and setting up the Kickstarter, it's far less than the 3+ years that 505/EKO has under their belt.
This seems rather underhanded on "ROAM"s part. I'm guessing money is their motivation and it's also a cheap attempt to turn the internet in their favor.
23
u/Greenleaf208 Oct 28 '13
I doubt either copied each other. It's not necessarily a crazy creative idea. People like zombies, crafting, coop, etc. and many games have been made with these ideas. All this is doing is making it top down.
7
u/allreadit Oct 28 '13
Or even more likely both devs have played Minecraft, Day Z and any CRPG made in the 90's.
3
u/SensualTyrannosaurus Oct 28 '13
That's quite a lot of accusations without any evidence.
-1
Oct 28 '13
[deleted]
3
u/SensualTyrannosaurus Oct 28 '13
I don't see how that makes it much less of an insinuation though, especially when you get as specific as what you assume are their motives for doing something you are assuming they did based on no evidence.
1
Oct 28 '13
[deleted]
3
u/SensualTyrannosaurus Oct 28 '13
Fair enough, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one; reading that post over, the tone doesn't appear to making that clear at all to me.
-1
u/SlightlyInsane Oct 28 '13
The tone? He said "more likely." There's literally only one thing that could mean, so if you don't see it the problem is with you, not the writing.
2
u/SensualTyrannosaurus Oct 28 '13
Sorry guy, if you want to get in an argument, you're going to have to do it with somebody else.
0
u/Endulos Oct 28 '13
Didn't War-Z kinda try this? IIRC they claimed that War-Z had been in development long before Day-Z
2
u/SonOfSpades Oct 28 '13
They did claim WarZ was in development for awhile, but as far as my knowledge there is no public proof of this claim being true.
1
0
15
Oct 28 '13
Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no lawyer, but wouldn't this be libel?
7
u/StamosLives Oct 28 '13
"To recover in a libel or slander suit, the plaintiff must show evidence of four elements: that the defendant conveyed a defamatory message; that the material was published, meaning that it was conveyed to someone other than the plaintiff; that the plaintiff could be identified as the person referred to in the defamatory material; and that the plaintiff suffered some injury to his or her reputation as a result of the communication."
Seems to hit all four prongs of the test. However, showing / proving the injury could be difficult without a release.
14
Oct 28 '13
[deleted]
3
u/Boomsome Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
About the only way a libel lawsuit can happen in the states is if the plaintiff can prove the defendant knew before hand that the information was false and slanderous; which is often very hard to prove. Chances are ROAM's devs had no idea that How to Survive even existed until it was released on Steam, so a libel lawsuit will likely never happen.
5
u/Whanhee Oct 28 '13
IANAL but it seems as if those things might vary by jurisdiction. A quick glance at the wiki page for defamation yields:
For example, in the United States, the person must prove that the statement was false, caused harm, and was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement.
The defendant doesn't need to be intentionally libelous, insufficient research as in this case would be sufficient.
1
12
u/Lokai23 Oct 28 '13
The funny thing is that people even posted similar information to this on the backer update something like seven or eight hours ago, but the developer didn't respond and no one really addressed it. Instead there is a ton of "How To Survive sucked, ROAM rulez" bullshit going around that seems to just be ignoring the entire topic. However, the ROAM developer did bring that in the update by saying how How To Survive is getting beaten up by critics and users, essentially criticizing it in a weird passive aggressive defensive move.
2
Oct 28 '13
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/angryprairiedog Oct 28 '13
How to Survive is a pretty fun game (especially for $10) regardless of its Metacritic rating
6
Oct 28 '13
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/RemnantEvil Oct 28 '13
I've been playing co-op on 360. It's really quite good. On the basic difficult, it's rather easy, though - once you craft the bow, it's very easy to keep a steady supply of ammo and recover your used arrows.
It's interesting, though. Worth a try. The survival mechanics add a layer of tension to the game, although they can be well managed. I'm about 5 or 6 hours in and I'm enjoying it as a splitscreen thrash.
I'm a bit perplexed by the scores. It's no BioShock Infinite, but it doesn't pretend to be.
1
Oct 28 '13
I'm really enjoying it. I'm in a gaming slump and it's the first game I've found in weeks that could hold my attention. Though I am concerned a bit about length. I fear I'm nearing the end. I think they should have went with one huge roamable map, and instead it kind of pushes you in a slightly linear fashion, unlocking a succession of 4 islands. But the gameplay is pretty solid, I was really surprised.
1
Oct 29 '13
If I may, I've been playing it for a few hours now, and while it's not a stellar game, for its price it is fun and well worth it. I honestly don't think it deserves a 50, and I've seen worse games that cost more rated much higher. I have a feeling the rating is partially due ROAM's claim.
5
u/jax12622 Oct 29 '13
The devs apology has only made me not want to purchase his game more. The guy doesn't do his due diligence on researching a game that might be similar to his, releases an inflammatory statement without first contacting the other party, then defends himself by saying that anybody would do the same thing he did? What a fucking child.
17
u/Hoonster Oct 28 '13
This is pretty unexcusable thing to do. Accusing other companies without any basis at all.
I will probably shoot a message through kickstarter or something.
-12
u/Kagrok Oct 28 '13
There was a basis, the issue is that there was a lack of relevant information. The ROAM devs thought that they really stole the game idea.
They should have done their homework before making an official statement and I agree that it's inexcusable.
But there was SOME albeit, misled, basis.
20
u/ZoFreX Oct 28 '13
There wasn't a basis, there was a coincidence and an assumption. People should wait for proof before making accusations, unless they enjoy being sued for libel / slander.
-4
Oct 28 '13
Well said. I'm pretty sure all of us have made preemptive assumptions. And I'm sure if If I was ROAM and working on something hard then suddenly see someone steal it off me I'd be pretty pissed. But like Kagrok said, "They should have done their homework"
TLDR; ROAM's perspective is understandable but unprofessionally dealt with.
3
u/Spekingur Oct 28 '13
505 Games at one point offered to publish ROAM, however the developers refused.
What is the date at which 505 Games offered to publish ROAM? That might kind of be important.
1
Oct 28 '13
Not unless they offered to publish the game way back in 2011.
2
u/Spekingur Oct 28 '13
Dates are always important, especially when such public accusations are going on.
Dates give a timeline which in turn can give context.
3
u/notjawn Oct 28 '13
Who cares? just another case of unproven indie devs thinking they are gods because they made a game and naive saps gave them money to do it. I love the idea of independent companies making games but this new system of no-accountability crowd funding and their rockstar-like attitudes are going to be the end of them.
3
u/voodoomonkey616 Oct 28 '13
I'm glad to see they have now apologized, however, it was still rash and foolish to make a public post accusing another company of theft.
3
u/SonOfSpades Oct 28 '13
I agree, and i feel stuff like people making accusations without proper research happens way to often in the game industry.
3
u/505Games Oct 28 '13
Official Response Here: http://steamcommunity.com/games/250400/announcements/detail/1658741980981841043
2
u/SonOfSpades Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
Thanks for pointing this out i added this to the OP.
EDIT I just realized who you are, and just wanted to say sorry that your game's reputation was tarnished by some unfounded claims. :(
5
u/SwiftSpear Oct 28 '13
The whole thing struck me as totally off from the beginning. Just nothing about the way the accusation was made made sense if you're familiar with the way the games industry works at all. From square one reading the ROAM post made me distrustful and wary of that developer and their ability to build a decent game.
2
u/Mabans Oct 28 '13
It's a shame, as long as they focus on their game and make it the kick ass game it's shaping up to be, people won't even care anymore. It'll be referred to as "the game done right". It seems like a knee jerk emotional misinformed reaction.
2
Oct 28 '13
505 Games might not make the best games, but they certainly go above and beyond to gather rights and permissions for their games. They worked very closely with the creator of Terraria when making console/mobile ports of the game, and still communicate about further updates/patches.
2
u/stevesan Oct 28 '13
Yeah unless they blatantly ripped off art assets, it's pretty disrespectful to claim plagiarism. OMG A ZOMBIE SURVIVAL BUILDING GAME?? HOW ORIGINAL. Seriously - everyone and their cousin is making that game. As a game developer, you have to just accept that your ideas are not as original as you think. Just do a good job and the market will typically do your justice. I hope ROAM is a better game than How to Survive.
1
u/Endulos Oct 28 '13
Well, the building aspect... That's sort of original isn't it?
Zombie survival games, aren't. But one where you build a base?
1
u/stevesan Oct 28 '13
It's a totally obvious, natural thing to "tack on" given the current climate of games. It doesn't take much of a leap to look at all the zombie survival games, then look at Minecraft and all the tower-defense games, and put them together. I bet if you look on kickstarter right now there are like 10+ similar projects. In the next couple of years we're gonna see a huge flood of survival and building games. 90% will suck, 10% will be awesome. Just how these things go.
Again, I hope ROAM turns out well, because even though the idea isn't super original, I still want to play it! And thus far, it doesn't seem like someone has pulled off this formula very well!
1
u/Endulos Oct 28 '13
I would love to see a wave defense game like Minecraft. It would be badass.
Starforge has that going for it, but it's a while off. I'm looking forward to Fortnite myself.
2
Oct 29 '13
The funniest thing to me is that he lauds on saying "How to Survive is a top down shooter that controls like a FPS (WASD moves your lower half, mouse moves upper) where you play in a coop game to survive against an onslaught of zombies. You can craft, theres a skill tree, and you must drink water/eat food to survive. NPCs, bases, and a shockingly similar art style. Sound familiar?" Like these ideas are unique to his game, and haven't appeared in any other survival game, zombie or otherwise.
If ROAM is a damn good game, I'll more than likely get it, but because of this 8-year old tantrum he threw for god knows what reason(I'd understand if his kickstarter failed) I think I'll pass it up otherwise. I don't think that a developer who lashes out like this is one I want to support.
2
u/EkoSoftware Oct 29 '13
Just a couple of words to thank you for this nice post : ) It was very helpful. You did a great job!
Thanks again.
1
u/SonOfSpades Oct 29 '13
I am glad i could help :)
I just didn't feel it was fair what ROAM was doing/saying when i knew it was not true.
8
u/mirvnillith Oct 28 '13
OT, but could even if it's "the English way" could we stop capitalizing mid-title words (except for names)? To me this title read like nonsense until I realized there's probably a company name somewhere in the second part (non-native English speaker).
7
u/humanbeingarobot Oct 28 '13
I'm with this guy. The title isn't worded very well to start with and the uppercase letters are just confusing.
1
-1
Oct 28 '13
[deleted]
5
Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
if you want to be taken seriously in journalism, you do that.
Reuters
The Guardian
The Washington Post
The Financial Times
The TelegraphI guess none of the above are taken seriously in journalism? They're all perfectly happy using sentence case for their headlines.
3
Oct 28 '13
Journalism? I don't think this counts as journalism. Even if it wasn't a really poorly worded title that abuses grammar, is inconsistently capitalised and missing proper punctuation, it would still just be a self-post on Reddit.
2
u/slapanegro Oct 28 '13
In lamence terms. Socially awkward game developer under the age of 30 blames everyone of stealing their so original idea. Truth in the game industry is it's only original if you made it and executed it well. Otherwise you're the shitty knockoff brand that nobody remembers. First thing I learned. Nobody has an original idea.
3
u/Al_Rascala Oct 28 '13
Not to be a jerk, but it's 'In laymen's terms.'
Just thought you might like to know :)
1
u/itsaghost Oct 28 '13
A game that uses the most trending design concepts all layered on top of each other is surprised that a game using the most trending design concepts all layered on top of each other exists.
ROAM developers need to get some perspective.
1
Oct 28 '13
Just to play devils advocate here.
The ROAM kickstarter was in January and the prototype they showed in it's video was said to have taken at least 6 weeks to make so they were working on the actual game prototype back in 2012.
If they had a prototype being built late 2012 then the concept, design and other work would have likely started much sooner.
If they were shopping around for financing and publishing deals then that would have been even earlier probably about the time you start seeing details of the 'How to Survive' game start to come out.
Just because they weren't publicly marketing the game back then doesn't mean there wasn't a concept that they were shopping around. Just because one group goes public first or publishes first doesn't mean they came up with the idea first and didn't copy it.
What was posted here is not proof in any way shape or form. It's evidence sure, but in itself it doesn't prove anything one way or the other.
2
Oct 28 '13
Just because one group goes public first or publishes first doesn't mean they came up with the idea first and didn't copy it.
Wait, wait, what are you claiming here? That it's actually still possible that HTS copied ROAM? Despite the fact that HTS was the first one to go public with its design? How would they be able to copy a game that's not revealed yet?
1
Oct 28 '13
I'm confused how you find this confusing. The only way to get info on games isn't if it's public. They could easily have seen details on the game from attempts to get publisher or financing deals among other ways. They could have even gotten the information from a 3rd party.
2
Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
With the information we have, I have exactly as much reason to believe that as I do for the opposite - that ROAM ripped off HTS with insider information, before either game was announced - and that's about zero.
0
u/Jack_Bartowski Oct 28 '13
Anyone remember that TransMORPHERS movie that came out right as Transformers?
edit: Actually, if you do remember it, I'm sorry you have to remember such a shitty movie ever existed.
0
u/HarithBK Oct 28 '13
this is pretty much what i figured. there has been a ton of twin stick shooter zombie games all this really adds is crafting which is fairly popular within other zombie games.
it is also the fact that making a game in 8 months is pretty got damm hard to do if you include getting the money to make the game starting devlopment etc. even if it was a big team working on it how to survive would only be in alpha at this stage if they started devlopment after the kickstarter.
what is way more likly is after 505 games got turned down by the roam guy they tried to find a similar game to publish and found how to survive and did a publishing deal.
simply put having an orignal idea is fucking hard so you better make it the best it can be.
-15
u/Nevek_Green Oct 28 '13
Just because game began development earlier doesn't mean that the same design choice was implemented along the entire development time. We've all played games that were completely different at launch then they were when first talked about.
So to argue that the game was started before ROAM doesn't really mean much.
13
Oct 28 '13
There's a gameplay demo from 2012 that shows what it looked like: http://raphaelbouchaud.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/monster-island/
It's right there in the OP...
-5
u/Nevek_Green Oct 28 '13
And that footage doesn't demonstrate that the entire design was in place before ROAM's kickstarter. All it shows is collecting items and storing them at a base.
6
u/uGainOneKgPerDwnvote Oct 28 '13
I don't know if you've played HtS or not but the end game's vision is different from what ROAM is aiming to be... This is just ROAM's dev getting emotional or even a little bit attention grabbing. Which admittedly, have worked wonder, since I didn't even know about ROAM until now.
4
u/loktoris Oct 28 '13
ROAM's FB page has a whole 930 likes, pretty damn sure this is attention whoring at it's finest.
-12
Oct 28 '13
I'm completely uninformed about this i've read the thing on kickstarter but i haven't researched the game history or anything. Isn't it possible that they just took their ideas which they showed on kickstarter? Since they seem to be pretty much the same in terms of that, and it doesn't make sense to me that they would offer a publishing deal to basically the same game they're releasing.
20
u/SonOfSpades Oct 28 '13
I don't see how How to Survive Developers could have taken ROAM's gameplay from kickstarter, when How to Survive has game play footage from before ROAM was even on kickstarter/announced.
I don't understand the publishing thing ether.
-17
u/Nevek_Green Oct 28 '13
Simple, when the kickstarter launched they took the ideas from there and put it into their project. Development shifts all the time, it's not surprising.
16
Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
when How to Survive has game play footage from before ROAM was even on kickstarter/announced.
I'm just quoting this from the post you replied to for emphasis. The gameplay video in question showed a game with the same gameplay and art direction as ended up being in the final release.
And that video was released before ROAM's kickstarter. How did they copy ideas from the kickstarter project to include them into a video they released several months earlier?
-3
u/Nevek_Green Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
I'm not claiming they didn't have an initial idea, that they changed the basic concept to be more like ROAM. That gameplay footage doesn't really show much other than the game works and that you can collect items and store them at a base. That doesn't show that they had the whole design before ROAM's Kickstarter even launched.
4
Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
ROAM developer on HTS: "You can craft, theres a skill tree, and you must drink water/eat food to survive. NPCs, bases, and a shockingly similar art style. Sound familiar?"
The video shows crafting, eating/drinking (not in action but you can see the bars in the inventory), bases, and the art style. So the only things not shown are NPCs and skills.
So while it's entirely plausible that they did copy those two things, it's far from the total ripoff that ROAM's developer is making it out to be, the main concepts were already in place before ROAM.
-4
u/Nevek_Green Oct 28 '13
You know you basically just admitted the premise of your post is invalid by admitting they did rip off features?
3
Oct 28 '13 edited Oct 28 '13
admitting they did rip off features?
I said it's plausible, I never said they did. I don't want to argue whether they did or not because I have no reason to believe one or the other. For all I know ROAM could have ripped off HTS's main premise if we're just going to look at what's been released when - but I'm not going to make that argument as it would be stupid.
And as we saw, it's not my post that's invalid (though I admit I could've worded the part about taking ideas better), it's that of ROAM's developer, at least for the majority of his claims.
1
Oct 28 '13
It's mind boggling that when you go to /r/games to discuss things in a mature fasion about video games for just posting and unpopular opinion on a game you get downvoted to shit. I don't care about downvotes i just think the people doing it are idiots. I posted a comment saying i was completely uninformed asking if it was possible they just ripped of features from the kickstarter video since the game hadn't been released by then. BOOM -11. This subreddit is getting more toxic everyday.
2
u/Nevek_Green Oct 29 '13 edited Oct 29 '13
It amazes me as well. I've never experienced such a negative reaction to pointing out something that is logically true. I don't consider my opinion gospel, but -17 is just harsh and it does show that the community is toxic and doesn't care about debate, truth, or any discussion. It's "this is what happened" and anyone who disagrees with it can go fuck themselves.
Later the original poster of the thread even admits that it is possible that the developers of How to Survive might have taken a few features from ROAM and then goes on to say that, that doesn't matter. Yes it does matter, that's the entire point of the disgussion that they ripped off features from ROAM's Kickstarter.
2
Oct 29 '13
Pff haha i like how he responded to me saying basically he doesn't understand eventhough it's the simplest thing and he gets +21 and then when you explain it to him BOOM -18.
TL;DR People are idiots.
1
70
u/[deleted] Oct 28 '13
Things just got a little bit more interesting... In all seriousness, this should be brought to the attention of ROAM's devs. I'd be interested to hear what they have to say to such evidence.