Poll: Settle a Debate, Please

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
BloatedGuppy said:
Two people are having an argument over the use of the word "clone" as a descriptor for video games. I.E. Game X is a clone of Y.

The specific trigger in this case was the statement:

"Bastion is a low-rent Diablo-clone."

Position A: Any major points of similarity between two games supports calling the later title "a clone". IE Dragon Age Inquisition was a Skyrim clone. Going on at length about nuance and separation between the way games play and feel qualifies as pedantry. "Clone" is typically used in a descriptive fashion with no inherent judgment.

Position B: Stating that simple mechanical convergence, as in the case of Bastion and Diablo, makes one game a "clone" of the other is hopelessly reductionist, and does a disservice to both games. "Clone" is typically used in a derogatory fashion.

As a general rule I think for something to be a "clone" there needs to be more than a few major points of similarity. When your dealing with top down, action-heavy, clickers using waves of enemies, and which randomized loot and money drops from the defeated (and chests) to lay on the ground and be picked up for example it's fair to start talking about clones when games converge on all those points and more.

The whole "clone" thing got started when you say had people duplicated old Atari games for shovelware, and you might say see someone make "Snack Man" instead of pack man, where you run away from monsters collecting things in a maze, exactly like Pac Man which even the name points out. Sure "Snack Man" might have a few twists and differences of it's own different lay outs, maybe an extra kind of power up, more or less "ghosts", etc...) but it's pretty obviously something duplicating a famous property VERY closely and wouldn't have existed without it.

Diablo as a successful game wound up spawning an entire genera of games, Torchlight, Fate, X Hero, Sacred, Darkstone, Bastion, and others are all fairly defined as being clones of Diablo, even though they all involve their own little spins on the formula. This by no means makes them bad, as many clones can wind up being superior to the original as they cater to people who liked the original idea but wanted specific differences.

In the case of "Dragon Age" it would rightfully be called a "Baldur's Gate" clone, as the entire series started as, and was promoted as, a homage to that game series. Albeit it's not as recognizable in it's later iterations.

Pretty much all games are clones, eventually someone WILL come up with something new, and then people will start cloning that, but it happens very slowly. We're lucky if we get something new, and good enough to clone, once or twice in a generation.

That's my thoughts at any rate.
 

rasta111

New member
Nov 11, 2009
214
0
0
Clones... Surely the word defines two completely identical things... Although I can tell no one here is being that pedantic the reasoning is sound. No two games are clones of each other because no one would buy two identical games as it's basically the same thing as buying the same game twice and copyright and all that...

... I can tell what you're getting at though, obviously, I've seen the term thrown around used to describe a knock-off which generally tends to be a derogatory term for similar games. Many games use the same engine and can therefore appear similar. The opposite of that would be a game inspired by another similar title.

The closest thing to an actual 'clone' game I can think of would be something like The Great Giana Sisters, which is conspicuously similar to Super Mario Brothers but I'm fairly certain even that doesn't qualify. Even if the assets are similar they are never going to be identical as that would just be piracy and no lawsuit was ever filed although it was taken off sale out of respect I presume.

Whether or not this is a highly regarded practice would depend on the quality of the respective games in question I suppose. Just because a game is in the same genre for instance doesn't make it a knock-off but it may take inspiration from it's peers of course.

The only use of clone in this context I can think of would be art fraud. The copying of a work from a popular or renowned artist to be as exacting as possible to actually pass off as theirs and thereby increase it's value in a sale.
 

Apl_J

New member
Jun 16, 2011
44
0
0
I think it was Extra Credits who said that games and genres aren't defined by mechanics but rather the mood behind the game. Bastion is nothing like Diablo because you literally play them for completely different feelings. Bastion is a narrative/mood-heavy experience. Diablo is a loot grinder. Despite any mechanical similarities, they're nothing alike.

And to speak on the idea of a clone: No, I don't think it is derogatory. We have a whole genre called Roguelike. Whatever Monster Hunter is, it and every one of the games like it still don't have a proper name; we just call them MH clones. Nothing is inherently wrong with that. Its succinct. In these cases, either of these games made their respective genres (or rather, I should say popularized, to be 100% fair). When I say a game is setup like Monster Hunter, my friends know exactly what I mean. When I say this game is a roguelike, my friends know exactly what I mean. Of course there are differences, but those don't make the game.
 

MorganL4

Person
May 1, 2008
1,364
0
0
I think what it comes down to is this: A game comes out, said game defines a new genre, and until enough other games in said genre are released we can't actually call it a genre. For example: When LoL was first released everyone called it a DoTA clone. Today we just call LoL a MOBA. Why? Because now we have more than JUST DoTA to compare LoL to. The same way Overwatch is being called a TF2 clone. Until we have a genre title for TF2 and Overwatch and whatever other games fit what is becoming a genre ("Team based shooter" is a term I have heard thrown around) the term clone will be the best means of explaining what the game is. It is used more as an explanatory term, than an insult, despite the negative connotation that comes with it.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
I support position A, and thus think everything's a "clone".

This is mostly because I grew up with an endless barrage of self-professed "Myst Clones" and quickly found out that this had no real indicator on quality. The games were first-person point-n-click puzzle games, some had FMV, some had in-between-standing-spot animations, some had 360 "bubble-view", some looked realistic and some looked fantastical, and their quality ranged from "atrocious" to "excellent".

And they were all clones, because they only existed because Myst was a massive success.

That's fine by me.
 

Phrozenflame500

New member
Dec 26, 2012
1,080
0
0
Position A is incredibly weak and seems to be a half-assed defense of a poorly conceived comment (I'm projecting here of course).

"Clone" directly implies a nearly identical comparison that extends far beyond superficial details. Pretending otherwise is ridiculous and would contradict what the word means outside of this context. I'd say the descriptor only applies when two games are so similar that they contain almost all the same gameplay mechanics, enemy design and aesthetic presentation. Another metric would be if you could take one section of one of them and place it in another with the game still functioning.

Clone also very much as a negative connotation, as copying something else is considered generally a negative thing in today's culture. Add that to the fact the original example was a negative comparison and I think arguing that it was used without judgement is being very disingenuous.

Anyways, back to video games, Bastion is way better then any of the Diablo or Diablo knock-offs I've played. Although that may just be because I don't really like those type of slow-paced dungeon crawlers very much.
 

cleric of the order

New member
Sep 13, 2010
546
0
0
A clone should refer to a work that is by nature derivative.
for example saints row and lords of the fallen can be considered clones of GTA and dook sauce respectively.
In both attempts it's a blatant attempt to capture the formula of the game that sired it.
In essence a clone in much the same way cloning works in this day, more a sister or brother to the game then anything else.
The people that argue that bastion/diablo, dragonage/skyrim are clones are misguided and in both cases I am mystified by that train of thought, it seem alien to me.
Simply, dragon age and skyrim have different mechanical natures, different narrative bases and different focuses, while I don't know about the current one, I know it isn't a first person exploration and is a more linear narrative experience why the assumed patron is far from linear in any way.
Bastion is just straight up not Dablio, clone status would be better leveled at torchlight or Herosquest.
Bastion takes little if any inspiration from it's assumed patron.
Seriously if anyone argues this with you, just go /v/ on their ass, they be dumb and deserve it
 

JohnnyDelRay

New member
Jul 29, 2010
1,322
0
0
I don't know about this one, it seems the first time something is "cloned", it carries the negative connotation the heaviest, but then every one after it, it becomes accepted as a new way of doing things. I mean, every since wheels were round and tables have 4 legs, you can't go saying they are "clones" of the original. I mean, there was a time when phones didn't have touch screens, are they all clones?

I remember thinking Dante's inferno was a total God of War clone. I mean it really mimics everything about the combo system, leveling up weapons and powers, etc. But it was a great game in it's own right. Castlevania developers absolutely deplored being called a God of War clone. But when God of War came out, people were calling it a Devil May Cry clone, which when you look retrospectively, had nothing to do with it.

It all depends on how unashamedly something is copied, before it deserves to be called a "clone" or "rip-off". If you want to see those, just grab your phone and look at your apps store, you will see hundreds of those, down to the titles and graphics, trying to cash-in on the latest AAA successes.
 

Ragsnstitches

New member
Dec 2, 2009
1,871
0
0
I side with B, but I don't agree with the sentiment that "X is a Y Clone" is a negative. It's more so the fact that if X is LIKE Y, but is fundamentally different then Y, then it can't be a clone. A clone is (effectively) identical in fundamental ways, not just similar.

Sine carbon copies are extremely rare if the literal understanding of term was used I feel like I should give it some greater leeway. I would say a Clone of a game is one that shares fundamental aspects with another title, things that would usually be iconic or distinctive to the original game.

So in my mind Medal of Honor: Warfigther is a clone of the CoD: Modern Warfare series, i.e they are tonally, aesthetically, mechanically and thematically similar to a point where the distinctions are facile. However, Battlefield 3 is not a clone of Modern Warfare, as though they are aesthetically and thematically similar, they are mechanically different in fundamental ways (if only sharing some superficial qualities, like FPS mechanics).

Also, the original CoD series were clones of the original MoH series, an observation I find very amusing.

So in relation to "Bastion is a Diablo clone". Only in so far as it has an isometric viewpoint, point and click combat mechanics, leveling system, dungeons and a hub. After that they are tonally, aesthetically and thematically distinct from one another and the mechanical similarities are only superficial. Using the word clone to describe them isn't close to being accurate.

I do see the word Clone used disparagingly quite often though, but I hate arguing against colloquial understandings of terms. If people wish to argue a point, they should argue from clear definitions, not accepted non-literary hyperbole that can be misconstrued.
 

Vlado

Independent Game Journalist
Feb 21, 2015
97
0
0
There is no inherent problem with calling a game a clone of another, it does not necessarily need to be derogatory. Still, the word is often misused - some games borrow gameplay mechanics from others (sometimes, it's more or less inevitable, as certain mechanics have established themselves strongly on the market), but are also unique enough so that calling them clones would not be justified.
 
Apr 5, 2008
3,736
0
0
BloatedGuppy said:
Two people are having an argument over the use of the word "clone" as a descriptor for video games. I.E. Game X is a clone of Y.
You mean e.g. here. i.e. is incorrect.

BloatedGuppy said:
The specific trigger in this case was the statement:

"Bastion is a low-rent Diablo-clone."

Position A: Any major points of similarity between two games supports calling the later title "a clone". IE Dragon Age Inquisition was a Skyrim clone. Going on at length about nuance and separation between the way games play and feel qualifies as pedantry. "Clone" is typically used in a descriptive fashion with no inherent judgment.
Again, e.g. would be used here. i.e. is not correct.

Another incorrect statement is calling Inquisition a clone of Skyrim. Inquisition is not an open world game and at best is a pale shadow/imitation of Skyrim. It is not a clone by any stretch. They're both fantasy RPGs but very different in most every other regard. EA wish Inquisition was a Skyrim clone (tho Skyrim is in fact a sequel in the TES franchise. Morrowind f.ex is over a decade old. It would make more sense to call something a TES clone, or Morrowind clone.)

On topic, games can be described as clones of those rare few games that have defined a genre. GTA3 defined open-world city crime driving/shooting games and thus GTA-clone was a valid comparison to games that tried to emulate it. "Clone" says nothing of the game or its quality, just that it mimics the game that defined the genre. Saints Row 3 is a GTA-clone, but is so much better than any GTA game that has ever been made. It out GTAd GTA as it were.

Other genre defining games include Diablo II, Baldur's Gate II, WoW, CoD, TF2, CS, DotA, RE4, Thief, L4D2 and some others. Examples of clones of these games that set the benchmark, defined a genre and were the leaders in their fields include:

- Diablo clones: Torchlight, Titan Quest, Sacred, Path of Exile
- BG clones: Pretty much any isometric fantasy RPG, particularly D&D/infinity engine and pseudo-real time
- WoW clones: Any fairground MMO. Wild Star, TOR to a point, Age of Conan, Kingdom of Amalur, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age: Inquisition
- CoD clones: Crysis 2 and 3, Mass Effect 3, Dead Space 3, Any post-CoD4 MMS that isn't CoD, any set-piece shooter
- Halo clones: Vanquish, Section 8.
- L4D2 clones: Payday 1 & 2, Dead Island
- BioShock clone: Singularity, Cryostasis. BioShock itself is kinda an evolution of System Shock (2).
- GTA clone: Saints Row (only they're much better than any GTA), This page [http://gta.wikia.com/GTA_Clone]

And so on. Just because a game is a clone, doesn't say anything about how good or bad it is. As I mentioned, the SR series is so much better than GTA. Many people say Path of Exile is better than Diablo 3 too. People will always try to emulate those more successful and popular in the hopes that by doing so they'll get noticed and one could also argue that with art, imitation is the highest form of flattery.
 
Apr 5, 2008
3,736
0
0
To add briefly a thought that just occured, we even have a couple of (sub)genres of games that are named for the thing they clone. "Roguelike [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike]" is the most obvious example, an entire sub-genre of RPG that is evolved from the game "Rogue" from 30 years ago.

We also have very narrow genres now. Where RPG, RTS, Turn-Based Strategy, FPS and so on are massive, umbrella-categories beneath which we have many varied and original titles, we have things like MOBAs now, a very defined category with variations being tweaks to a well-established formula that originated in "Defence of the Ancients". Every MOBA is a DotA clone.