It's crazy how big Angry Birds is sometimes.
 

http://www.ingame.msnbc.msn.com/tech...usiness-746793



So apparntly Finland now has an entire theme park dedicated to Angry Birds.

I'll say it again, it's crazy how big this game has gotten over the years since it's release on the Andriod(Google Play)/iTunes App Stores.

easy to play, hard to master. Cute graphics, coherent visuals, good sound, fitting music.

Seems like a simple formula, but i can hardly recall a single game that has meet all these criteria and have not become a legendary success story... that's how often this does not happen.

The fact that this game has become the cultural sensation it has is a testament to the degradation of modern society.

All they did was steal somebody else's flash game, slap some cartoon birds and pigs on it, and then sell it for a gorillion dollars. If someone has actually paid money for anything related to Angry Birds, they need to stop where they are and take a long, hard look at the series of mistakes they've made to reach that point in their life.

really?

If that's the main gripe of your point, then i'm sorry i just don't see it... yeah the games are similar, but not in the "100% copy paste" style, they do have different mechanics, even if only slightly.

And i honestly thought the Castle version a bit more complicated to handle...

Afterall, in gaming, is not really who does it first... but who does it better, or at least... who market it better to sell it first... if the argument is just from the copy and monetization of another game, you could also argue that a LOT of games are slightly changed copies of one another...

But business sense also comes into play, and the Angry Birds guys just thought they could have a better bsiness model on Mobiles instead of just Newgrounds.com ...

Well, let's say some indie artist writes a song and they have it up on their website. It's found by an executive at Interscope Records who takes the song and has the Black Eyed Peas record a poppier version of it and then puts that on iTunes for 99 cents, giving no credit to the original artist. Then it becomes a big hit and they make a ton of cash.

Is that also perfectly acceptable? And, if you don't believe so, how exactly is it different from what Rovio did when they made Angry Birds?

Angry Birds is pretty much the terribleness. It's not even well built, and the levels are poorly designed.

Yet I still will use it to kill ten minutes, sometimes. And rant about how terrible it is when I do. It's like, a lesson in what NOT to do.

that's... not really the same thing.

I mean, i know what you are going at it here, but "Fling Things at Structures with Physics" is not a lock down concept. Sure, both games -are- similar... but they have different inner mechanics at work here that do make them different... then it's just a case of who did it better to monetize their idea.

as a matter of fact... the Castle guys have their game on Android or Ios? Did they TRIED to monetize their idea in the same grounds as Rovio? Cause i've see clones of Angry Birds... it's the exact same game with just different art assets... that's cloning. Having similar games with slightly different mechanics... well, might not be the Brightest of minds at work... but stealing it ain't.

From what you're telling me i really, honestly, don't see any shoddy tactics or actions from Rovio, unless there is something else i don't know about...

Can i mention Bloom Box?



Cause that's pretty much Angry Birds in 3D, and it came out first...

That little bitty change! It's not the same!
 

while crush the castle didn't come first there was a ton of other games CtC copyed off of. (COUGH*Castle clout*COUGH) When you say that its like saying Canabalt ripped off Robot unicorn attack (despite the fact that Canabalt came first). they are in the same genres.

Angry birds took a similar idea and added onto it various things. First off does CTC have the something like Triangle bird? nope. Does CTC have a ability to fire from a slingshot. Nope. what about the boomerang balls CTC had...wait They never had those ether.

The difference is that CtC gives credit to Castle Clout on the title screen, and the makers of Castle Clout gave their permission to the devs of CtC to borrow from them. Rovio did not do that. At all.

Actually, it's like saying Robot Unicorn Attack ripped off Canabalt, which it did. The difference is that RUA was free.

Those aren't major differences, though. They're surface changes on top of identical base gameplay mechanics. It's like saying if I took Tetris, changed the graphics to be logs added a couple differently shaped blocks into the mix and called it "Perturbed Lumberjacks," that it's no longer a ripoff of Tetris.