comment_box_33-1-2With the long-awaited release of Oceanhorn [$4.99] this week, there has been a lot of talk about its very heavy inspiration from the classic Zelda series. Now, don't get me wrong, Oceanhorn itself is a phenomenal experience, and the developers have been completely upfront since the very beginning about them taking inspiration from Zelda. However, while I maintain that Oceanhorn carves out its own identity overall, there are some very, very close similarities to Zelda games in regards to certain details, and that seems to rub some people the wrong way.

Now, I'm not talking about wholesale cloning here, like when a game swipes another's mechanics wholesale and copies them down to the letter. That's never ok as far as I'm concerned, and I think most people would agree. And essentially Oceanhorn is just a top-down action RPG like many, many, many others out there. The Zelda series has definitely pioneered and progressed the genre over the past three decades, but it's not like they outright own it.

But it would be nearly impossible for someone familiar with Zelda games to look at Oceanhorn and not immediately think "Zelda." The overall look is extremely similar in terms of the environments and main character. The sailing mechanic is very much like that found in Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass. Heck, even throwing clay pots around evokes strong Zelda feelings, even though I've seen that used in tons of similar games before. The question is, is it too much?

lozww oceanhorn

There are dozens or even hundreds of games on the App Store that closely mimic other popular franchises, but one company in the iOS space has garnered the copycat stigma more than any other I can think of: Gameloft. N.O.V.A is like Halo (or in the case of N.O.V.A. 3, like Crysis), Modern Combat is like Call of Duty, Six Guns is their Red Dead Redemption, Gangstar is like Grand Theft Auto… the list just goes on.

While I think that Gameloft has come into their own with their more recent releases, they'll have to bear that "Scarlet Letter" of a copycat for a long time, and I know for a fact that some people just plain avoid their games because of it. On the other hand, some people absolutely appreciate that Gameloft is trying to bring experiences to mobile that otherwise might not ever be available.

So, where do you sit on this delicate matter? Are you fine with "heavy inspiration" in a game as long as it's not outright cloning? Do you not care how deeply a game mimics another as long as you get a fun game for your mobile device? Or would you rather avoid a game altogether that draws too much from other well-known IPs? Let us know in the comments section below.

  • TheBitPilot

    More power to them considering Nintendo refuses to port any of their games. If they did Oceanhorn wouldn't sell.

    • Lazer Kat

      If they did, they'd be stupid.

      • ScotDamn

        Once Nintendo turns into strictly a software company, they'll port. (Looking at the Wii U sales it's entirely possible) Until then, I agree no way.

      • xx99

        3DS is doing well and Nintendo has enough cash to last for 50+ years even if they never have a console do nearly as well as the original Wii again (really, I don't think any future home
        console will ever outsell the Wii's 100+ million units sold).

      • rewindx

        I agree. They have a huge stockpile of cash that they're sitting on, enough to continue for now, and come up with the next innovation that will make people go nuts. If Nintendo were even thinking about going third party, they wouldn't be making such definite statements, and they would've discontinued the Wii U quickly.

        They're thinking long term. I honestly think they'd rather go bankrupt than sell themselves or go third party.

    • gryphonofmight

      Why would they port their games to iOS when it would only hurt their company?

      • michaelfields

        Seriously? If Angry Birds can make a billion dollars I'm sure Nintendo could easily make that by releasing Pokemon Red/Blue, Super Mario Bros., or A Link to the Past on iOS.

        They don't need to put their newer games all on iPhone because then no one would need a 3DS but why not port the older ones and make a ton of profit?

        Look at every fake Mario or Pokemon app that's come out. Within an hour or two they're in the top 5 paid apps even with 1000 1 star reviews.

      • gryphonofmight

        Nintendo can make more money from the virtual console. They have nothing to gain by porting to iOS

      • michaelfields

        Because obviously everyone that owns an iPhone or iPod touch also owns a DS. I love the hell out of some old school Nintendo but the only Nintendo console I'll ever own is if I get nostalgic enough to find an SNES.

        More money is more money. Who gives a shit how much money they made in japan; that wasn't the point of my post. The point was that there is PLENTY of money they're missing out on by not porting because I'm sure there are PLENTY of other people, like me, who'd insta buy some old school Nintendo games.

        Everything in your responses was irrelevant.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        If they sell Nintendo games on iOS then why buy a Nintendo console?

        A company like Nintendo isn't there for a quick buck; they're in for the long haul. And selling their exclusive IPs on other platforms would bring in high profits at first but would only damage them in the long run.

        Just like Nintendo's CEO, Satoru Iwata, said:

        “If we did this, Nintendo would cease to be Nintendo. Having a hardware development team in-house is a major strength. It’s the duty of
        management to make use of those strengths. It’s probably the correct decision in the sense that the moment we started to release games on smartphones we’d make profits. However, I believe my responsibility is not to short term profits, but to Nintendo’s mid and long term competitive strength.”

      • visualplayer

        This assumes people will buy a nintendo console. I won't. I would buy the games if they were available on iOS. It's called an untapped market.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        Just like Appe wants me to buy an iOS device to be able to play iOS games, Nintendo wants me to buy a Nintendo console to be able to play Nintendo games.

        Sure, iPhones are more "useful" than a 3DS which makes a decision of which to buy easier.

        But I think Nintendo simply is content with selling games to people who buy their consoles and maintaining that exclusivity.

        I wish they should reconsider but it's not gonna happen.

      • James Ross

        There's one major difference, though—Apple haven't taken as much advantage of the iOS gaming sphere as much as they probably should, so Nintendo most likely make more per head on software sales than Apple. As for how Nintendo should deal with the mobile market, I would favor a hybrid approach, with the more well-established franchises remaining exclusive to Nintendo hardware, while new IPs and lesser franchises get tested in the mobile markets. This approach should give Nintendo the best of both worlds, allowing them to maintain the independence that comes with having their own hardware while also tapping into the mobile market and making full use of their vast army of IPs. I doubt that Nintendo will do this, though, since Nintendo, for better or worse, tend to stick to what worked in the past

      • xx99

        It's an untapped market alright, and nobody's arguing that they couldn't make a ton of money on mobile (not even Nintendo's arguing that). However, they believe their IP exclusivity is more valuable in the long run than spreading the love to other platforms. Sure, there are more iOS and Android devices out there than 3DSes and Wii U's, but Nintendo games also sell at 10–60 times the price of an App Store game. Maybe they're right and maybe they're wrong, but it's pretty easy to imagine that being the exclusive hardware provider for Mario, Pokémon, Zelda, Animal Crossing, Smash Bros., and the rest of their IP is a pretty valuable position to be in.

      • mgs2ss

        It is also called destroying their current market. Nintendo would rather make over $800 a year on me buying 20 of their games at $40 each, and forget that iOS-only people exist, than have to get 200 to buy their games at $5 in order to make $800 (including the cost of Apple's licensing fee).

      • Phoen1x1

        He is talking about 20 year old games, so tell me again why people would no longer have to buy a Nintendo based console? There would be zero damage to the brand if they ported some old Gameboy and NES or even SNES games over to iOS. The only thing that would happen is they would add another billion dollars to their bottom line.

      • mgs2ss

        The reason many hardcore gamers bought so many Wii systems was the Virtual Console. Many people caved in and bought a 3DS as soon as it got its Virtual Console. Old games sell systems just as well as new ones do.

      • Phoen1x1

        And what does that have to do with also selling a few old games from their catalog on a mobile phone? You mean to tell me if they sold the first SNES Mario game and the first SNES Zelda game on iOS that this would cripple their business? LMAO..I don't say they should sell every old game, just a few of the classics. Money lost on systems would be negligible when compared to the money that rolls in from those game sales on iOS handheld devices.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        Because Nintendo sells those 20 year old games on their Virtual Console platform. They profit from selling old games and get to keep their brand exclusiveness intact.

      • Quazonk

        A ridiculous comment in the purest form. Laughable.

      • gryphonofmight

        Nintendo made more money in a few months from Animal crossing in Japan only than Rovio did all year, That's why Nintendo has no need to port to iOS

      • Alex

        I would love to know the numbers on this. I always just figure Rovio is sick with cash, considering I can practically buy Angry Birds condoms.

      • mgs2ss

        Pokemon X/Y made over $200,000,000 in its first two days on sale. The release also made lots of people buy 3DS and XL systems (which they make a good profit on), and made people buy the new 2DS system (which they make a MASSIVE profit on).

        Also, when you get people to buy your console for one game, you are basically guaranteeing that they buy at least a few more.

        If they were to release on iOS devices, there would be fewer reasons for consumers to buy Nintendo's dedicated handhelds. Nintendo makes money off of other things than just their games. They make tons of money off of console sales, and they get a huge royalty for every game released on their systems from other developers.

        Why would they ever give up on all of that, just to release ONLY their own games, and ONLY get 75% of the sales income that they generate?

        It would be complete suicide to do such a thing.

      • swatbot

        Nintendo is hurting itself more than enough already with a flagship console that is literally tanking and with shoddy sales a year after release may go the way of the dreamcast. This doesn't please me personally, because I like more competition in the market, but let's face it. Wii U is DOA.

        I don't see other game companies failing when they release their games on other platforms. Actually everyone is doing quite well aside from Nintendo. Sure a system needs a few exclusives, but aside from that your argument makes no sense. In fact, I think not doing things the Nintendo way is probably a good idea.

      • gryphonofmight

        The console hasn't been out a full year.
        Nintendo has major games coming. Sales shot up 684% worldwidw after the price drop in October alone. The 3DS was written off as a failure by many and its now the best selling system. Nintendo would hurt more by putting games on mobile. That's a fact and cant be refuted.

      • swatbot

        You're kidding me. The console came out mid-November 2012, at most we are a few days short of a full year. Aside from that your arguments are pure speculation and fanboyism.

      • gryphonofmight

        How is stating the fact that sales shot up after a price drop speculation? Do you understand what that word means?
        The recent Mario and Luigi Wii U bundle has been selling out consistently at walmart and target and gamestop. Nintendo had a rough start but so did the PS2 and people forget that.

      • Holcman

        Please, I don't care what you say. Give me Pokemon on iOS! It would be an insta-buy for me!

      • gryphonofmight

        No chance of that happening when Nintendo makes a huge amount of money and doesn't have to share it with anyone.

      • Holcman

        Do you work for Nintendo or something? I'm not saying it will happen, I'm saying I wish it would. If you don't want Pokemon for iOS because it would "hurt" the multi-billion dollar company, and call Oceanhorn a "rip-off" for a small company that's been working hard on a game for the last 2 years, there's something wrong. You're like the people who don't get games by a company because they made 1 game you don't like.

      • Snipyro12

        I wouldn't want them to port it over. Not because I don't want people like you to enjoy the games (that's just being selfish), but because I want Nintendo to keep making handheld consoles, and porting games to iOS means Nintendo is giving up making hardware. I love tactile buttons, and I love the things like Streetpass that are integrated into the 3DS. I've never had any games on my phone that compare to the Nintendo games either.

      • fleshman

        So porting old games like Pokemon Fire Red/Leaf Green is like giving up on hardware.
        Nice to know

      • Snipyro12

        It would certainly not add to their hardware sales. I'm sure there are many people out there that would be satisfied enough with an older Pokemon on their phone - and therefore be less inclined to impulse buy a 3DS for Pokemon X and Y.

        They will certainly get a crapload of money form iOS, but they lose that exclusivity appeal of their consoles. Part of why 3DS stands up so well when phones are taking over everything is the fact that these experiences cannot be played on anything else.

        Nintendo obviously doesn't see porting to iOS as a financially beneficial course of action at the moment. I just find it wrong people think it's their "Pride" - they are a big company - they have shareholders: if porting their exclusives to other consoles was the best financial decision, I'm sure they would have done it already.

      • Phoen1x1

        LMAO exactly..oooh nooo they can't port 20 year old games to the iOS, it would cause harm to Nintendo (meanwhile people all over the world are playing these same roms on their PC's and PSP's and a bunch of other pieces of hardware that Nintendo doesn't sell )

      • Edwin Ramirez

        Virtual console. Why sell their games on other platforms when they can sell them on their own platform and maintain exclusivity?

        Piracy is another issue.

      • mgs2ss

        Yes. It would dilute their brand. Do you know how high it will boost Nintendo's hardware sales when they add Red and Blue or Fire Red and Leaf Green to the 3DS Virtual Console? Even ignoring the money they could make off of the games themselves, they will make tons of hardware sales.

        And guess what all of those people who buy the hardware for those games is going to do? Buy more games. When software and hardware sales go up, other developers want to make software for that system, which means more profit from royalties.

      • michaelfields

        Personally I think if Nintendo made an iPhone controller that had an SNES or gba layout and released some older games on iPhone they would make millions easily. I'd buy that controller day one and all of the games. It'd save me from the shit touch screen controls on this emu.

      • Snipyro12

        Yeah, I respect the fact that many gamers would certainly want this - I certainly would buy it if I didn't have a 3DS. My arguments so far are purely from a financial perspective. I'm not an expert on economics, but I think Nintendo has more to gain by keeping it on their consoles. (See my other posts in thread).

        I don't disagree with your points though. Ultimately I don't think it's easy to predict whether or not this would benefit Nintendo financially - I just don't think it's as simple as release on iOS = instant profit for Nintendo in the long run.

        Certainly happy to hear the many opposing opinions posted here and discuss etc.

      • mgs2ss

        Or they could sell their old games on their already existing consoles and make even more money, which is what they are doing.

        People buy their systems for both old and new games. If they sold games on other platforms, fewer people would buy their systems.

      • swatbot

        That's changing the subject--The subject is releasing non-exclusive games, not sales after consoles. The fact is, the xbox hasn't tanked because Microsoft released games on other platforms. It's speculative to argue that releasing any Nintendo games on other consoles will tank Nintendo.

        Also I hope the Wii U picks up but a year of failing sales is well, a very long run of failing sales.

      • gryphonofmight

        the point is The virtual console has become a big thing for Nintendo and a big money maker. They lose that if they port the games

      • swatbot

        I asked you for proof of that and you simply repeat the same sentence. They don't lose anything by releasing a few games actually, they broaden their audience, significantly. Normal people don't own 20 consoles nor can they be arsed to buy every piece of plastic that comes out every two years. Also, amusing to watch you voted up within 5 seconds of posting and every dissenter voted down within 5 seconds of posting. Presumably not by you.

      • gryphonofmight

        Nintendo games are the selling point for Nintendo consoles. It cheapens the company brand for them to not be on Nintendo consoles. It doesn't broaden the horizon for them to be on other platforms.

      • swatbot

        Yes, it's part of their company identity and ideology and they have stated so many times, I simply see no evidence as argued that porting a few games to another platform will damage them. If anything it would be like.. advertising. But either way the point is moot, as Nintendo isn't going to allow Nintendo titles on a non-Nintendo system

      • Edwin Ramirez

        Where's your proof they won´t lose anything in the long run?
        You don't have to own every console, just buy the latest and the rest of the games you can buy them on Virtual Console.

      • swatbot

        It's not my job to prove someone else's unsubstantiated conjecture wrong. Logic fail.

        Personally I don't need the virtual console, I have the original consoles and games.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        So... it's not your job to prove someones elses "unsubstantiated conjecture wrong" but it's our job to dissaprove yours?
        This statement wasn't someone's unsubstantiated conjecture, it's yours:
        "They don't lose anything by releasing a few games actually, they broaden their audience, significantly."

        And this:
        "I simply see no evidence as argued that porting a few games to another platform will damage them."

        Not seeing evidence does not mean it's not there.
        So, again, do you have proof to back your statements? Do you have results from some financial study as proof?

        At least we know what Nintendo's CEO, Satoru Iwata, has to say: Developing for iOS is “absolutely not under consideration”
        “If we did this, Nintendo would cease to be Nintendo. Having a hardware
        development team in-house is a major strength. It’s the duty of
        management to make use of those strengths. It’s probably the correct
        decision in the sense that the moment we started to release games on
        smartphones we’d make profits. However, I believe my responsibility is
        not to short term profits, but to Nintendo’s mid and long term
        competitive strength.”

      • swatbot

        Let's break logic/epistemology 101 down into bite-sized chunks.

        Since you jumped halfway in the thread, let's start over. Let A=the topic of the thread, the claim: 'Nintendo will encounter damage if they release old games outside their ecosystem'. (Though some posters cannot stay on topic and seem to confuse our discussion about old games with modern console exclusives which are not remotely comparable)

        I ask for proof and get none, or people change the subject to modern console exclusives. When I say so, you wish to convince me by more or less saying 'You can't prove A wrong, therefore A is true!'

        To which: There is not a single, observable instance of A being true, and in fact, the only remotely similar instances I can find (MS and Apple) contradict the claim. Even if there are some differences between MS and Apple, it doesn't undermine my point that there's still absolutely no evidence--Show me one instance of a major company damaging themselves by daring to release a few older titles outside of their ecosystem. There is none. Saying that there is no proof is not the same as making a conjecture. It's your job to convince me of your claim, and if you can't even stay on topic, that will prove difficult.

        Substitute A above with 'Unicorns or invisible creatures exist' and query a believer and you'll often run into the same pattern of argumentation: 'You can't prove me wrong! Where's your evidence I'm wrong?' Because you can't ever 'prove' something completely wrong, people can believe anything they want, and well, they do.

        The rest of your post is more or less stuff I've already repeated elsewhere in this thread, given we've all read N's stance on the subject many times, which is irrelevant (it neither proves nor disproves) the subject above. Absence of evidence is neither evidence, nor evidence of absence.

      • Onikage725

        What 1st party xbox games are on ios??

      • swatbot

        Uh, where did I mention iOS? What has this even got to do with iOS? Microsoft has been releasing multi-platform games for quite some time, and the xbox is doing just fine. Their company image is neither tarnished nor ruined.

      • Snipyro12

        I don't really agree with that. Microsoft may make multi-platform games, but most of these games are released on PC - which is still their platform. And even considering that, there's a reason why Microsoft would never release Halo on a PlayStation or even PC (Every Halo past Halo 2 has not been on PC) - it's a system seller that locks consumers into their ecosystems. Sure, if Nintendo ported a few of their "non-system seller" games, it may not affect them very much. But in reality, all the games people actually WANT ported over to iOS are the exclusive big system sellers like Pokemon, Mario, Zelda. There's no gain to selling games on iOS when they can sell a Pokemon game for 40 bucks, suck more people into buying a 3DS (which they profit from) and still have 4-5 million people buy it.

      • Onikage725

        We were discussing Nintendo releasing on mobile, so I assumed that was your implication. Otherwise, as was said- Microsoft releasing a PC version is not quite the same thing. And they don't even do that often. That last Halo cross platform title works on Windows 8 PCs, Windows phones, Windows tablets like Surface, and supposedly Xbox One. That's not much different from Nintendo having Cave Story on Wii and 3DS, or Sony's cross-buy initiatives. Regardless, it has no bearing on there being a a 1st party console release on ios. If you aren't discussing ios, perhaps you're on the wrong website?

      • swatbot

        Halo's a great example as MS released the original Halo not only on the original xbox and PC but also on Mac, which is well, a lot like porting say, Super Mario 64 to another platform.
        Microsoft isn't tanking nor is their image tarnished, nor are they prevented from having xbox exclusives. As far as understanding the thread goes, I invite you to return to the above and see the OP's claim that porting old games would 'hurt' Nintendo. That was the topic. And there is no evidence for that claim whatsoever.

      • Onikage725

        I don't think that's quite the same thing. Nobody bought a Mac FOR Halo, or PC for that matter. But it was considered a system-seller on consoles, which is why there was no PS2 version. Compare to third party devs, like Capcom's "exclusive" GameCube titles going to PS2.

        And yes, I'm aware of the topic. I addressed some of the troubles with such ports further down. I'd also add that they make a killing on exclusive software. In one month, the newest Pokemon has made almost as much money as the first Infinity Blade made in a year. In addition, it has moved regular units, attracted people to buy the otherwise easy to overlook 2DS at a lower price (every 2DS customer is a potential future 3DS customer as well), and special edition bundles. I'm also not sure if the units sold figures reflect digital eshop sales. Companies like Sega, Capcom, and Square Enix aren't moving hardware, so can afford to branch in this way. I mentioned below, but Nintendo isn't going to cut their own sales by putting their newest Mario Kart on mobile at a fraction of the price. So we would get one of two things- a port of an older title, like Super Mario Kart, which would probably still come in pricey (at least what they charge on VC, likely a little more to cover conversion cost) and appear outdated and clunky compared to competition like Sonic & Sega All Star Racing. Or they the modern titles sitting at a price that would make Final Fantasy Dimensions and X-Com look like discount day. Just thinking realistically here. People act like they can/should just slap MK 7 up for $5 bucks, when it still goes for like $30 and would need work done to fit the mobile platform.

        Putting these games out on mobile is something they *could* do, but they would have to go all in. Otherwise they risk damaging brand image, which Pokemon in particular is conscious of. Game Freak is on record saying they don't want to do dlc, because they don't want to damage trust with their customers. If they went mobile, they'd possibly damage that trust as they become the next Square Enix. The prices would not seem competitive with comparable App Store titles. They'd have to devote employees to the conversions, as I already pointed out a simple virtual pad would be terrible for most of their properties. In the case of Pokemon, they haven't even put them on VC yet, because of the concern over it being incomplete in that format. Unless they re-code the game to utilize wifi features, there is content that would be gated off without the ability to communicate with the other games of that generation, or to receive event items.

      • swatbot

        Okay, I see you're more or less addressing my point here.... so I'll tone it down.

        I didn't really want to compare third-party developers because well, yes third-parties reflect their own brand with their port. And yes plenty of third parties have already ported games to iOS with varying degress of success. But if we want to talk of the risks of porting affecting brand image, sure third party developers provide a template.

        I agree that porting games is tricky, but it is actually less of an issue now with the game interfaces coming out for iOS. In the future touch interfaces will probably not really be so much of an issue. (EG with a gamepad Lunar RPG is pretty much indistinguishable from the console experience). There's actually a lot of successful ports now, not using those as examples of what N should do because those games are different than N's classic lineup, just sayin', successful ports happen. I agree that nobody bought a Mac for Halo (likewise I doubt anyone would buy an iPhone to play Legend of Zelda) or other Microsoft games, however at the same time it increases brand exposure and increases interest in new games. Lots of companies put out 'bites' for iOS to whet interest in their products.. regardless, the claim that Nintendo loses potential system buyers to me doesn't make sense to me at all. Maybe if they ported the entire virtual console, yes.

        Regarding price, the price of older games on the Virtual Console when I looked it up is already comparable to that of iOS games. As far as I can tell those of us for the idea of porting in this thread have only talked about older games like SMW3 or Zelda. It would not be reasonable to assume -any- console is going to port recent system exclusives. That's obvious.

        Anyway yes it's N's brand ideology not to, and they don't need to. I understand why Nintendo won't do it, but my only actual point ever was that I see no reason why it would actually 'damage' the company to port a few classic games. Does that make more sense now? Does it make sense how me simply saying 'I don't see how porting old games will damage the brand; and 'Other games from comparably older gaming eras released outside of ecosystems hasn't damaged any company brand eg Microsoft' ..

        ...is irrelevant to compare to Microsoft porting Xbox exclusives to iOS? I was never arguing for something that ridiculous or specific at all nor as far as I can tell were most other posters here. That latter point merely confuses the debate entirely and turns it into something else. OK, now I'm taking a break.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        Onikage725's question is quite valid. What 1st party xbox games are on iOS or on Android?
        Microsoft releases multiplatform games as in games for xbox and for a PC running Windows. They win on either platform.
        Besides, Microsoft is mainly a software company. They profit if their software sells on any platform.
        Nintendo has to worry about hardware first, then software.

      • swatbot

        Valid but irrelevant to my point which was stated repeatedly. Reading comprehension, please.

      • Onikage725

        I went to great lengths to expand my point. Knock off the attitude, kindly. Thank you.

      • swatbot

        "Knock off the attitude, kindly." My reply clearly isn't even directed at you or labeled at you. That's rich.

      • Onikage725

        Yes, but the point under discussion was the one I made, which you claim is valid but irrelevant. You're being dismissive, and you were rude to him.

      • Onikage725

        And said "irrelevant" comment was to you. You'll ignore me, but be snarky with someone backing me up. Awesome debating.

      • swatbot

        Seriously? I'm all for politeness, but this late into a thread in which everyone has been entirely snarky (when you have been snarky yourself, or perhaps you're in the wrong thread) you're going to pull out the high ground? Also, politeness is bothering to read the entries in a thread so that people don't have to repeat themselves before posting.

        Secondly, there's nothing to be dismissive about if someone is arguing irrelevancies. Only like one or two posters anywhere here have bothered to respond to my actual and very simple point which is clearly stated in this thread at least two times. You keep moving the goalpost.

        Lastly the only reason i bothered responding was because I got an email notification. I find it ironic that you responded so quickly to a thread not addressed at you, which indicates to me that you must be scanning this thread constantly, and I wonder why that is.

        Anyway this is boring and isn't going to affect the outcome of Nintendo's policy, and I've better things to do.

      • swatbot

        Actually, this prompted me to reread the thread and your posts were far and by polite, and I was being snarky in any case. Snarky thread is no excuse. I apologize.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        Microsoft has released xbox games to the PC which has to be running Windows. Microsoft both benefits of selling the game and selling xbox consoles or windows

      • michaelfields

        You don't know the difference between fact and opinion. Nintendo wouldn't be hurt because they'd be gaining a NEW market. The people that want to play on their 3DS are still going to but the people who don't want one are just never going to be giving money to Nintendo so they are missing out on money.

        Also, once again the whole point in what I said is them releasing OLDER games. Keep the new games you need to sell consoles but give people some older titles in a new market and watch how fast the money comes.

        How the hell you don't get that is beyond me. You seem extremely dense.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        Sorry but no. If the same game is available on iOS and on 3DS then why should I buy a 3DS? Now Nintendo lost a hardware sale. That hardware sale which would lock me into their ecosystem and make me a potential buyer for other 3DS games, be they first party or not Nintendo wins for each game sold.

        If I already own a 3DS then why should I carry a device that only plays games when I could carry a more useful device like a smartphone (which I already carry anyways) to play the same game?

        Soon that 3DS will be picking up dust and I won't be interested in wasting money on Nintendo's next portable console. What for? To let it pick up dust because I can play the same games on my iPhone?

        And now Nintendo lost another potential hardware and third party software buyer

      • Eseres

        I was tempted to get myself a WiiU, but only because of that ZombieU game...

      • gryphonofmight

        bayonetta 2, xenoblade 2, smash bros 4,

      • Eseres

        Nope! Just for the ZombieU, nothing else.

      • gryphonofmight

        that's fine. its a cool game. I love survival horror games

      • Holcman

        I'm not getting another game system (WiiU) just for a few good games. There's PC Gaming, the next-gen consoles by Sony and Microsoft, and iOS gaming. All those have MUCH broader horizons than the WiiU. With the release of iOS controllers, lots of high-quality games are going to come to iOS. We'll be able to plug an iOS device into our TVs, take out a controller, and have console-quality experiences. Plus, there's no hassle on keeping track of game disks; it's all saved. You will be able to delete games and get them again with no extra cost; plus, iOS has more than just games. While the WiiU has it's own features, iOS overrules it with the vast amount of different apps that are found, created by the huge community.

      • JCman7

        I've never played an iOS game that has had kept me captivated like a console game has. The only good ones are like Star Wars KOTOR which are ports. Sure there are decent games but I finish them and then that's it. Nintendo games are games that you truly enjoy and will last forever in your library that you want to play over and over. For those complaining that they want nintendo games on iOS, that's a shame you are willing to pay $600 for a phone or iPad to play $2 games that get deleted in a week or two, but not a nintendo system. Buy a quality console that has innovative quality games that will always be better then ios gaming. Many have tried to copy Nintendo, like Oceanhorn but it's no where near as good as the real deal. Can't wait for Zelda A Link Between Worlds next week. One thing is for sure I love my 3DS and WiiU, I would take those games over any other iOS game. But having both is the best thing, both are very unique and different but there is no reason why the big N should merge the two. They are doing just fine.

      • theryanlilo

        $600? A week or two?? I can't stand generalizations. I paid $73 for my iPhone 5. Unless it's truly abysmal, I won't delete a game in that awfully short timeframe. In any event, you do realize I can just re-download a game I miss playing. My physical Nintendo games have been collecting dust for months and years. I would totally buy Nintendo ports on iOS. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

      • Snipyro12

        There isn't anything wrong from your perspective - but from Nintendo's perspective, it's a lot of potential money lost. So financially, there's no reason to port to iOS when the 3DS is doing so well.

        I think pricing is a huge issue too: too many iOS gamers aren't willing to pay big money for games.

      • JCman7

        It is a generalization cause obviously I can't point out every possible situation... But it's an example that I'm sure many fall into. You obviously don't know Nintendo they makes a console based on the games they make so by separating the two it doesn't work. Classic VC games are barely put out onto the consoles so how can we expect them to port them to a non nintendo device? And a device that is a direct competitor to their hardware?? It's absurd. A lot of people hate on Nintendo and won't buy their consoles yet they feel the need to say they should port their games to another companies hardware...laughable. Spend the money on their consoles if you want to enjoy their games it's that simple!! I'm sure you can buy a used system for cheap if you want.

      • theryanlilo

        I don't hate Nintendo. I love them. I have owned all of their consoles at one point or another in my life. I don't care if they stay away from mobile ports. I'm just saying I wouldn't be bothered by it if they did port.

      • JCman7

        I didn't say you did :) said a lot of people. Obviously you do like them since you want to play their games on iOS. Any fan of Nintendo and their iOS device would love to see it happen, I would too but the experience wouldn't be the same. It just isn't right to mix them. Nintendo has a lot of strides still to make they are behind in most modern console features like online play, a dedicated unified network etc. They are starting to finally come on board with these features and I just don't see them changing their ways that drastically unless they are going bankrupt which I don't see happening. We shall see what the future holds! Let's let the indie devs stand a chance on the AppStore I think Nintendo would blow the competition away and it would ruin the AppStore lol

      • Onikage725

        Another thug tho- apparently there's a lot of cross-licensing nonsense with this stuff. That's why Sony and Nintendo are so slow to update PS1 classics and virtual console on Vita/3DS/Wii U even in cases where the game was already on PSN or Wii's VC shop. And another very real concern is pricing. If they put out Super Mario Kart on ios, they'd want to charge heir SNES VC price of $8, possibly an extra buck or two if getting it on the App Store incurred extra costs or fees. So maybe $10. And it's going to be there next to Sonic & Sega All Star Racing, a much more modern and polished racer. Selling for half that price, since Sega has no console and can do whatever it needs to to make a buck. Plus they'd have to work out controls. Pokemon could work so a virtual D Pad, but they get huffy about those because without a link option they are "incomplete." Also, they don't fully own them. Believe me from using emulators, but a virtual pad on pathetic Super NES library (especially Mario World, Super Mario kart) would be horrid. I barely find Mario 1-3 playable, as holding the run button and jumping is tricky. So they would need to go all in to develop new engines for these games. People act like "oh just stick them on the App Store" but it really isn't that simple.

      • Onikage725

        -thing

      • Jake7905

        People use iPhones and iPads for much more then just games. Even if I wasn't a gamer I would still own an iPhone and IPad.

      • JCman7

        Consoles do more than just games as well. Were just talking gaming here though

      • Onikage725

        What you said about Wii U is how I feel about Xbox One and PS4! Almost everything I'm interested in them for is coming either to current gens also, Wii U, or PC. One of my friends got me hyped for Warframe on PS4... Then I remembered I already have it on Steam, just hadn't gotten around to it yet.

      • Nanashrew

        There's a problem I often see in comments and articles about Nintendo when it comes to these statements. Nintendo is fine, the Wii U is not and the 3DS is selling incredibly well. I love my Wii U, but no, it is not doing fine but it isn't sinking the company. The comparisons to Sega are also inaccurate because Sega was so horribly mismanaged since its inception, always "living on the edge of tomorrow," then history caught up. Nintendo is not like Sega.

        The 3DS is doing remarkably well and was the top platform in October, and the last month and the month before that. Software sales for the 3DS are also threw the roof. Pokemon has sold more than 3 million copies already and Monster Hunter 4 has also hit 3 million copies and has a sell through rate of 90%

        We've seen so many companies come and go and Nintendo, decades later, is still expanding and very much alive and well.

      • gryphonofmight

        The sega comparisons are annoying because so many ignore the basic reality of the situation.

    • Snipyro12

      Why on earth would Nintendo port over their great franchises when they're selling craploads of 3DS?

      I don't have a problem with heavily-inspired games like Oceanhorn, but I don't buy them either as they don't appeal to me personally. They just feel empty in comparison to the games that they copied - i.e. I'd rather just play Zelda on a 3DS.

      Gameloft games though, I downright hate. Unoriginal, filled with IAP.

  • Pocketnova

    In the case of the MC and Nova games, we'll never actually get those games that they copy on iOS, so I'm fine with that kind of stuff.

    • TheGrimCreeper

      You never know. Halo could be ported to iOS, but they'd have to take major elements out of the game. As long as it has key elements that make it Halo, then it'd still be a good port. The same thing for CoD. Have you seen Strike Team? I mean, it's a spinoff of BO2, without a few weapons, multiplayer, and campaign. If they REALLY put time into it, they could make a full scale CoD game for mobile.

      • Pocketnova

        I know what you mean, I loved everything about CoD:ST, but it's not a normal CoD game. I'd love Halo and full CoD games on iOS, but it just doesn't seem likely. I'm still hoping, though.

  • TheGrimCreeper

    I have no problem with them at all. But when a major console developer decides to make port their game to mobile devices, they never fail go amaze me. Spinoffs are awesome, so long the game they're copying doesn't make it to mobile, cause the mobile ports will always sink the copier's ship.

    • kioshi

      Gta Vice City didn't sink the Gangstar series.

      • TheGrimCreeper

        Seriously? GTA Vice City is ORIGINAL, has a better storyline, better voice acting, and is a full-on port of the original console game. Gamgstar Vegas (or Gangstar IV) is just GTA IV physics & dynamics, and a catch on to GTA V, cause, you know.. Whenever a major console franchise releases a new game, Gameloft does too.

      • detourne

        You didn't quite master reading comprehension, did you?

        The poster said that the release of Vice City didn't sink the Gangstar games. Both franchises are still going strong on ios. He said nothing about which is better.

  • Adam9812

    Well, I accept this. "Ideas are meant to be stream" - I forgot who made this quote.

  • Xissoric

    If its made well and that original game isn't already on the platform, then why not?

    • gryphonofmight

      because its coming dangerously close to ripping off another game?

      • Xissoric

        So? If I already have and enjoy a game on one platform, and would like a version close to it on my iPod as well I see no problem with that. If the original developer eventually decides to port their own game over I'd pick that up too. In the meantime though I'll be enjoying games like Oceanhorn.

      • gryphonofmight

        Well its ripping off another companies IP. And Nintendo has a portable Zelda game coming next week. Doesn't that seem wrong at all to you?

      • Holcman

        Just because you use some elements from a game doesn't mean you're ripping it off. If someone has a heart system in a game where you find pieces to gain more health, someone who hasn't played Zelda would think, "Hey, this is neat!" Nintendo games "defined" several genres, but if someone uses parts of that to make their own unique game, it's not a ripoff or a copy of their IP. The only way it would be is if they took practically everything from Zelda and named the game something like "Zelda Legend."

      • M M

        Is that portable zelda game coming to IOS?

  • PresidentZer0

    Got no problem with that when the developer admits it.

    • PresidentZer0

      *if

  • http://www.AppUnwrapper.com App Unwrapper

    I haven't played Oceanhorn yet, but I loved Sacred Odyssey, Gameloft's version of Zelda. I used to like Gameloft's before they went overboard with the freemium junk.

    • detourne

      Gameloft has always had freemium games going on the side, so I don't know what you're talking about with their recent 'junk'
      Do you mean games like Iron Man 3 and Thor, that not only are free but have fully voice acted storylines? Or do you mean games like Asphalt 8, a cheap racer that although not as realistic as Real Racing 3, is a much more pleasant gaming experience, when it comes to 'pay-to-win' situations?

      • http://www.AppUnwrapper.com App Unwrapper

        For me, it started with Order & Chaos, actually. I paid full price for it, spent quite a bit of time playing (maybe too much), but they just kept adding more and more IAP-only equipment that was better than anything you could get without real money. Big turnoff, especially for an MMO.
        And then there was Dungeon Hunter 3 with its IAPs at every turn. I'm not sure if those games have improved since then, but I lost interest.
        Part of my disappointment with them may also be due to the fact that the last games I played were the Dark Knight and Amazing Spider-Man, which both ended up not being worth the huge amount of space they took up (they look great and the swinging and gliding were fun, but not enough to keep them on my phone). So I admit, it might not just be the freemium that's turned me off from Gameloft.
        I would love to see a quality sequel to Sacred Odyssey, but not keeping my hopes up.

      • themostunclean

        (Poorly) Voice acted storyline doesn't mean it's not freemium garbage. Thor was horrible.

      • Onikage725

        This is inaccurate. They did not ALWAYS. And many of their older games are abandoned. No updates, no sequels. Older Gameloft fans have seen a shift in their marketing strategy.

  • kioshi

    As long as the game's good I don't care.

    Gangstar Vegas is still great even with GTA available on iOS. And even talking about PC only, Saints Row the Third is heavily inspired by GTA and I like it more than Rockstar's games.

  • bigjack66

    There's a very simple answer to the question is the game any good? If it's good it's paying homage to if it's bad then it's a complete rip off!

  • http://www.tangentworlds.com/ Brian

    Nothing is original, and at a certain point the similarities just describe a genre. Look at Match-3... there are tons of Match-3 games on the store. Think of the first game that was a top-down shooter - now they're everywhere. Do we laugh at Battlefield and Call of Duty because they're just rip-offs of the 1st first person shooters?

    Some games are homages, and I think this fits into that category somewhat. You have the heart meter, some similar things like the sailing... but it's okay. It's not trying to be Zelda, it's merely trying to present a quality game in the same genre with some clear nods to the series.

  • gryphonofmight

    This game does look dangerously too close to Zelda ( and suspiciously releases just before an eagerly awaited portable Zelda game)

  • Dude.. Welcome..

    I don't think there's absolutely anything wrong with developers drawing inspiration from other developers. In Oceanhorn's case, Nintendo has not released (and, of course, understandably, will not release) any Zelda games on the App Store. Because of that, it's cool to have a game of a similar style to the Zelda games we've all known and hopefully loved on our iPhones, iPods, iPads, etc. And if the developers that had been the initial source of inspiration choose to port their games onto the App Store, then that's even better, as we the consumers are graced with a more quality gaming experience (unless the recreation exceeds the creation in its magnitude, in which case, that's rad and who can complain)

    .. And honestly, is any thought or idea ENTIRELY original anymore?

    tl;dr if the copy is enjoyable to play then who cares if it's a copy

  • gryphonofmight

    The idea that this shouldn't be a problem and isn't hurting anyone doesn't really hold up when Nintendo has a majorly promoted and highly anticipated 3DS Zelda Game coming next week. This kind of confuses the situation.

    • Holcman

      They have been making Oceanhorn for 2 years now; the Legend of Zelda new game was announced MUCH more recently. Also, they're for completely different systems. I doubt someone with just a 3DS would go and buy an iOS device just for Oceanhorn. Besides, because it's Nintendo, Oceanhorn will, at the most, barely effect the Legend of Zelda game.

  • Flynn Taggart

    I don't like them and I think they do more harm than good. The one thing they all have in common is that they aren't as good as the games that "inspired" them. This is largely due to controls. We need to stop trying to force traditional game archetypes onto this platform and start coming up with new ideas. What happens is games like oceanhorn get released and if they don't do well, we just get flooded with more crap like candy crush.

    • hourglass

      We're getting controllers.

      We can already play console quality games through our phones and tablets. Why bother getting a dedicated handheld console?

      • Weewoo312

        Because it plays and looks like shit compared to other handheld consoles?

        Off the top of my head, FIFA 14 on IPhone looks nothing and doesn't play even close to a PSVita FIFA 14, even FIFA 11 for it.

        Kill zone Mercenary for Vita looks and plays waaayyyy better than MC4 or MC5 when it comes out.

        3DS has plenty of 1st Party games that will never be released on iPhones, or any where else for that matter. Plus, 3D.

        No matter what you say, dedicated handheld gaming devices are completely better than mobile gaming.

  • Shellcore

    I think that the phrase "heavily inspired" is a little lenient. It upsets me that a studio with obvious talent went to such lengths to "borrow" from a game that was always going to be superior to it. So what if Nintendo decided not to bring the original to iOS? If gamers want to play Zelda and don't own a Nintendo console, why should Nintendo let their property be copied. BUY A 3DS. Rant over.

    • gryphonofmight

      This is especially suspicious with A Link Between worlds coming next week.

      • Xissoric

        This is such a dumb argument, no offense to you whatsoever. Nobody who was planning on buying the new Zelda game is going to say "well, now that Oceanhorn came out looks like no Zelda for me".

      • 21tigermike

        Maybe, but if Nintendo were to make any argument in court, that's EXACTLY what they would say. ;)

      • joaquin_ondamoon

        You keep repeating that over and over. These guys worked on Oceanhorn for 2 years. I'm so sure they timed the release to coincide with a game that wasn't even announced until after this one was in production. There's nothing 'suspicious' about it.
        Anyhow, people have been 'borrowing' game mechanics forever. I don't mind if they put on a different spin or an innovation on it. But if you're just gonna slap a coat of paint on a game and call it something 'new' (yeah, I'm looking at you Tiny Death Star), then no thanks.
        There's nothing wrong with bringing a console experience to iOS. It might be the only way to ever play that game on iOS. In the case of Oceanhorn, it's not gonna stop anyone from buying the new Zelda game when it comes out.

      • Shellcore

        It's not just the mechanics it borrowed though. It wholesale stole the imagery, design and even some sound effects. It's okay to feel fine about that though, as long as it isn't your intellectual rights being dumped on right?

      • joaquin_ondamoon

        Yes, you're absolutely right.

        *eyeroll*

      • Onikage725

        You do know that when a game begins development has nothing to do with its release date, right? Releases are decided upon to maximize sales. Since this games launch date was set fairly recently, I'd be very surprised if they weren't trying to ride the Zelda fervor a little. Close enough hit hat people are thinking of that kind of game, far enough back that it hits a sweet spot between Wind Waker HD and the new one.

        I'm not insulting them for this. It's smart marketing, and how the industry works. Acting like they have nooooooo clue what this "Zel-da" thing is is silly. But that doesn't make them bad in any way.

  • http://portablegamingregion.com/ PortableGamingRegion

    As long as their role models are not on the market, I have no problem with it. Take Gameloft, for example: if it wasn't for their heavily-inspired games that took a lot from NFS, GTA, FF, Sims, and other AAA titles, mobile gaming until 2007 would mostly revolve around colorful remasterings of Snake and Tetris.

    What Gameloft managed to do within constraints of J2ME (it's called JME today) is downright impressive.

  • Lester8_4

    If they are trying to bring the gameplay of great games to ios, that's fine. But when these companies use names and logos that are similar to the famous console version for the sole purpose of drawing in people, and they don't spend any time on actually developing a quality game, that is not good.

  • Eseres

    Maybe Oceanhorn is a straight up Zelda ripoff, but i really like it. I've been wanting a game like Oceanhorn for quite some time. None of the other attempts of making a Zelda clone really did it for me. So i welcome Oceanhorn for all that its worth.

  • Lester8_4

    Gameloft does a good job of taking inspiration from famous console games and developing similar ios versions. What annoys me about Gameloft is it's habit of making games with so many timers and gimmicks trying to get you to use iap.

  • Holcman

    I feel like gryphon has been liking his own comments and disliking those with different opinions. Too many one-minded people here. Take this into perspective: do you want an extensive, premium, long-awaited game like Oceanhorn, or do you just want more freemium junk. If you complain about Oceanhorn, just don't buy it. I bet you haven't played it anyways; you're like those people who see a game based on another and hate on it without trying it. (Like what happened to SurvivalCraft for many people.)

    • theryanlilo

      Agreed!

    • Edwin Ramirez

      Too bad you have to buy it to try it.

  • Lazer Kat

    What if oceanhorn had not of been approved by apple because of IP theft, after two years?
    Now that's a crazy thought...and its a real risk they took when deciding to spend years cloning a well known IP.

    • hourglass

      Then they would have released it on Android.

      • Lazer Kat

        It isn't that easy to release a game made for iOS on android. It isn't just, ok...let me hit the android button.
        Also, premium games don't sell on android, so they would have had to rethink the entire strategy.

    • joaquin_ondamoon

      Judging from the video, I think it's safe to say it's different enough from Zelda that they weren't in any danger of that happening. Now if the little dude had blonde hair and a little green hat....

      • Lazer Kat

        Well sure they were in danger of it happening. Look around the net. There's literally thousands of cases of apple not approving apps for reasons much less than this (but then they allow crazy broken clones that even steal the name of the originator onto the App Store). All it really would have took is Nintendo getting word of the game, and deciding to put a few Million into lawyers. They would have issued a cease and desist, contacted apple...and apple would have bowed down.

  • worldcitizen1919

    If the devs refuse to bring out Zelda then I say to other devs BRING IT ON! They are only losing $$$ if they choose not to bring out these games. If they don't take the chance to make a cool fortune then others will.

  • Schpank

    As long as the the games they're inspired by are great, and the homage is solid, I say Yay!

  • HardyRawls

    I first thought it read "Heavenly" inspired games. I'm much more interested in those now.

    • detourne

      Totally. But if there was a big scandal about those game it could be called Heavensgate, and well we all know grow that ended

  • rewyan

    I don't mind games that are similar to others. It happens every day. However, I do get angry when the developer clones their own game (such as the upcoming Boom Beach).

    • gryphonofmight

      who is that by?

    • imp70

      Have you actually played Boom Beach? It's actually quite different from Clash of Clans in key ways. Hardly a clone.

  • RelientKSoCal

    I have no problem playing a "heavily inspired" game if it is still fun to play, has great gameplay mechanics, graphics, music etc. Although I have yet to play Oceanhorn, I played the entire game of Swordigo (another iOS title inspired by Zelda), and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
    What I do have a problem with is a game like "Better Than Portal," which is clearly NOT better than Portal, and is just trying to profit from the success of the game they're copying. (Granted I haven't personally played "Better Than Portal," but I'm basing this on TA's review and my own impressions from screenshots.)
    Although Oceanhorn may be "heavily inspired" by Zelda, I think it's safe to say the game developers were still looking to make a fun, high quality title, not just a cheap knock-off to profit from Zelda's success.

  • doublezz

    Well if the origin producer doesn't port to the new platform why we have to wait forever? As long as the clone is good enough, I don't care.

  • GamerGuy

    I still don't get the idea behind it, besides the attempt to cash in on it.

    A lot of work goes into it, so why not put all of that effort towards something original? Because they don't want to 'design' something new or maybe can't? They are scared of the risks involved? I say take the risk and make an original. The appstore is already filled with too many clones...

    • Smaug

      I feel as if they love zelda a LOT. Like so much they wanna create a game that basically is zelda.

  • madrogue

    "Heavy Inspiration," done right, is absolutely required in this space. It is extremely difficult to get controls right on touch devices, so when a classic franchise is reimagined/sourced for this form-factor with controls that work well, it should be welcomed with open arms. Take a game "heavily-inspired" by Animal Crossing on iOS, for example. With a good control scheme, it would be very profitable. Players want to take a great experience with them. If the first-party developers can't (or won't) deliver the experience on a prolific platform, then second/third-party developers should make the most of it. If they can deliver the experience as well as Oceanhorn does, players will pay a premium for it. Capturing an experience like Zelda, Metroid, Animal Crossing, or Sonic or creating a new experience like Angry Birds, Words With Friends, or Plants vs Zombies is what the mobile games medium needs.

  • ste86uk

    I've never played Zelda in my life and yes I am 27 so I've had chances so to me on my iOS device this game is the only one exactly like it so I could care less where it's inspiration or copying came from.

    Most of the games on the store are just mobile copies of console versions or flash but I don't generally see a big fuss about this. There are piles of CoC clones that are exactly the same in every-way pretty much bar graphics...so do I care that Oceanhorn is very similar to Zelda? Not at all because I'll still never play Zelda unless it's released on iOS. Besides if people like this game that much and have never played Zelda maybe they'll make the effort now knowing they'll like it.

    • Edwin Ramirez

      "I've never played Zelda in my life and yes I am 27"
      Poor you! That is so sad. Like hearing a tsunami survivor tell his story about how all his family died except him.

  • TrencH

    I guess I am on the fence on the issue. If the game is like another but plays real good I will play it. It will not stop me from stocking up and playing the original games on my 3DS or my wiiU. If someone also decides to sue another company because it is a obvious they ripped too much I will definitely understand their perspective. Let the courts decide. In the meantime I will be playing games on my 3DS and my iOS. If they play like crap or have a big paywall then I delete or don't buy it.

    There is just too many games borrowing and from each other and even themselves with remakes (the new Zelda is awesome for both 3DS and WiiU but come on... Let's see some new stuff Nintendo!

    I could keep on but basically if it is a good game I am playing it so I guess if it's a good copy of a original I am playing that too. When I get tired of crappy copy's or get spoon fed too many sequels or remakes I am going to start looking elsewhere.

  • Advancedcaveman

    Heavy inspiration is great, but Oceanhorn isn't inspired. Inspiration means an idea influenced by an existing source; the key term here is "idea." Some kind of original thought spurred on by an existing example. Oceanhorn doesn't have any ideas: all it really sets out to do is duplicate aspects of Zelda. Everything in it looks, sounds, and behaves just like Zelda.

    The fact that you are actually saying this duplicative type of game "carves out its own identity" is worrisome. I know Oceanhorn doesn't carve out it's own identity because I have played other games that genuinely qualify as being "inspired" by Zelda. Okami, Beyond Good & Evil, and Outcast are examples of games that are genuinely inspired by Zelda rather than being copycats. They have elements that, rather than being 1:1 duplicates of things in zelda, are independent concepts evolved and extrapolated from things in Zelda.

    BG&E has an extremely similar structure to zelda; there's a very zelda esc progression where you go through dungeons solving puzzles, you finish off each dungeon with a boss fight, and you have a condensed hub like overworld linking all the dudgeons togather. Really nearly the same basic structure and flow is here, but between photography, stealth, hovercraft upgrades, partner mechanics, the french comic book presentation and science fiction setting its easy to forget just how similar the game is to Zelda. This game basically has zelda dungeons, but Jade doesn't literally lift round bombs over her head and throw them at little cracked walls, followed by a "doodolydoodoo" noise. Now what happens in Oceanhorn?

    • wigzisonfire

      Shut up you chump! We have been crying for zelda and Pokemon for years. Did Nintendo hear our cries? Yes, and they ignore them.

      Thank goodness two dudes had enough and they manned up and made a zelda game for the masses.

      I'd love to see you achieve anything of such outstanding magnitude in two years!

    • pauldavidmerritt

      I agree with you completely. Good or bad, this gameplay creation style is such a cheap shot. What I take from this is that Dev's simply don't have the drive and prowess to create their own ideas and, instead, is worth more to them to make money off of someone else's game inventions. This industry is weakening at the knees a bit (Dev's, get your money quick and cheap--hurry!) and all the dorky comments from these young kid gamers don't really know what's going on in the industry outside of their subjective, small world mobile life (not surprising).

    • Onikage725

      I completely see your point. And Oceanhorn does toe that line. I suppose I give it slack for at least doing it well. I mean, Mighty #9 is going to be a shameless Mega Man clone, but I hope it is good since it is being made by the creator of Mega Man do deliver the type of game fans want and that Capcom of late flat refuses to. There's a difference between "same soul, different skin" to, say, Gameloft. I have many of their games. I like some. But their brutal release schedule and low price keeps them from hitting that AAA mark that they present themselves as. They feel like the mockbuster version of the movie you just saw in theaters, that airs Saturdays on SyFy. Snakes on a Train, Transmorphers, Thor: God of Thunder, you get the idea. Some big names have done the "spiritual successor" thing quite well. Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon were attempts by former Square Enix employees to evoke classic Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, in an age where Square Enix had grown obsessed with MMORPG mechanics. The original Donkey Kong was meant to be a Popeye game, but the license was denied. So it got a Ruskin. After it's success, they got that license. If anyone remembers arcade Popeye, that's why it feels like a Donkey Kong sequel with a Popeye license.

  • htp24

    If it's not lifting direct assets from the game, I think it's fine, especially since there's no first party / Nintendo IP on the market.

  • dariusjr98

    I feel like this article was made because of what I said on the review for Oceanhorn.

  • sonicandfffan

    There's a reason oceanhorn evokes strong feelings of Zelda, and that's because Zelda absolutely owns the genre. Similar to how every open world game is compared to GTA. It's just the downside of a good quality series out muscling any competition in that genre.

  • DannyTheElite

    GT racing 2 is an exact copy of rr3

  • Kane

    I personally like heavily inspired games of famous titles. Like a lot of people, we don't own every console from various companies which have there own exclusive games. So having other developers creating these faithful clones is a welcome bonus. It just means you can enjoy what you potentially never will without waiting forever for say Nintendo to release any of there old games to iOS. We need more of this to happen.

  • MidianGTX

    My biggest problem with Oceanhorn is the length. It was a long, long time coming, and it's what, maybe a 12th the length of a Zelda game?

  • Dailion Ando

    I like "heavily inpired" games, sometimes, more than the original.

  • http://www.jugarjugar.net/ Jugar Jugar

    Actually a lot of the game is to pay attention to. It is not simply a pointless game that we have. It is more than the gadgets that we are blind. This is really very good

  • azsxdc

    I would rather they didn't but I bought Oceanhorn anyway and am really enjoying it.

    Many games have taken those individual elements and incorporated them but not so many have taken a whole chunk of them. That's probably what causes people to call this game a rip-off. It's a bit dodgy in principle but I can't really find anything that's wrong with it especially when it's generally a well executed game. I don't think Nintendo gets to have a monopoly over the concepts introduced in Zelda.

    Nobody who wanted to play Zelda is going to not buy it just because they already have Oceanhorn on iOS.

  • marc0313

    Honestly, as long as Activision isn't making a good CoD game, not that sorry excuse that was Strike Team, I'll continue to support Modern Combat and Gameloft. Why not? They make great games.

  • Inaba-kun

    Being original is comically easy, you just need a functioning imagination. Those who don't have that, steal and copy. It's really too bad.

  • Ph0lly

    As long as the game of inspiration is not on the same platform I see nothing wrong with it, Nintendo says they'll never release their games on other platforms so its their fault.

  • joshnolan

    I think its awesome...all of my gaming is on the move so i do not have a gaming console... And i get jealous when i see games coming out so this is the closest i get... And i dont have to spend $60 its hilarious reading comments about people bitching spending $7 wanting it to take up Zero space and have a long campaign

  • http://deanmayers.tumblr.com/ DeanDMX

    I think it's gross and only highlights all the small touches and polish that the original developers put in. Al so why the hell doesn't it synch progress between iPad and iPhone?!

  • M M

    Since I can't get Zelda on my phone I'm all for this!

  • poorwealthyman

    I have no problems with developers copying a game entirely. As long as they don't pretend that it was all their idea...

    There are dozens of awesome games on home consoles that will never make it to iOS devices for whatever reason, but that I would love to play. If a dev can imitate it closely, I have no problems what so ever!

  • Buzzit

    As long as there is no breach of intellectual property then studios can release what they like. If the market likes it they will play it. Like the music industry, songs are a composite of elements taken from prior ones, some stand out as shaping new sounds and ideas but everything borrows from the collective.

  • Goggles789

    The reason I avoid Gameloft games is because they are terrible games, not necessarily due to the copy-cat tactic they employ. Yes, I have played them, and they didn't gel with me, before the "you've never played them" argument gets thrown in. Anyway, I'm not so sure that "heavily inspired" is such a big deal. Look at the way car companies blatantly copy each other, purely on aesthetics. For example, I'm seeing Hondas looking more like BMWs in terms of exterior design. Most of the time, "heavily inspired" turns into "shallow clone" in video games. That's what gets me the most. I don't mind playing games that are similar in aesthetics or gameplay as long as they aren't just...bad. Oceanhorn is a rare example of a heavily inspired game that does things very, very well. Oddly enough, even the story progression screams of Nintendo aesthetics. And they made a very good choice with the composers. Oceanhorn actually has heart and soul, as opposed to many of the uninspired Gameloft clones. I just think that if you're rubbed the wrong way by it, it would make more sense if you were the actual developer for the game in question. Otherwise it's just armchair whining.

  • BulkSlash

    I don't have a problem with games inspired by other games, the only reason I haven't bought Oceanhorn is I bought Wind Waker HD just a month ago and only recently finished it. Give it 6 months or so and I'll probably buy Oceanhorn to scratch that Wind Waker-style itch.

    That said, it's rare for me to enjoy an "inspired by" game as much as the original game they are mimicking, although there have been a few exceptions over the years.

    As for Nintendo releasing their games on iOS, I can't see it happening any time soon. While the Wii U is struggling, the 3DS is selling really well and with the cheaper 2DS and Pokemon X/Y out they're going to clean up over Christmas. I wouldn't rule the Wii U out anyway, the DS and 3DS both had really bad launches and quickly became huge successes once some good games started to materialise. Time will tell!

  • pauldavidmerritt

    Good game or not, these piggyback tactics are cheap. It cheapens the industry, its creativity and thinking power, as well as weakening the longterm strength of this mobile console. Building a game is supposed to be a work of art--an invention, not a reiteration of someone else's handy work.

    Most people (both consumers and developers) are so used to it now and expect it. I think it's pathetic. It shows how focus is leaning further away, bit by bit, from true creation and development in this industry, and leaning closer to the increasingly popular belief: Making money quicker and easier is better. Its a stupid dirty way to cut corners, with a lot less dignity and honor involved.

  • EZ Ice

    "Angry Candy Ninja Clan Run with Friends!" oh and it's a "Freemium" because everyone loves them...

  • Drummerboycroy

    Based on the comments I just waded through, someone seriously needs to go ahead and re-title this article, " Are you upset that Oceanhorn looks kinda like a Zelda game?"... And no, I'm not. ;-)

  • Sven Van de Perre

    Most of the" heavily inspired" are soulless copies (I'm looking at you, Gameloft), but Oceanhorn is clearly a labour of love.

  • Cookies

    There's a difference between creating a unique and magical experience that is heavily influenced by another game (although I'd like to point out that Oceanhorn is far less similar to Wind Waker than people are making it out to be) and completely ripping it off (a la pretty much every Gameloft game). The former should be seen as little more than intelligent use of flattery (immitation and all that) while the latter, I think, practically constitutes intellectual property theft.

    One could argue that there is really no such thing as an original idea, so as long as it's not a wholesale cut and paste-athon, it should be seen as just an homage.

  • rabidnz

    Lazy and greedy game designers.

  • JollyPostman

    I personally think it's a rip. I'm a firm believer that all good ideas start from taking inspiration from others but when you just remake something to a lower standard (I don't care what you say it isn't as good as windwaker) that isn't taking inspiration and developing something of your own. As it has already been said, if Nintendo sold games on the App Store they would lose any chance of ever developing new exciting, big games. All they could do is port games and that would be cool for a while and make big money but you have to look at their key drivers - pioneering the way, trying new things, they couldn't do that if they stopped selling their hardware. Look at Sega, they just port the same old games over onto different devices and release mediocre new games onto other systems, when was the last time they did something revolutionary or exciting?

  • Demonskunk

    I personally have been wanting a Zelda-like rpg on my device for a long time (specifically an rpg with no level ups, grinding or random loot drops) so this is a prayers answered type of thing.

    I've never been bothered by the fact that people ape concepts, settings or gameplay styles, I just hate it when they do that and release a horrible product - I avoid gameloft titles until they're free or 99c because they usually control badly, or have hideous bugs ( their spy game was AWFUL and you could just walk right up walls) and they all have terrible, unfulfilling endings.

    I actually love it when a company goes "I like this game, let's make something like it, but better, or with our own flavor."

  • raul3d

    Hi there! Returning to the original question...I REALLY don't like when a game has so many similarities with other game, it just doesn't feel right to me. Jared pointed out some very close game mechanics and the overall look that inmediately make you think of zelda. To answer the question over whether it is too much or not, for me in this case it is. The game looks awesome and people who buy it will enjoy it for sure, it seems like a great game to play, but that wasn't the question, was it? Anyway I wish the best of luck to the developers they made a beautiful game.