Cybernoid clones?

[Morkin]

Slubberdegullion is like the secret love child of Cybernoid and Thrust.

...Though I'm not sure if ZXDB has an 'illicit liaison' table...

[R-Tape]

I disagree. Slubberdegullion is basically Cybernoid with different controls. Although it's innovative, the inspiration from Cybernoid is very clear!

Aye fair enough. It certainly has a high CRN.

Slubberdegullion is like the secret love child of Cybernoid and Thrust.

...Though I'm not sure if ZXDB has an 'illicit liaison' table...

I wonder how thrust managed to dock without exploding?

[Audionautas]

Hi guys!

A new Exolon clone detected!

* SHURIKEN (Crash, 1989) (https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/entry/4 ... m/Shuriken).

Thank you!

[Einar Saukas]

Good catch!

[druellan]

Hi guys!

A new Exolon clone detected!

* SHURIKEN (Crash, 1989) (https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/entry/4 ... m/Shuriken).

Thank you!

OMG! Those "inspired" graphics are fantastic! On the screenshot alone I count Nodes of Yesod, Stormlord and Trantor?

[Joefish]

OMG! Those "inspired" graphics are fantastic! On the screenshot alone I count Nodes of Yesod, Stormlord and Trantor?

You mean that's a game? I thought it was the Friday Quiz...

[Einar Saukas]

Hi guys!

A new Exolon clone detected!

* SHURIKEN (Crash, 1989) (https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/entry/4 ... m/Shuriken).

Thank you!

OMG! Those "inspired" graphics are fantastic! On the screenshot alone I count Nodes of Yesod, Stormlord and Trantor?

To be honest I can't see the similarity with Trantor.

About Nodes of Yesod and Stormlord, do you think they are close enough to deserve getting added as inspirations too? We can have multiple inspirations for the same game in ZXDB.

[druellan]

To be honest I can't see the similarity with Trantor.

The score section, but looking at it side by side, perhaps is not that similar.

About Nodes of Yesod and Stormlord, do you think they are close enough to deserve getting added as inspirations too?

Well, the author is not gathering graphics from other games directly, but using them as template to build their own. Besides, I think to call a game inspired by another, the main focus should be the gameplay (so, Exolon is a good call). This might be a good comment, but not more than that IMHO.

[Einar Saukas]

Well, the author is not gathering graphics from other games directly

If the author of a game simply copied graphics directly from another game, it would be a "mod", not inspiration. For instance Ku-Ku is a mod of both Project Future (copied code) and Sabre Wulf (copied graphics).

An "inspired" game means this game is so similar to another that it cannot be just a coincidence or a "loose inspiration". It has to be an intentional attempt to reproduce some aspect of another game although not a straight copy. For instance it's quite obvious the author of Shuriken was looking at Stormlord when drawing most vegetation for this game. Or perhaps the author imported and altered the original Stormlord graphics. It goes beyond some similarity, although it's not a direct copy. Likewise this game is an obvious attempt to reproduce Exolon.

I'm just not so sure about the similarity between Shuriken and Nodes of Yesod. Considering both games have an astronaut as main character, is it really reasonable to expect they should look more different from each other? Upon close inspection, these graphics look somewhat distinct...

[Lethargeek]

If the author of a game simply copied graphics directly from another game, it would be a "mod", not inspiration. For instance Ku-Ku is a mod of both Project Future (copied code) and Sabre Wulf (copied graphics).

it cannot be a 'mod' of both, there must be one base to modify it
taking/ripping chunks of code and gfx from different sources to build something new is not modding
almost every original author/team does it with their own assets at the very least
(is the Arc of Yesod a mod of Nodes of Yesod?)))

[Einar Saukas]

it cannot be a 'mod' of both, there must be one base to modify it

He hacked one base game for graphics, another for code.

If someone rips all graphics from your game to create their game, it's a MOD. And if someone rips your entire game code to create their game, it's also a MOD. He did both.

taking/ripping chunks of code and gfx from different sources to build something new is not modding

Taking/ripping SIGNIFICANT chunks of code and gfx from different sources to build something new is modding.

almost every original author/team does it with their own assets at the very least
(is the Arc of Yesod a mod of Nodes of Yesod?)))

No, because reusing your own assets is not ripping or hacking.

[Daveysloan]

Cybernoid (and the Pyramid before it) was the inspiration for Forward to the Past.



https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/entry/3 ... o_the_Past

And it's slightly more obviously inspired a few levels in Janky Joe.



https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/entry/3 ... Retro_Hell

[Lethargeek]

He hacked one base game for graphics, another for code.

NO, he either ripped assets from two sources OR modified ONE base with assets ripped from another source.

If someone rips all graphics from your game to create their game, it's a MOD.

NO. It's just ripped gfx. The original was not MODified.

And if someone rips your entire game code to create their game, it's also a MOD. He did both.

NO. If someone just 'rips' then it's a ripoff, NOT a mod. It is possible to build a new game with the same old routines that would look and feel completely different and even belong to another genre. Now, if someone takes the whole original executable that is initially working the same way and begins to change things here and there then it becomes a mod (until it becomes a 'rewrite' with too many changes).

Taking/ripping SIGNIFICANT chunks of code and gfx from different sources to build something new is modding.

oh yeah, so all BASIC programs using SIGNIFICANT chunks of the ROM code are helloworld mods it seems

No, because reusing your own assets is not ripping or hacking.

How so? There's no other difference except the person doing it. Also it may be another team member if not the author.

[Nitrowing]

is Jetset Willy a mod of Manic Miner?

[Lethargeek]

is a chess game with Rex and JSW sprites used to represent the pieces a mod of both? by Einar's logic it is

[Einar Saukas]

NO, he either ripped assets from two sources OR modified ONE base with assets ripped from another source.

Ripping and modifying are basically the same thing.

"Modifying" means you searching someone else's program to find a (significant amount of) content you want to use, keeping it and replacing the rest.

"Ripping" means you searching someone else's program to find a (significant amount of) content you want to use, COPYING IT TO ANOTHER FILE, then keeping it and replacing the rest.

You seem to think that "COPYING IT TO ANOTHER FILE" makes all the difference. I disagree.

NO. It's just ripped gfx. The original was not MODified.

Suppose you take an AGD game, keep all graphics and rewrite the events logic.

Now suppose you take the same AGD game, extract (rip) all graphics (sprites, layout, and so on except events logic) into files, import these files into a new clean copy of AGD, then rewrite the events logic.

If you are careful enough, the resulting programs will be absolutely identical in both cases. According to your logic, only the first is a MOD.

NO. If someone just 'rips' then it's a ripoff, NOT a mod. It is possible to build a new game with the same old routines that would look and feel completely different and even belong to another genre. Now, if someone takes the whole original executable that is initially working the same way and begins to change things here and there then it becomes a mod (until it becomes a 'rewrite' with too many changes).

If someone takes a certain game, copies ("rips") exactly half of its routines to another file and rewrites the other half, is it a MOD?

oh yeah, so all BASIC programs using SIGNIFICANT chunks of the ROM code are helloworld mods it seems

I don't think you understand how a BASIC program works.

Programming in BASIC does not involve copying the ROM, modifying the ROM or ripping parts of the ROM.

How so? There's no other difference except the person doing it. Also it may be another team member if not the author.

Because reusing your own company assets is not ripping or hacking.

[Einar Saukas]

is Jetset Willy a mod of Manic Miner?

No, because reusing your own assets is not ripping or hacking.

Technically JSW could be considered derived from Manic Miner. Although sequels are usually expected to be derived, so we don't mark them as such, unless in extreme cases like Jet Set Willy II and Jet Set Willy II+.

To see a brief explanation of these terms (mod, derived, etc) visit this page and click to expand each section:

https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/relations.php

[Einar Saukas]

is a chess game with Rex and JSW sprites used to represent the pieces a mod of both?

Reusing a few sprites is not taking/ripping SIGNIFICANT chunks of graphics.

[AndyC]

Ripping and modifying are basically the same thing.

"Modifying" means you searching someone else's program to find a (significant amount of) content you want to use, keeping it and replacing the rest.

"Ripping" means you searching someone else's program to find a (significant amount of) content you want to use, COPYING IT TO ANOTHER FILE, then keeping it and replacing the rest.

I'm not convinced about that.

I'd say it's a mod of the code remains largely the same, regardless of asset changes. In the case of common engines like AGD that would really only be the distinct code, because everything built on AGD isn't really a mod of AGD for example. Swiping just one small routine out of an existing game isn't enough to make a mod of the original.

Ripping is a term I'd reserve solely for taking assets, not code. Taking all the assets from Batman the Movie and using them in a chess game (for example)isn't really a mod to most people, I'd say.

[marenja]

No, because reusing your own assets is not ripping or hacking.

To see a brief explanation of these terms (mod, derived, etc) visit this page and click to expand each section:

https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/relations.php

DERIVED FROM (118)
Officially modified variant of a program for the same platform (by same author/company)
MOD FROM (157)
Unofficially modified variant of a program for the same platform (by unrelated third-party)


What does 'Officially' mean ? Is condition 'by same author/company' necessary in this case?


What we should claim if one file e.g. Dizzy was modified 'Officially' to get new game Dizzy-2 and the same file was modified UN-Officially by some fan to Dizzy-Two, is Dizzy-Two NOT DERIVED according to given definition?
What we should claim if Dizzy-2 is absolutely equal to Dizzy-Two, is Dizzy-Two still NOT DERIVED from Dizzy but just a MOD according to given definition?

What if unofficial mod Dizzy-Three is then officially released by CodeMasters as Dizzy-in-wonderland - will it (absolutely the same file) change status from MOD to DERIVED just because of the fact it was released by CodeMasters.

Are these terms mod, derived, reusing, ripping and hacking LAW terms, not TECHNICAL?

And aren't gfx and/or sound assets just themes and skins that could be applied without changing a single executable line of code similar to how you switch between day/night theme in browser?

No, because reusing your own assets is not ripping or hacking.

How so? There's no other difference except the person doing it. Also it may be another team member if not the author.

Here I absolutely agree with @Lethargeek

We mix terms official/unofficial with other terms and that will result in double number of groups. And it is not clear what group to choose because words MOD and DERIVED are similar.

ANOTHER PLATFORM FOR (143)
Programs officially ported from a different platform (by same author/company)
UNOFFICIAL PORT FROM (16)
Programs unofficially ported from a different platform (by unrelated third-party)

EDITOR FOR (42) - official or unofficial? Programs to modify aspects (maps, graphics, etc) of a certain game
INSPIRED BY (81) - official or unofficial? Programs based on another program
DEMONSTRATION OF (6) An official demo version to showcase another program or device

[Timmy]

I only noticed this thread recently, but I do want to say that I'm glad that it was obvious to see that Future Looter was described here as 'inspired' by Cybernoid.

[AndyC]

What does 'Officially' mean ? Is condition 'by same author/company' necessary in this case?

It's trying to account for the fact that companies would often reuse a lot of code between similar games. Dizzy 2 is a refined version of the Dizzy engine, Dizzy 3 is a further refinement. They almost certainly share a lot of code, but you wouldn't really think of one as a mod of the other.

Are these terms mod, derived, reusing, ripping and hacking LAW terms, not TECHNICAL?

I'd say they're probably technical. "Derived" games were.probably done at a source code level, modded games were done by hacking the binary directly. Asset ripping/reusing is a very different process to doing the same with code.

And aren't gfx and/or sound assets just themes and skins that could be applied without changing a single executable line of code similar to how you switch between day/night theme in browser?

On an 8-bit system? You might be surprised to discover they aren't always. It.can very much be the case they you can't just arbitrarily change graphics. Sizes are almost always fairly rigourous, but often there are whole other swathes of rules that need to be followed for the graphics to actually work.

[marenja]

It's trying to account for the fact that companies would often reuse a lot of code between similar games. Dizzy 2 is a refined version of the Dizzy engine, Dizzy 3 is a further refinement. They almost certainly share a lot of code, but you wouldn't really think of one as a mod of the other.

Yes, for me derived means usage of much original code. And mod means usage of even more of original code. But none of those terms means for me the person who has done the work--official publisher or bad hacker.

On an 8-bit system? You might be surprised to discover they aren't always. It.can very much be the case they you can't just arbitrarily change graphics. Sizes are almost always fairly rigourous, but often there are whole other swathes of rules that need to be followed for the graphics to actually work.

Not always but just sometimes. You can change font without any difficulty. And you can change sprites if they are not packed with other sprites of the same size am i right?

[AndyC]

Yes, for me derived means usage of much original code. And mod means usage of even more of original code. But none of those terms means for me the person who has done the work--official publisher or bad hacker.

To you, perhaps. But most people would distinguish between an official released game that happens to share source code and a fan modified game. Even in the modern PC world, people don't typically refer to sequels as mods, it would be weird.

Not always but just sometimes. You can change font without any difficulty. And you can change sprites if they are not packed with other sprites of the same size am i right?

Not necessarily. I've certainly written code in the past that had certain strict requirements on sprite design, so you couldn't just arbitrarily lift sprites from another game, regardless of the format they are stored in.

Even when the graphics seem relatively modifiable, there can be other restrictions in the game engine. For example, every single character in Double Dragon has to used the same animations for legs. Which is why, despite lots of fan made "improved" graphics over the years, you don't see anyone just putting those graphics into the existing game. It just wouldn't work.

One of the most common misconceptions among people who've never actually coded an 8-bit game, is the perception you can just draw a bunch of graphics assets and the a coder can straight up use them in a game. The reality is often different and there are very often weird rules that might well seem arbitrary or bizarre but are necessary to get the performance required.

[Einar Saukas]

I understand there's no "standard" definition for these terms. Some people may consider that "ripping" only applies to graphics, others that it may also apply to extracting music or entire chunks of code from a program. And so on... OK, I'm not trying to convince anybody otherwise.

The key point is, there are certain aspects of a game that are relevant for ZXDB:

• It's no surprise that developers reuse many of their own assets/routines/whatever. Of course they don't throw away everything they built and restart every new game from scratch! Also companies usually reuse material between projects even when different people are working on each one, and may even share this material with third-party companies they hired to develop sequels. Fine, that's to be expected. However if a certain game reuses so much content from another that they are almost the same game, this information is relevant. For instance Daley Thompson's Supertest 128 is an improved version of Daley Thompson's Supertest with additional events. Championship Jet Ski Simulator is a simplified version of Jet Bike Simulator. And Heart Stealer - One Key Version is a variant of Heart Stealer with different control mechanics. In ZXDB, we say that Daley Thompson's Supertest 128 is "derived from" Daley Thompson's Supertest.

• Sometimes developers learn new tricks from looking at games from other (unrelated) authors/companies/etc. Or they may invent similar ideas independently. That's fine. However if a certain game is built using a significant amount of content from another (unrelated) authors/companies/etc, then this information is relevant. In ZXDB, we say that Dizzy: Return to the Magicland is a "mod of" Dizzy. Technically I don't even know how they did it: Perhaps they edited the original game file directly. Perhaps they disassembled, modified, then assembled it again. Or perhaps they extracted specific graphics and routines to use in their game. It only matters that they used a lot of content from someone else's game, beyond just an "inspiration" or coincidence.

In both cases, we chose these terms ("derived" and "mod") because most people will understand what it means, without the need for a detailed explanation (that most people would never read anyway).