Chapter 46: This Game Won't Succeed

Amy Johnson said, "Manager, shouldn't we sue this company?"

Paul Wilder also nodded, "Yes, manager, send a lawyer's letter!"

Alex Parker shook his head, "It's useless."

Amy was astonished, "Why? Manager, let's at least consult a lawyer."

Alex explained, "It's hard to establish a case of plagiarism based on game mechanics alone. The easiest way to prove plagiarism in games is by using similar artistic resources and identical text content in the design documents. If these two aspects are not proven, it is challenging to defend our rights."

"Therefore, even if we send them a lawyer's letter, they'll most likely just throw it in the trash."

Amy was unsatisfied: "But this game is so similar to 'Plants vs. Zombies.' Anyone can see that!"

Alex calmly responded, "But that's not enough to convict them."

Amy was frustrated but had no rebuttal.

In this parallel world, Alex had already researched the game industry, especially regarding "game plagiarism," and had reviewed several cases. Similar to the previous world, this world judged game plagiarism mainly on two aspects: the similarity of artistic resources, music, sound effects, and textual content, and the core game rules, equivalent to the source code in the previous world.

These aspects are the easiest to prove plagiarism. Once solid evidence is gathered, it's a sure win.

However, the critical aspect of "gameplay mechanics" is difficult to judge for plagiarism.

In the previous world, the famous board game "War of Three Kingdoms" once sued "Kingdom Wars," accusing it of "plagiarizing their work."

But "Kingdom Wars" argued that the designer's work, including setting design direction, designing the framework, and detailing, belonged to the realm of ideas and was not protected by copyright law.

From the perspective of game rules, "Kingdom Wars" claimed that the entire design concept of "War of Three Kingdoms" was modelled after the Italian card game "Bang!".

Ultimately, the case concluded with the lawsuit being withdrawn.

There were many such examples in the previous world, where "borrowing" and "plagiarism" incidents in the game industry were abundant. Except for a few cases with solid evidence, most "plagiarism" cases ended inconclusively.

This wasn't entirely due to inadequate laws but also because the boundary between plagiarism and inspiration was inherently difficult to define.

Even the famous "Monument Valley" was accused of excessively borrowing (plagiarizing) from "Echochrome."

Therefore, "borrowing," while sounding bad, could be framed as "inheritance" or "tribute."

In this parallel world, people had a stronger awareness of copyright and anti-plagiarism, but it was still easy to infringe and hard to defend rights. Suits took a long time, evidence collection was challenging, and the cost in time and money was high, often leading to the plaintiff's gains being far less than the cost.

As a result, some "plagiarism" cases in this parallel world ended inconclusively.

Alex reviewed the content of "Moon Defense." The artistic resources and music were all revamped, leaving no trace of "Plants vs. Zombies."

Regarding game mechanics, although similar to "Plants vs. Zombies," the designer had clearly rewritten the design documents from scratch, making modifications to avoid legal risks.

It seemed that Fly Entertainment was a habitual offender, knowing exactly where the legal boundaries lay and perfectly playing within the gray areas.

Alex knew that suing them would garner public support but likely wouldn't result in much benefit.

...

However, Alex wasn't completely helpless. He had anticipated this scenario.

Alex downloaded the game and played through the first two levels of "Moon Defense."

"No need to worry, this game won't succeed," Alex said.

"Really? Why?" Amy asked.

Alex returned the phone to Amy, "Play it yourself, and you'll understand."

"Not going to succeed? Are you sure?" Jessica frowned.

Lily Emerson also nodded, "Yes, manager, the game's graphics are quite good, and it's free."

Alex confidently replied, "I'm sure it won't succeed."

Paul hesitated, "So, manager, should we still leave bad reviews?"

Alex smiled, "Do as you please."

With that, Alex headed upstairs.

"Manager, wait! You haven't explained why this game won't succeed!" Amy called out.

Alex turned and said, "I need to plan the new game. As a designer, you should start making your own judgments."

Alex went upstairs.

Amy pouted and started playing "Moon Defense."

She wondered why Alex was so sure that "Moon Defense" wouldn't succeed.

The others were also curious.

Paul wondered, "The manager seemed so confident. How does he know the game won't succeed?"

Jessica said, "Maybe it's because of the ratings. Look, everyone is boycotting this game. With such a bad reputation, how many people will play it even if it's free?"

Another boy said, "It might be due to the monetization strategy. The manager didn't use ads for 'Plants vs. Zombies,' so he must have his reasons."

Paul hesitated, "So, should we still leave bad reviews?"

Jessica said, "Of course! Let's go leave bad reviews and then uninstall the game!"

Amy thought their points were valid but felt there must be another reason behind Alex's confidence.

Amy decided to play "Moon Defense."

In the first level, the game guided players to set up energy supply stations and then install a machine gun turret to fend off the attacking aliens.

In the second level, new alien species appeared, unlocking new defence facilities.

In the third level, the game continued to unlock new features...

Amy played through the levels; by the third level, she already wanted to uninstall the game.

It felt too much like "Plants vs. Zombies," making Amy feel like she was playing a redundant second run of the adventure mode, with many elements she had long grown tired of.

"Strange, why does this game, despite being similar to 'Plants vs. Zombies' and of decent quality, make me not want to continue playing..."

Amy pondered deeply.