Hacker News Reader

" A common algorithm for succeeding in the App Store is take Popular App A from 2009 and re-implement it with new graphics and perhaps an additional gameplay mechanic and release it as Hopeful Popular App B in 2011."

Not disagreeing with you, but isn't this the common algorithm for most things? I can think of TV Shows, movies, books, websites etc. that use the same algorithm.

I think mimicry exists across various mediums, but the starkness of it on the App Store is pretty intriguing. Most times there's not even a new gameplay mechanic, just new artwork and a new name.

There are actually a number of those algorithms, often it is either a combination of two existing things (G+ is like Facebook but with asymetric relationships like Twitter); a twist on something that already exist (Firefly is a western but with an oppressive government set in space); or (but mostly with physical things) something that is not as good as what was previously but ordinary people can afford it (indoor plumbing which is not as good as servants preparing your bath, but much much cheaper or the Ford T).

Sometimes it is a mixture of these.

You might want to look for a more current and better example.

PapiJump was a free game and it came out in summer 2008. Later the developer released PapiJump Plus, a paid version of the game. It never was all that successful in the grand scheme of things, at least compared to Doodle Jump. Doodle Jump is a clone that came out one year later. It cost money from the start and it felt a lot more like a sequel than a straight up clone.

All gamers love sequels. All gamers love variations on a theme. The story of PapiJump and Doodle Jump is not in any way surprising and, I think, also not in any way something that defines the whole iOS ecosystem.

Agreed. I've more or less stopped buying any new iOS apps. Having had an iPhone for just under three years now, I've basically found a solution for anything I care about using my phone for. However, I've noticed that I regularly hear about a "great new app" from newer iOS users, but it turns out to be some recycled version of an app/game I already have.

'Just realized I'm a hipster iOS user.

I recently bought a game which I (and friends) implemented versions of in high school... in the early 80s. :-)

Which one?

Hard Lines.

(I saw some article about problems with a version; just shows that all advertisement is good...)

> "The mentality that you need an original, unique idea to succeed ...is rubbish."

I don't know whether to make an Electronic Arts, Activision or Zynga joke here.Suffice to say: you're absolutely right in a business sense and that's a damn shame.

Why shame? We're not really talking about endless repetition, we're talking about actual improvements, however minute, and changes that make the game playable on new iOS versions/device.

It is great if you can make something new, but if you can't, and have a good idea on how to improve something old, I say go for it. We need that too.

The problem of EA/Activision/Zynga is that they take ideas, make almost no improvements, and then use their marketing power to come on top anyway.

The shame is that the approach works almost independent of whether the improvements are there are not. The success of knock-offs seems to have much more to do with marketing.