Check me out....Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing, Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing.
My Gaming PC: MSI Trident 3 - i7-10700F - RTX 4060 8GB - 32GB DDR4 - 1TB M.2SSD
played fortnite's battle royal, and it is pretty much exactly the same as PUBG.
Start in some island where you mess around for 2 minutes, ride the lightning (instead of plane) to an island and drop where you want to get loot/kill.
It's only difference is the crafting/base building.
Fortnite's pvp felt buggy as hell too.
And I'm sure Call of duty didn't copy Medal of Honor at all.
Except early access is universal nomenclature these days. It's a common release platform that is widely discussed and criticized.
Whereas I can't recall the phrase "early alpha" being used with any regularity. That stage of development is rarely discussed by the public.
"Paying To Be An Alpha-Tester" just doesn't roll off the tongue like Early Access does.
Because they are the only company that does it right?
Star Citizen, Everquest Next/Landmark, WoW at one point for guaranteed access to MoP Beta, Subnautica, Ark and the god knows how many MMOs that are popping up on EA or Kickstarter that guarantee beta/alpha for backing a certain amount.
This kind of shit has been happening long before PUBG.
How in the world is it sketchy? The game mode has existed for a long time now. I guess the WWE should sue PUBG for ripping off Royal Rumble amirite? King of the Hill / Battle Royale has been around long before PUBG. It existed in H1Z1 long before PUBG. I don't care if the guy that started up PUBG helped bring it about in H1Z1. The fact is, is that its in that game and was before PUBG.
I wish the streamers would bail from PUBG so it would go away already.
"There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
"The bit about hardcore players not always caring about the long term interests of the game is spot on." -- Ghostcrawler
"Do you want a game with no casuals so about 500 players?"
#1. The dude said alpha, not beta.
#2. He said the wording, not the practice of it. Call it Early Access and be done with it.
#3. EQN never had a pay-for-entry alpha. Landmark did indeed. They were 2 entirely diff games.
#4. See #2.
- - - Updated - - -
There definitely isn't. If there was, PUBG wouldn't exist as a battle royale game. CoD / Battlefield / CS wouldnt exist. WoW wouldn't exist. You are talking about patenting / copyrighting genres. It will never happen. So these PUBG guys are nothing but whinging cunts at this point.
good things pubg isnt a copy of that arma mod
Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
How about we put all the Battle Royale games into a room and let them fight it out until only one is left?
"There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
"The bit about hardcore players not always caring about the long term interests of the game is spot on." -- Ghostcrawler
"Do you want a game with no casuals so about 500 players?"
1. Alpha/Beta. You are still paying for a product that is in a stage of development. So yes paying for a Beta is still paying for a product in the stages of development that can range from early to late. Early Access can refer to either stage.
2. Wasn't debating that.
3. That's why I said both. I wasn't so sure on which one charged for entry or that it was both so admittedly I guessed. Thank you for clarifying it for me.
Thread title is pretty misleading. The reason PUBG devs Bluehole are looking into taking action over this is because of their relationship with Epic Games. PUBG uses Unreal Engine which is owned and maintained by Epic. Obviously PUBG Dev's have essentially done the hard work in getting the game working in engine and they've also liased with Epic off and on for technical issues. Then Epic comes along with Fortnite using the same engine, gameplay that's pretty much 1 for 1 and even going so far as to name drop PUBG in their advertising of it.
Notice how Bluehole has no issues with GTA doing their own Battle Royale? It's not that they care about other people replicating the game mode. It's the fact that Epic may have literally picked up technical pointers from them building PUBG and incorporated them into Fortnite and the fact that Epic refers to PUBG a lot in their advertising of the mode. If Rockstar was advertising Motor Wars as being just like PUBG then they might get some flak too.
Hypocrisy.
They copied H1Z1 and that was OK
I'd be down for this.
- - - Updated - - -
And good luck taking any form of action. They don't own the genre. They have no say in how Epic designed the mode for Fortnite.
If Bluehole want to waste their own time and money going after the company that not only supplies them the game engine but at the same time tarnishing their own reputation then go for it. The case would be laughed out of court in an instant.
If anything Epic have the high ground here because they could just stop them using Unreal 4. Game companies have been building games that are inspired by others for ages. It's perfectly normal that Fortnite would create a game mode inspired by a game that right now is a success.
And you've never seen companies take digs at each other in advertising? Rift did it towards WoW and Sega and Nintendo absolutely went after each other in the 90s in fun ways.
Last edited by Eleccybubb; 2017-09-25 at 01:12 PM.