Re:Why Do Fads Fade? The Inevitable Death Of Flappy Bird
by watwut on Friday December 08, 2017 @01:52PM
(#15880924)
I never played Piou Piou vs Cactus and have no idea about exact differences. Flappy Bird could not possibly be exact clone down to details about speed, difficulty, how easy it is to start new round, level generation etc. It was done too fast for that and has clearly different graphics. Flappy using familiar popular Nintendo look might have been factor in why people liked it. People are emotionally attached to that plumber.
It does not matter who was first nor who of the two games is better. There is too much luck involved, there was social network effect in play and playstore is not meritocracy.
However, most flappy clones that popup are not fun to play are not fun to play nor addictive.
1.) I have no idea what differences are. It is perfectly possible Piou Piou is more fun.
2.) I suggest you download some and play. Did you played for 20 minutes, did they got you angry while you simultaneously are still hitting "next"? It is safe to guess that not, which is why they did not replaced it.
Some were too slow and no challenge. Others had elaborate long die animation that took you out of mood to continue. Yet others were ugly or reacted slowly to your touches. Just like millions tetris clones out there, despite being theoretically same game, they are not fun.
3.) Pretty similar in concepts.
4.) What about them? All the kids want fidget spinner and dont care about brand. However, all fidget spinner turn well. Clones that don't turn well eventually don't sell and if the stores routinely selled them, fidget spinners would die much sooner. Fidget spinners existed long before everyone discovered them this summer.
> So the question is, why and how to the originals succeed? Is it just luck? First mover advantage? Or is it something else?
You yourself claimed Flappy Bird was not original. Piou Piou had same concept and was first. It is not that originals succeed. It is that randomly once in a while someone succeed. Fidget spinner copies are selling. In flappy bird case, most of clones are bad and thus popularity died with flappy bird being pulled from stores.
It does not matter who was first nor who of the two games is better. There is too much luck involved, there was social network effect in play and playstore is not meritocracy.
However, most flappy clones that popup are not fun to play are not fun to play nor addictive.
1.) I have no idea what differences are. It is perfectly possible Piou Piou is more fun.
2.) I suggest you download some and play. Did you played for 20 minutes, did they got you angry while you simultaneously are still hitting "next"? It is safe to guess that not, which is why they did not replaced it.
Some were too slow and no challenge. Others had elaborate long die animation that took you out of mood to continue. Yet others were ugly or reacted slowly to your touches. Just like millions tetris clones out there, despite being theoretically same game, they are not fun.
3.) Pretty similar in concepts.
4.) What about them? All the kids want fidget spinner and dont care about brand. However, all fidget spinner turn well. Clones that don't turn well eventually don't sell and if the stores routinely selled them, fidget spinners would die much sooner. Fidget spinners existed long before everyone discovered them this summer.
> So the question is, why and how to the originals succeed? Is it just luck? First mover advantage? Or is it something else?
You yourself claimed Flappy Bird was not original. Piou Piou had same concept and was first. It is not that originals succeed. It is that randomly once in a while someone succeed. Fidget spinner copies are selling. In flappy bird case, most of clones are bad and thus popularity died with flappy bird being pulled from stores.