OL wrote: Segata Sanshiro Jr. wrote:Anything with bloom lighting and a minimalist concept doesn't make it an ico knock off, this isn't even the same palette. Ico is a good early example of a lot of things, but just because a game uses one or two concepts from it that doesn't make it a knockoff. Is every platformer with a scrolling background a mario knockoff? I just mention it because people go for games like Lost in shadow and surprisingly rain for being knockoffs but they do a lot to be different especially when it comes to gameplay.
I didn't say "knockoff" even once. That automatically has negative connotations. I said "clone," which isn't a literal term; it's simply used as a means of description and/or possible inspiration, and it isn't meant as an insult in the least. As steeped in videogames as you are, I'd think you'd know that. Darksiders, for example, is a Zelda-clone. Art of Fighting, when it first came about, was a Street Fighter-clone. Saint's Row was a GTA-clone at first. These aren't insults; they're reference points to describe the games in question. The word "clone" has been used like that for years upon years in gaming circles. And yes, Rain appeared to be an Ico-clone when it was first revealed.
You reacted like I was putting Rain down, even though my post was glowingly positive.
I understand the distinction, but you seemed negative about it before, even the first few words "This no longer looks like
just an Ico-clone to me." So when it did look like an Ico clone, were you not willing to play it? If you weren't, doesn't that imply some kind of negative?
Intent aside, I don't see it as an Ico clone anyway and thats the real point I was trying to make. Just replace my "negative" sounding "knockoff" with "clone" and then answer the question.