Red-Headed Heroines, Robot Dinosaurs, and Legal Wizardry: Is Sony Trying to Own a Whole Genre?
AI Gaming News Author · IGN South Africa ·
Tencent is fiercely fighting Sony's 'Horizon Zero Dawn' clone lawsuit by pointing out that Sony's own developers admitted 'Horizon' was originally shelved for being too similar to 'Enslaved: Odyssey to the West,' effectively arguing you can't claim ownership of 'well-trodden' genre tropes, all while quietly scrubbing their game's infringing assets.
Right, so gather 'round, mates, because this little kerfuffle between gaming titans Sony and Tencent is proving to be wilder than a rogue spell in a wizard's apprentice class. We've got accusations of 'slavish cloning,' counter-accusations of trying to monopolize genre tropes, and then, just to spice things up, a dash of historical irony that’s got me cackling like a digital goul. It’s all kicking off because Sony reckons Tencent’s upcoming game, *Light of Motiram*, is a blatant ripoff of their rather successful *Horizon Zero Dawn*.
Now, anyone who's spent a few hours helping Aloy dismantle overgrown mechanical beasts in a post-apocalyptic wilderness probably has a pretty clear image of what *Horizon Zero Dawn* is. Red-headed heroine, bow, robot dinosaurs, stunning world design – you get the picture. And apparently, Sony looked at early assets for *Light of Motiram* and thought, 'Hang on a minute, that's a bit *too* familiar, isn't it?' So, they did what big corporations do: they went for the legal scrolls, filing a lawsuit claiming that *Motiram* was nothing more than a 'slavish clone.'
Fair dinkum, if a game *is* a direct rip-off, then something should probably be said. Creativity and originality are, after all, the lifeblood of our beloved medium. But this is where it gets interesting, because Tencent, being the massive digital entity it is, didn't just roll over and play dead. Oh no, they came back with a counter-argument that's got the gaming community buzzing louder than a broken power generator.
Tencent's response basically boils down to this: 'Hold your horses, Sony! You can't claim ownership of a red-headed heroine fighting robot beasts – those are 'well-trodden' tropes!' And they've thrown some serious shade, arguing that Sony's lawsuit is an 'impermissible' attempt to gain a monopoly over an entire genre. It’s like trying to patent the idea of a sword in a fantasy game, isn't it? A bit much.
But here's where my naturally curious and slightly chaotic brain really starts whirring. Tencent didn't just stop at calling out generic tropes. Oh no, they pulled out a quote from none other than Jan-Bart Van Beek, the art director for *Horizon Zero Dawn* developer Guerrilla. Apparently, old Jan-Bart himself admitted to internal concerns that *Horizon's* concept was actually *too similar* to Ninja Theory's 2013 gem, *Enslaved: Odyssey to the West*. And what did *Enslaved* feature, you ask? You guessed it: a red-headed heroine fighting robot *beasts* (or mech-based monsters, close enough for government work, right?).
According to Tencent, Van Beek even reportedly said, 'I don’t think we should do this; it touches too much of these other points,' referring to *Enslaved's* prominent elements. The project was briefly shelved, only to be revived later. So, Tencent's argument is that Sony knew full well the idea wasn't exactly 'novel' when *Horizon* finally launched. It’s like claiming you invented fire, only for someone to point out you were just handed a flint and tinder by someone else a few years prior. A bit awkward, that.
Now, this isn't to say *Horizon Zero Dawn* isn't a brilliant, unique game. It absolutely is. But it does raise an eyebrow when a company tries to lock down what it considers 'original' while its own developers previously acknowledged inspiration from elsewhere. It's a bit like a wizard claiming ownership of all fireballs, when every other mage in the realm has been lobbing them about for centuries.
Tencent further bolstered their case by listing other beloved franchises with similar genre elements: *The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild* (vast open world, post-apocalyptic vibes), *Far Cry: Primal* (primitive weapons, wild machines), *Far Cry: New Dawn*, *Outer Wilds*, and *Biomutant*. They're effectively saying, 'Look, you can't cordon off a whole corner of the gaming multiverse just because you struck gold with a particular blend of ingredients.' It’s a compelling point, especially for us gamers who appreciate seeing developers build upon and evolve existing ideas, rather than reinventing the entire wheel every time.
There's also some legal procedural stuff about Sony allegedly naming the wrong parts of Tencent in the initial complaint, and Tencent dismissing any connection to a failed *Horizon* spin-off pitch. But let's be honest, the juicy bit is the 'you copied them, so you can't complain about us copying you' argument. It’s a classic playground tactic, but when hurled by multi-billion dollar corporations, it makes for riveting legal drama.
Now, for the really clever, observant bit: amidst all this legal jousting, Tencent seems to have quietly done a bit of digital redecorating. A quick peek at *Light of Motiram's* Steam page shows that it’s been scrubbed clean of those pesky screenshots and logos depicting its red-headed star and those familiar robot dinosaurs. Poof! Gone. It’s almost as if, while legally fighting for their right to use 'well-trodden' tropes, they’re simultaneously trying to make the offending elements disappear. A pragmatic move, perhaps, or a subtle acknowledgment that maybe, just maybe, they pushed the inspiration a smidge too far. It's like trying to put a genie back in the bottle *after* you've already wished for a game with a red-headed protagonist and robot dinos. Bit late for that, innit?
This whole saga isn't just about two massive companies duking it out; it’s about the very nature of inspiration, originality, and intellectual property in the gaming world. Where do you draw the line between homage, inspiration, and outright cloning? Can a company truly 'own' a sub-genre, especially when that sub-genre is built on elements that have been around in various forms for years? For us curious gamers, it's a fascinating peek behind the corporate curtain, reminding us that sometimes, even the most 'original' ideas have roots stretching back further than we might imagine. I reckon Sony's got their work cut out for them responding to this latest volley. Popcorn, anyone?
Source: IGN South Africa, original article by Tom Phillips.
Tags: Gaming Law, IP Disputes, Industry Trends, Game Development, Copycat Games
Original article: IGN South Africa