Zevvion

As someone who doesn't play nor watch someone play Siege, what exactly did these people do to warrant bans? I know from other games people usually cry foul enforcement when they have been banned saying they did nothing wrong, only for it to surface they were cheating/being absurdly racist/sexist and the ban being completely justified.

If you're telling me people are being banned in Siege for spouting racial slurs, then I'd say these bans are completely valid for example. You don't get to be a dick in social context and demand no repercussions to fall on your person.

This really makes me scratch my head. You're prepared to defend PUBG and see the truth in it with this statement, yet you can't do that for Fortnite. What does 'was it supposed to be the first shooter ever' even mean? Was Fortnite supposed to be the first Battle Royale game ever? No. Even the devs have said so, so why is this different? Because you're triggered by Fortnite's success? PUBG is a shooter, fact. Saying it is that and nothing else is reductive, agreed. Fortnite is a Battle Royale game, for all intents and purposes. Saying it is that and nothing else is... completely valid and not at all hypocritical because man do we hate Fortnite up in here.

Tell me specifically which game(s) PUBG stole from and how, and back up said rip-off claim(s) by demonstrating a direct link between PUBG and said game(s) on par with the Fortnite devs' admission that their BR mode exists because they "love Battle Royale games like PUBG". Until you can do that, the rip-off claims you are making of PUBG are not even in the same ballpark as the cited, specific, undisputed, direct aping of PUBG by Fortnite.

ARMA, Minecraft Battle Royale mods. In case you didn't know PUBG was originally a mod for ARMA, now you do, that is where all of its mechanical gameplay comes from. Completely copied. In case you want to argue the mode itself was not inspired by other Battle Royale modes already out, then I honestly don't know what to tell you. I guess absent of Epic's admittance they liked PUBG, Fortnite would have been completely unique too.

I don't necessarily think Fortnite "should fail" or anything (although it's worth noting that it WAS failing before it aped PUBG), and good on them for recognizing an emerging genre and finding a spot in it.

Is it also worth noting that since Fortnite has arisen, PUBG has been on the decline? Or does that not fit the narrative you want to prevail?

I don't find it particularly "silly" to have these sorts of discussions, because perhaps they make people consider opting for the defining game instead of its bargain-bin imitation.

Your arguments make a whole lot more sense when it's apparent you're fanboying PUBG. You mean to tell me you only play the defining games of any genre? If that is true, that does not give you the self-righteous position you think you hold. 'Pf, only the original for me' is pretty pretentious. Reminds me of entitled iPhone users taking their dumps on anyone who chooses a different platform. Not to mention since Fortnite outperforms PUBG in technical performance and anti-cheating measures, calling Fortnite the 'bargain-bin' product of the two is very insincere.

Let me ask you something: what really is the problem here? If you want PUBG to be the best game it can be, then you should be grateful for Fortnite's existence as it puts pressure on PU to actually make PUBG a better game now. If they don't adapt and things continue the way they are going then PUBG will die off and Fortnite will become even more popular.

Let me ask you something. Why does gameplay not matter? If we accept that PUBG copying a game mode is OK because it resulted in popularity, then why is its usage of completely copied gameplay, in its shooter mechanics that was already popularized by other games not by the same token a 'bad thing'?

No one is saying you should like Fortnite, but opposing it is another thing entirely. It seems to me that the people that oppose Fortnite in this thread are very selective with their criteria on what is and isn't okay to make sure they arrive at the conclusion that PUBG is cool and Fortnite is not.

I'd wager if Fortnite was less popular than PUBG, no one here would make the same arguments. But because it is steamrolling and PUBG is tapering off, it is an issue. Fortnite's existence can only be seen as a good thing, even if you dislike playing Fortnite and love PUBG. It forces PUBG to become better.

Please don't make an argument that me not having played the game but only watched it means I cannot comment on the genre it is operating in. Please don't be that person. For one thing, it is a non-sensical argument. 'PUBG plays exactly like Ridge Racer'. Haven't played Ridge Racer? Well then, I guess you can't tell me I'm wrong. Also, there are people with thousands more hours in both PUBG and Fortnite than you that say the games don't play the same at all. So I guess you're 2 for 2 wrong on your argumentation here.

Here is how the reality works: I have watched a fair amount of both and they don't play the same. PUBG is more tactical, Fortnite is more skill-based and mobile. I can say this based on what I've seen. If you are not satisfied with that, then I invite you to listen to the top PUBG players who have played Fortnite and the top Fortnite players who have played PUBG who say the exact same thing: they're different.

The only argument you're making here is that popularity of a game clears the 'rip-off' nature of it you attribute it to. By that logic, Fortnite is in the clear, as it took PUBG and made it even more popular. In fact, I could argue PUBG is just a lightning strike. It has horrible developer support, which is why the player base is dropping off and some of them are moving to Fortnite. So if you want to argue PUBG is OK because it took an existing concept but popularized it where other games failed in that, we can say Fortnite is OK because it took an existing concept and actually built a community around it that it caters to, whereas PUBG fails in that.

By the same token, it's easy to counter your argument and say PUBG is not popular because of PUBG, it is popular because of the shooters that came before it that it blatantly copied and merely added a Battle Royale concept to it, which was invented elsewhere. The problem is that you're putting a lot of special 'rules' in place to arrive to the conclusion that PUBG is cool and Fortnite is a rip-off. Everything that PUBG rips-off 'doesn't count because of X' and everything Fortnite is doing that is unique 'doesn't count because of Y'.

In the end, this is the same argument we had about DOOM and Wolfenstein years back. It's the same argument we had about Medal of Honor and Call of Duty, it's the same argument we had about Dark Souls and Nioh, and it is the same argument we had about League of Legends and Dota. All these arguments have one thing in common: some people realize it is an incredibly silly argument to have while it is happening and all people realize it is a silly argument years after the fact.

I'll also remind you that this discussion is being had with the side-notion that Fortnite should be disliked and perhaps fail because of its similarities to PUBG. If we can't find common ground here that notion is silly and this criticism of Fortnite is, historically, pretty silly, then we will simply not see eye to eye on this.

The gameplay is basically the same? I really doubt you've played Fortnite.

Watch like 30 seconds of this and tell me it is identical gameplay to PUBG. Come on now.

If the sum of your argument for why Fortnite 'ripped off' PUBG really is: 'Yeah, but you drop on the map somewhere and have to fight to be the last person standing which is similar', then we can discount PUBG immediately as the most ripoff game ever. It features guns and you have to shoot people, literally thousands of games before it did that. It features a last man standing game mode, literally hundreds of games before it did that. It features a Battle Royale mode, other games have done that too. Which by the way started with mods for Minecraft since you asked.

If you really want to look for similarities in Fortnite and refuse to acknowledge the things that make it undeniably unique, then we can do the same to PUBG and it is a generic mess of a game in that comparison.

And indeed, I said it was more entertaining. Not better. The two words are not the same. Fortnite entertains more people than PUBG does. It pretty much always beats PUBG on Twitch (entertainment) when I look at the directory. It's not uncommon for Fortnite to have 4x the numbers that PUBG does. Though now that I think about it, it isn't that hard to make a case for Fortnite to be considered better. The dev support it gets is better, the updates it receives with the transparency and frequency of them are better. Anti-cheating measures are better. It runs better. It doesn't feel like a mod either.

That's not me making an argument that you shouldn't like PUBG. I don't play either game, I like playing Destiny 2, one that lacks in all above mentioned areas and many others. But this entire notion that Fortnite is trash if it didn't 'rip off' another game (which itself ripped other games off) and silently hoping it will fail is just lame and hypocritical. Not to mention a weird stance for any serious gamer to have considering all their favorite games are likely to be 'rip off's' too.

I'm not sure if it would be. Maybe I am reading to much into OP's opinion, but I think the implied caveat here is that the game is a continuous live-game. I don't know if Vermintide 2 is that?

I didn't say Fortnite was better, I said it was more popular. I don't play Fortnite myself, I have no interest in playing these types of games. I do like watching them though. Do you ever watch high level Fortnite play? Can you honestly tell me that looks like PUBG in any way? It really doesn't. It is only the underlying concept that is the same, the Battle Royale mode, which existed before PUBG. The actual gameplay could not possibly be more different between both games.

I'm having a hard time reading what you wrote here and you not realizing you're not making PUBG's case in this argument at all. You're admitting PUBG did not invent the Battle Royale mode we are talking about, but you're saying it popularized it. So you admit that PUBG also completely ripped other games off, but because the game became popular that is okay.

Alright, well, Fortnite is bigger than PUBG at the moment. They took their Battle Royale mode and made it even more entertaining. So why is one right and the other isn't? You may only popularize something once? In that case why does PUBG exist at all? Under the Battle Royale mode it is clearly still a shooter, which have been popularized many times. PUBG has no single thing that makes it unique either, whereas Fortnite undeniably does.

You're calling Fortnite 'failed' if it didn't succeed by adapting... okay, confusing. PUBG would have failed if it didn't succeed by taking over existing game concepts either. PUBG would have failed if the game it was built on did not exist.

You're giving one-sided arguments here. PUBG is guilty of everything you accuse Fortnite being guilty of. On top you end your argument by saying you prefer innovation over imitation, in which PUBG compares unfavorably to Fortnite, since it only invented one single thing (circle) in an otherwise completely imitated game mode. Whereas Fortnite has actually innovated in creating builder-combat, which no other game does.

Gone were the days, I thought, where we called games 'ripoffs' because they operate in the same genre as another game. League of Legends a ripoff from Dota, Heroes of the Storm a ripoff from both, Hearthstone a ripoff from Magic, Overwatch a ripoff from TeamFortress, and on and on it goes.

You're not making much sense in follow up comments in this thread. You've said things like:

I like Rainbow Six Siege and it's borrowing some stuff from Counter Strike and SWAT, but it's definitely its own game with its own mechanics and ideas.

As if to imply Fortnite is not its own game. You go watch high level play of Fortnite and tell me it looks identical to PUBG. In fact, is there even a combat-builder game? Where you use high speed building to defeat opponents? I haven't heard of any. PUBG certainly doesn't do any of it.