It says in the article that he explicitly stated it was a clone, so yeah. only bad thing was being kinda a jerk when asked to take it down

Exactly. It feels more like making a snake clone with fun features. Second guy learned some stuff, but was a dick about it. Ultimately no one was hurt tho and this doesn’t seem like a big deal

But games and art aren’t exactly like that. People train by copying great art, and code and games especially are iterative. It’s not like he took a super useful thing and made millions by claiming he invented it. He took a game, made a clone and added features, admitting it was a clone. Like snake and pong and brickbreaker.

Maybe I’m bad at itch.io but it looks like they are both free. Lemme offer another analogy.

Your and your friend have sandwhich parties and one day you compare notes. Your friend’s sandwich is really good, so you make it yourself and add some things. Now you really like the sandwich so you throw a sandwhcih party with the new sandwich and tell everyone it’s based on your friend’s sandwich.

Then your friend asks why you coppied his sandwich and you’re a jerk about.

That’s how this reads to me

Guess I just don’t understand how it screws the other guy

I feel like it matters that he’s not selling it though… He liked the idea, added features he liked and is sharing what he made. He also mentions that it’s a clone. He sounds like a jerk, but like…

Because I am Billgamesh, king of Uruk, the walled city