This blog post analyzes the reality where imitation and promotion competition take precedence over originality in the mobile game market and explores ways to change this.
Anyone with a smartphone has likely encountered mobile games at least once. These games have become deeply embedded in our daily lives, establishing themselves as a primary entertainment medium for utilizing brief moments of free time. Thanks to their simple gameplay and accessibility anytime, anywhere, mobile games are now popular across diverse demographics, no longer limited to specific age groups or dedicated gamers. However, many people enjoy these games without knowing who developed them. Users simply choose and play the games that interest them most from the multitude of similar offerings, and it’s true that awareness of ownership and patents related to mobile games is weak.
Among these, Anipang is a popular game that virtually every South Korean has likely heard of at least once. Yet, many people probably don’t know SundayToz, the company that developed Anipang. This is because ownership and patents are not considered particularly important in the mobile game market. Among existing mobile games, many share a similar format to Anipang. Among these, Bejeweled by the overseas company PopCap Games was released before Anipang. Nevertheless, Anipang gained popularity first through its partnership with KakaoTalk, and in Korea, it is often called a copycat of Bejeweled.
Looking at examples from other markets, the mobile phone market places great importance on ownership and patents to prevent such situations. This is why people are very familiar with companies like Samsung and Apple. Samsung and Apple, protected by ownership and patents, engage in endless development and competition, advancing the quality and functionality of phones every year. In contrast, in the mobile game market, without the protection of ownership and patents, companies simply imitate each other, focusing only on who can attract more users to their game.
Why does this situation persist? Why do so many companies release imitations of existing games instead of developing their own original titles? Numerous mobile games have sparked crazes in Korea. Games like Anipang and Dragonflights, among others, once gained immense popularity, becoming major topics of discussion. However, over time, that popularity naturally faded. Unlike computer games, mobile games tend to have relatively short-lived crazes.
This phenomenon is closely tied to the business model of mobile game developers. The mobile game market emphasizes rapidly changing trends and short-cycle profit generation. Therefore, companies choose strategies that mimic existing popular games for short-term profits rather than investing resources long-term. Many mobile game development companies avoid investing significant time and money into new games with uncertain success, instead releasing clones of currently popular games. The content is the same, but they repackage it with a different shell to promote the product, aiming to attract public popularity and make money.
Furthermore, tolerance for these similar games is high among users. Familiar game mechanics and interfaces make it easy to accept new games, and as a result, users don’t notice the differences between similar games very much. As a consequence of this phenomenon, users prefer games from the most familiar companies under the limited choices available in the mobile game market. While familiarity isn’t the sole criterion for choosing a game, it’s true that games from large corporations with formidable capital power feel more familiar to us.
Even if a mobile game company develops and releases an original, new game, if a large corporation invests heavily in promoting a similar game, people will naturally gravitate towards it. Consider the overseas game Candy Crush Saga as one example. Candy Crush Saga is a game well-known to puzzle enthusiasts, and its content is nearly identical to Anipang 2. Released first overseas, Candy Crush Saga gained immense popularity, and this popularity gradually spread to Korea. Around the time this type of game began gaining traction in Korea, Anipang 2 was released and heavily promoted. The public, unfamiliar with Candy Crush Saga, perceived the newly introduced Anipang 2 as an original, innovative game, propelling it to great popularity.
This phenomenon ultimately creates an environment where companies find it difficult to protect ownership rights for the games they develop. This dampens the motivation to develop original and new games, threatening market diversity in the long term and potentially hindering the growth of the game industry. In conclusion, the mobile game market, where promotional competition takes precedence over content competition, is hindering market development and stifling the growth of new companies.
If large corporations can freely appropriate the originality of small businesses without regulation, large companies will continue to grow while small businesses continue to decline. Ultimately, small businesses will be forced out of the market along with their originality, and large corporations will see their growth slow as they run out of games to imitate. Meanwhile, other markets protect the innovative products of small companies with patents, preventing large corporations from stealing that creativity. This creates an environment where companies can compete fairly in the market, driving the development of the entire market.
The concepts of ownership and patents are also crucial for the development of the mobile game market. Ownership and patents do not merely protect the growth of small businesses; they also incentivize large corporations to develop original games to maintain their position. Furthermore, the protection of ownership and patents will encourage all companies in the mobile game market to provide users with more fun and original games, thereby driving market development.
Therefore, establishing ownership is essential for developing the market and fostering corporate growth. Originality is a form of property, and this property must be protected from the powerful. In a mobile game market dominated by the powerful, the concepts of ownership and patents must be clearly established. Recognizing ownership rights provides incentives not only for small businesses but for many companies to develop original games. This can significantly contribute not only to corporate growth but also to the development of the entire market.
Furthermore, the role of the government and relevant agencies is crucial in supporting this. It is necessary to strengthen legal systems to clarify the concepts of ownership and patents, and to impose strong sanctions on companies that violate them. Such proactive government intervention can help create a fair competitive environment, protect innovative ideas, and ultimately contribute to strengthening competitiveness in the global market.
