Thank you for your comment. I wanted to add that credit should indeed be given where it's due and that while I didn’t mention Threes in my original post, it has played a significant role in 2048’s existence. Threes is credited on the play2048.co site (and now also on GitHub), and I’ve always tried to acknowledge its influence.
That said, I think there’s a balance to strike. As I mentioned before, I created 2048 before I became aware of Threes, and while it’s important to credit inspiration, I’m not convinced that every creative project needs to trace back every indirect influence. 2048 began as a small experiment without any intent of gaining popularity, and it grew into something distinct, shaped by the viral spread and its community of its open-source variations.
I understand the value of recognizing origins, but I also believe 2048 has developed its own identity over time. I appreciate the feedback, and I’m always open to improving where needed. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Humans are incapable of absolutely original thought - whether our inspirations are conscious, sub-conscious or fabricated.
Wordle was just...
DropBox was just...
the iPhone was just...
Modern movies are just...
Don't allow others to dismiss your work. They are jealous they didn't do it first - which begs the question - if it was _just_.... then why didn't _they_ do it?
I was originally frustrated with your game and jealous of you for awhile, too.
I feel like this is a bit misleading. You say you weren’t aware of Threes at all when you made 2048, which may be technically true, but then you should probably clarify that 2048 was a clone of 1024 which was a clone of Threes. And this all happened within around a month of when Threes released… to the point where many people started accusing Threes of being a clone of 2048.
It seems like you are piling on just to pile on, not simply "pointing out the origin". There's already 52 matches for "Threes" on this submission. I think we get it. The author of has added credits to Threes. You won!
If this was your only comment, I wouldn't have said anything. But you have 5 (now 6!) separate comment chains going on about Threes. In addition to the other 5 top-level comments, and ~20 replies that talk about Threes. All saying the same stuff.
I didn't post any top level comments, I'm only correcting people who I see posting misinformation. Isn't the point of Hacker News for people to talk about things they have expertise in? This happens to be a situation I know a lot about since I was also a mobile puzzle game developer at the same time this happened.
>Isn't the point of Hacker News for people to talk about things they have expertise in?
No. Although that certainly can help, it's not the main point.
From the guidelines: "If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."
Seeing the exact same thing posted about Threes in over half of the comments here is the opposite of gratifying one's intellectual curiosity. It's boring. Especially when the comment is just a slight rephrasing of a comment that's already been posted several times (or worse, solely a link to your own comment elsewhere in the submission).
Oh come on, you're not really going to claim that my comment where I linked to my other comment is the problem, vs the person who initially told me "Let it go, Matt.".
And for the record my initial comment was bringing up new information anyway, since I was the first and only person to point out that OP cloned 1024 rather than Threes directly.
Please don't do this. 13 comments on this is too much, and (as is typical) they've gotten progressively more off-topic and flamewarrish.
When people start arguing about what they did or didn't say, with swipes like "Oh come on," it's clear that curious conversation was left behind quite a while ago and it's time to stop.
I get why you'd want to get rid of this thread, but surely the problem was caused the much earlier comment from doppp that said "Let it go, Matt". From what I've seen in the past, you would usually remove that kind of personalized negative response, but not in this case?
I hear you, but different people draw the what-caused-it line completely differently—it basically always feels like the other person started it and did worse (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). It's like the old adage "The fight started when he hit me back."
The reason I replied to you is that your account was producing quite a bit more than the other accounts in this repetitive and dyspeptic discussion.
That said, I think there’s a balance to strike. As I mentioned before, I created 2048 before I became aware of Threes, and while it’s important to credit inspiration, I’m not convinced that every creative project needs to trace back every indirect influence. 2048 began as a small experiment without any intent of gaining popularity, and it grew into something distinct, shaped by the viral spread and its community of its open-source variations.
I understand the value of recognizing origins, but I also believe 2048 has developed its own identity over time. I appreciate the feedback, and I’m always open to improving where needed. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.