Scheme evolution, variation, inspiration, new ideas & plagiarism

[Kradie]

I would like to think that I've made a couple of interesting schemes for this community. ZaR is another variation of Roper, & Roper is another variation of Worms 2 Roper.  Some may argue that Roper is just an evolution of Worms 2 Roper, and is the definite one. But my point is that we all have our preferred scheme to play.

My question is: When does a scheme become copy paste of existing scheme? When is a scheme considered plagiarized? Is it plagiarism if the scheme is based on ideas & concept of past & present that didn't go anywhere?

For example: In the past, the idea of no parachute was merely thought of and executed as a thing. It could had been some random test games here and there between friends in the past, but it was never made into its own identity. Therefore we have ZaR, where I thought of the idea of having no parachute, while I did not know anything of the past. So it gives ZaR its unique & minimalist appeal.

Here's an example of evolution: Freemediate (scheme created by Kalue), is just an unique evolution of Intermediate, another version if you will.
https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/schemes/freemediate-an-evolution-of-intermediate-32903/

Freemediate, Elite & Intermediate, are similar in my opinion, but plays differently enough to be their own.
Here's a free idea: What if someone made FreeLite? (Free Elite). I suppose that would be considered plagiarism?

I see no harm in inspiration, I think it is quite healthy for the community for players to make new modes & explore their schemes merits & shortcomings with other players. I think it is competitive and can give some really nice results.

What's your thought on this?

[Senator]

Nothing wrong with copying parts of existing schemes and combining them into a new one. After playing both WA and W2 Roper I took the best of both worlds (in my opinion) and made "Roper no CBA" where the CBA rule is kinda built-in but you are allowed to ignore impossible crates. It's good to have some different name for the variant so people know what it's about. I wouldn't want to join a host called "Roper" and then end up playing ZaR.

[h3oCharles]

When does a scheme become copy paste of existing scheme?

i probs won't be able to answer with a proper answer, but think of BigRR, with 40sec no nana and 30sec with nana

When is a scheme considered plagiarized?

when did authoring schemes happen? is it properly documented who made most of the league schemes besides the authoring on TUS?

Is it plagiarism if the scheme is based on ideas & concept of past & present that didn't go anywhere?

if it's not published, not really

i need foxhound here

[Kradie]

Nothing wrong with copying parts of existing schemes and combining them into a new one. After playing both WA and W2 Roper I took the best of both worlds (in my opinion) and made "Roper no CBA" where the CBA rule is kinda built-in but you are allowed to ignore impossible crates. It's good to have some different name for the variant so people know what it's about. I wouldn't want to join a host called "Roper" and then end up playing ZaR.

Fair enough! And don't worry, ZaR Ropers are often marked with the letter Z or ZaR tag. I would like to add that in ZaR there can only spawn maximum of 2 crates on a map and no more. This is to avoid crate hording and perhaps equal opportunity to get a difficult crate. I think this should be applied for Roper scheme too.

When does a scheme become copy paste of existing scheme?

i probs won't be able to answer with a proper answer, but think of BigRR, with 40sec no nana and 30sec with nana

When is a scheme considered plagiarized?

when did authoring schemes happen? is it properly documented who made most of the league schemes besides the authoring on TUS?

Is it plagiarism if the scheme is based on ideas & concept of past & present that didn't go anywhere?

if it's not published, not really

i need foxhound here

What about Big ZaR RR? With Zook, 30s turn, 10s retreat, & batty? And some maps featuring difficult long climbs?

Authoring Scheme is something I recently noticed when select people pointed fingers at my own scheme as if they were stolen from others.

Yeah why not get FoxHound or anyone else here to shed some light what plagiarism really is, because I am not sure.

[h3oCharles]

What about Big ZaR RR? With Zook, 30s turn, 10s retreat, & batty? And some maps featuring difficult long climbs?

i usually call these "Variation of X" where X is a more well known and more standardized scheme

[FoxHound]

I do think most of your schemes are variations of existing schemes, Kradie. This doesn't mean it is plagiarism. I did not study about plagiarism, so I don't know technically what can be considered plagiarism. Maybe searching on the internet we can find a better answer than my opinion. My opinion is that plagiarism is when you copy and paste someone's idea saying it is your own work. Example of plagiarism: if I play a game with a different scheme someone did not release yet and then I simply extract the file and upload it on TUS as my authorship. For me plagiarism is usually bad intention of someone to receive ALL the "glory" from the hard work of another person.

Note that sometimes coincidences happen and this is normal, for example, after a research I discovered that the first Trick Race map was from 2001 by a brazilian player called Stratovarius, but if you search in WMDB, you will find many very old trick race maps with other names, from 2005 for example. I don't think people even knew the Stratospecial map, they only had the same idea on a different time (the scheme wasn't that popular). Sometimes the coincidences are way too close from each other and make us think if it was a case of plagiarism or not. For example, the Darts scheme was released when there were very, very similar schemes such as "Drill Fly" and "Drill Flier". Why only under the name "Darts" the scheme got well known? I don't know. I believe SiD is a very creative person since he created many other original schemes, very interesting maps such as the one with a big condom with a worm inside it and he doesn't seem to be someone who would steal someone's work or idea. I believe Darts got famous due to his influence as a competitive player and his strong link to the community. Even though I believe the ones behind Drill Fly or Drill Flier weren't credited or mentioned enough all this time. In my opinion it is a good practice to say the schemes that inspired you for creating your scheme or if it is a variation, just make it clear that it is a variation or cite the author of the scheme or the scheme itself you modified.

Everybody inspires on each other ideas, this is normal, this is how things evolve. Darwin and Wallace had the same idea and published that idea together. If weren't they, other people would release the idea of Natural Selection with other name, but it could take a long time for this. I believe some works of art are more creative than others, usually few are very creative introducing a new way of thinking and the majority just release alternate version of something it is already consolidated.

I'm trying to reunite and classify many of the different schemes I find around the community (check Scheme ideas page), but I really don't know if I'm doing this correctly, sometimes people don't agree with my choices, but I believe this is just like the classification of living beings, it is not easy and this is made by an agreement of many scientists. This is what I like on a wiki, it is not a simple website, everybody can contribute or change something they don't agree, until a consensus.

[Kradie]

Yes, most of my schemes are variation of others, but yet I feel like some may be unique enough to stand on their own.  Even if some of my schemes are variations, I do feel a sense of pride knowing I made them, hence it can feel like they are my own scheme. I do also admit I like to take credit if I made an original or alternate take on existing scheme, there's no shame in that. I am not going to examine over 3000 schemes on TuS, and/or ask every player on Worms if there was a scheme similar to what I am thinking now to make. 

This whole thing about coincidences is more likely to happen for me and other scheme makers. Like I said in my previous post, that I'am positive there are other who thought of no parachute in roper games but was never popularized.  I think but with no guarantee that avirex made claim he thought of no parachute back in his days. But this could only been an OPTION to be included in w2roper style, but not an actual thing. 

Speaking about inspiration, my latest scheme is good example of inspiration of Freemediate and is called Total Time Trial Rope Race TTTRR. https://www.tus-wa.com/schemes/scheme-3435/
Finish all your worms in one turn with help of instantaneous worm select.

I also see Lucky Strike is on that wiki page, that's news for me lol.

It just pisses me off a little when some people say that Kradie is ripped off other people's schemes.
Even if someone were doing this, it is better to consolidate and work together.

My goal is to make interesting and perhaps original schemes for the people of this community. Because that is something WA is all about. That's basically what Mario Maker is about! Make something cool for other people to try & play