I’ve heard that song before!
There comes a time when listening to new songs that you’ll hear a song and think, “I’ve heard that song before… or at least something very close to it.” You’re not wrong about that. There have been many songs that have either fully or partially ripped off aspects of previous hit songs. Some of these ripoff songs have landed some artists in court battles. Some ripoffs have been created at the blessing and permission of the previous artist. Some ripoffs have yet to be discovered. Let’s explore.
Rock, Pop, Country and even Classical works
No genre has been immune to these rip off works. Note that this author lumps all works whether by permission or not under ripoffs. Why? Because there’s no way to know WHEN the permission was obtained (i.e., before or after the fact). Some songs have only gotten permission when they’re found out. Others artists have attempted to hide the fact that their song is a ripoff of another artist.
A note to artists. When you’re caught at ripping off something from someone else, come clean and admit it. Don’t hide behind bogus arguments trying to gaslight fans and make them think yours was an original work. That’s so degrading, underhanded and disingenuous. Be honest and fess up.
Sampled Music?
This article won’t include artists who have intentionally sampled musical beats or sampled full out original recordings and then included those samples within their own works. This author classes sampled music as a direct form of plagiarism, one that is blatantly obvious to anyone who listens. Such notable sampled songs include, but are not limited to, Vanilla Ice’s Ice Ice Baby (vs Queen), Nicki Minaj’s Anaconda (vs Sir Mixalot) and The Verve’s Bittersweet Symphony (vs Rolling Stones). If you’re planning to sample someone else’s stuff, then you better get permission before you use that sample.
The songs included below are artists who either unintentionally rewrote a song they had heard in the past or intentionally ripped off portions from a past popular song, but rerecorded them again solely to improve the odds of having a radio hit. Sampling is obvious. Rerecording a backing track leaves ambiguous the interpretation of the artist’s ripoff intentions.
List of works?
Let’s get started. Below are some songs that this author is aware of, but these songs are not listed in any particular order.
Heart and Led Zeppelin
It’s no mistake that Heart started out attempting to play and sound like Led Zeppelin (or at least a more pop-rockish version). However, Heart has ripped off Led Zeppelin on at least one occasion and landed a smash hit on the radio as a result. Unfortunately, Led Zeppelin’s original tune did not fare quite so well on the radio.
Led Zeppelin song: Achilles Last Stand (1976)
Heart Song: Barracuda (1977)
Heart wholesale lifted almost all of the entire backing track from Led Zeppelin’s Achilles Last Stand (from the 1976 album Presence) including drums, bass and guitar riff and placed it directly into Heart’s Barracuda (from the album Little Queen). Heart did at least update the sound quality and sonics to sound more like Heart and less like Led Zeppelin, but the backing track is unmistakable.
Status: Unknown. Since Heart has had some of Led Zeppelin members occasionally tour with them, it is assumed that the remaining members of Led Zeppelin may have given permission to Heart. Either that or Heart may be paying royalties to the Led Zeppelin boys.
The Beatles and The Sylvers
It took a decade for this ripoff to manifest, but here it stands. While the Sylvers song Boogie Fever was a chart topping disco success in 1976, it seems to have been thanks to the Beatles. With an almost identical opening guitar riff, this song’s undertone is unmistakable. While the production sound quality was somewhat better in 1976 when the Sylvers recorded this track when compared to the 1966 track from the Beatles, the near identical lifted guitar work most definitely hearkens back to Day Tripper.
Beatles song: Day Tripper (1966)
Sylvers song: Boogie Fever (1976)
Just have a listen to this one for yourself.
Status: Unknown
The Emotions and Mariah Carey
In 1991, a budding R&B singer, Mariah Carey, burst onto the scene with her chart topping success single Emotions. The odd thing is, this ripoff was hidden in plain sight. With Mariah’s song name being identical (Emotions) to the artist name from which the song was ripped (the Emotions), how could anyone NOT see this one.
Almost the entire backing track and melody including the background chorus was lifted from The Emotion’s Best of My Love to drive Mariah’s 1991 song Emotions.
The Emotions song: Best of My Love (1977)
Mariah Carey song: Emotions (1991)
It was later publicly revealed that the track borrowed from Maurice White’s “Best of My Love“, written for the band The Emotions. This situation led to an out-of-court settlement between both sides.[4]
Status: This one didn’t go unnoticed. In fact, it eventually became known that much of The Emotions’s 1977 song Best of My Love was lifted to craft Mariah’s 1991 Emotions. This act of plagiarism resulted in a lawsuit which was settled out of court for an undisclosed sum of money… which likely means The Emotions band not only got a windfall payment from Mariah, but they likely continue to receive royalties whenever Mariah’s song plays.
The Pointer Sisters and Journey
Even big named established pop rock acts can fall prey to ripping off the works of others. In 1986, Journey was involved in a number of various band personnel issues resulting in band lineup changes, along side Steve Perry’s own personal family medical issues involving his mother’s health. Unfortunately, this band trouble left the writing and recording of a big portion of Journey’s 1986 album Raised on Radio in a quandary.
One song that came out of this difficult recording period is the Journey song entitled Suzanne, with portions of this song sounding very much lifted from The Pointer Sister’s 1982 hit, I’m So Excited.
Pointer Sisters song: I’m So Excited (1982)
Journey song: Suzanne (1986)
The drums and some of the keyboard parts are almost identical. The guitar and Steve Perry’s vocals overlaid don’t sound much like I’m So Excited, but ripping the backing track is still ripping the backing track.
Status: Unknown
The Chiffons and George Harrison
When George Harrison (and the rest) split from the Beatles to go solo, one of George’s first radio hits was 1970’s My Sweet Lord. It later become apparent that much of the sound of this song could be attributed to (or was lifted from) a 1962 hit by the Chiffons entitled He’s So Fine.
The Chiffon’s Song: He’s So Fine (1962)
George Harrison song: My Sweet Lord (1970)
Status: This comparison didn’t go unnoticed. After being noticed, George Harrison attempted to buy out the Chiffon’s catalog from its then record label owner to quash the problem. When that purchase didn’t initially work out, George was found guilty of “subconscious plagiarism” and was fined around $1.5 million. Later, the amount was reduced to around $500k after George was finally able to acquire their music catalog and renegotiate the payment.
Andy Stone (Songwriter) and Mariah Carey
Once again, Mariah Carey is alleged to have ripped off material to produce her 1994 song “All I Want For Christmas Is You”. Mariah Carey collaborated on this song with Walter Afanasieff.
Andy Stone wrote a 1989 song of the same title “All I Want For Christmas Is You”. The melody and lyrics are somewhat different, but the “vibe” of the song is mostly the same as Mariah’s, at least so Andy Stone claims. It is possible that Mariah or Walter had heard this song and decided to collab on something similar for release in 1994, or at least so Andy Stone surmises. There’s really no way to know. Both Walter and Mariah argue the recollection of this song’s origination in a way that doesn’t include having heard Andy Stone’s version. Of course Mariah is going to say that. Why would any artist choose to freely admit to ripping off someone else?
Vince Vance and The Valiants: All I Want For Christmas Is You (1989)
Mariah Carey: All I Want For Christmas Is You (1994)
Status: Lawsuit is still in progress.
Marvin Gaye Estate and Robin Thicke + Pharrell Williams
Speaking of “vibe”, here’s the song that set the vibe precedent. No longer do songs have to have notes, chords and obvious plagiarized sounds, this song (and its court result) now allow lawsuits against artists who lift the overall vibe of a song. This is a slippery slope, but let’s vibe into this one.
Marvin Gaye song: Got To Give It Up (1977)
Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams song: Blurred Lines (2013)
Status: The estate of Marvin Gaye argued that the vibe contained within Got To Give It Up was wholly reused within Thicke’s Blurred Lines. The court agreed and awarded the estate of Marvin Gaye $7.4 million, which was reduced down to $5.3 million and then reduced again on appeal to $4.9 million plus all future royalties.
This lawsuit and its subsequent court precedent opened the door allowing “vibe” (aka. similar sounding) music cases into court. This case’s court precedent, unfortunately, has opened the door to a whole lot more music plagiarism lawsuits.
Gustav Holst and John Williams
Star Wars was both a big blockbuster experience and a phenomenon. By the time The Empire Strikes Back released into the theaters in 1980, Star Wars had fully solidified itself as a pop phenomenon. The soundtrack music for this film was no exception. In fact, it would be Star Wars that would forever change the “summer blockbuster”, striking each into the stratosphere with each and every classical beat matched to film visual cues.
John Williams not only produced some of the most recognizable themes with Star Wars, these musical themes are so closely matched to each visual film beat, such film soundtracks would become the standard by which composers must comply if they choose to score a summer film blockbuster. Before Star Wars, music was mostly an afterthought for film, something that helped carry the film, but that remained loosely tied when compared to film visual beats. After Star Wars arrived, musical and visual beats became one-in-the-same. Not only do the musical themes need to be instantly recognizable, like Star Wars and Harry Potter, but the scores need to be perfectly married and timed to each scene to maximize that scene’s visual power.
Unfortunately, there’s always a fly in the ointment. The Empire Strikes Back introduced the Imperial March which, unfortunately, seems to have been almost wholesale lifted right from Gustav Holst’s Mars, part of Holst’s The Planets suite of music. When Holst released his symphonic suite in 1918, most audience members were flummoxed. They didn’t understand what they were hearing. Thus, it received mixed to negative reviews. In fact, Holst’s Planets suite was far, far ahead of its time. Listener’s couldn’t understand it because it needed a vehicle like Star Wars visuals to carry it. That wouldn’t happen until 1977.
Once again, nabbing a theme from a past space themed composition seems an almost obvious choice for a science fiction space film. Yet, there are still many who debate this fact. Seriously, you’re going to debate the fact that the John Williams’s Imperial March sounds like Holst’s Mars? It does. There’s no way around it. There is absolutely no debate involving this track.
Gustav Holst song: Mars (1918)
John Williams song: Imperial March (1980)
Status: Holst’s Planets Suite of music is now in the public domain in the United States (and most other countries) because it was published before January 1, 1928. Still, that doesn’t make ripping material from other artists “acceptable.” Plagiarism is still plagiarism.
Spirit and Led Zeppelin
One of the most iconic and popular rock songs to emerge from the early 1970s was Stairway to Heaven by Led Zeppelin. This song inspired many guitarists. In this Led Zeppelin song, the opening acoustic guitar riff and vocal ballad slowly gave rise to a rocking powerhouse of an ending in true Led Zeppelin form.
In 1968, a band named Spirit released a track entitled Taurus. This instrumental track opens to what sounds like violins followed by an acoustic guitar riff with an uncanny sameness to the riff that opens Stairway to Heaven. Unfortunately, the song Taurus never progresses beyond that mellow acoustic, almost symphonic track. Taurus also sports no vocals. Unlike Led Zeppelin’s multipart track which begins as an acoustic ballad and slowly progresses into a heavy rocking anthem complete with vocals, drums and lyrics, Taurus as a song doesn’t take on this extended structure.
Spirit song: Taurus (1968)
Led Zeppelin song: Stairway to Heaven (1971)
Status: While the estate of the late Randy Wolfe of Spirit claimed that Stairway to Heaven was ripped from Taurus, apparently the estate found that claim difficult to prove. Led Zeppelin won the case on appeal and the court found that Stairway to Heaven did not infringe on Taurus. The estate’s appeal to the Supreme Court was denied.
However, a discerning ear can definitely tell that the acoustic riff played in Taurus to be almost identical in structure to the riff played in the opening of Led Zeppelin’s Stairway to Heaven almost note for note. Either the court has a tone deaf ear or they intentionally chose to side with Led Zeppelin for some odd reason. Additionally, it is widely known that Led Zeppelin drew near plagiaristic inspiration from many rock and blues artists from the 50s, 60s and even from those directly around them to craft many of Led Zeppelin’s hits.
To compound matters over this situation, Led Zeppelin even opened shows for Spirit on Spirit’s 1968 tour, which would have allowed Led Zeppelin to see and hear how Spirit performed Taurus. The acoustic riff between these two songs being so uncannily similar and when combined with Led Zeppelin touring with Spirit, this being a coincidence is far too improbable. With that said, the fact that Led Zeppelin took Stairway to Heaven so far beyond where Taurus went musically is likely what confused the court. Still, a riff is a riff and plagiarism is plagiarism no matter how much or for how long it was used in a song.
Alexander Cardinale + Morgan Reid and Jake Owen
As stated earlier, even Country hits are not immune to plagiarism. In 2020, Jake Owen released his song Made for You, which became a hit country song on Billboard’s country charts in 2020.
Alexander Cardinale song: Made for You (2014)
Jake Owen song: Made for You (2020)
TMZ reports that songwriters Alexander Cardinale and Morgan Reid have filed suit in Nashville, alleging that Owen’s No. 1 hit “Made for You” lifted significant portions of its structure and lyrics from their song of the same name, which dates back to 2014.
Source: Taste of Country
Once again we see that the 2014 songwriters of their earlier release Made for You claim that Jake Owen ripped off significant portions of their 2014 song to drive his 2020 release, also entitled Made for You. The duo from the 2014 song are seeking a court trial.
Status: Unknown
References
- The Biggest Music Copyright Cases in History
- Mariah Carey sued for copyright infringement over All I Want for Christmas Is You
- Wikipedia for Mariah Carey Emotions
- Songs on Trial: 12 Landmark Music Copyright Cases
- Country Star Jake Owen Sued This Legal Mess is ‘Made For You’ !!!
This article is by no means a complete list. This is just a sampling of the most visible of many of these ripped off songs. Unfortunately, now with the “vibe” precedent firmly allowed in courts, many more lawsuits will commence claiming “vibe” theft. That “vibe” ideology is that a song “feels”, but does not necessarily sound or rip off notes or ideas from a previous song. Claimants simply need to show enough proof that “vibe” was a factor.
Allowing the “vibe” idea as a defense is now a big legal risk for the music business. Any Tom, Dick or Harry can claim their insignificant little track written 5 years ago and was barely even heard, but is now being infringed by a big name star who never even heard the track. There are only so many notes on the musical scale (12 major notes to be exact, with 5 more sharp/flat notes) and only so many ways to arrange all of these. Eventually, even coincidentally, it’s far too easy to arrange those limited numbers of notes in a similar fashion without even having heard anything prior. But, there are definitely unscrupulous and greedy people willing to capitalize on and at the expense of the the hard work of others.
↩︎
Game Review: Ghost of Tsushima

This Sucker Punch studios created game feels like a sucker punch to Ubisoft as it is far too much like Assassin’s Creed for its own good. Let’s explore.
[Updated: 9/2/2020] After having rethought this entire article, I’ve come to a new conclusion about Sucker Punch studios. It seems highly likely that Sucker Punch is an empty-shell game development arm for Sony. What do I mean by empty-shell? Let me explain what I mean. There’s a lot that also supports this shell idea. Sucker Punch may actually be a sub-company that strictly comes up with game ideas and doesn’t actually implement them. Instead, Sony / Sucker Punch hires out third party development studios to produce a game for a fee (and under contract) based on Sucker Punch’s game concept.
In the case of Ghost of Tsushima, it appears that Sony / Sucker Punch may have hired out Ubisoft to produce Ghost of Tsushima using Ubisoft’s AnvilNext engine including Ubisoft’s development team. Sucker Punch likely wanted something very specific (i.e., all of the particle animation and Japanese environments) including the assassination concept. Who better than to hire Ubisoft for that project? Sucker Punch may employ a small team helping produce some limited assets for the game such as trees, some character models and so forth. The majority of the development work likely went to the third party team (e.g., Ubisoft).
What this likely means for Sucker Punch and Ghost of Tsushima is that Sucker Punch indirectly licensed Ubisoft’s AnvilNext for this game because Ubisoft actually produced this game for Sony / Sucker Punch under contract. As an aside, it’s odd to note that both Sucker Punch and Sony PlayStation begin with (SP). Anyway, why am I jumping to this conclusion so much later? There are excessively too many suspect mechanics included in this game that mimic Assassin’s Creed to be a mere coincidence.
That’s just the beginning of this conclusion jumping. There’s also the suspect lack of credits anywhere on the game. Any game studio putting in years of time and effort would want to reward their developers by giving credit where credit is due. Unfortunately, credits are not listed on Ghost of Tsushima… at all. Not anywhere is there a credits page within this game. If you had devoted years of your life to an entertainment / game project, wouldn’t you want credit? Wouldn’t you expect to see your name listed on the credits page? Yet, no credits appear anywhere on this game. The lack of due credit is the biggest suspect item thus leading me to the empty-shell studio conclusion.
One further telltale sign is that games by direct developers place all engines and technologies they use up front immediately after the developer’s logo splash page. Again, Ghost of Tsushima fails to give credit to the engine, physics systems and technologies used within the game… an extremely odd play for an “alleged” big name developer.
This situation could also easily explain Ubisoft’s extreme silence on the Assassin’s Creed front for the last two or three years. If Ubisoft were deep in development for Ghost of Tsushima for Sony, that team would have been unable to make significant progress on a new Ubisoft Assassin’s Creed title. Sure, there has been both Odyssey and Origins. Odyssey being the newest, was released in 2018 with nothing since. Even then, that game could have been produced at least year earlier… giving Ubisoft a minimum of 3 years development time on Ghost of Tsushima.
Since Ubisoft already has a workable existing engine in AnvilNext, it wouldn’t have taken much time to rework that engine to produce Ghost of Tsushima. However, for Sucker Punch to devise their own engine from scratch that’s even more capable than AnvilNext (and that renders almost identically to AnvilNext) in two or three years, that’s a bit of a stretch. Developing an engine as sophisticated as what’s seen in Ghost of Tsushima would take every bit of that 3 years and likely more. That doesn’t account for the time it would take to produce a functional game including character models, game mechanics, 3D assets (trees, villages, carts, etc), stories, motion capture, voice actors and all else to create a complete game. To produce a game like Ghost of Tsushima from nothing to completion would be at least 6-8 years.
While it is possible Sucker Punch could have created an engine that looks and acts like AnvilNext, considering that the last game released by Sucker Punch was INFamous Second Son, released in 2014, the idea of it doesn’t really work especially considering there are no credits. The engine used in INFamous Second Son doesn’t at all resemble what’s in Ghost of Tsushima. Sure, both offer decent lighting models, but the engines are completely different between these two games. The engine used in INFamous looks, feels and acts entirely different. There was some limited particle animation in INFamous, but nothing like what’s in Ghost of Tsushima. Even then, INFamous is just an overall different game that operates entirely differently.
Ghost of Tsushima looks, feels and acts like Assassin’s Creed. From the horse, to the assassinations, to the perks to pretty much everything in the game. Even the world lighting looks and feels like AnvilNext when the light falls on objects. Even the swirly wind motif iconography feels like Assassin’s Creed. The whole thing has a telltale sign that it was produced by the Assassin’s Creed developers.
Let’s get back to the credits, which seem to tattle on Sucker Punch (and the lack of technologies used). If credits were listed on this game with real people’s names, it would be easy to spot developers who work at Ubisoft. It would be even easier to know that this game was actually produced by Ubisoft. I’m guessing that both Sony and Sucker Punch decided against revealing this information thus definitively proving that SP hired Ubisoft to produce this title. In fact, if I had to make a guess, such a development agreement contract probably stipulated keeping Ubisoft’s name (and technologies) off of the game. To do that, no credits or technologies could be added to the game which would reveal Ubisoft’s involvement… hence, likely the reason the game doesn’t have credits of any kind.
With the above said, please read the rest of this article recognizing my previous mindset before I had come to the above conclusion. If the above ends up being true, then Ghost of Tsushima is technically an unofficial Assassin’s Creed installment.
Assassin’s Creed
Ubisoft originated the stealthy assassin take-down style game, but it seems that Sucker Punch is cool with both ripping off and carrying this concept forward in its latest game, Ghost of Tsushima.
By comparison, some of the most notable and identifiable mechanics in Ubisoft’s Assassin’s Creed include:
- Eavesdropping
- Hiding in weeds, hay piles or crowds of people
- Smoke Bombs (usually comes later as you unlock skills
- Healing, although this mechanic has changed several times in successive AC games
- Various button mashing combat mechanics including parrying, blocking, dodging and combos
- Parkour (climbing rocks and structures)
- Eagle Vision — allowing the protagonist to differentiate enemies from friendlies with an x-ray like vision
- Taking over Forts
- Horse riding and combat
- And… stealthy assassinations… basically how Assassin’s Creed got its name.
There are other features included such as the hidden blades, which also adds to the identity of Assassin’s Creed. However, there have also been AC games that lacked the hidden blade feature.
Why am I harping so much about Assassin’s Creed? It’s important to understand exactly how much Sucker Punch took from Assassin’s Creed to create Ghost of Tsushima.
Ghost of Tsushima
While no Assassin’s Creed game has yet visited feudal Japan, Sucker Punch decided it would be their turn to do so in Ghost of Tsushima. The game is set during the time of the Samurai, during the Mongol invasion of the island of Tsushima.
In that goal, the game sets up the protagonist, Jin Sakai. A little goofy, a little nerdy, a little naïve, Jin ends up becoming the lone Samurai who wanders the island helping out with various problems along the way while learning new skills, including stealthy assassination both from behind and from above. Learning these new skills, along with parkour, ultimately help him to defeat the Mongol leader holed up in Castle Kaneda.
Along the way, Jin learns how to become a ‘Ghost’ (Sucker Punch’s word for an assassin). He uses his newfound assassination techniques to stealthily take down everyone from archers to Mongols to whomever deserves it. Though, he is nearly just as adept at being a Samurai, heading into open combat nearly as easily.
Sounds similar to Assassin’s Creed? It is. In fact, it’s far too much like Assassin’s Creed for its own good. Even the landscape, terrain, stories, enemy archetypes, combat and situations feel like Assassin’s Creed, right down to a nearly identical Assassin’s Creed combat maneuver to break through an enemy’s shield and take down that enemy.
Stolen Ideas
Not only has Sucker Punch taken practically everything that was Assassin’s Creed and placed it into Ghost of Tsushima, it has done so with careless abandon. It’s as if Sucker Punch is flaunting this fact in Ubisoft’s face. “See what we made? It’s just like Assassin’s Creed, only better!”, I can hear someone at Sucker Punch saying.
Here’s the non-exhaustive list of how Ghost of Tsushima ripped off Assassin’s Creed:
- Eavesdropping
- Hiding in Pampas Grass and weeds
- Smoke Bombs
- Healing with ‘Resolve’
- Parrying, blocking, dodging and combos
- Parkour (climbing up rocks)
- Focused Hearing (looks like Eagle Vision)
- Forts and taking them down
- Horse riding and combat
- And, of course, stealthy assassination takedowns

Ghost of Tsushima even goes so far as to use a logo that looks like an A, just like Assassin’s Creed uses a different looking A for their franchise.
In fact, there are so many mechanics, behaviors and actions so similarly constructed to Assassin’s Creed (and in particular Origins, but really all of them), it makes me heavily wonder if Sucker Punch hired some of Ubisoft’s disenchanted Assassin’s Creed developers away and put them to work on this project. It’s all so suspect.
Legal Issues?
It’s one thing to hire a team to build a game that has slight similarities to another popular game title from another studio. It happens all of the time. However, it’s an entirely different issue to steal practically everything that made a single game, like Assassin’s Creed, unique and then put it all into a new game and call it your own without giving Ubisoft any credit.
Ubisoft’s Legal Team
If I were on Ubisoft’s legal team, I’d be looking at all options right about now. Considering that AnvilNext is a proprietary engine developed by Ubisoft and which is strictly for its own internal use… then seeing another engine looking, acting and performing similarly to AnvilNext, while driving a game that practically mimics Assassin’s Creed in nearly every way? Yeah… suspect.
Not only would I review that game with a fine tooth comb, I’d be looking through the credits roster to see who might have left Ubisoft and taken something with them. Talent moves around in every industry. It might be worth determining if any developers who worked on Assassin’s Creed made their way to Sucker Punch with a little something extra in hand.
Beautiful Rendering
There’s no denying that the landscape and terrain that has been built on Tsushima is outstanding, but no more outstanding than Assassin’s Creed Odyssey and Origins. Yes, the rendering of the environments doesn’t look at all much different from what’s seen in Assassin’s Creed Origins and Odyssey. Galleries below.
In fact, it looks so similar that I’d have to say that Sucker Punch may be using portions of Ubisoft’s AnvilNext engine. The look and feel of the graphics are far too similar in quality. It’s also possible Sucker Punch picked up another similar game engine. Unfortunately, even Wikipedia doesn’t yet state which game engine Ghost of Tsushima is built on. My money’s on AnvilNext, or rather a modified version of AnvilNext, Ubisoft’s proprietary engine.
Game Play
Sucker Punch’s Ghost of Tsushima plays pretty much like mashup of the best parts of Assassin’s Creed games. It utilizes the eye popping graphics seen in Odyssey and Origins, but then goes back to basics with the combat mechanics and healing. It does have various staples seen in every AC game, such as smoke bombs and hiding in weeds and it improves upon the smoke bomb by adding its new sticky bombs.
Combat
The combat mechanics are almost identical to various Assassin’s Creed games, but with one difference. Jin is easily killed with one or two hits. The enemies also have the ability to immediately stagger Jin leaving him unable to attack or move for at least a minute. This means that the rest of the enemies can simply move in for the kill and they do.
Even though Jin has decent Samurai moves, his armor leaves a lot to be desired… and that stagger mechanic is literally a game killer.
For whatever reason, games have been adding these longer and longer lasting stagger mechanics into their games, which leaves the player unable to do anything other than watch their character die. I’m not a fan of this in games, particularly when my weapons don’t equally stagger opponents in the same way. Giving the enemy an upper hand method to basically kill the player’s character instantly is never satisfying.
What you, as a player, end up doing is… entirely avoiding this situation by making sure you always have the upper hand. The problem is, this game doesn’t let you get that upper hand when in open combat. The enemies always surround you and the best you can do is dodge out of the circle.
Healing
Here’s another sore spot of this game. Ghost of Tsushima gives you the ability to heal (called Resolve), but once used, you must gain it back through specific combat moves. The problem is, you can kill enemies galore, yet never gain any resolve back. There are some times where you do get it back, but there are many times were you can defeat 10 or more enemies and still have no resolve recovered.
This ‘resolve‘ mechanic is actually an incredibly piss poor design. It definitely needed a whole lot more development time. In fact, I’d have preferred just having dead enemies drop health and let me pick it up without having to regenerate “resolve” through very specific means, which clearly doesn’t always work.
Photomode
To carry on from the Beautiful Rendering section above and because this game is just so damned photogenic, you’re inevitably going to want to take some pictures. While photomode does work, it has some important limitations, which may be resolved in later updates. Let’s go through them now:
- If the game is night time and you change the time of day to daytime, the sun comes up, but the night sky remains. It looks like a very brightly lit night moon sky rather than daytime. If you want daytime shots, you’ll need to wait until it’s actually daytime in the game.
- There’s no way to pose the character at all. Once photomode begins, the character is in whatever pose he was in when it began. The only thing you can change is the facial expression. Even then, the facial expressions are poorly crafted.
- Likewise, there’s no way to pose the horse.
- While there are various types of weather from foggy to rainy to clear, none of them really work as well as you might expect. When switching between these, like the night/day problem above, the difference is just not that noticeable.
- Yes, there are filters. No, they don’t look great. In fact, the filters are so piss poor in quality, there’s really no reason to use them. Though, vivid is probably the most useful of these crappy filters.
- Unfortunately, photomode entirely lacks a vignette mode.
- Depth of field is also here, but it also doesn’t fare well. While it does support foreground and background blurring, it just doesn’t look as good as it should. It’s just not configurable enough.
- There’s no way to improve contrast, only brightness.
There are a number of other photomode features, but they just don’t really work as well as they should. You can get some great shots out of the game, but mostly by happenstance and not by messing with the filters and settings. Here are some images I’ve captured while playing….
Image Gallery
Ghost of Tsushima
Compare the above to these similar in appearance images from both Assassin’s Creed Origins and Odyssey…
Weapons
As one would expect of a Samurai game, Ghost of Tsushima offers you your choice of blades including a dagger and a Samurai blade and more as you progress. You also get access to a Bow, bombs and various other weapons that you’ll get as you complete ‘Tales’.
Dyes and Plants
Picking certain plants and flowers gives you resources, such as wood and dyes, that you can trade at merchants to change or improve your clothing, armor or weapons. Remember back to Assassin’s Creed 2? Dye was a big thing in those early Assassin’s Creed games.
Skill Tree
There are basically two skill trees in this game. One is the Ghost (assassin) skill tree. The other is the Samurai skill tree. As you progress through the Tales (Quests), you are given skill points at the end, which you can use to unlock skills from any tree. As you progress more and more, you can unlock more and more skills. It’s a fairly bare bones basic skill tree setup.
Animus Missing
The one thing that Assassin’s Creed included that Ghost of Tsushima doesn’t is having an outer shell. What I mean is that Assassin’s Creed was predicated on Templars from the present using the Animus virtual technology to revisit the past to find specific relics. These relics would help them in the present day gain specific power.
Ghost of Tsushima refrained from using this wrappered shell system so as to avoid that similarity. Although, even though that’s not included in Ghost of Tsushima, the rest of the mechanics included more than make up for the lack of this one missing thing.
Tales
As with any open world system, there must be quests. In this game, they’re called Tales. When you participate in a tale, you help someone do something in return for their help. Sometimes they give you a bow or armor, but sometimes you’re recruiting them to help you later. In return for that help, they expect you to do something for them now. Most times, it involves combat.
Forts
As mentioned above, forts are common in Assassin’s Creed. You end up having to not only take down everyone in a fort, you must also take down its leader. Once you do this, you basically own this fort.
The same can be said of Ghost of Tsushima. Though, while at the end you don’t own the fort, you do get to loot it for whatever rewards you can find.
Overall
Ghost of Tsushima is pretty. Very, very pretty, particularly when the wind is blowing across the grass and trees. One only needs to look at the above images to see that. But, having a game rendering a pretty environment is only part of the battle.
The other part is producing compelling, innovative mechanics to drive this world. Unfortunately, Sucker Punch actually lives up to its name and practically sucker punches Ubisoft for its Assassin’s Creed franchise. Sucker Punch entirely took almost everything that was Assassin’s Creed and imported it almost intact into Ghost of Tsushima.
If you’re an Assassin’s Creed fan, you’ll probably like this game. However, it’s so similar and plays so similarly to Assassin’s Creed, you may also feel like you’ve played this game before… and you likely have.
Is it worth $60? That’s debatable. I’m not usually one to urge people to run out and buy copycat games. In the case of Deep Silver’s Saint’s Row 3 and 4, these were so satirical of Grand Theft Auto, they had their own quirky uniqueness. In this case, I would recommend Saint’s Row because while they had some similarities to GTA, they were uniquely different.
With Ghost of Tsushima, the only really unique thing about this game is it having been set in feudal Japan. Everything else pretty much feels like a clone of Assassin’s Creed, for better or worse.
Ratings
Graphics: 10 out of 10
Sound: 9 out of 10
Gameplay: 4 out of 10
Uniqueness: 1 out of 10
Stories: 7 out of 10
Voice Acting: 8 out of 10
Mouth Tracking: 2 out of 10
Replayability: 1 out of 10
Multiplayer Mode: none, single player campaign only
Overall: 4.5 out of 10 (Rent first. If you like it, then buy it.)
↩︎






leave a comment