No worries, horneegurl. This isn't a stolen game at all. It's based off of the tutorials on Kongregate, which are intended for people to adapt. In other words, there's open permission for anyone to use this code. Therefore, it's definitely not stolen. However, Alex did accuse someone else that used the exact same tutorials as 'stealing', but since he's now using it himself, he must have realized that using these tutorials isn't plagiarism.
Alex, we don't need to see the 'coding' to know that it's stolen from walterreid.com. It had the exact same layout, turrets, creeps, etc. It was identical down to the pixel, except for the 'credits'.
The entire game design is identical to the one posted 318 days ago. Everything from the turret design to the creep design to the actual in-game text is identical. Even the turret text descriptions are identical, including the same word that was misspelled in that text.
So you finally admit that you DID take the tutorial and made 'some changes'. That's a lot different from it being your own 'original work'. You 'edited' the game, you did not 'create' the game. I find it odd that you made negative comments to another person who did the same thing. That's called 'hypocrisy', Alex.
No, it's not your work, Alex. If you want to prove it wrong, then upload code as a text file on google.docs and provide a link. Submit some proof that your coding was done more than 350 days ago, and I'll believe you. Otherwise, simply admit that you copied the code from someone else.
You're really going to continue to try to claim that this is your original work? Come on, Alex, you got busted; be a man and admit it.
And as far as 'never playing it again', we can just got to www.walterreid.com to play it there. It's been there for almost a year now, and your game is identical to it, down to the pixel. There's really no talking your way out of this one.
The designer is asking for a specific rating? If the game deserves it, then it will receive it. And for someone that was criticizing another person for using a tutorial as the basis for their own game, you sure are hypocritical. 1/5
Uh, Alex, this isn't stolen. The entire point of the Kong Tutorial is so people can use it as a basis for their own games. It's a training tool, meant to be used in this way.
"I mostly uploaded it because I'm working on a new (original) game with a friend and I wanted to see how the Kongregate system worked from the developer side." - Translation: "I just wanted the [D] next to my name and didn't want to waste any effort making anything original." 1/5
Horrible controls. Not only does the car go the wrong way when in reverse, it also turns on the wrong axis point. And the collision detection is atrocious. At least the 'demon' level was mildly entertaining. 2/5
This is the most ridiculous and illogical meme in the entire history of the Internet. Anyone that takes this 'game' even remotely seriously (and that means anyone that ever brings it up in conversation with the intent of 'recruiting' new players) should be ashamed at wasting neural energy on such a pathetic pastime. The ironic part is that the 'winners' of this game are the ones that simply ignore it and go about their daily lives. (And, no, it's NOT a 'mass psychological experiment'. Get over yourselves.) 1/5
When random collisions of the planets result in such fast rebounds, it removes most of the skill from the game and simply makes it luck-based. Unless there are hugely different masses & velocities involved, such high-speed rebounds should NOT occur. Overall, good graphics, decent gameplay. Tighten up the collision logic, and you'll have a winner. 3/5
 "City Sky Defender"){kind=icon}
 "Tower Defence (random!)"){kind=icon}
 "Shootout"){kind=icon}
 "The Cartoon Quiz"){kind=icon}
 "Maze Game 2"){kind=icon}
 "Me vs. Humans"){kind=icon}
 "blockdown"){kind=icon}
 "Me-Gun, Ultimate Experience"){kind=icon}
 "Drivers Ed"){kind=icon}
 "The Game"){kind=icon}
 "Planet Runner"){kind=icon}
 "THE Red Button"){kind=icon}