• Prethoryn Overmind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Seeing a lot of comments on here and it just reminds me of what I have been telling my friends since day one.

    1. PalWorld is a threat to Pokemon. It has potential to crown Pokemon in a different way and really compete. Nintendo will 100% find a way. I told them and told them. I said the same thing on Reddit. Sure enough, downvoted.

    2. I love Pokemon, I love Zelda, and Mario but I absolutely love competition. There is no way a billion dollar franchise, multi level marketing, insanept popular game series is going to let something come along and compete against it. If you haven’t watched The Boys on Amazon you are missing out. One of the most redeeming characters, IMO, says it best in two sentences in the boys in one whole episode and it is the premise of everything. "You don’t get it do you? You don’t mess with the money.

    3. I love seeing games come along and bring something new to the table because it should drive Nintendo to do better for GameFreak to do better. I liked PalWorld and welcomed it as someone who loves Pokemon. While PalWorld didn’t maintain my interest its because Pokemon just does something for me PalWorld doesn’t. However, that being said I have found my self turned away from Pokemon since Gen 7 and 8 semi redeemed 7 and 9 is just sad (performance wise). I have found my self playing the hell out of tjr classic Pokémon games. Point being I welcomed PalWorld in hopes that it would light a fire under Nintendo’s ass to develop a really good next gen Pokemon game. It was wishful thinking though. Nintendo is a “don’t mess with the money” company and that is all it is. Fuck Nintendo. PalWorld was good for the game industry. What Nintendo is going to try to set precedence on is that you can own an idea a simple concept.

    I have been telling my friends for literal fucking years and for some reason they just swing the bat for Nintendo. Nintendo makes some great games but holy fuck they are a shit company. They just are. I told them over and over this was coming Nintendo would find something and now here we are.

    I sent this too them and they all got silent. They genuinely believed Nintendo couldn’t and wouldn’t.

  • moonleay@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago
    >Open Thread
    >People shitting on Nintendo, because fuck Nintendo
    >Nobody actually looked at the 1:1 model comparisons
    >Nobody actually looked into PocketPair as a company
    
    Jeez. I thought we were better then Reddit. 
    

    That being said, I don’t like Nintendo & their Ninjas, but PocketPair is not innocent here.

    This is not their only ripoff. For their next project, they choose to ripoff Hollow Knight. (At least they are consistent I guess?).

    They also abandoned an unfinished early access game (This game is 4 years into Early Access).

    Their CEO is also a crypto bro and said himself that he does not necessarily care about originality, if it means, that he can reach more people (and by extension earn more money).

    Just to name a few.

    • IzzyScissor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Didn’t the guy who originally posted the “1:1 model comparisons” later admit that he stretched and scaled the models to fit better?

      It’s derivative, but not a ripoff.

    • Spaceballstheusername@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 hours ago

      My opinion for what it’s worth is generally no one is going to not play hollow knight because they are playing the ripoff. You can’t own a style or game genre if someone has a similar look and feel there’s not much you can do about it than have a better game.

  • irotsoma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Patenting things like this that are obviously unpatentable ideas rather than actual inventions is unfortunately a necessity for defensive purposes in a world where companies will do anything in order to kill competition except risk competing with them since that isn’t guaranteed by throwing money at it. Enforcing a bunch of patents against a company with fewer liquid assets is a guaranteed way to beat a competitor with money alone since winning the suit isn’t the goal, only draining the assets of the competitor. Sucks that this is considered a valid business practice now.

  • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 hours ago

    “Multiple patents”

    Specifies none

    Off to a great start, I see. I know that actual game mechanics cannot be patented or copyrighted (the same principle applies to non digital games), so I’m really curious to what these patents are.

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I know that actual game mechanics cannot be patented or copyrighted

      In America, sure. But these are two Japanese companies…

      I’m not an expert on Japanese copyright and patent law, but I don’t have a great outlook for Palworld.

    • sandbox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      You’ve mixed copyright and patents together and confused yourself a bit. Game mechanics cannot be copyrighted, but they can be patented. Some game component designs can be copyrighted as well, and even trademarked.

      There are many, many, many game mechanics and features which have been patented, such as in-game chat, minigames on loading screens, arrow pointing to destination, and so on. Game studios have to license those features from the patent holders if they wish to use them.

      Some random company even owns a patent for the concept of sending and receiving email on a mobile device. The entire system is a fucking joke.

    • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      Someone linked a list of all the patents Pokemon Company specifically holds and the very first one was “creature breeding based on good sleep habits.”

      1. How does that even get a patent?
      2. What the fuck iteration of Pokemon requires you to have good sleep habits to breed your pokemon? 🤨
      3. Does it actually help you sleep? 🤔 I might need to start breeding pokemon…
    • Charzard4261@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Game mechanics can be patented. It’s stupid, but things such as “loading screen mini games” and “overhead arrows pointing to your objective” have been patented. The second I believe even got enforced once.

      I think these kind of things have been getting approved less and less, but I wouldn’t be surprised if “balls that contain monsters” was patented back in the early days too.

      • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The game during loading screen isn’t a “game mechanic” per se, which is why I think it was patented back then. Completely ass backwards that it could be patented, but there’s that.

        As for the overhead arrow for navigation, I wasn’t aware of that one. Was that from EA? I think it can be argued that’s not a “game mechanic” either, because it’s not “an essential component of the game”

        • greenskye@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 hours ago

          It was crazy taxi and no other game could use the mechanic. And telling you where to go is pretty darn important to a lot of games

          • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Interesting… The Wikipedia page for Crazy Taxi talks about their lawsuit with Simpsons Road Rage in 2001, for using the overhead arrow among other complaints. But makes no mention at all of Midnight Club, who by 2005 when I got Midnight Club 3 DUB Edition was using that same overhead arrow for in-race directions. I don’t see screenshots of Midnight Club 1 or 2 having the arrow but I can guarantee from personal experience that MC3:DUB did have them. I wonder what happened in those four years that made Rockstar not afraid to use that mechanic, especially as this section on the Crazy Taxi page states

            The case, Sega of America, Inc. v. Fox Interactive, et al., was settled in private for an unknown amount. The 138 patent is considered to be one of the most important patents in video game development.

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      “Method for releasing 927 iterations of the same stale game across multiple platform generations.”

      It can’t possibly be for “Method of splitting one complete game into two mutually exclusive cartridges with separate rosters to entice whales to buy two copies,” because if it were they’d have already sued Capcom 15 years ago.

  • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 hours ago

    It shocks me just the amount of people rallying behind Palworld SOLEY just to “stick it to the big corp”

    At worse its blind rage and ignorance

    • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I dont care who it is thats suing.

      You cant fuckin make what looks and feels like “pokemon” or any other fucking property and expect to get away with it. Thats PLAGIRISM.

      I DONT CARE IF ITS NINTENDO. If Palworld fucking wins, then that means that anyone else who makes 3d models, or just any kind of content IN GENERAL, can have their shit stolen, tweaked, and resold to millions. If you think that is a valid and okay thing to do to ANYONE, then go fuck yourself.

      Majority of yall are the same people to bite dien on companies like ChatGBT and others a like. but once they start stealing content, patents, and recourses from large companies, then its suddenly ok. The amount of Moral flipflopping this country does is fuckin stupid at best.

      This all comes down to one point and one point only

      “DONT TAKE MY BASE MODEL AND USE IT WITHOUT MY CONSENT.”

      I’ve gone against nintendo on a buncha shit, I still do, this shit ain’t one of em. They have the right to try someone in court if they suspect they are using their models for profit.

      Theres THOUSANDS of avenues they could’ve taken with this game. It coulda made with voxels, coulda been legofied, it coulda been hyper realistic, coulda been created to look like Dark souls, they could’ve AT THE VERY LEAST, play the game of “Im making a Parody so therefore my content is fine.” Theres so many avenues they coulda took to avoid shit like this. Super Mario Logan and SMG64 have been doing this shit for AGES. But nah yall are up and arms and shocked with the slightly altered Pocket Monsters game is hit with some court papers. Make it make sense, deadass.

      • pkmkdz@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Your wall of text doesn’t make sense, contradicts itself and mixes up cases. PocketPair was sued for patent infringement, not intelectual property. If they did commit intelectual property / copyright infringement, you bet they’d be sued before even releasing the game.

        That being said, this angry wall of text implies that you might need help with mental health. I’m sure there is a beautiful human being underneath all that, so please, consider talking to therapist.

        • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          Did I not already just say that I admitted to being wrong beforehand???

          And of course I got mental health issues you dipstick IM AUTISTIC lmfao. I’m not finna hide that fact either. I’ll admit when I’m wrong and be done with it! Id appreciate you not bringing my mental health into this shit thanks✌ I cant always control what I do but owning up to my mistakes is the best I can do. You playing me off like I need therapy is a shit move.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 hours ago

        How much is Nintendo paying you to be their mouth piece?

        Have you seen the kind of patents Nintendo are trying to get?

        Here is an example :

        Publication number: 20240286040 Abstract: In an example of a game program, a ground boarding target object or an air boarding target object is selected by a selection operation, and a player character is caused to board the selected boarding target object. If the player character aboard the air boarding target object moves toward the ground, the player character is automatically changed to the state where the player character is aboard the ground boarding target object, and brought into the state where the player character can move on the ground.

        You can check them out for yourself

        patents assigned to the pokemon company

        So calm the fuck down with your chatGPT which is a whole different situation.

        • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Bitch I pirate all my nintendo games wtf are you on 😭😭😭

          Their sueing in Patents. Not how similar it looks.

          I dont see this as any different than ChatGBT generating me an essay similar to one that already exists, the only difference is it changed some of it. Thats plagiarism(if not then its just wrong).

          Theres even proof of them using THEIR MODELS and altering them. You cant do that shit without being transparent about it. Hoe hard is that to grasp

          • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 hours ago

            What do you think I linked dipshit?

            With ridiculous patent like that, Nintendo could sue pretty much any companies.

            ChatGPT is scraping copyrighted material, not patents.

            Nintendo is suing for patent infringement.

        • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Why tf would you even say that, everybody deserve the right to own some shit bruh. I fuck with fangames n all that but stealing assets and profiting from them with no consent is fucked.

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 hours ago

      The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

      IDGAF about Palworld as a game, personally. I’ve never played it and I don’t plan to. But that doesn’t make Nintendo’s behavior not bullshit, and I still hope the Palworld developers win this battle.

      • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Thats perhaps the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard and fuels my point if yall only acting like this cus “big gaming industry bad”

        Palword did what thousands of scammers, Cryptoland, and some con artists Vrchat model makers do. Take a model or asset that ISNT THEIRS alter it, then sell it.

        if they win. Companies like ChatGBT and AI’s like it will have free rain to steal whatever shit they want, you think the government will give a shit if its from a indie game? Hell no. Everyone is gonna suffer from this dude.

        Im not boutta live in a world where people, anyone ever, can take my stuff, alter it, then profit from it

        • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Yeah, you did not read any of the articles about this or understand the suit.

          Nintendo is putting this forth as a patent issue, not a copyright issue. I presume this is because even they are smart enough to realize that they would probably lose a copyright challenge. However, the patents they are attempting to claim are clearly bullshit. They’re just doing this as a bludgeon to bully a company they don’t like, most likely in the hopes that the sheer cost of litigation will break them.

          If they were going to propose that some of the monster models from Palworld originated as Pokemon model rips, they could arguably have a leg to stand on. But that’s not what they’re saying. The outcome of this case is not going to have any impact on copyright issues. Rather, the potential result is much more dangerous – it would confirm that a big company can just come in late and retroactively lay claim to large swathes of mechanical concepts that have already widely in use in a particular industry for decades.

  • Buttons@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Patents and video games huh? We can’t ignore what John Carmack had to say about this:

    The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying.

    –John Carmack

    • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 hours ago

      The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying.

      Thats essentially what both an AI does and what ChatGBT does. Are you gonna defend that to?? Just dont take credit for shit someone else made, who cares if its Nintendo. I don’t want my game sprites altered and then sold as though whoever altered them made them by hand?!

      • Veneroso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        My cock is not inspired after reading this bad take.

        John Carmack is human intelligence and therefore more valuable than artificially generated drivel.

        -edit- I mistook inspecting for inspiring for your name. I’m leaving it.

        • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 hours ago

          John Carmack is human intelligence

          [X] Doubt

          John Carmack is many things, but I have my doubts about whether human is one of them. At minimum, he’s some kind of alien. Most days I lean more toward incognito archdevil of the plane of knowledge. I’ve heard someone accuse him of being God, or at least standing in for him on Wednesdays.

        • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I never said John is an AI. But there are steps Palworld coulda taken to avoid the inevitable. If anything its just sad they did nothing to prevent this. I can see why thousands of people like it a fuckton. But they did nothing to actually avoid this from happening.

          • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 hours ago

            The whole game was intended from the very beginning to thumb their nose at Nintendo, just so happens that it got really popular and sold a ton of copies because it isn’t difficult to make a better Pokémon game than The Pokémon Company does, even when the entire game in question is a shitpost.

            • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Im not about to sit here and tout the game that gives Lugia a gun as a game better than Pokemon, fuck no 😭😭😭

              I’ve changed my statements (see above) about the lawsuit but this game is DEADASS just a higher quality newgrounds game similar to “Mario with a gun/bazooka/truck”

              A shitpost is a better way to describe this. I simply refuse to look past the quirky, cartoony, 3d monsters HOLDING WHOLE ASS GLOCKS n RIFLES, to suspend my disbelief just enough to enjoy whatever this game has to offer. It hits these levels of Uncanniness with me that I severely dont like and bothers me for whatever reason.

              • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 hours ago

                And that’s fine, different strokes and all. I personally find it highly goddamn hilarious and enjoy playing it with my gaming group. I just think it’s a little disingenuous to say “palworld devs did nothing to prevent this, sad” when the whole original concept was basically designed around parodying Pokémon. They knew what they were doing.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 hours ago

      More like he wouldn’t be able to sell his solution to others, but yeah I think Patents on simple processes and mechanisms are dumb, especially certain software and firmware.

      • BigPotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Imagine if you had a hammer and decided to use it to hit a nail and then someone came along and said “I see you’re using my method to build a house! Pay up!”

        Well, you can’t patent something like that!

        Imagine you open up a game engine, any engine, and decide you need to point to an objective so you decide to use an arrow. A game company says “You’re using our method to identify objectives! Pay up!” and that one is a unique mechanic?

        How long has humanity been using arrows to point to things? How can you patent it just because it’s a digital arrow?

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              No, the very premise of that user’s analogy is that he isn’t profiting from it. If somebody invented hammering nails literally this year and a company came in selling it as a product without permission, then it would be comparable. It reads as if he failed to read my comment entirely but still replied with multiple paragraphs.

              The game development analogy is better, floating arrows about characters heads was actually patented, but it was widely criticized and it expired in 2019. Plus I already took offense to simple mechanisms and especially certain software and firmware solutions.

              • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 hours ago

                A patient on hitting a nail with hammer is ridiculous if it’s your framing or theirs.

                • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  Countless buildings would never be built if you didnt invent hammer and nails, being paid royalties for a few years by large businesses who make use of it seems pretty fair.

    • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Dont steal my base model that I patented and made entirely by hand and then claim it as your model.

      its that simple. As barbaric as the VRCHAT community can be sometimes, I can wholeheartedly agree that it is 100% a crime to take someone else’s hard work, tweak it, and then pretend that you own it. Pay people their fucking respects/royalties or take a different approach. Toby Fox did it, Every other Pocket Monster-like Series in Japan did it, and so on. if your gonna make a product similar to another, especially fucking Nintendo with how notorious they are for copyright striking, TAKE THE STEPS AVAILABLE TO MAKE IT DIFFERENT. Don’t churn out a “Pokemon with guns” and then get shocked with your copyright stricken. Thats fucking stupid to me. And its even stupider people are shocked it’d fuckin happen.

      There’s deadass so many routes they could’ve went with, Art-styles they could’ve went with, fucking game mechanics they could’ve went with. And they chose something that 90% of people can agree “looks like Pokémon, smells like Pokémon, functions similar Pokémon”

      I mean for GOD FUCKING SAKES, At least GO WITH DIFFERENT MONSTER IDEAS. We have an ENTIRE WORLD Filled with Cryptids and mystical beasts of all kind, and Palworld STILL CHOSE TO GO for Yokai/Japanese based creatures? Get the fuck outta here with that. Homeboy coulda did American mythos and got away with that, no ones holding a patent against the design of The Flatwoods monster?? Let alone is there a “pokemon” clone of Australian Mythos, so why the fuck are we still trying to do what’s already been done to death and then getting shocked with it falls flat or is criticized.

      • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 hours ago

        You are conflating copyright and patents. Copyright is protection for the expression of an idea, like the art design. This is a patent issue, which is a protection of how something works.

        If somehow I patent a vague mechanic like “a method of selecting weapons with the directions of an analogue stick or mouse, presented as an 8 direction on screen circle.” Then I could sue Red Dead Redemption and Batman Arkham, despite there being no copyright infringement with whatever game I made with that feature.

        • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Aren’t they suing because of the 3d models?? not the design of them but the fact they took Nintendo models and tweaked them???

          If im deadass wrong I will 100% shut tf up and delete my rants.

          • rain_worl@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 hours ago

            according to first sentence of article, it was a patent infringement lawsuit, so you are deadass wrong.

          • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Aren’t they suing because of the 3d models??

            No, they’re not. The word “patent” is used in every single article about this repeatedly. Patents are not the same as copyrights.

            A copyright protects a creative work: A work of fiction, a movie, a character.

            A patent protects the method in which the way a thing functions: A machine, a chip, an algorithm, or in Nintendo’s assertion certain vague gameplay concepts.

  • littlecolt@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    I can read the room here. I know this will be an unpopular opinion, and I want to preface this with a big “fuck Nintendo” and particularly their legal team.

    That said, fuck Palworld, too. They are absolutely just straight up copying Nintendo/The Pokemon Company’s designs. It’s blatant. It’s AI bros making money by copying Pokemon designs, plain and simple. Palworld would not have caused the stir it did if not for the blatant “It’s Pokemon with guns!” angle.

    So, while Nintendo can normally go suck the biggest of dicks when they swing around their lawsuit arms, this time I think they fully have every right to go after these guys, I don’t care how much they say they’re gonna fight the big bad mega company “for the fans and for indie devs everywhere” lol man, great statement. Guaranteed to get the base riled up.

    Thank you for reading, you may downvote.

    • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Palworld is just one of them Newgrounds games where its Mario but he’s got a Bazooka or some crazy shit.

      Whenever I run into someone with a Palworld Oc and their telling me about it, I cant help but feel like their offering me some kinda fake/knockoff Balenciaga; for lack of a better comparison. Like it looks like Lugia, flaps like Lugia, but this “thing” aint Lugia. Its- I dunno its just weird as shit.

      Its an uncanniness for me, that’s why I hate it and it feels wrong. My mind sees Jigglypuff with a pistol and I’m violently taken out of the scenario. Its just so- Fuckin weird man I cant describe it. It aint natural 😭😭

      The best way I describe it is that Palworld is the Alternate Universe version of Pokemom, only it exists in this universe and in this timeline and it weirds me out.

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I’m not going to downvote you, but, I disagree. Nintendo might have had a leg to stand on if they tried to say Palworld infringed on their Pokemon intellectual property and/or copyright, especially after the mesh controversy, but they didn’t attack them on that. They’re going after Pocketpair for patent infringement on a so-far undisclosed patent. Probably a game mechanic of some sort. Pokemon did not invent the monster collecting and/or battling genre. Dragon Quest predates it by a good margin.

      I’d like to see the patent they claim to have. In what way might Palworld be infringing upon their patent that another similar game, like say TemTem for instance, is not? I hate the idea that a fun game mechanic can be patented and locked down by one company for up to 20 years.

      Palworld would not have caused the stir it did if not for the blatant “It’s Pokemon with guns!” angle.

      This was 100% a fan reaction to the trailer, and not an official stance by the developers at all. That’s obviously what they were going for, but they stopped long before outright saying it out loud and let the consumer make their own inferences.

      They have every right to go after them, but I really hope they lose this one. Nintendo doesn’t deserve to have a monopoly on fun creature collecting games.

    • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      I think you could be right, but it depends on the details Nintendo comes out with. I remember people were saying that they thought certain Palworld monsters had been ripped from the Pokemon games and recolored - if Nintendo can demonstrate that, then that’s a slam dunk for them.

      But if it’s just creature designs and collecting them, then I just don’t think that “a cute monkey with green fur” is a novel enough concept to be defensible against someone else doing something similar.

    • Buttons@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      They didn’t copy Pokemon, they created new content that is similar to Pokemon.

      Do you believe it is wrong to create new content that is very similar to existing content that people enjoy?

      Is it wrong for Pocket Pair (Palworld’s creator) to create new content that is similar to existing Pokemon? Is it wrong for GameFreak to create new content that is similar to existing Pokemon? Morally speaking, why are the answers to those questions different?

    • racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I love how you wrote all this, and are completely missing the mark. Nintendo is filing a lawsuit claiming that the palworld devs violated their patents, not their copyrights.

      Anything palworld ‘copied’ from pokémon is either japanese lore, or from older games. This is not a copyright suit. If a copyright suit were possible, Nintendo would have brought it waaaay earlier. I’m wondering which patents Nintendo has that were supposedly violated.

      I love how there’s this entire discussion here about copyright etc… while that’s not even what this is about.

      • CatLikeLemming@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I bet Nintendo has a lot of patent violations to choose from. They have a patent on such bangers as, rephrased from legal speech to human speech: “An air mount automatically turning into a ground mount upon landing” Source

        According to Nintendo, if I understand this correctly, they have the sole legal right to make a bird mount that can also sprint on the ground if needed, because that sure was a special idea.

    • ZeroHora@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      They are also making a copycat game “inspired” by hollow knight, obviously doing for the indie devs out there.

        • MoogleMaestro@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 hours ago

          If we allow this to continue, we will end up with more content for players to enjoy.

          More slop that’s copy and pasted from other games?

          No, I don’t think I want that, thanks though.

        • ZeroHora@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Yeah of course, they are only going to ripoff others indie devs out there for the players to enjoy.

                • ZeroHora@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  Or jigsaw puzzle, the thing is there’s nothing 100% original and people always get inspired by others.

                  Things is starting to get strange when a company only makes games there have the same aesthetic of a more famous game.

                  Craftopia This isn’t Genshin is Craftopia

                  Never Grave This isn’t Hollow Knight is Never Grave

                  Metroidvania and the Open World of Genshin is nothing new, Genshin share a lot of similarities with BOTW and have the combat animation similar to Nier:Automata but this company tried a lot to differentiate only in the mechanics of the game while coping the aesthetics.

                  Fuck Nintendo and miHoYo but come on don’t go and tried to emulate the aesthetic of a indie developer and than say “fight Nintendo lawsuit on behalf of fans and indie developers”.

                • Buttons@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Good call, the shape arranging mechanic existing in board game form before Tetris, and the “challenge approaching from the top of the screen” thing was a staple of many many Atari and arcade games.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I just don’t believe in copyright, IP or having fences on human culture.

      So even if they straight up put Pikachu in their game I think they have the moral right to do so. If they can make a good game with Pikachu in it, who is Nintendo to private humanity from that piece of culture?

      My statement is about morality. What’s legal or not is another matter.

      • kyle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I mean…artists should be paid for their work right? Fuck Nintendo, but that same logic could be applied to anyone. I’d be pissed if someone just straight up lifted my designs and resold it.

      • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I’m not extremely against all of copyright because I believe artists should have some protections (though the law sucks at this), but I also believe that once something becomes a decades-old billion-dollar franchise, non-identical imitation should be fair game. Can you imagine what would happen if companies could simply say that they own whole genres?

  • Harvey656@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Pocketpair is a Japanese company too right? That doesn’t bode well, Japan has some shit laws for defending these sorts of lawsuits. I really like palworld, and don’t want it to go away. Fuck Nintendo.

    • Summzashi@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 hours ago

      This isn’t about copyright. Is there anybody here that has actually read the article? It’s absolutely insane how everyone just opens their mouths without understanding anything.

      • blazera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Consider it a catch all term for “copying intellectual property”. Patents, copyrights, trademarks, its different words for the same idea.

    • pjwestin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      No, Copyright exists to protect creators. It’s just been perverted and abused by the wealthy so that they can indefinitely retain IP. Disney holding on to an IP for 70 years after an author dies is messed up, but Disney taking your art and selling it to a mass audience without giving you a dime is worse.

        • pjwestin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Literally everyone who’s ever written a book, recorded a song, painted a painting, or created any other artwork.

          • blazera@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Books and song rights go to the publisher. Graphic artists generally dont own their art they make money from, I.E. illustrations or concept art for various things like shows, movies, games.

        • nomous@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Holy fuck I see some stupid takes posted here but this might be the stupidest.

        • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Anyone who creates anything? If not for copyright Steam would be a sea of games named Undertale Stardew Valley Elsa Spider-Man

    • Ragincloo@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Idk about that, maybe indefinite copyrights would be but limited term is entirely fair. Like imagine you spend 5 years and $50M to develop something (random numbers here), then the next day someone just copies it and sells it cheaper since they had no overhead in copying your product. There’s no incentive to create if all it does is put you in debt, so we do need copyrights if we want things. However Pokemon came out in 96, that’s 28 years. There’s been very little innovation in their games since. And seeing as Digimon wasn’t sued it’s not about the monsters, it’s about the balls. But those balls haven’t changed in almost three decades so I don’t think the really have a case to complain

      • blazera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 hours ago

        The people spending 5 years to develop something arent the ones that own the rights to the end product. Like I said, copyright exists so rich people can own more. The people that own the rights to pokemon are not game developers, artists, writers, anyone that put actual work into creating the games and other media. Its people that had a lot of money, shareholders and executives. And then they receive the biggest share of the profits off others work and the feedback loop continues.

      • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 hours ago

        The problem is that IP laws eventually are lobbied by the big copyright holders into being excessively long. How long did Steamboat Willie really have to be copyrighted for, and has their release into the public domain really affected Disney?

        Eventually after you get back the money you invested, it’s just free money, and people like free money so much they pay lawyers and lobbyists that free money so that they can keep it coming.

      • Syrc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 hours ago

        However Pokemon came out in 96, that’s 28 years. There’s been very little innovation in their games since.

        First, not really, there’s been a LOT of innovation in Pokémon, as much as people want to deny it.

        And second, 28 years is really not that much. We’re not in the Disney realm of copyright-hogging, I think 50 years is a fair amount of time. The issue is that it’s often way too broad: it should protect only extremely blatant copies (i.e. the guy who literally rereleased Pokémon Yellow as a mobile game), not concepts or general mechanics. Palworld has a completely different gameplay from any Pokémon game so far, and (most of) the creatures are distinct enough. That should suffice to make it rightfully exist (maybe removing the 4/5 Pals that are absolute ripoffs, sure).

        • Teils13@lemmy.eco.br
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 hours ago

          50 years is already excessive, dude or dudette. The north american law originally gave 14 years, plus another 14 years if the creators actively sought after and were approved (most did not even ask, and approval was not guaranteed). This is comparable time to patents, which serve the exact same function, but without the absurd time scales (Imagine if Computers were still a private tech of IBM … those sweet mainframes the size of a room). 28 years, or lets put 30 years fixed at once, is more than sufficient time for making profit for the quasi totality of IPs that would make a profit (and creators can invest the money received to gain more, or have 30 years to think of something else). 30 years ago was 1994, think of everything the Star Wars prequels have sold, now remeber the 1st film was from 1999, would star wars prequels ventures really suffer if they started losing the IP from 2029 onwards ?

        • pjwestin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 hours ago

          I agree with you almost entirely, but if we’re being honest, there really hasn’t been a lot of innovation in their games since Gen 4, and that was almost 20 years ago. Once they figured out the physical/special split, nothing really changed in the major mechanics. They have a new gimmick mechanic every game, like Z-Moves or Dynamax, but they’re always dropped by the next game. I guess camping/picnics are evolving into a new feature, but that’s about it.

          • Syrc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 hours ago

            If we’re talking PvP, battling has constantly evolved through new abilities, even without gimmicks the way the game is played changed a lot through the years.

            In single player they also changed a lot of stuff since gen 4, although the positive changes were mostly in gen 5/6 and the later ones like wild areas and the switch to “””open world””” were… not as well received.

        • Petter1@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I think 50 is generally too much, but I think it should depend on categories, so that it is based upon the efforts put into an idea to create and how much it value (like in expected ROI).

          I fear, that is hard to define

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 hours ago

          50 years… 5 maybe. If you have not earned back your investment by then you are just squatting on it.

      • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 hours ago

        How about no. Let people create if your only incentive is money fuck you. If someone spent $50 million to develop something the labor has been paid. You will be first to the market and you can make money if your invention isn’t that unique oh well.

        • Womble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Thats a great way to make companies spend 0 on r&d that has longterm benefits and instead focus on squeezing out every penny from current assets.

          • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 hours ago

            So you tax the fuck out of them and fund invention though schools and unis. But the fact companies won’t is not a sure thing… it just means they will be more pickey.

          • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Want to make something, the people eho want it pay to make it happen, once it’s done and paid for, it belongs to everyone. I rather live in the star citizen dystopia than the Disney vampire dystopia.

            Making an unlimited reproducible resource artificially scarce for 160 years is really fucking evil parasiticism.

  • PenisDuckCuck9001@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    Fuck Nintendo. I think Palworld is a stupid game that I wouldn’t ever bother to play but Nintendo is pure evil and they NEED to lose. They do not deserve a monopoly on whatever type of genre that is.

  • ozoned@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Welp, I had no plans of buying Palworld. I’ve been playing Enshrouded instead. But I’ll be picking it up now. Screw you Nintendo and your anticompetitive ways.

    • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Thank you for reminding me about Enshrouded. I started playing that a few months ago, but a week into it my gamer friends wanted to start a new Valheim playthrough, and that was that. I should revisit it though