Palworld maker vows to fight Nintendo lawsuit on behalf of fans and indie developers : technology

[–] [email protected] 4 points 50 minutes ago* (last edited 38 minutes ago)

I'd support anything to see NIntendo get kicked in the nuts for shutting down yuzu, which could have easily continued legally by removing like 2 paragraphs and probably a few lines of code.

Also Citra which was 100% legal.

EDIT:

I also wanna mention that current Pokemon gameplay sucks, and would also kill to see GameFreak's billion dollar franchising burn. Maybe ~~15~~ 20 years ago when hardware was "limited", a low asset turn based RPG focused around pocket monsters was a fun game. Ain't no way a PS1 graphics looking game with practically zero changes to the formula can be considered AAA title in 2024. And even then they've somehow made it into an A button press simulator by nuking the difficulty.

Being completely honest, the DS hardware was not that limited (had 2 generations on it with significant upgrades despite being the same console). BW2 was probably the golden era with very well done animated sprites, overworld, features, etc. The moment it hit the 3DS, it started showing its cracks with GF continuing to develop the game without expanding the team to meet development demand.

Palworld isn't even the first challenger. TemTem gained some popularity purely for showing how much of an upgrade it was from Pokemon only a few years ago.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 hours ago

I stand by the indie studios. We have proof again and again that indies just want to reach their public.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

They're gonna fight it, but not for the fans. They're doing it for themselves. They're a company too.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 hour ago

All the same, I'm glad someone is standing up to those litigious fuckwagons.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago

They would prob do smth like this to tux kart

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Hope Nintendo lose. I don't understand why they are always the bad guy

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

The answer is money and eliminating competition for money

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

Half of Pokémon are heavily inspired by artist's (who are not affiliated with Nintendo) illustrations of popular Yokai (Japanese mythological creatures). The rest are simply animals with very generic additions. "It's a cow but bipedal" "It's a kangaroo but with horns" "It's a pigeon but... actually yeah it's just a pigeon. No difference."

How can you copyright/patent that? It's hardly original.

I say this as someone who grew up loving Pokémon.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 minutes ago

It's not for copyright infringement, it's for patent infringement. Apparently when they made Legends Arceus, Nintendo patented the idea of pointing the camera at a monster and throwing stuff at it.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It's a patent case. It has nothing to do with the creative design of the games.

But yes. Every pokemon is copyrighted. Every pal is copyrighted. (In the US) All creative work is automatically copyrighted to the creator.

You can't copyright "a standing lizard with a small flame on its tail" but you can copyright Charmander. If you copy enough elements that a lay person can't distinguish the original and the copy then it opens it up for a copyright claim.

None of that is relevant in this case.

A patent is to protect a specific invention from being copied. In this case, there is an innovative game mechanic that Nintendo patented has that Palworld copied. The speculation is with throwing an item that captures a character that fights other characters in a 3d space.

The patent is dumb. Personally I don't think it is innovative or special enough to be patented. Patenting software or game mechanic are dumb anyway.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

And hopefully something that they'll be able to find reams of prior art that precede the patent

[–] [email protected] 1 points 32 minutes ago* (last edited 47 seconds ago) (1 children)

~~Once again. Patents have nothing to do with art. And even if they had proof they worked on those mechanics before Nintendo patented them doesn't mean they have the right to use it. Yes, it's kinda a dumb system. But there is a lot of effort to get a patent, and once you have one you have a lot of protection because of it.~~

Disregard. :) see comment below

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 minutes ago* (last edited 15 minutes ago) (1 children)

(Not sure if I'm being whoosh'd, but just in case: "Prior art" is the legal term for a precedent that something was in use prior to being patented, and is the primary means of fighting software patent troll shit like nintendo is trying to pull here)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 minute ago

Nope, my bad. Im far from an expert but know enough to differential between copyright and parent. I didn't know that prior art had that meaning.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I don't play this game, but would love to donate to help the fight. Nintendo is out of control with their bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 hours ago

Buy the game.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 hours ago

Nintendo filled some vague ass patents after the game launched, they are a disgusting company that already did the same to white cat project because of some virtual analogue because they were releasing their own Dragalia Lost.

[+] [email protected] -11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

As much as I don't like Nintendo's business practises to be fair in this case many of the pals are straight up copies of Pokémon with one thing changed

Definitely a good case for Nintendo here, not sure this is a winnable battle even without the overwhelming force of Nintendo's ninjas

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

This is

PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Not COPYRIGHT

This is patent trolling because Nintendo knows they don't have a case elsewhere

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago

Ah, had thought the obvious thing for them to go for was copyright because of the obvious similarities

No reasonable person looks at palworld pals and doesn't see the heavy similarities with pokemon

[+] [email protected] -30 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

I mean, Nintendo isn't typically the bad guy though, right? And palworld is a pretty clear like 1:1 rip, so....

I mean, good to challenge the "big" guy generally, but wrong target here specifically and weak case, right?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 13 hours ago

I think this is sarcasm, right? They are literally the bad guy. Nintendo does not hesitate to destroy people's life if they can. Just one example: https://www.pcgamer.com/gary-bowser-charged-with-paying-nintendo-a-sum-hell-never-be-able-to-afford-talks-about-his-life-after-prison-the-sentence-was-like-a-message-to-other-people/

[–] [email protected] 25 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

What parallel universe did you come from? Nintendo is like the company known to be a bad guy when it comes to IP lawsuits. They went after a Smash Bros tournament for emulating a game they literally don't sell anymore for a console they also no longer produce.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago

Wasn't talking IP, meant more generally like how orgs like EA and Activision are the go to assholes in gaming, generally. Feel like I don't hear about Nintendo in the more meaningful (In my opinion) microtransactions, mass layoffs, ridiculous price increases, attempts to kill physical media optionality, etc conversations...

As long as IP is the law we live under, I don't really mind them enforcing that part. I think it was a bit lazy for palworld to blatantly ripoff Pokemon when they could be creative and make their own character universe. If you're mad at IP law, go after your reps in government.

Technology

Our Rules

Approved Bots