• mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours 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.

  • obbeel@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 hours ago

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

  • Jeanschyso@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

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

  • OutrageousUmpire@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Rooting for Nintendo on this one. Palworld was dumb, you can’t just steal others’ IP without consequences. They could have made things just different enough… But they didn’t, they were dumb.

  • demizerone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 hours ago

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

  • Egg_Egg@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    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.

  • Jin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 hours ago

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

  • yamanii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 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.

  • Prethoryn Overmind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    23 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.

    • kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Well arguably they can’t legally but… Bludgeoning people with lawyers regardless of legality is pretty standard big business behaviour

  • Buttons@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    157
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day 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

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 day 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
        27
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day 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?

          • webadict@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Hey man, I’m future you. I here to give past me a warning. You keep looking like a complete fool and when you look for evidence to support your false claims, it turns out you were wrong the whole time, so you built a time machine to stop yourself. Anyway, the warning is to only use 1.11 Jiggawatts, as you miss the return time to stop yourself from looking foolish by about a day. Good luck!

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Hey, further future you, due to the nature of paradoxes your specific version doesn’t exist as a result of this timeline; and thank fuck for that because you’re a total loser.

          • BigPotato@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            The ludicrousness is the point. “Capture a creature in a ball”… How close is that to Red Dead’s lasso? Could Nintendo patent capturing a creature with a rope? Does anyone hold that patent yet? No, it would be silly to try to patent something like that - yet at one point I’m certain it was someone’s “technique” while everyone else was jumping on the horses back like Breath of the Wild.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              13 hours ago
              1. This thread started with a general statement about patent laws with a glaring innacuracy that it applied to noncommercial applications and in perpetuity. That is what I argued against. I fully support PalWorld.

              2. If that were Nintendo’s justification they would lose instantly. You can patent and/or claim intellectual property for very specific named designs, but you cannot do so for vague narrative concepts. Example: PokeBalls in various colorschemes is a go, but “a ball that capture creatures” is not good enough to patent.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              edit-2
              23 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
                12
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                23 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
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  16
                  ·
                  23 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.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          idk, but the user above me made a general statement about patent laws and I responded in kind.

    • Cock_Inspecting_Asexual@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day 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

      I was mislead about what the lawsuit was about and Im retracting all my statements thank you :’ )

      • Veneroso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day 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
          2
          ·
          1 day 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
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 day 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
            3
            ·
            1 day 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
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 day 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
                3
                ·
                23 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.

      • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 day 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
          2
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 day 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.

          • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 day 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.

          • rain_worl@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

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

  • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day 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.

    • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day 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…
    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      23 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
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      24 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.

      • FatCrab@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        There is an era of patents from the late 90s through the early-mid-00s that were insanely vague and rarely stand up to scrutiny, but most are expiring at this point, if they haven’t already. Generally, though, patents are not granted on “concepts” but on implementations. That’s a sometimes ambiguous line, but that’s a fundamental principle of modern patents.

    • Charzard4261@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day 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
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day 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
          9
          ·
          1 day 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
            4
            ·
            1 day 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
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day 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.

    • FatCrab@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Oh wow, this suit is shaping up to be silly. I didn’t realize it was filed in Japan, too. That makes the patent aspect even shakier. Japan has no discovery process like in the US, which is generally very necessary for many software-related patents as, assuming they have a strong likelihood of surviving challenge, they are typically drawn to processes that are completely obfuscated from the user and outside observes.

  • flashgnash@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    10 hours ago

    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