How about they everyone just focus on making shit instead of worrying about who owns the gameplay from a toy that’s old enough to have a quarter life crisis now.
Heh, good one. Just think about it for a second - what would then Nintendo do with their whole office building full of lawyers?
Give them jobs as playtesters
I’m not defending Nintendo, because they are a shithouse of a company, but I do feel Pocketpair could have avoided all these wasted legal fees by not just blatantly copying a bunch of very recognisable Pokemon, and at best recolouring them, or giving them another Pokemon’s ears.
That’s not why they were sued tho
It does feel a little like going after Al Capone on tax evasion, but here we are.
There’s other games that do the sued for things, and they didn’t get sued. Tem Tem, etc. World of Warcraft’s pet system was very Pokemon-like.
Palworld isn’t even like Pokemon games. It’s Ark Survival Evolved with a Fortnite look and Pokemon instead of dinosaurs, as far as I can tell.
Blatantly swiping the art style and several Pokemon designs, and plastering it all over their marketing clearly pissed somebody at Nintendo off. They decided to sic the lawyers on them for something, even if it wasn’t what they were angry about.
Which pals used Pokemon trademarked material?
That yellow Gengar with a machine gun on all their advertising for starters.
It’s like when you go to Aldi and see their knock-off products. Although Tunnock’s don’t have a copyright on stripes, diamond shapes, red, gold, chocolate, wafers, or caramel, there’s no accident that their own brand can be mistaken for the real thing if you’re not paying attention.
And sure, it may well hold up in court, but it’s still going to be expensive finding that out.
They never hoped to win, they just wanted to drain Pocketpair’s money with lawyer expenses
Games Fray’s report claims Nintendo now has “zero chance” of prevailing against current Palworld versions under the revised scope, arguing that any injunction would apply only to older builds. The outlet also said the maximum damages at stake would be 5 million yen, roughly $30,000, if Nintendo succeeds on the remaining claims.
Oh what a return for the widespread disgust. No such thing as bad PR right guys? lol
No such thing as bad pr when your company has millions of brainwashed fans who have literally never played any other games.
I know a lot of people including me that haven’t bought a switch 2 after owning every nintendo console released in their lifetime because they’re disgusted with with Nintendo’s behavior. I’m sure some percentage of them will cave eventually but it’s definitely a non-zero amount of money they’ve left on the table by being like this
That’s okay. Youtubers still buy the new Nintendo games and consoles day fucking one all in the name of “cOnTeNt”. (RTGame, Poofesure, and others)
So basically good fucking luck trying to get anyone to change when you have people advertising for Nintendo basically for free.
Or we can watch those YouTubers to still partake in Nintendo games while not buying anything.
I watch maybe 5 minutes of any of those Nintendo game videos because after those 5 minutes it becomes incredibly stale and boring looking at the same bright colors and round shapes all the goddamn time.
Also the fact that almost all Nintendo games amount to what is essentially a fancy arcade game with not a lot of depth to them.
What are they gonna do? Hack into my PC and send a lawyer to my house demanding I remove the version that has round balls? Kiss my ass Nintendo!
Yes, they will.
Who do they think they are, WotC?
Magic The Gathering is known for it’s 5 color card system. Red, Blue, Black, White and Green.
But the most dangerous color is Pink.
Even the older versions were vastly different, and Nintendo’s patents are both exceptionally vague and infringe on older works. Hopefully this keeps reducing until it collapses entirely. Any win for Nintendo, even minor, will give precedence for future lawsuits.
That’s not how the law works. It’s not a thing where this company sued another company for patents and won, therefore all future lawsuits on patents automatically win. There may be some precedent about specific details in the case, but there’s no reason to assume a future judge in a future case wouldn’t rule in the same way even if this case never existed. Seems to me precedence paranoia is just some internet lawyer thing.
The strangest thing about this case is that Nintendo didn’t sue for trademark infringement or copyright. I assume Pikachu is trademarked and this company had a Pikachu with a machine gun on the cover of their game. Looks like an easy win for trademark infringement, given everyone referred to it as Pokeman with guns.
There is no Pikachu in the game. While it does take inspiration from Pokémon certainly, that is perfectly legal. Imagine the shit hole the art world would be in if you couldn’t take inspiration from previous works. Their argument is about mechanics, and their mechanics aren’t particularly unique anyway.
It’s amazing how people will pretend an image of a pikachu isn’t a pikachu because they feel like supporting one company over another is some kind of rebellious act.
It’s an electric rat, but it isn’t even close to Pikachu. Anyone who’s saying it is isn’t being honest.
Anyway, you ignored the entire point of the comment. Inspiration is perfectly legal. Making something reminiscent of existing artwork is protected. If it weren’t, making anything would be illegal.
I’m not supporting them. I played the game and I don’t really care for it. I just know that it isn’t illegal to make art that resembles someone else’s, as long as it isn’t trying to be passed off as theirs. Yeah, they’re style is similar. No one is debating that. That’s not illegal though. If it were, Nintendo would be sueing over that, but they aren’t. Either you think you’re smarter than Nintendo lawyers or you’re just trying to be obnoxious.
No, it’s just a monster capture and battling game. Their issue most definitely losing Pokemon sales to this game but the lawsuit they went with is in relation to a patient on throwing a ball and a creature being summoned to do battle. So Palworld removed the ball throwing aspect and the creature now just appears which is why they are now focusing on older versions of the game that still contain that.
I wasn’t aware that they had a ball throwing mechanic in the game. Considering the context they put a Pikachu with a machine gun on the cover, yeah they were just copying someone else’s shit.
No, it’s just a monster capture and battling game.
Do you really believe the similarities are coincidental? Like if Pokeman didn’t exist, they would’ve had the character on the cover look like that and would’ve had players collecting creatures with balls?
They’re obviously just ripping off someone else’s ideas.
Actually play it and give it a shot. You’ll see how unlike pokemon it actually is. And you may just have some fun.
