Japan games industry analyst explains why Nintendo is going after Palworld, and why it’s probably going to win.

So you don’t think these patents are going after any aspect of Palworld that players would recognize as a defining feature of a Pokémon game?

I mean, there’s like a mechanic where you throw the spheres, right? And this is a very obvious, in your face system [that’s very much like Pokémon]. But I think that it will be a lot more technical than this. Nintendo would have dug through every single action inside the game, they would have probably reverse engineered it, and just find ways to sue these guys.

You can bet your life that Nintendo hates this company, and they couldn’t find an angle with the character designs. This is why they are not mentioned in their press release. So they come with these technical peculiarities. So I personally believe, if you act like this, you can sue like 90 percent of the game developers in the world. I’m sure there’s like thousands of games that have a confirmation screen when you go from sleep mode to resuming the game right, but if you basically trigger the wrath of Nintendo, they will come after you.

  • ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.placeEnglish
    7·
    2 months ago

    You haven’t read the article, have you?

    The problem is not the pals looking like Pokémon. The problem is that Nintendo has an enormous amount of software patents for stuff as dumb as “a confirmation pop-up window after resuming a game from sleep”.

    They could literally sue any videogame in the world if they wanted because of their patent trolling in software. And that is dangerous for everyone. They can sue you for patent infringement if you make a game where the players catch a creature with a sphere. Because yeah, they patented that.

    • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
      22·
      2 months ago

      I’m taking issue with the “got too big” part.

      Nintendo are patent trolls, but I think we all know why they’re going after Palworld and it won’t be about confirmation screens.

      • ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.placeEnglish
        4·
        2 months ago

        Actually that’s what they are going after. That’s why they are filing a patent infringement and not a copyright infringement cause.

        • OpenPassageways@lemmy.zipEnglish
          02·
          2 months ago

          Yes… technically. But clearly with those broad parents the could also technically go after other monster catching games that have been around forever. I think the point is that Palworld poked the bear a little too much, particularly with the character designs which look to me like they fed all 1000+ Pokemon into generative AI and slapped the results into their game. Are they getting sued for character design? No. Do I think that is a big part of WHY they are being sued? Absolutely.

          • ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.placeEnglish
            5·
            2 months ago

            Yeah but that’s not the point.

            The point is Nintendo being able to parent troll any threat they see because the Japanese patent system is so dumb and rotten that they are allowed to patent something as stupid as a confirmation window to resume a game.

            That is the real problem here. Nintendo is being shitty and has a dangerous capability to literally kill any game they don’t like.

            That’s all that matters. They can (and will, let’s not pretend they are a charity) sue potentially any competitors because of this. Nintendo is not a good company and doesn’t act in good will. They want money, and they will do whatever to get more. Shutting down a fan game by simply saying “I have more money than you so even if you’re not doing anything wrong, you can’t afford defending against me” or patent trolling any game that has even a simple confirmation window.

            • OpenPassageways@lemmy.zipEnglish
              01·
              2 months ago

              Yeah, they could. However, I think if they DID sue Digimon, TemTem, Monster Hunters, etc using the same patent trolling tactics, they’d probably have a harder time winning, because those games haven’t (as blatantly) copied Nintendo. I suspect that’s why they haven’t done so.

              • ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.placeEnglish
                3·
                2 months ago

                From the article:

                They [Colopl] have, I think, almost 2,000 [employees], nobody but knows them outside Japan but they had a famous mobile game called White Cat Project, not copying Mario, not copying Pokémon, not copying Zelda, nothing at all. Nintendo brought forward six patents […]

                One of the patents was for a confirmation screen after sleep mode. […]

                And they had five other ones, including one for isometric, pseudo, 3D games, when the character is hidden behind the tree, the game forms a shadow, so you have a kind of sense for where the character is, even though you don’t see the character clearly. Nintendo has a patent on that, […]

                Yeah, they are abusing the patent system. And yes, they potentially have a case against basically any game. This is what we should be talking about.

                • OpenPassageways@lemmy.zipEnglish
                  03·
                  2 months ago

                  And we would be talking about it, if Palworld was NOT such a blatant ripoff of Pokemon.

                  It’s like using the OJ Simpson trial as an example of how messed up the LAPD is. Is the LAPD fucked up? Yes. Is OJ Simpson someone that we should be sympathetic to? Not so much.

                  If they start going after games that are NOT blatant ripoffs of their IP, then yes, I’m much more concerned about the abuses of the patent system. Patent trolling IS a real problem, I’m just not sure if Palworld is the right catalyst for people to be sympathetic about patent trolling.

                  • ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.placeEnglish
                    3·
                    2 months ago

                    And still, Nintendo can’t sue for copyright (or doesn’t want to) which is interesting, because if it was such an evident rip off as everything says and the case was so clear, why wouldn’t they go that way?

                    There’s inspiration in the monsters, but what else? Is Pokémon an open world with survival mechanics? Can Pokémon carry weapons?

                    The problem is still the fact that Nintendo has these patents. That is the issue here. I wouldn’t argue if they made a copyright claim, but they are doing a scummy thing and they are setting a precedent that’s dangerous. Basically they’re telling a new player in Japanese business “hey, we’re the big fish, we own the place, you don’t have business here, go away”.