Why is everyone here pretending like palworld isn’t a straight up Pokemon clone that went a bit too close with the designs? I mean the game was basically marketed as pokemon with guns. I know you guys have this new hate for Nintendo, but this isn’t even them.
If I made a game about an Italian contractor with a red hat and mustache that fights mushroom people and turtles, you guys would defend it and claim it isn’t a copyright issue lol
Why is everyone here pretending like palworld isn’t a straight up Pokemon clone that went a bit too close with the designs? I mean the game was basically marketed as pokemon with guns. I know you guys have this new hate for Nintendo, but this isn’t even them.
Because it doesn’t matter. Palworld isn’t getting sued for copyright infringement, it is being sued for patent infringement.
If I made a game about an Italian contractor with a red hat and mustache that fights mushroom people and turtles, you guys would defend it and claim it isn’t a copyright issue lol
Again, Nintendo isn’t suing for copyright infringement, but for patent infringement. It’s more like Nintendo suing Monster Hunter Stories for allowing you to ride your monsters (this is literally one of the patents Pal World is getting sued for).
I will never understand when people engage in volunteer (i.e. unpaid) PR work for some random company.
Criticizing a company for lazy patent trolling (a patent for riding a mount?) is not engaging in “hate crimes against video games”.
Nintendo is welcome to release good products on multiple platforms (Palworld runs on PC) to compete with Palworld. Crazy idea, I know!
One would think I should patent the concept of releasing good games to compete with other companies, but out of the goodness of my heart I will release this unique idea into the public domain.
If your opinion is identical to the corporate sourced PR copytext (not to mention the condescending style - “everyone knows”), then yes it is de facto PR work.
Even if it were an exact clone I don’t think a single company should have a monopoly on the idea for almost 30 years. Pokemon red was released in 1996, 28 years ago. Why should they still be able to be the only company that releases pokemon-type games?
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25721238/palworld_anubis.jpg)
Why is everyone here pretending like palworld isn’t a straight up Pokemon clone that went a bit too close with the designs? I mean the game was basically marketed as pokemon with guns. I know you guys have this new hate for Nintendo, but this isn’t even them.
If I made a game about an Italian contractor with a red hat and mustache that fights mushroom people and turtles, you guys would defend it and claim it isn’t a copyright issue lol
Because it doesn’t matter. Palworld isn’t getting sued for copyright infringement, it is being sued for patent infringement.
Again, Nintendo isn’t suing for copyright infringement, but for patent infringement. It’s more like Nintendo suing Monster Hunter Stories for allowing you to ride your monsters (this is literally one of the patents Pal World is getting sued for).
I will never understand when people engage in volunteer (i.e. unpaid) PR work for some random company.
Criticizing a company for lazy patent trolling (a patent for riding a mount?) is not engaging in “hate crimes against video games”.
Nintendo is welcome to release good products on multiple platforms (Palworld runs on PC) to compete with Palworld. Crazy idea, I know!
One would think I should patent the concept of releasing good games to compete with other companies, but out of the goodness of my heart I will release this unique idea into the public domain.
So pointing out my opinion is PR work now? Stupid fascist
“Everyone I don’t like is a fascist!”
Just Americans. You guys are fascist idiots
If your opinion is identical to the corporate sourced PR copytext (not to mention the condescending style - “everyone knows”), then yes it is de facto PR work.
Even if it were an exact clone I don’t think a single company should have a monopoly on the idea for almost 30 years. Pokemon red was released in 1996, 28 years ago. Why should they still be able to be the only company that releases pokemon-type games?