• sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Normally I’d say fuck Nintendo but palworld obviously stole the designs and artistic direction for many of their characters.

    Most of the pals I saw at first were modified versions of an already existant pokemon with little to seperate it from fan art of that pokemon. This is particularly agregoous as they clashed against the rest of this games aesthetic. Nothing that was original fit with the design of the pokemon rip offs.

    Many other games have a pokemon esque aesthetic without direct copying. It looking similar is not my issue. My issue is that while playing I could easily name most pals to a pokemon. Seriously, look up comparisons. It’s blatant.

    They’ve moved away from thisbrecently but fuck man if it ain’t obvious. If they did the same to some small project I’d assume people would be much more up in arms, rightfully so.

    Still though, I won’t cry if Nintendo loses. I hope they pay an insane amount in lawyers fees either way and never see a dime out of the case

    • stormesp@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      For real, its fun to see people shitting on Nintendo on this one, i dislike them as the most, but its absurd here. Pocket Pair just releases copies of other games, they also released a Hollow Knight copy just before Palworld, and on Palworld they almost copied the design 1 to 1 in some creatures. There is a reason you dont see Nintendo suing the other million pokemon clones, which is because they dont went of and almost even used the same geometry for some models. They straight up copied Pokemon like Lucario, Luxray, Cinderace, Cobalion and a bunch of others to the point where people showed their triangles and it was pretty certain they used ripped assets as the base for them.

      • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Copied characters is not what the lawsuit is about. It’s like nobody ‘defending’ the lawsuit has read anything about it.

    • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I am typically anti-capitalist and usually root for the underdog. Palworld is a blatant ripoff of Pokemon and those denying it are delusional. Reverse the situation, where Nintendo releases Pokemon after Pocketpair releases Palworld and everyone would be calling it a ripoff.

      Yeah, Nintendo’s legal department does some shitty stuff, but their likeness was stolen. Also, they are suing for patents, not copyright. The fact that the monsters are caught in a sphere is damning Pocketpair, while other Pokemon copies like Digimon avoid this.

      It’s just my opinion. I’m often wrong.

        • stormesp@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Cant know if you are for real, most of those designs are barely the same despite being based on the same creatures, against how palworld straight up copied designs with a few changes? Seriously, fuck Nintendo and their shitty and buggy Pokemon games, but the Dragon Quest vs Pokemon designs are not even close to what Pocket Pair, masters of copying games did here.


          • Hominine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m just going to shove these words into your mouth because I cannot grasp the obvious.

            • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              It was wrong for Nintendo to copy someone, but it’s not wrong for Pocketpair to copy someone. That’s what you are saying?

              • FaceDeer@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                It’s not wrong for either to draw inspiration from the other. It’s the hypocrisy that’s wrong.

                • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I don’t disagree with that, but the line that is drawn between inspiration and imitation is blurred and the courts will probably rule in favor of those with the most money, unfortunately.

                  • Womble@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    Nope, because Nintendo arent suing over copyright (like how the pals look) they are suing over patents, so either gameplay mechanics or under the hood processes. They are complete bullshit and involve things like a patent filed in 2024 for riding a mount in a game.

                    As others have pointed out patents in Japan expire after 20 years so it cant be anything that was in the original pokemon as that has already termed out.

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Except they didn’t steal designs and I’m pretty sure art direction can’t be protected. Even if it could, it would be morally questionable at best. The whole lawsuit also isn’t about that but about some really fringe patents on Nintendo’s part. Patents that Nintendo certainly didn’t come up with, shouldn’t have and last but not least threaten smaller studios in the game industry. Since Pocketpal teamed up with Sony, I don’t consider them indie anymore but it’s true that they have to win this lawsuit for indie devs regardless. If Nintendo gets away with this you can say farewell to smaller game studios in Japan.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The fact that Nintendo are going for a patent claim rather than a copyright claim makes me think that they don’t think a copyright claim would be successful.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Nor should it be. The standard for copyright violation is pretty high, things don’t have to just look similar, they need to actually match, so there’s no copyright over the idea of cute, Japanese-themed monsters, especially with other Japanese-themed monster games/shows like Digimon. Even if they matched the art style, you can’t copyright art style, you can only copyright the art itself.

          • dan@upvote.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Right. I just feel like they’ll find it even harder to successfully sue over patents, especially if the patents are fairly generic. The defendants just need to find prior art that predates Nintendo’s patents. It’s weird that Nintendo aren’t saying which patents are being violated.

    • Franklin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      sharing aesthetic shouldn’t be enough to prosecute, especially in the case of patents.

      My biggest defense against any claim like that is that they’re identifiably distinct. You put two of them side by side and not a single fan of either will be confused which is which.

      • _NetNomad@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        any fan could tell the difference, but i can see parents being confused, and they’re the ones footing the bill for the vast majority of pokemon fans. pair that with the guns and back in the day if my parents caught wind of it, Pokémon would be banned in my household no matter how hard i tried to explain Palworld was different

        for the record i am very anti-copyright and think Pokémon should be in the public domain by now, and generally hate Nintendo’s over-ligitous practices. i also don’t understand the patent angle of this action. but i ln this one specific case i can see where they’re coming from, as opposed to if they were going after good-faith tributes like Coromon or Cassette Beasts or a ROM hack