• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Nintendo is suing Palworld devs

kevboard

Member
no way they have a case here.
this would set a precedent that would instantly make multiple other games guilty.

like, Mighty No 9? Bloodstained? these games are such extreme copies of their inspiration that they look and feel more like the real deal than some official titles in those IPs.


or what about 20XX?
literally Zero and X from TEMU

2EC3E4BB2C1C0A7CE0E3B7357E6583B9E0DA8404
 
Last edited:

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
I don't think Palworld infringes on Nintendo's copyrights, from what I've seen. Infringing on Nintendo's patents makes even less sense. But if Nintendo filed, they're confident they have a case. We'll see.
 

solecon64

Member
Honestly, I'm with the multi-billion dollar companies on this one. The Palworld devs were flying way too close to the fun and just asking for trouble with their designs.

It's one thing to go "they have a bat, we have a bat", but tracing whole body sections from different pokemon and they mashing them together is just gross.

I kinda expect Nintendo to go all out on this one, as an example for everyone else. Because can you imagine if they lost??!? Creating the impression that it's okay to infringe on the largest entertainment ip in the world without consequences?!

There's no way the can afford to lose this one, the optics would be too damaging. They're going to be out for blood hard.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
TBH, Palworld has been proven to be outright tracing designs I'm not shocked at all
Thats exactly my point....are Nintendo asshole compony just like any other compony? Yes but should I feel sorry for Palworld devs?....fuck no!

They should have design their own original creature design just like Atlus and Capcom (MH) but no they actively decide copy Pokemon so they use that IP's popularity
 
Last edited:

donfonzie

Member
The timing of the lawsuit is very interesting. Maybe Nintendo is coming out with a new Pokémon game with the launch of Switch 2.
 
And so is other companies, you are mistaking thinking they are your friend.

They will do what it takes to protect their IP it doesn't of its justified or not and not just Nintendo, every companies will do the same.
I know they aren’t my friend. One of the 1,000 reasons I haven’t bought a NIN console since N64. This thread topic is another one of the 1,000 reasons.
 
No they are not...Akira Toriyama artstyle is very distinct.
g3lM20n.png
Zh8MGEw.png


Are these two look remotely same to you? If you think so then I'm sorry you need glasses.

They only thing both share is both are bats.
Sugimori and Tajiri both played DQ as kids. Sugimori's old style was Toriyama inspired by who WASN'T back then. It's not completely farfetched tbh.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
I know they aren’t my friend. One of the 1,000 reasons I haven’t bought a NIN console since N64. This thread topic is another one of the 1,000 reasons.
I dont buy systems or games based if the compony is gonna be my friend or not.....I demand and they supply, thats all there is to it.

Sugimori and Tajiri both played DQ as kids. Sugimori's old style was Toriyama inspired by who WASN'T back then. It's not completely farfetched tbh.
There is big difference between inspiration and just downright coping.


This doesn't look like "inspiration" to me.
T_FlowerDinosaur_icon_normal.png
153.png
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
I dont buy systems or games based if the compony is gonna be my friend or not.....I demand and they supply, thats all there is to it.


There is big difference between inspiration and just downright coping.


This doesn't look like "inspiration" to me.
T_FlowerDinosaur_icon_normal.png
153.png
Doesn't look anywhere near copyright infringement by a legal standard or plagiarism by an informal standard. Only the eyes are directly derivative.
 

Maestr0

Member
I completly forgotten that this game existed, it was big at first and then it just disappeared
 
Last edited:

solecon64

Member


We're already 2 for 2 now. I feel like they're just doing weird shit now just to postpone the Switch 2 announcement 😑
 
Played the game a bit when it came out on GP and I was surprised by the similarities like the throw/catch mechanics and monsters that are virtually identical to some Pokemon. It's so blatant that a lot of streamers simply say they're catching "Pokemon". I'm amazed Nintendo hasn't already done this.
 
every companies will do the same.

No one does, except for Nintendo.

From Software should be in the courthouse 24/7 if they were run by Nintendo lawyers. Even Hollow Knight, which has been copied ad nauseam in the recent years.

What's next? is Nintendo suing Sony for Astrobot, too? After all, the bot jumps and collects coins. And there's a giant monkey, like King.., oops, Donkey Kong.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
Doesn't look anywhere near copyright infringement by a legal standard or plagiarism by an informal standard. Only the eyes are directly derivative.
I dont really care about the legal part of it, to me Palworld devs took the cheap way to create their creature design, which makes me have less sympathy for them.

And it not like they had no idea what they were doing, they actively chose to copy Pokemon style, they should have known Nintendo eventually gonna come after them.
 

angrod14

Member
I find it hard to believe Palworld devs would've released this game without getting strong legal clearance by their lawyers, knowing how litigious Nintendo is.
 
Last edited:

Musashipan

Member
Nice
I hope they win.
Naysayers were calling for defeat against all those switch emulator and we know what happened.
Good luck Nintendo
 

near

Gold Member
They're not suing for copyright infringements which the character designs would fall under, this is a patent infringement which would possibly be some sort of gameplay mechanic. If they had a case for the character designs then Nintendo would've shut that shit down a long time ago imo. I'm curious to know what this patent is.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
No one does, except for Nintendo.

From Software should be in the courthouse 24/7 if they were run by Nintendo lawyers. Even Hollow Knight, which has been copied ad nauseam in the recent years.

What's next? is Nintendo suing Sony for Astrobot, too? After all, the bot jumps and collects coins. And there's a giant monkey, like King.., oops, Donkey Kong.
Difference Astro Bot might took inspiration form Mario games they still have their own distinct style.

I can't say the same about Palworld.

I personally dont fuck about both Pokemon or Palworld but maybe next time those devs should design their own fucking creatures.
 

near

Gold Member
Difference Astro Bot might took inspiration form Mario games they still have their own distinct style.

I can't say the same about Palworld.

I personally dont fuck about both Pokemon or Palworld but maybe next time those devs should design their own fucking creatures.
I know you're a huge Atlus fan and love Soejima's artwork. I don't want to go on a tangent but since you've had a strong stance on this for awhile. How do you feel about Atlus and Soejima using Hieronymus Bosch's work in Metaphor?

YJ05gY2.jpeg
 

tkscz

Member
A patient suit and not a copyright suit? Only way I can see them winning that is if Game freak was working on something for the Switch 2 and patient something for it before Palworld officially released or Palworld is working on content that leaked to Nintendo. Otherwise this would be a waist of time and money for both companies.
 
Last edited:
I dont buy systems or games based if the compony is gonna be my friend or not.....I demand and they supply, thats all there is to it.


There is big difference between inspiration and just downright coping.


This doesn't look like "inspiration" to me.
T_FlowerDinosaur_icon_normal.png
153.png
I buy systems based on my company not acting like Nintendo acts. If you think that is a blatant copy, that’s on you. Similar colors, sure, but “downright copying”…come on now, you are reaching.
 

Skeptical

Member
I love how half the responses here are nothing more than feeling based hot takes that have literally nothing to do about the case. I wonder how many times people have to point out that Nintendo said patent infringement and not IP infringement before those comments stop? There are gazillions of games out there that ape Nintendo's style and art. Some of them blatantly. Nintendo doesn't sue them. Maybe, just maybe, consider the thought that a company doesn't do such things lightly and might have a case?

After all, remember how this forum reacted the last time Nintendo filed a major lawsuit? Against Yuzu? And half the people were putting out hot takes yelling at Nintendo that emulation is legal and they are only doing it because they're crying that the games run better on PC or whatever? And then Yuzu folded immediately and it was obvious that Yuzu was literally stealing Nintendo's code?

It wasn't frivolous then. I don't read Japanese and I haven't seen this suit. But neither have you. But based on historical precedence, I doubt it is frivolous now.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
know you're a huge Atlus fan and love Soejima's artwork. I don't want to go on a tangent but since you've had a strong stance on this for awhile. How do you feel about Atlus and Soejima using Hieronymus Bosch's work in Metaphor?
Same way demon in SMT based on actual mythology.
5UxbDRt.png
tVZB6WG.png


I'm pretty sure there is story reason why "humans" monsters looks like Hieronymus Bosch's painting.

I dont personally see anything wrong with that.
 
Last edited:

Do you think this is what tipped the lawsuit into happening?

They'll still drain them financially via the long and drawn out litigation process.


I thought this was a hoax and proven false.

By who?

I know nothing about Japanese patent law, so I'd be curious to hear an expert take on this one. What's the likelihood that Nintendo would actually win this case, or are they just going for a settlement?

Not a lawyer, but: they're probably gonna settle out of court, and Pocketpair'll probably have to update some code and assets that were in violation or whatever.

Patent rights? That has me curious. I'm not familiar with how broadly Japan construes patent rights, but this is presumably not the claim that so many assumed Nintendo would bring against the Palworld devs back when the game first launched.

Yeah, it being a patent lawsuit kind of flips this on its side. So many questions.

-Can a company patent virtual assets, like character models?​
-Can certain game mechanics and systems be patented?​

I know that way back in the day, Namco patented the "mini-game loading screen" concept they used for early PS1 games, so no one else could use mini-games to hide loading screens unless they went through Namco. That patent expired somewhat recently (well, back in 2015).

So, if THAT can be patented, them I think certain mechanics/systems programmed in a game itself could also be patented.

Really makes me wonder how deep into Pokemon code Pocketpair went digging...
 
It was bull every time, one guy even massaged the results just to ride on the public adoration on Twitter. Same goes for AI accusations.




"This only matters to you if you ignored all the other actual 3D artists who literally already debunked this"


I don't think that actually disproves anything. That person who put the idea out there got caught up in semantics, and they might not have had any proof themselves when they started the speculation, but that doesn't mean Nintendo couldn't have found proof of their own in the meantime.

The potential issue for Palworld isn't if the model meshes are "exactly" the same; it's if they ever used any Nintendo/Game Freak Pokemon model meshes at all. They could have used those meshes, changed 99% of the mesh and slapped on different textures and be able to claim they're unique meshes, but that doesn't mean what they did was actually legal.

It's like reverse-engineering a BIOS; if you don't do it in a "clean-room" environment it doesn't matter how much of the code you end up changing. You still infringed on legal rights of the original code, and you're liable for being sued because of it. Could be a similar situation happening here with this patent lawsuit.
 
It wasn't frivolous then. I don't read Japanese and I haven't seen this suit. But neither have you. But based on historical precedence, I doubt it is frivolous now.

Stealing Nintendo code is literally STEALING. It's not in the same league, not even in the same universe, as "copying" or making similar designs for a different videogame.

Nintendo is just butthurt because someone might eat their cake. That's the whole case.



I dont personally dont see anything wrong with that.


Metaphor is using the work of famous artists without permission or copyrights. This is a more blatant case than Palworld's. The difference is that you like this perpetrator.
 
Top Bottom