Support NeoGAF

[Kerotan]

"Alleged"
More like blatant.

 

[Hypereides]

To be honest, the tencent cheap knock off version of the protagonist looks more beautiful.

That's Sony's/Hulst's real concern here.

 

[Loope]

I mean...

What the fuck?

 

[Vaquilla]

Nintendo lawsuit is not about plagiarism or copyright. It's about patent infringement.
A patent about game mechanics so vague it could be applied to thousands of games of many different genres and they are trying to amend it mid lawsuit.

If Sony was complaining about patent infringement then it would be the same.

Let's be real, the Palworld suit's not actually about patents, not really; if the game had the exact same gameplay but didn't copy-paste Pokémon's designs, the lawsuit would never have happened.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Let's be real, the Palworld suit's not actually about patents, not really; if the game had the exact same gameplay but didn't copy-paste Pokémon's designs, the lawsuit would never have happened.

What matters to courts is the text of the lawsuit, and it mentions patent infringement, not likeness or copyrights.

 

[Mephisto40]

TBH I'd probably be trying to sue them too looking at the video footage posted on the first page, it's not even debatable that it's ripped off pretty much everything aesthetic wise from Horizon

It doesn't exactly help that the original trailer footage makes the Tencent game look like Horizon gameplay wise, when you see the actual footage of the game playing it looks janky and less similar. They've clearly done that on purpose with the first trailer to make it look like the game plays more like horizon when it's actually more like a Genshin clone

 

[Goalus]

They shouldn't be sued, they should be praised for trying to improve it.

 

[Danny22]

Is there any expensive looking obvious knockoffs like this. I know the mobile market is full of these but those are cheap usually just made a dude or two. This one actually looks like a proper game while it blatantly copies.

I feel like they already had this game when they approached Sony, got rejected and decided to release it anyways, probably just changing a name or two here and there.

TO WAR! NO ONE WILL DISGRACE MY ALOY!!!

Herman should be flattered, the more aloy, the merrier

 

[Astray]

I think Sony will have no problem winning this.

The problem is not winning, the problem is enforcing the win.

Is there any expensive looking obvious knockoffs like this. I know the mobile market is full of these but those are cheap usually just made a dude or two. This one actually looks like a proper game while it blatantly copies.

I feel like they already had this game when they approached Sony, got rejected and decided to release it anyways, probably just changing a name or two here and there.

Herman should be flattered, the more aloy, the merrier

Easy to make great looking games for cheap when you're ripping off an entire art style, music styling and character/monster designs.

 

[Herbspiceguy]

Acting like this is different, entirely even, than Nintendo suing Pocketpair sounds like some hard fanboy cope.

Look, if you're okay with Palworld, you should be okay with Motiram.

Both games are also very similar in gameplay loop: gathering & crafting simulator with exploration and big boss fights:



They're basically both Rust, but with a Pokémon and Horizon flavor.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Let's be real, the Palworld suit's not actually about patents, not really; if the game had the exact same gameplay but didn't copy-paste Pokémon's designs, the lawsuit would never have happened.

That is pretty obvious, but that's not the case at all. More reason to criticize Nintendo's cowardice to pretend it's about something that clearly isn't. It's pathetic that a giant like Nintendo go after fellow japanese knockoffs. Loser mentality.

This case is not only different because of the relationship between Sony and Tencent. Besides, the resemblance to Horizon was made for promotions, the actual game doesnt feature a ginger protagonis (it's a MMO) and its mechanics are very different from Horizon, the resemblance was purposefully made for the pitch and the reveal.

Tencent will win easily when they show what the actual game looks like. Sony is stupid to bother with this.

 

[Vaquilla]

That is pretty obvious, but that's not the case at all. More reason to criticize Nintendo's cowardice to pretend it's about something that clearly isn't. It's pathetic that a giant like Nintendo go after fellow japanese knockoffs. Loser mentality.

This case is not only different because of the relationship between Sony and Tencent. Besides, the resemblance to Horizon was made for promotions, the actual game doesnt feature a ginger protagonis (it's a MMO) and its mechanics are very different from Horizon, the resemblance was purposefully made for the pitch and the reveal.

Tencent will win easily when they show what the actual game looks like. Sony is stupid to bother with this.

It's no different really.

Palworld and Light of Motirum are both blatant plagiarism, and both Tencent and Pocket Pair should face consequences for stealing other people's intellectual property.

 

[Alexios]

Folks that would mistake screenshots of one for the other, never mind actual footage, simply don't have the eye to even appreciate the art they're claiming they're defending from copycats, the games look distinctly different. Even in Sony's presentation of their case they show one Tencent monster twice supposedly copying two very different Horizon designs so which one is it a clone of then, it can't be a clone of both as they also differ to each other, lol, might as well say they copied Rising's Blade Wolf or something. The others are also about as different as that and they've just tried hard to get bad enough quality and certain angle snapshots to have their rough silhouette blend together more than they really do, not to mention padding the list of displayed similarities with just vaguely similar forested areas that look like any number of other games. Post apoc with forgotten high tech isn't a fresh concept either, from Nausicaa to Panzer Dragoon and the artworks that inspired those to begin with (and they weren't sued even despite stating their inspirations plainly and occasionally worked with such creators for promotional material after the fact rather than get them pissed off).

Lol at the blatant racist hatred in here, like the west hasn't had companies like Gameloft actually cloning shit left and right, no, it's just Chinese studios actually making completely different games like this that copy stuff, we don't have a gazillion western Fortnite-likes, Zelda-likes, Smash Bros-likes, Mario-likes, Pokemon-likes, Gorilla Tag-likes, Overwatch-likes or whatever other popular or even unpopular shit, whether from indies or AAA studios there's far more blatant stuff than this from every region and then some (it's only getting worse and will get more so thanks to AI too eventually). Shit, so many big genres started off because people were making actual copycats and clones of one popular game (whether it invented or iterated the core idea) but eventually branched off to adding new twists (or even not doing that as recently with Souls-likes which often don't bother).

Trying to licence the IP has no bearing or anything, they could just as easily ask Capcom to licence MH and had they accepted just change from a vaguely similar but original setting like this to actually working with Capcom's designs or provided assets with a different final result, same for any IP. Shit would have loved if they asked Sega for the Panzer Dragoon IP and have a game like this take place in the Panzer Dragoon world, I've been wanting something like that since I first played Monster Hunter as it didn't use to have such a great setting itself and would have been improved with it.

 

[Mephisto40]

Acting like this is different, entirely even, than Nintendo suing Pocketpair sounds like some hard fanboy cope.

Look, if you're okay with Palworld, you should be okay with Motiram.

Both games are also very similar in gameplay loop: gathering & crafting simulator with exploration and big boss fights:



They're basically both Rust, but with a Pokémon and Horizon flavor.

I don't think it helps at all that the original announcement trailer isn't particularly reflective of what the game actually plays like, and seems to have purposely tried to mislead people into thinking the game plays more Like Horizon than it does games like Genshin Impact

 

[Astray]

Acting like this is different, entirely even, than Nintendo suing Pocketpair sounds like some hard fanboy cope.

Look, if you're okay with Palworld, you should be okay with Motiram.

Both games are also very similar in gameplay loop: gathering & crafting simulator with exploration and big boss fights:



They're basically both Rust, but with a Pokémon and Horizon flavor.

It's actually entirely different due to two factors:

- Tencent literally approached Sony to license the IP got rejected, then went to continue work on their rip-off. Pocketpair didn't have any contact with Nintendo over anything prior to releasing Palworld.
- Nintendo is suing over gameplay patents, not IP infringement (I would actually be ok with them suing over that if they want to, it's their call to sue over that and whether they win or not is up to the courts).

Also the stakes are entirely different: If Sony is successful then devs don't get to specifically rip off Horizon anymore and they free to grow/ruin their IP as they want, however, if Nintendo wins against Pocketpair then every single big publisher will start patenting every gameplay mechanic under the sun, get ready for lawsuits about who invented double-jumping and gliding moves in games, get ready for entire gameplay mechanics to be patented and vaulted with zero usage like what's already happened with Monolith's Nemesis system.

One lawsuit is a pissing contest between megacorps, the other threatens to upend gaming as we know it.

 

[Robb]

it can't be a clone of both as they also differ to each other, lol,

Of course it can, technically. If I take the head of Joel from TLoU and attach it to the giraffe from that same game it's not suddenly original creation. It's just a copy of two of their models mashed into one.

 

[Alexios]

Of course it can, technically. If I take the head of Joel from TLoU and attach it to the giraffe from that same game it's not suddenly original creation. It's just a copy of two of their models mashed into one.

Then to display that you'd show a portrait shot of the abomination's head vs Joel's head and not pretend you invented primates and artiodactyls so nobody else can do those. Wasn't talking theoretically anyway, my mention was for specific things, which are not like you describe at all, but exactly as I said instead, with three different monster designs that simply all riff on canine features, like countless other video game enemies/characters prior, which they can't copyright (just as they can't copyright robotic versions, see Blade Wolf mentioned above, guess Konami should sue them all too).

Showing the mounted bits is the cherry on top as Nintendo also argued that with Palworld and folks found that ridiculous there but now it's so legit because it's robotic mounts, even if those compared are also very different, one more canine the other more horse-like and very different designs.

 

[Robb]

Wasn't talking theoretically

Yeah, and I can't recall their example. I'm just saying.

not pretend you invented primates and artiodactyls and nobody can have those.

I'm not sure I understand. Designs of ordinary things are patented all the time. You can't just take the fish from Disney's "Finding Nemo" and put it in whatever you want, for example.

 

[Alexios]

I'm not sure I understand. Designs of ordinary things are patented all the time. You can't just take the fish from Disney's "Finding Nemo" and put it in whatever you want, for example.

But you can't stop people from making other talking fish, only that specific, unique character (just like Joel's face, but not all humans). Not sure what's hard to understand, the designs and art style are different, they aren't clones/copies. Sony tries to claim otherwise I guess, it doesn't make it true...

 

[Robb]

But you can't stop people from making other talking fish, only that specific, unique character (just like Joel's face earlier). Not sure what's hard to understand here, the designs and art style are different, they aren't clones/copies. Sony tries to claim otherwise I guess, doesn't make it true though.

Oh, yeah I agree. I just interpreted your comment differently I think.

Like, it sounded to me that you were saying that if you put the hands of a Squirtle on the body of a Pikachu with the legs of a Charizard and the head of a Beedrill it wouldn't be infringement.

 

[NeoLed]

Its probably well made, but that's irrelevant.

The people acting like Sony don't have the right to protect their IP in this thread do my head in. They actually make me angry.

Here's the basic premise: Can you (the creator of a thing) object to having your work cloned by a mega-corporation ?

That seems to me, a pretty reasonable ask.

Blatant copy paste like the Marathon case, yes. I'll support the original creator
But inspired designs, not really. Sony own a chubby ginger named Aloy who wear tribal outfit mixed with white plating. But Sony dont't own similiar dressed characters with different names and appearances (that are not created by them). Those red grass tho, that's looks like a copy paste, but is red grass an IP owned by Sony?

 

[demigod]

After this, I don't want to hear SHIT from Sony fans about the Palworld lawsuit.

Who are you even talking about? Palworld is 100% plagiarism and so is this.

 

[ANIMAL1975]

Good!
Now Sony fans that laughed at us when we shout out about palworld blalant ripoff feel in the skin how we felt.

Spoiler

I'm sarcasm lol

 

[demigod]

nial Can you please add the court doc link to the OP

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.453426/gov.uscourts.cand.453426.1.0.pdf

Also interesting to see that Tencent started development of the game before they asked for the IP license, then just continued along after being told no.

It's hilarious to see folks defending Tencent, they are going to lose badly.

 

[Clear]

Blatant copy paste like the Marathon case, yes. I'll support the original creator
But inspired designs, not really. Sony own a chubby ginger named Aloy who wear tribal outfit mixed with white plating. But Sony dont't own same dressed characters with different names and appearances (that are not created by them). Those red grass tho, that's looks like a copy paste, but is red grass an IP owned by Sony?

I don't really want to be rude, but if you can't concede how blatantly plagiarized the marketing materials are for Motiram, you need your eyes testing! This is a blatant as it gets, way worse in my view than the Marathon stuff due to extent - this is more than textures being copied. Its everythig down to the 3 syllables used in its short-form title.

The real issue though is people playing favourites based on how much they like/dislike the work itself or its owners.

This is not a principled position. Its fanboy bullshit that has no place in a serious discussion of intellectual property rights. Especially when the rise of AI generated content is going to involve asking a lot of deep questions about the value of human creativity in the face of hyper-automated mass derivation from such works.

When it comes down to it, this is about whether we see value in artistic invention, and protection of that creative impulse as a fundamental right under the law, or decide to be a consumerist drone who's happy slurping up munged-up/recycled shit because its cheap and freely accessible thanks to our corporate overlords.

This should not be a difficult choice.

 

[demigod]

actually, you really can. there are a tons of exceptions, take for example parody.

I could make a can of soup that looks like with a joke logo or some bullshit and pass it of as my own if I claim it is a parody

there are other exceptions as well. it is exceptionally hard to prevail on copyright cases

diffusionx is correct, you cannot do blatant copies. Look up Oreo vs Aldi.

 

[NeoLed]

I don't really want to be rude, but if you can't concede how blatantly plagiarized the marketing materials are for Motiram, you need your eyes testing! This is a blatant as it gets, way worse in my view than the Marathon stuff due to extent - this is more than textures being copied. Its everythig down to the 3 syllables used in its short-form title.

The real issue though is people playing favourites based on how much they like/dislike the work itself or its owners.

This is not a principled position. Its fanboy bullshit that has no place in a serious discussion of intellectual property rights. Especially when the rise of AI generated content is going to involve asking a lot of deep questions about the value of human creativity in the face of hyper-automated mass derivation from such works.

When it comes down to it, this is about whether we see value in artistic invention, and protection of that creative impulse as a fundamental right under the law, or decide to be a consumerist drone who's happy slurping up munged-up/recycled shit because its cheap and freely accessible thanks to our corporate overlords.

This should not be a difficult choice.

So let's say IP holder of Lord of the Rings should be able to sue anyone who have long eared humanoid and short stocky humanoid with beards in a medieval settings? Is that how IP works?

 

[SirTerry-T]

Monster Hunter Vs Zoids.
So pretty much Horizon ...

 

[diffusionx]

So let's say IP holder of Lord of the Rings should be able to sue anyone who have long eared humanoid and short stocky humanoid with beards in a medieval settings? Is that how IP works?

No, it's not how it works. However, the IP holder of Lord of the Rings can sue anyone who makes a game set in a fantasy world with long earned humanoids and short stocky humanoids with beards who live in rustic holes in the ground, and a wizard with a long white beard and a valiant knight and short stocky humanoids who are on a quest to go to a volcano to dispose of a ring that grants the holder great power, with a great evil using risen armies of violent orcs to try to find it.

I really am surprised people don't understand this.

 

[demigod]

Dude you hate sony/playstation so much that it's clouded your judgment on this tread and numerous other ones. Here's some of your quotes exposing yourself and your hatred for a console you don't even own in your own words 'ps5'.

Another green rat hiding his profile, goodness the receipts.

 

[diffusionx]

Acting like this is different, entirely even, than Nintendo suing Pocketpair sounds like some hard fanboy cope.

it is different. Nintendo is suing Palworld for patent infringement and Sony is suing for copyright infringement. They are both protections granted to people/companies who make original work, but are different.

Trademark, patent, or copyright

Trademarks, patents, and copyrights are different types of intellectual property, learn the differences between them.

www.uspto.gov

 

[Musashipan]

Chinese one looks much much better and no ugly main character.
They just took inspiration from it lol. sony you villain

 

[GamesDontSuck]

I opened up this thread and never heard of Light of Motiram.

So did a google search before reading anymore and come on! it is a total rip off. At least try to change it up a little so you TRY and not get sued.

 

[Clear]

So let's say IP holder of Lord of the Rings should be able to sue anyone who have long eared humanoid and short stocky humanoid with beards in a medieval settings? Is that how IP works?

You are simplifying to the point of absurdity!

What you describe is too vague to be defensible; however depicting that with characters that bear a strong likeness to the cast/performers of Peter Jackson's depiction of those characters in his movies, is going to get you in trouble.

Its called "look and feel" for a reason. If a product apes a pre-existing product so closely that it could be seen as operating as a market substitute through confusion/conflation of brand and identity it can be challenged in court.

For instance you can copy the fundamentals of a Mario platformer so long as you aren't stupid enough to make it too blatant. e.g. Great Giana Sisters was the only clone of SMB to ever get pulled despite it forming the basic template for almost an entire generation of scrolling platform games

In simple terms, you can "scratch the same itch" for consumers provided you don't be so blatant that the similarities could potentially cause market confusion and loss of income for the originator.

 

[ElRenoRaven]

So Horizon with you having a Ghost from Destiny. Yes yes that video screams sue us.

 

[pulicat]

Tencent game is actually
-Survival and crafting game similar to Palworld
-Focus on Melee combat
-Companion leveling
-Good character design

Astro Bot is closer to the definition of Rip-off than this tencent game from actual gameplay point of view.

 

[Herbspiceguy]

it is different. Nintendo is suing Palworld for patent infringement and Sony is suing for copyright infringement. They are both protections granted to people/companies who make original work, but are different.

Trademark, patent, or copyright

Trademarks, patents, and copyrights are different types of intellectual property, learn the differences between them.

www.uspto.gov

The technicalities may be different, but the intent is 100% the same.

 

[Astray]

I never denied hating Sony. On the contrary, I'm extremely vocal about it.

What does that have to do with Nintendo?

If you are a hater then at least be good at it.

Let's be real, the Palworld suit's not actually about patents, not really; if the game had the exact same gameplay but didn't copy-paste Pokémon's designs, the lawsuit would never have happened.

Which in itself is telling imo. They knew their chances of winning that weren't as good as their chances of winning a patent infringement lawsuit (still not a lock either).

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Tencent game is actually
-Survival and crafting game similar to Palworld
-Focus on Melee combat
-Companion leveling
-Good character design

Astro Bot is closer to the definition of Rip-off than this tencent game from actual gameplay point of view.

Fucking hell, Pikmins always manage to take the conversation to new heights of insanity. Kudos.

 

[diffusionx]

The technicalities may be different, but the intent is 100% the same.

The intent is to protect their respective IPs which is why these protections exist. The details matter in a sober discussion (which this is not) and each case should be judged on its own merits.

 

[NeoLed]

You are simplifying to the point of absurdity!

What you describe is too vague to be defensible; however depicting that with characters that bear a strong likeness to the cast/performers of Peter Jackson's depiction of those characters in his movies, is going to get you in trouble.

Its called "look and feel" for a reason. If a product apes a pre-existing product so closely that it could be seen as operating as a market substitute through confusion/conflation of brand and identity it can be challenged in court.

For instance you can copy the fundamentals of a Mario platformer so long as you aren't stupid enough to make it too blatant. e.g. Great Giana Sisters was the only clone of SMB to ever get pulled despite it forming the basic template for almost an entire generation of scrolling platform games

In simple terms, you can "scratch the same itch" for consumers provided you don't be so blatant that the similarities could potentially cause market confusion and loss of income for the originator.

I saw the gameplay video, I don't feel these two share the same itch. Share aesthetics, play quite differently. Know nothing about the stories/lores

 

[Astray]

Fucking hell, Pikmins always manage to take the conversation to new heights of insanity. Kudos.

I will be stealing this lol.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Maybe the fact that the NCSoft partnership started in 2022, while Tencent didn't pitch this project until 2024?
Cancelling an already established project in development just for the sake of seeing how Tencent's sticks the landing? Allowing both projects to the market and inevitably see market cannibalization? I know you're in your 'bitch eating crackers' phase with SIE, but it's amazing how you don't see the way this can completely fuck with your partners, or BOTH on the second case.

Not saying SIE should've cancelled the NCSoft game, but rather just go with both. Fund the NCSoft one, give Tencent a license to Horizon for theirs. Let the games come to market, see which one does best and support that one going forward. OR, maybe they both do well, so now you've got two sources of income instead of one, and you didn't have to spend any development dollars for one of them whatsoever (the Tencent one).

This is the same SIE that wants a pipeline of sustainable GAAS, right? The one that apparently values Horizon as an IP very high, right? I'm surprised Herman wouldn't want two Horizon GAAS from two outside companies on the market. Potentially redundant? Maybe. But the market would solve that problem on its own, and this is a case where SIE wouldn't have tied up their own internal single-player studios on GAAS or have spent hundreds of millions acquiring a studio simply for GAAS.

Again, do I think SIE have a strong case against Tencent here? Considering what's on display, yes certainly. They're in the right to sue going off just principle, just like Nintendo's lawsuit against the Palworld devs. But in SIE's case, it won't do jack shit for them in China; in fact this lawsuit could very likely negatively impact PlayStation growth in the Chinese market. Tencent have home court advantage over there; if they want to get way more aggressive cockblocking SIE out of future major Chinese titles as retaliation for this lawsuit they could absolutely do it. So from that POV, SIE should've probably gritted their teeth, looked at the bigger picture and worked out a deal with Tencent so they could get the Horizon license for their game.

Maybe they can do that out of court with a settlement; however IMO if this goes to court the whole way through, that opportunity will be dead and if SIE loses the case somehow, I don't expect Tencent to just stop with this game. They'd probably try pretty hard to stifle SIE & PlayStation's growth in the Chinese gaming market through more direct competition. If SIE are willing to risk that with the lawsuit, then I guess they see the upside being that a win can prevent Tencent from releasing the game as-is outside of China, it'll set a legal precedent, and maybe the block for markets outside of China will force Tencent to avoid this type of practice going forward.

I mean, Tencent would probably still be more directly competitive with SIE in China in getting software deals, funding 3P initiatives and hell maybe even making their own "console" for the Chinese market to compete against PlayStation. It's just if SIE win the lawsuit, that'd put a hard cap on this type of stuff Tencent could do outside of the Chinese market.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Acting like this is different, entirely even, than Nintendo suing Pocketpair sounds like some hard fanboy cope.

Look, if you're okay with Palworld, you should be okay with Motiram.

Both games are also very similar in gameplay loop: gathering & crafting simulator with exploration and big boss fights:



They're basically both Rust, but with a Pokémon and Horizon flavor.

So you are saying that a lawsuit over patent infringement of a single gameplay mechanic is exactly the same of a lawsuit over copyright and likeness?

I heard of new math to appease social minorities, but I didn't hear of new equivalence laws to appease mentality challenged people.

 

[Idleyes]

As a selfish consumer who just wants to play good games, I don't care. Let them bitch slap each other in court, I'm here for the games.

 

[mrMUR_96]

China gonna China

 

[Toons]

I'm not so sure, you'll never see this thing in a Tencent game:

A human being?

I mean some Chinese companies are soullness but that's a bit far...

 

[yogaflame]

Very winnable case. Easy money earned for Sony either by wining the case or out of court settlement. .

 

[Toons]

Yeah, I was combing through it as well..

Spoiler

Oh yeah this is open and shut

 

[nial]

Not saying SIE should've cancelled the NCSoft game, but rather just go with both. Fund the NCSoft one, give Tencent a license to Horizon for theirs. Let the games come to market, see which one does best and support that one going forward. OR, maybe they both do well, so now you've got two sources of income instead of one, and you didn't have to spend any development dollars for one of them whatsoever (the Tencent one).

This is the same SIE that wants a pipeline of sustainable GAAS, right? The one that apparently values Horizon as an IP very high, right? I'm surprised Herman wouldn't want two Horizon GAAS from two outside companies on the market. Potentially redundant? Maybe. But the market would solve that problem on its own, and this is a case where SIE wouldn't have tied up their own internal single-player studios on GAAS or have spent hundreds of millions acquiring a studio simply for GAAS.

I already addressed this, allowing two extremely similar projects on the market, that would inevitably compete with each other, is a great way to sour relationships with your partners. Think for two seconds on why we're not getting MvC4 anytime soon, for instance.

Again, do I think SIE have a strong case against Tencent here? Considering what's on display, yes certainly. They're in the right to sue going off just principle, just like Nintendo's lawsuit against the Palworld devs. But in SIE's case, it won't do jack shit for them in China; in fact this lawsuit could very likely negatively impact PlayStation growth in the Chinese market. Tencent have home court advantage over there; if they want to get way more aggressive cockblocking SIE out of future major Chinese titles as retaliation for this lawsuit they could absolutely do it. So from that POV, SIE should've probably gritted their teeth, looked at the bigger picture and worked out a deal with Tencent so they could get the Horizon license for their game.

Maybe they can do that out of court with a settlement; however IMO if this goes to court the whole way through, that opportunity will be dead and if SIE loses the case somehow, I don't expect Tencent to just stop with this game. They'd probably try pretty hard to stifle SIE & PlayStation's growth in the Chinese gaming market through more direct competition. If SIE are willing to risk that with the lawsuit, then I guess they see the upside being that a win can prevent Tencent from releasing the game as-is outside of China, it'll set a legal precedent, and maybe the block for markets outside of China will force Tencent to avoid this type of practice going forward.

I mean, Tencent would probably still be more directly competitive with SIE in China in getting software deals, funding 3P initiatives and hell maybe even making their own "console" for the Chinese market to compete against PlayStation. It's just if SIE win the lawsuit, that'd put a hard cap on this type of stuff Tencent could do outside of the Chinese market.

All of this is a big reach, this won't necessarily impact their venture on China, why would it? Not only have they fostered many relationships with different Chinese companies, but Tencent doesn't particularly the influence you think they have to suddenly make the entire industry look against SIE.
In what way would Tencent be competitive with SIE? In what way they are NOW? Do you seriously think this lawsuit will result into actual company resentment that Tencent will spend the necessary resources and effort into making a console competitor to PlayStation in China (especially when PS isn't exactly huge over there? Come back to fucking reality.