Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
That's how stupid you people look when you constantly talk about lawsuits pertaining to this game
copyright doesn't work this way. Copyright is a protection for written work, art, and the like. you can't "copyright" a mechanic. You can copyright a character, its name, its appearance.
You can not copyright the idea of using a device to capture a creature. That would be called a patent. They can copy right the pokeball and its design. They could attempt to file a patent for capturing a creature in a device... That's called a trap though and is the universal conclusion for catching things... Which you can't patent.
So please stop throwing around copyright unless you'e done any amount of research on what it is, or how its even protected.
To further this point to really drive this home. Other games including Ark Survival, and starbound use ball like objects to catch and release creatures.
i posted a response to you here just now, but i realize i made a stupid. ignore me. you are correct @ patents.
The first thing I always think of whenever something like this comes up is a lawsuit that was a big deal with hobby board games. One publisher literally just copied someone else's game. I assume they changed the reworded the rules, and they had their own art, but from what I gather the actual components could be matched with the older game 1:1
Guess what? They ended up being declared innocent of copyright law. I thought this game might get taken down when I saw the designs and how close a lot of them are, but it's Nintendo, there hasn't been any action yet
I'm not sure if this is a troll or not but I'll answer. Fan games indicate you use elements that are tied directly to the inspiration, such as characters or regions. If it is a rom hack, you are also copying code
Breaking this into categories, you have
Original game (obviously you can't sell on Steam)
Rom hack (While there is typically some creativity that goes into this, using code you took from someone else is also a no go)
Fan game (you are likely still using established characters. Sure, that includes completely original designs such as Pikachu and Kirby, but stuff like Mario is also copyright infringement)
Parody ("look, this game has thundersqueek, a little mouse who I force to fight." Obviously inspired by an IP, and doesn't try to hide it, but changes enough to be considered original)
Copy (a game with no previously existing characters or story. In it, the construction worker can run and jump, defeating enemies by landing on them. Not making fun of the original, not adding or changing anything to be noticeable. Typically lazy cash grabs, but I'd guess quite a few are also learning projects)
Homage (pretty much nothing is new. Something might use existing ideas to create something new, and it might spawn a lot of games doing the same thing, but it likely wasn't the first to do whatever. A game that is heavily inspired by another might wear it's influence proudly. It changes or adds to its influence, even simple changes can make a world of difference
I think the easiest example of the last is in the form of Vampire Survivors. It isn't the first game in that style, but it did it well enough to show what that style of game can do. Now a lot of games are like it, and some are better, some are worse, but they came in droves because of Vampire Survivors
Notice those all important words that start the headline. Then read the article. Then read copyright law. Then, having been humbled on how wrong you were about everything, apologize to all the trees who work tirelessly to provide you with precious oxygen that you refuse to allow to reach your brain.
I bet you are really fun at parties.
We get it. you love Pokemon and nintendo and stroke both of them before going to sleep at night.
They don't own creature collecting. They also don't own a ball function to capture creatures, as a similar function was used for World of Final Fantasy with a three action capture animation. Further, yes, if somebody WANTED to. They could make Pikachu, change him up slightly and change the color and it's not copyright actionable
Fangames directly use Nintendo's copyright protected IPs, assets and/or their trademarks, such as the names.
This game does none of that, and is nowhere close to the edge of borderline copyright issues. They are VERY far removed from that edge as it stands.
Exactly what is going on
Somewhat yea, but this game doesn't even need a parody defense. It's just legally fine, and it would not be considered a copy of Pokemon in any regard. Check in to Asteroids vs Meteors if you still don't understand, otherwise you just look like a goof.