a friendly reminder to those who think Nintendo will take legal action

[Uncle Crispy]

IF nintendo had a case this game either would never have released on steam or would have been taken down within 24 hours of its early access launch as nintendo lawyers are beyond ravenous. nintendo goes beyond overboard to protect their IPs including suing people who just want to preserve the games that nintendo refuses to re-release, going nuts with copy right strikes on youtube for simply showing gameplay footage. if the devs actually stole pokemon assets nintendo would have taken IMMEDIATE action especially after the game made so much money in so little time. hypothetically speaking lets say the devs did steal the assets nintendo still wouldnt have a case for stolen assets and do you know why? its because the devs would have to completely remake every single aspect of any pokemon game asset in existence since graphically speaking every single pokemon game would look out dated even on a PS2 (i have a PS2 and i've played on it recently so im not exaggerating) which means the devs created the assets. so they still wouldnt be stolen even if they designs were EXACTLY like pokemon (which they aren't)

now in case i (for some reason) have to clarify i do not own palworld and im not really into pokemon (i loved platinum and thats basically it) palworld does interest me but i plan on waiting to see how early access goes over the next 6 months before i buy it. heard its great though and i hope the devs keep up the great work! maybe if nintendo gets some proper competition the pokemon games might actually get some new features and/or some form of innovation

[Pyro Penguin]

do we really need more of these posts?

[Uncle Crispy]

Originally posted by Pyro Penguin:

do we really need more of these posts?

i just checked out the forums. didnt do much browsing but i only saw people saying that nintendo will take legal action. wanted to clarify a few things.

[TacoFox]

*things I needed to be clarified*

Nope, that is not on the list.

[Uncle Crispy]

Originally posted by TacoFox:

*things I needed to be clarified*

Nope, that is not on the list.

what list?

[Osmium]

I'll admit the thing that pushed me over the edge and got me to buy it was the small possibility it might get delisted. I don't think Palworld did anything illegal or wrong, but sometimes that doesn't matter. The points you make are valid, but it's still possible Nintendo will be forced through public opinion to do something even if they know it'll be ultimately unsuccessful. If people think they've stopped defending their IP, it'll encourage actual thieves to be more bold. As a customer I'd rather Nintendo stop using the law as a weapon, but it makes sense from their perspective to double down on this.

It's weird seeing where the lines are in copyright law. There's an adult game here on Steam with naked Disney characters and most of them have their original names and/or appearances. Some are public domain but there's also more recent ones like Elsa from Frozen. That's been sold for over a year and is somehow acceptable but several people on Youtube have gotten copyright strikes or even channel deletion and lawsuits for extremely trivial things, like singing 10 straight seconds of the lyrics to a Disney song without music.

I never played any Pokemon games or breath of the wild, but I've watched a little gameplay from them. I have no nostalgia for either and no desire to play anything Pokemon. I would have likely never played anything like Pokemon if this hadn't come along. I thought it'd be a lot more barebones than it is and was pleasantly surprised.

[Uncle Crispy]

Originally posted by Osmium:

I'll admit the thing that pushed me over the edge and got me to buy it was the small possibility it might get delisted. I don't think Palworld did anything illegal or wrong, but sometimes that doesn't matter. The points you make are valid, but it's still possible Nintendo will be forced through public opinion to do something even if they know it'll be ultimately unsuccessful. If people think they've stopped defending their IP, it'll encourage actual thieves to be more bold. As a customer I'd rather Nintendo stop using the law as a weapon, but it makes sense from their perspective to double down on this.

It's weird seeing where the lines are in copyright law. There's an adult game here on Steam with naked Disney characters and most of them have their original names and/or appearances. Some are public domain but there's also more recent ones like Elsa from Frozen. That's been sold for over a year and is somehow acceptable but several people on Youtube have gotten copyright strikes or even channel deletion and lawsuits for extremely trivial things, like singing 10 straight seconds of the lyrics to a Disney song without music.

I never played any Pokemon games or breath of the wild, but I've watched a little gameplay from them. I have no nostalgia for either and no desire to play anything Pokemon. I would have likely never played anything like Pokemon if this hadn't come along. I thought it'd be a lot more barebones than it is and was pleasantly surprised.

the disney ones dont really count. not only would they be considered fair use but disney is borderline bankrupt so they lack the funds to go after some porn game. honestly the only genuine similarities between pokemon and palworld that i'm aware of are some of the creature designs are similar and you can capture, fight, and collect monsters and thats not really something nintendo can legally do anything about proven by the fact that digimon and pokemon are around the same age and digimon is still around

[Plake]

I posted the video of why they CANNOT sue (well, they can, but won't win the case...) days ago. There will never be a situation that this is "clear", as many clowns don't even CARE about reality and only want to vent anyway... No need to open a new topic every day!