• Agent Karyo@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    What is your argument here? Your support the Japanese patent law irrespective of whether it reflects reality? You would be OK with Japanese patent that is de facto non-valid (i.e. the approach was already used in games 10+ years ago) just to support a random company?

    I am going off memory, but one example would be one of the Japanese gaming companies patenting cross-game saves (release to sequel); an approach that was implemented by the Ultima games 10+ years before the patent was filled? Do you support this?

    We have access to Palworld, we have access to Nintendo products. If commentary criticizing Nintendo is “greedy clickbait”, then what innovation has been abused by Palworld? Can you provide an example in context of gaming experiences?

      • Agent Karyo@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Sure, I mean this is a forum discussion (in a relatively underground platform no less).

        I don’t see what this has to do with what I am talking about. If the article sucks, what is this innovation in Nintendo’s products/services that was copied by Palworld? This is a very simple and straightforward question, no?

        What’s wrong or “too deep” about a question like that?