With the implementation of Patch v0.5.5 this week, we must make yet another compromise. From this patch onward, gliding will be performed using a glider rather than with Pals. Pals in the player’s team will still provide passive buffs to gliding, but players will now need to have a glider in their inventory in order to glide.

How lame. Japan needs to fix its patent laws, it’s ridiculous Nintendo owns the simple concept of using an animal to fly.

  • ArkoudaBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    90
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Serves the Palworld devs right. This is what happens when one blatantly plagiarizes, and I am here for it.

      • ArkoudaBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        59
        ·
        22 hours ago

        We are talking about gliding on a mount…a very common game feature…

        "On November 30th, 2024, we released Patch v0.3.11 for Palworld,” it said. “This patch removed the ability to summon Pals by throwing Pal Spheres and instead changed it to a static summon next to the player.

        Well I am talking about the blatant plagiarism, which is what the devs for Palworld did.

        • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          Summoning creatures from an object is hardly “blatant plagiarism”. Many, many, many games have the ability to summon creatures from an object. Pokemon was certainly not the first one to do it…

          • ArkoudaBanned from community
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            42
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Summoning creatures from an object is hardly “blatant plagiarism”. Many, many, many games have the ability to summon creatures from an object. Pokemon was certainly not the first one to do it…

            What will you argue if I bring up the fact that they ripped off countless Pokemon?

            Oh wait.

            I don’t care because I am not here to argue with someone who doesn’t understand what plagiarism is. Luckily the courts do, and ruled on the case. :)

            • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              31
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              21 hours ago

              What will you argue if I bring up the fact that they ripped off countless Pokemon?

              The case case isn’t about character designs, the case is about patents Nintendo filed after PocketPair released a game with said mechanics. The idea that one should be able to patent a game mechanic someone else has already released in their games is BS. Japan’s patent system sucks and Nintendo sucks for abusing it.

              • ArkoudaBanned from community
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                32
                ·
                21 hours ago

                Whatever you say bud.

            • Tattorack@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              25
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              21 hours ago

              The courts ruled it isn’t plagerism. So… You’re looking pretty stupid here.

              The patents in question have nothing to do with creature designs. And neither would patent law be covering the design of creatures. That would be copyright law.

              • ArkoudaBanned from community
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                30
                ·
                21 hours ago

                Weird how they are overhauling their game if the courts ruled in favour of them eh?

                • pivot_root@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  21
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  21 hours ago

                  Buddy, quit while you’re ahead not too far behind. You’re just proving what @[email protected] said: you don’t understand the difference between patents, copyright, and trademarks.

                  • ArkoudaBanned from community
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    26
                    ·
                    21 hours ago

                    Removed by mod

            • Caesium@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              21 hours ago

              the difference here is that a ton of other creature collector games have done something similar when it comes to summoning them. Coromon is the first one thst pops up in my head.

              what makes palworld different? it genuinely sold well, enough to challenge Nintendo and it’s monopoly with their Pokémon games. Which they barely put any effort in nowadays because they sell regardless because of brand loyalty

    • samus12345@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Except it doesn’t. Nintendo was only able to do this by exploiting Japanese-specific patent law since Palworld is made by a Japanese company. They had no case otherwise.

      • ArkoudaBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        19 hours ago

        “They wouldn’t have a case if they didn’t use local law” is a crazy argument.