I am not usually in favour of big companies bullying smaller companies with the law, but it's pretty egregious how much they were ripping off Pokémon.
Edited to add, apparently this was a really hot take. I am not saying that the gameplay between the games was similar, but I saw a comparison of several of the designs of the creatures for the first time when this whole kinda started kicking off a bit ago and it was the first time I realized how blatant the designs were lifted right from popular Pokémon. Combined specifically with the pokeball-alikes and like... I don't know how people can defend it. There's homage and then there's IP theft.
The game itself isn't ripping off anything. Pokémon is such a direct "rip off" of digimon, too, then. Except it doesn't matter, cause that's what stuff is. Stuff is made up of other stuff and oftentimes there will be similarities!
I mean, for one I was talking about the designs of the creatures and the specific ball mechanic/theme, but also Pokémon came out before Digimon anyway.
Brother, you made a stupid comment. You didn't read the article and you don't know why the lawsuit is happening. Literally all of your comments are irrelevant to the discussion — you can't hide behind it's the hivemind!
I did read the article and I do know why the lawsuit is happening, at least what's been reported, as I've read a few articles about it. I'm not hiding behind anything, and people are free to disagree with me.
A reminder that all I said at first was that I was surprised to find out just how much they were ripping off Pokémon, and what I was referring to (but not clearly) were in many of the designs and the brazen pokeballs. I didn't comment on the lawsuit at all, at first.
I really hope you're lying because if you do know what this is about, then that just makes all of your comments worse. Also, you're calling people who disagree with you a hivemind, so don't try to pretend you're fine with it.
You said that, in this case, you were in favor of a big company bullying a little one with the law because they ripped off pokemon designs, which isn't even a topic that is being discussed here. If anyone needs a reminder of what you commented, it's you.
I just want you to know that I saw your comment, said "oh, that's off topic and an overall bad take", and then downvoted. That's when I noticed your score was negative and not positive. I'm not part of a hive mind, friend. You just had/have a bad take imo.
If you really downvoted because you thought it was off topic then I think you used the button correctly, but in that case I'd just disagree with what is off topic. A thread about pokemon and palworld and I'm commenting comparing the two doesn't feel like a stretch to me but, eh.
Doesn't change my opinion about people downvoting though. My experience overall has been very similar to reddit, which makes sense considering the huge migration from there to here.
Now we're pretty far off topic though, so have a nice day.
I don’t remember the vitriol being as consistent on reddit. On a larger scale here, if it’s a computer, it needs to be Linux or you’re downvoted. If it’s video games, it needs to be a PC or they don’t want to hear about it. Even Steam that was generally loved on Reddit gets some flack, because GOG is more DRM free from what I can tell (I don’t game on PCs)
For one, I didn't say you could patent an art style. But distinguishable character can be IP. You're like the fifth person to mention Dragon Quest and I've never heard of that comparison before, do you have any examples?
There are a bunch of images out there making the comparison, but here’s a good video of just a direct side to side of each design. https://youtu.be/CZXKKbSCA34
I'd be more willing to agree if Nintendo was going after them for similar art styles. They went after them for fucking throwing balls of all things. This is going to set a horrible precedent for the game industry.
So either Nintendo didn't believe the monster designs were rip offs, or they didn't feel it was a proper violation because they've shown themselves as willing to litigate.
I disagree with your premise but even if I agreed that any IP theft has occurred, why do you care? surely you're aware that nintendo aggressively invests in IP lawyers and lawsuits?
They're both based on the same source material - various mythological creatures and real animals with a twist
I used to think Pokemon was super original - but a lot of it just seems they way because we don't learn much about Japanese or asian folklore overseas.
Like take Magikarp. There's a Chinese proverb about a carp leaping through the dragons gate (an actual waterfall) turning into a dragon (meant to describe how with diligence a common person could become powerful through the civil official exams)... The weak magic carp, if diligently leveled, can become a Chinese dragon that looks exactly like the ones they use in parades.
Meouth - a wealth giving cat, many asian shops have a cat figure with a gold coin for luck. And Persian is just a lioness (a bigger cat) with the same design.
Vulpix/Ninetails - nine tailed fox
Ekans - snakE. Arbok - kobrA. Pidgey - pigeon. Pigiotto, pigeot? Reminds me of fire, fira, firaga, firaja naming scheme from final fantasy
Hitmonlee and Hitmonchan - Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan
Noticably, most of these puns and references to actual people are not copied, instead it is things like wolves and mythological creatures
If anything, it's the style of the art that makes them so similar - but copying aesthetics is how art grows and develops. It's not like they were the first or only ones to copy the style either