วีดีโอ

Patent laws in Japan are very weird. Especially since because they didn't get the same level of refinement and protections from patent trolls that the West did so some stuff do be very different like this XD

Was gonna make an imagine if there was a lawsuit by PUBG against Fornight joke but realised unlike with LoL and Dota that one almost actually happened

I went back and looked at Craftopia more after all the talk about it and from the looks of it the capture system itself is midly different such as the lack of a display for the capture success chance and how the UI is displayed during that process plus there being more limitations in the way that the capture implement can be selected while in the process of trying to capture the monster. While it might seem like something very small, those minute differences can be enough to make the patent not valid in the case of Craftopia while valid in Palworld as (assuming things are done right) the patent neededs to be construed very stringently on the individual points within the patent and how they list out the steps and actions the player take as well as the way information is presented on each step. Especially in this case where Nintendo reworded the patent to target Palworld specifically, it is possible that they worried that those specific points make it less able to take out Craftopia as well and so left it out of the case in order to make it liklier to succeed. Yes it is quite scummy but that might be the reason why they are only targeting the one.

I'm glad you found it interesting. The content on this channel tends to be a chaotic mess in terms of variety but I hope you enjoy it nonetheless

@overworkedsalaryman Chaotic variety is perfectly fine by me. It's more Respectable than a lot of the nonsense that comes out of the US and EU these days.

That's how I feel about most of the ones in the game industry. It's wild the level of legalese that can be pulled to get patents like this

Kinda, yea. The public perception of Pocketpair here and how they run their social media is quite negative but it does when I look through it feel like how it'd be run in most other parts of the world. However, because they are a corporate entity back home that generated an image of them being insincere or manipulative by people who are unhappy with them. That said, it really depends on what the goal of the Nintendo lawsuit truly ends up being I feel like. Changing the systems of the game while difficult since Pocketpair didn't do any version control for Palworld might be the easiest way out assuming the goal of Nintendo's suit isn't to fight the case to the end just to run them down or kill the game fully. It's really unfortunate this case had to be brought in the first case because of this as it does seem like corporate bullying and it brings up the worrying question of it more companies might look at this and do it in the future. In part because the industry used to believe that Nintendo would stand up against said corporate bullying and exploitation as that was what they said they were doing during the Nintendo v Colopl case but if Nintendo is going to do something that can be perceieved as that themselves it might lead to other companies getting ideas as well.

@@SipeReborn Yea that feels like alot of what gameplay system patents always feel like. Someone makes something similarish maybe and successful and so the patent holder tries to squeeze money out of it or take them down

Yea and the thing with the argument of it's just 1 or 2 cases it's not a big deal that some people bring up is that it ignores the fact that the industry didn't use to do this as aggressive in part because the industry used to believe that Nintendo would stand up against said corporate bullying and exploitation as that was what they said they were doing during the Nintendo v Colopl case. But since NIntendo is out doing this themselves now it does set more of a precedent for companies as they see the ones who rattled against it kinda doing it themselves too

@overworkedsalaryman yeah. Its not...looking good for the gaming industry. Im nervous.

I would endorse that message but in the event I get doxxed in the future, people find out where I work and Nintendo is petty enough that might be a problem for the company I work in so I'm no going to say I endorse that message my apologies m(_ _)m

Another very important and less gameplay-based aspect to Mega Evolution is that it duplicates the "temporary change" nature of Digimon evolution and for the exact same narrative purposes. It is very convenient narratively to have kaiju mons, but it is very inconvenient to then have a story in which those same kaiju mons are part of. From the start Digimon realized the value in giving their mons multiple forms that can be switched between to emphasize "pet", "combat", and sometimes "transportation" roles. I don't think it's a mistake that Pokemon didn't entirely copy that as it ends up adding to in-setting lore (groups of trainers who emphasis not evolving a mon past its cuter stages, as well as the lifestyle changes required of a trainer who ends up with a gigantic partner not suited for urban life), but eventually Pokemon was bound to want some of that to tell more stories.

Just going to note that Lycanroc having a lighter color to its underside than its topside isn't referential, it's just a real-life evolutionary phenomenon called "countershading" -- and is also seen in various birds and fish.

@@Stratelier I figured, but it's a thing people used to call out Direwolf as being a lazy copy, so I noted the similarities of Lycanroc to the Tigers as a comparison. It is an interesting nature fact to know in general.

@@drakologarnus7248 Yea and the problem is they haven't really been put in that hard place for along time since they're just at the top of the jp industry and have been for a long time. They make fine games still don't get me wrong but it feels like they put too much time into industry politics as well as a result

​@@overworkedsalaryman Would you say Nintendo got complacent being at the top for so long?

Yea if they had just gone that way most people would've prolly said it sucks but is fair since it's a very Nintendo-y thing to do and there is a question of it being something they could be legit worried about but the shift to patents and its usage in this way makes it feel abusive of the very spirit of what patents were meant to be

First thing is that the lawsuit is on the specific implementation of the systems so even though Palworld may have through trailers shown that they had the systems those years back that doesn't immediately prove that they did not violate the patent as they could have consciously or otherwise modified it in ways that caused it to fit into that. The onus would be on them to prove that they did not do that but that would require ways to show logs of how the game's build was modified etc, something that might be hard considering they were talking about how they didn't use any version controls during development. Secondly, I looked at Craftopia and as far as I can see, the specifics of the system are somewhat different there it seems? For example when you aim the ball it doesn't show a capture rate nor any other clear distinction of how likely you are to succeed prior to the throw and there doesn't seem to be a way to select one of multiple variants of capture implements prior to the capture itself as it uses a preset key instead so the case against craftopia is likely to be weaker than against Palworld. This is especially so because thirdly, the modifications to the patent seemed to be directly for targeting the system as it exists in Palworld. The thing with patent alterations is that there are limits to how much it can be altered such as mostly text corrections for misunderstandings or specificity not rewriting entire chunks of it. Fourthly, it's possible that Nintendo is bringing the suit more as a workaround for not being able to bring trademark or copyright suits instead so that might also be why the lawsuit seems very targeted at Palworld as well.

@overworkedsalaryman okay, that provides much more clarity. I was really struggling to figure out what grounds Nintendo had with the patent but now I see where it's even coming from. Thank you for the reply.

I'm glad you found the video interesting. The thing with those systems is that when it's put in the general context like that it does seem like it encompasses everything but what Nintendo has is a patent of a very specific way to do those things. In the case of the former there are important steps that need to exist in the capturing of a creature in a 3D space such as there being multiple capture implements to select from and the liklihood of capture being shown during the capture atttempt for example which are in Palworld but not in Craftopia in the same capacity hence why while it might be seen as valid against one game it might not be as valid against the latter. That said it still super sucks that patents can be used like this and I wish they never brought the case in the first palce

Yea which is why the bigger issue I have is not so much that Nintendo can do these things but the larger scale ramifications it can have on the industry if it emboldens other companies to do the same as well

It has to be very specific in the steps that are taken in the riding process for it to be approved. For example with Nintendo's patent it is specifically for one where you reactively swap mounts to the appropriate type for the situation. i.e If you are in the air and mount you get a flying mount, if you're on the water you get a water one and you need to own the respective mount required for each type. On top of that it also patents how the game processes which mount to select if you have multiple mounts that can perform the same situation mounting etc and a violation would require violating all of these individual respective points brought forth in the patent is how it works. So the way it is supposed to work is a lot of legalese weaving to create a series of conjoined points that are uniquely defineable as one system that is sufficiently specific in a way that can't be easily achieved. In theory at least. The issue with the way it is practiced is that some wording can be corrected which could then change the intepretation of the wording itself as well and the patent office doesn't have the expertise to tell how sufficiently unique something is on top of the fact that 20 years is a lot of time for gameplay systems in a world where tech is advancing as rapidly as it is.

That's fair. I can understand the feeling of getting sick of saturation in the industry especially nowadays more so than before where that can cause a flood on online platforms like steam with an endless wave of games one wouldn't even wanna bother with. Personally I just wish they never brought the suit rather than rooting for either party winning just because Nintendo did present themselves as the champion of anti-patent abuse back during the Colopl case which may have staved off some bad actors in the industry and my main worry is Nintendo doing this might give those bad actors ideas to try again and do worse. Nintendo has always been quite innovative compared to a large part of the JP game industry and I feel like if they keep innovating they don't really have to care about other companies making games that are based on their present games in the first place since they should always be able to stay ahead of the curve as is. If a company whose main business model is making something similar to what others make, then they can only really make a good clone if the original has already released at which point the OG dev should've already made their money's worth from the game before they can make the copy. If they are losing out to the copy with their next offering after that or the copy is making something better than they are and beating them to market at that point I'd say the copy is prolly doing something innovative be it inside the game or out to be able to out-strip the OG if anything if they can beat out the brand power through imitation alone.

Yea even compared to other lawsuits in the same field it's tiny as well since most are in the billions of yen instead. Most people are expecting Nintendo to balloon the late payments as the lawsuit progresses like in the case against Colopl though idk if they can ballon it THAT much considering the low start amount this time.

You are partially right in that when it comes to the damage claims only the period between the updated version and the time of the suit can be claimed. However when it comes to how the court will judge the case itself it'll still matter because that's what the courts will look at here. This isn't the first time something like this has happened (let alone from Nintendo) and the courts have set a precedent of taking the original into account as long as it hasn't expired when it comes to deciding if the patent will apply as the updated version exists to specify what the intepretations of the original patent are.

Or that time they took down the wiiware store without backing up the games or preserving it anywhere so a large portion of that library just vanished into smoke

Meanwhile the genuinely interesting patents that they hold are the ones that they'll never even be able to actually sue anyone for because they're all backend and require having a company sized in the thousands of employees to even execute so it'll almost never get caught even if other companies use it (assuming they even can). The whole process of suing over mechanics feels so silly compared to that when the in-game stuff is what pretty much almost all games take inspiration from each other when designing.

I guess you could say if they did they'd be able to stand shoulder to shoulder with Nintendo on this issue

Settlements don't create a legal precedent

@jakemaanimeikalainen248 You're 100% correct, I need to stop commenting at 2am. 😭 What it will do is allow pocketpair to pay the amount without bankrupting them (letting Nintendo save face), which will set a precedent.

Good luck o7 If it works out give me 1 money for this luck blessing

I'd say that it's kinda true in that Sony was the trigger that caused the suit in that the partnership basically gave Nintendo the excuse to justify that they weren't going after an indie or small firm because of the big deal they had gotten. But also, looking at the application process that Nintendo went through they were likely already moving to sue even before the Sony deal announcement happened it's just that they were taking time to prep the patents and more importantly, a good excuse.

@@overworkedsalaryman Yeah,but tbh I think this won't change anything. No matter if Nintendo wins or not,the gaming world will be the same,people will stop talking about it and will move to another stuff to either hate or like.

@@lordlopes2424 For the people over there who are unaffected by it I can imagine that being the case yea. Over here it's already causing some companies to spend even more on legal for all of this which is gonna hurt the big firms that are already hurting which in turn is affecting their direction in the games they choose to make which just adds more fuel so while people may forget the impact doesn't go away. That's not to say that anyone is obliged to remember or do anything either way that's their own freedom. Just wanted to point out that there's potentially more to the point than what was explained by that channel is all.

​@@lordlopes2424 What you saying is correct. It's doesn't take much for the internet to move on to next big thing. In a month or two people will find something to hate or love. For example a lot of people forgot about Assisans Creed shadows. But then a TH-camr bought it up again and the comments were like oh yeah I forgot about that game. So let's talk about it. Then last month people were raging about the new PS5 being over 750 or something. Now I don't think a lot of people are even talking about it. With how lawsuits work most people will forget about it and move on. Mainly short attention spans or the drama has lost its flavor. That's how the internet is unfortunately.

@@Candymancan655 But that's the thing I'm saying No matter what,this whole lawsuit won't change much,just like how the Colopl lawsuit did.

Especially since the top here in Japan have a more traditional view of the workplace and worker treatment as well they kinda drive workers who don't want lifetime employment in a seniority based system with low wage growth to seek their fortunes in overseas firms or other industries which just further fuels in the problem imo

@@zegichiban I'm glad that it wasn't too stale then 🙏🎉 Was worried since this has already been quite widely covered

What’s different is that the story has only been covered by English speaking westerners and very few of them have insight into Japanese business practices and law. It’s either been games journalists, game developers, or western lawyers (or a combination) speaking on the matter. Your insight is much appreciated since most other countries’ businesses and legal systems operate very differently from Japan’s. One question I have though is about the legality of the patents and whether the court will back them anyway. PocketPair had art demonstrating the mechanic for throwing an object in an open field to catch a creature etc. in their 2020 game Craftopia. If the documents stating Japanese patent law were translated correctly, that should technically render the parent patent filed in 2021 and the child patents filed this year invalid. Will that hold up in court and would the legal system overlook this anyway in favor of upholding the larger company?

In the end most games are to some extent inspired by some other games just like with those systems so it always feels weird that system patents are even a thing that are allowed in the way they still are

Yea things in Japan are getting very split down the middle more and more since there are actually big JP youtubers who also are in the middle on this in that they hate that Nintendo brought the suit but they don't really like Pocketpair either for non-ingame related incidents but it does seem like the pro-Nintendo crowd are getting more polarised into thinking that the rest of the world is against them. Tbh I didn't want to include it in this video cuz some of it feel kinda er... discriminatory? In that there were people saying that Nintendo ought to win the suit because it will keep specific other countries in their place and there was a lot of whataboutism against the west too. On the one hand, a lot of Nintendo's exploits overseas don't get in so I kinda get why they are like that but it's scary to see how much of a wedge is slowly being driven in Japan

It's the one thing that will always remain constant

hopefully it turns into an F instead

@@tsuaririndoku I can see that yea, th3 same thing hapened in Singapore back in the day where because the only big game companies there were Koei, Ubi and Bandai the boss of Koei tried to convince the other two into wage fixing. It fell through but the everlooming threat of companies trying to get ahead at all cost is certainly very real

@@kamarulbahari152 It's one of those small little things I try to keep going as a tradition for the videos XD Glad you enjoy it

@@PsyArtKitech02 Yea which is why I hate this lawsuit and think it should never have been brought at all. Though that said, the issue with the rip off point is that Japan I feel like Japan is taking it overly seriously and that's part of why we're slowly getting outstriped by KR and CN. They have no qualms dissecting a game to understand its source code so they can make games or learn from systems rapidly to improve even if they rip it off in the process whereas here people hold themselves to an extremely high standard to not do that at all. There is an ethical argument to be made that about how maybe no one should do it instead perhaps but fact of the matter is that right now these patent rip off enforcements are mostly only done within Japan where the patents are actually effective so they only harm local businesses. I feel like if preventing ripoffs is their main concern there are much more macro things that ought to be done insted to handle that

That's the can of worms no one wants to find out in the industry I feel like. Though with WoW I'm not as familiar with it so it's hard to say but if that feature was in sufficiently far back they should be off the hook as the patent in question currently is only from 2021. Plus a Japanese patent wouldn't be effective in the US so it depends on which court the case is possible to bring up in as well as whether or not Nintendo has a seperate patent for the same thing in the US which makes the whole thing a mess.

from what i can tell WoW copies older pokemon games, not the patented parts of legends arceus. so they're safe from this.

The question would be If this happens,would people really care about it.

Prolly because they didn't expect it to be a hit nor did they have a clear idea of how similar the system would be from the trailer alone. If they had gone after Pocketpair at that point it likely would've turned more people against them because income wise Pocketpair was still considerable a lot more indie back then and it was the deals that Pocketpair cut with Sony that made them no longer seem indie in the eyes of many in Japan which gave Nintendo what they think is the moral highground to say we aren't hitting an indie firm anymore which is something that was brought up in Japanese discussions of the topic as well. That and without seeing how the system actually plays out it's hard to say with confidence that it defies the patent itself so the case would've been liklier to get thrown out hence the wait till now

They didnt have the patent until after Palworld showed the Trailer. (Patent fraud 100% confrimed) and That one was so vague it couldnt even BE USED so they made 4 more that used the first one to get the earlier date. (5X patent Fraud and Piracy with Conspiracy and Anti competitive SLAPP lawsuit.) nintendo has clearly broken EVERY LAW on the way to this lawsuit and they know they will wind because ONLY a special Judge (Bribery) will call in their favor. (Illgotten Gains and GRAND LARCENY) Sorry but My switch is dead Switch 2 should be seen as a target for vandalism.

@@StewardMcOy I'm glad you found the video interesting if anything 🙏 I am planning that video actually tho as a longer term larger project as I've been trying to contact people working in the industry in Cn and Kr to get more of a perspective as well. The video range on the channe is a little chaotic but even then, I hope you find them interesting all the same

I'm glad the video helped to clear some stuff up! Feel like there's some stuff I could've gone more into depth on but that'd have required prolly a longer video to go through all of which we'll see if there's a need for, am planning to do one on the entire patent thing seperately hopefully some time in the future.

@@overworkedsalaryman I've seen others talk about the problem of it but never went into this much detail. Though, for one... they didn't want to corrupt any evidence seeing as the case is on-going. However going more into the depths of general patents, it would shine more light on how they work and how people can get around the vagueness of it all when new upcoming developers come into play. I don't want a world where games can't be made.

@rmjrmj4 Same here, it feels like game system patents are a very slippery slope where it is very easy for things to go very wrong if proper balance isn't taken which is what makes it feel like a thing that really ought to not exist in its current capacity as it ends up being a problem for th3 jp game industry

@@overworkedsalaryman Same goes with AI things, things are being claimed for being used with AI and some things like music can't be used again and you can't copyright AI music though you can get strikes from people that made music that sounds like yours and if you do a remix one day that sounds like the AI music you'd get a strike or a claim. Money would be on hold until things could be proven it's yours but you can't prove ownership of AI slop so you both lose and the song just exist if it wasn't taken down, as TH-cam says "it's not up to us to judge on the AI things and we can't be held accountable for taking any action." In lame's term: "Your F***ed and we wont do anything about it seeing as we train our data with your music anyway, but don't want to make that public so we're going to sweep this all under the rug." Same thing could be done with the patents, the date can keep rolling back on a ruling and a new penny game could be made with new patents to farther push their claws into the cake and win the ruling and eat the cake too. I was looking forward to making games but now I'm kinda spent on these veg rules I must tiptoe over. I'm making re-imagined game from Dewprism, I thought if I'm making the models, I may as well do more than just animations with them. Though now I'm not sure if I should do anything like releasing a Demo.

I'd say that it's more like opinions in Japan are starting to wedge a lot more than before. When Colopl happened most people were on Nintendo's side because Colopl had a mixed rep as is and the narrative in court from Nintendo was that they were doing this for the betterment of the industry as Colopl was going to exploit their patents for self-profit. Cygames and Konami was a big ? because the details to this day are still not announced. But with Sega v BOI and this case people are able to see what is being sued over and the case doesn't hold the same level of righteousness in its image as that case against Colopl many years ago. Added on to the fact that people want something to blame for the degredation of the Japanese game industry (especially when it comes to mobile games) that it also fueled more people to look at this case cynically is what it appears so far at least.

Its really a hypocritical society in and out, most are really that corpo simp here and brand loyalty is more stronger, thats why iPhone is selling more than Android phones here

Japan has doest use the Jury system often...or well not one for these cases.(or many others). They live in the Medievil Guilty Before innocence the faster your told your guilty the better for their Corrupt Chinamen leaders.

@@Kakachi07 Japan only uses a jury for very special criminal cases but otherwise most cases go to just a panel of 3 judges instead so that's less of an issue but at the same time, the massively positive image that Nintendo had in Japan does still weigh on the minds of people here so it's hard to say how fair it would be