Apparently its on Gameplay Mechanics instead of design. Of which the only thing I can think of that exists is "capture them with capsules/balls" as most other Mon type games uses different objects that aren't as identical.
You're right, but it's still the same principle. Only the implementation can be patented, not the actual concept in itself. Which, given how different the 2 games are, is statistically impossible that they have the exact same code and implementation.
Considering Yu-Gi-Oh had that mechanic for monsters in defensive position, that must have expired at least 2 decades ago. Unless Yu-Gi-Oh's implementation was different enough that WotC's patent didn't apply.
Then it's going nowhere, since ''their gameplay mechanic is too similar'' is a horrible argument. And it if got anywhere, it would be devastating for games development. ( A good game mechanic could be stuck forever in a shitty game. Case in point ; new Pokémon games have become pretty shitty. ).
Case law already allows game systems to be patented unfortunately. See the Nemesis system. Where Nintendo should lose here is that Palworld isn't the first copycat. If they didn't go after everyone they can't go after anyone.
Apparently its on Gameplay Mechanics instead of design. Of which the only thing I can think of that exists is "capture them with capsules/balls" as most other Mon type games uses different objects that aren't as identical.
Which is a stretch among stretches.
It was already proven times and times again gameplay can't be copyrighted anyway. This won't go anywhere then.
If it had the legs to go anywhere, it probably would have happened when they had 2 million players and a lot of press.
Doing it now feels like a bluff and scare tactic to make other people not try it.
Patent isn't the same as copyright. Gameplay mechanics can be patented in Japan, apparently. Pretty sure there are gameplay patents in the USA too.
You're right, but it's still the same principle. Only the implementation can be patented, not the actual concept in itself. Which, given how different the 2 games are, is statistically impossible that they have the exact same code and implementation.
You don't know the difference between patents and copyrights.
The implementation is copyrighted, aka the exact same code.
The concept is patented.
Patent infringement doesn't require copying code. It's about using a patented concept or method, even if implemented differently.
You can patent game play in the USA. Wizards of the Coast used to have a patent on turning a card 90 degrees. It has expired.
Considering Yu-Gi-Oh had that mechanic for monsters in defensive position, that must have expired at least 2 decades ago. Unless Yu-Gi-Oh's implementation was different enough that WotC's patent didn't apply.
Then it's going nowhere, since ''their gameplay mechanic is too similar'' is a horrible argument. And it if got anywhere, it would be devastating for games development. ( A good game mechanic could be stuck forever in a shitty game. Case in point ; new Pokémon games have become pretty shitty. ).
Case law already allows game systems to be patented unfortunately. See the Nemesis system. Where Nintendo should lose here is that Palworld isn't the first copycat. If they didn't go after everyone they can't go after anyone.
That's generally reserved for trademark infringement.