Hating on Nintendo because of Pokémon is kinda silly, because Pokémon isn’t even first party. Pokémon is made by Gamefreak, whose products are always much lower quality than first party Nintendo. Actual first party Nintendo stuff is always top quality, and they’re one of the more ethical game devs out there. When other big name devs like Activision or EA will fire loads of employees during rough times, Nintendo instead gave its CEOs pay decreases so they could afford to keep their staff onboard. Not to mention how much they supprted their staff during Covid, buying them all sorts of extra accomodations for their work from home setups. If this is about the current price hikes, I guarantee those are primarily because of a certain other incident that we’re not allowed to talk about on the forums. And if it’s because of how they sued the Palworld devs for copyright, I mean, have you looked at the game? Enjoy it or not, it’s pretty hard to ignore. I’d probably sue them, too.

I'm not hateful on Pokemon per say...it's Nintendo being Nintendo Pokemon is Nintendo property and it's Nintendo making pokemon look bad over the fear of proper competition... pokemon should be better than it is but it makes more money with low effort iterations with smaller budgets making "kids games" knowing long time fans will buy it to regardless of quality...when was the last time you saw a kid playing Pokemon in nationals or any other tournaments card or otherwise..they know exactly what there doing and the palworld v Nintendo lawsuits and patent bullying is undisputed proof that they are afraid of competition

Sir please use commas that is a really long run on sentence with zero pauses

But circular breathing....

I’m please use commas instead of ellipses

1. Pokemon is published by Nintendo, but crucially, not developed by them. It's developed by Gamefreak. And while, yes, the publisher can often have a negative impact on a game, by rushing deadlines, or forcing devs to rework content, and so on, that is almost certainly not what's going on with the Pokemon franchise. Because: A. Nintendo is also a developer, and none of Nintendo's first party games have the same quality issues that Pokemon does. Quite the opposite, anything developed in house at Nintendo is almost certainly going to be very, very high quality. B. Gamefreak's other games, even when not published by Nintendo, like Giga Wrecker Alt, for instance, [i]DO[/i] still have the same quality issues that Pokemon does. The common underlying factor is Gamefreak. The fault with any quality issues you have with Pokemon lies with Gamefreak, not Nintendo. The fact is, Gamefreak is just kind of a mediocre dev team. They managed to knock it out of the park once, and somehow kept their train going on name alone, even though their actual game dev skills are kind of meh. There's a reason you probably haven't heard of any of Gamefreak's other games. It's because when they don't have the Pokemon name backing themselves up, they're not very good. (though, for what it's worth, I actually enjoyed Giga Wrecker Alt) 2. Nintendo is not "afraid of competition". They never sued any other monster catchers, like World of Final Fantasy, Ca**ette Beasts (is that word still censored? Dunno), Monster Keeper, DQ Monsters, etc. Nor did they sue any of the BotW clones, or A Hat in Time which clearly took inspirations from Mario. No, Palworld was sued because it is a blatant Pokemon ripoff. Like, straight up. It is so obvious, that I'm genuinely surprised they even thought releasing the game would be okay. Heck, Nintendo regularly advertises games that are in direct competition with its own games all the time. No offense, but this does kinda just sound like you're trying to force Nintendo to be the bad guys here because you like Palworld. There's nothing wrong with liking the game, but pretending the blatant content theft isn't there is a little much. Heck, the main monster I've seen used to advertise the game is literally just Electrivire.

I've been a Nintendo fan boy for years and played Pokemon from launch day and that's why I am mad... between all the drama lately it riles me up and I vent...the internet poison is thick in this topic and misinformation is a thing...I got burned on the pokemon games and I was super excited about palworld it's heads and tails better than pokemon for us older fans of monster games Pokemon Digimon ECT...and then the drama starts...patents copyright ECT it's an iteration an improvement over Pokemon and it's like if final fantasy try to sue under tail for using turn based combat it's stupid so many worse offenders for such things but it's the fact palworld got popular and fast running far and ahead in quality and engaging play making tens of thousands of dollars on early access so Nintendo was made to look bad and lazy compared in regards to Pokemon... Instead of upping their game or working with them for a possible legendary crossover they took the cowards way out in fear trying to burn the competition to recover lost players, revenue and reputation I just want to play games and have fun It doesn't need to be this complicated....all the legal patent BS is killing creativity preventing iterative progress..all because people are lazy and might lose some money to a better game..

See, and if Palworld was just another monster catcher, then I would agree with you. But it's not. Nintendo isn't suing Palworld because of the money it's making, or because they're afraid of competition, or because it's vaguely similar to Pokemon, it's suing Palworld because Palworld blatantly plagiarized Pokemon. Like, straight up. As I mentioned, its most iconic* monster is literally just Electrivire with a gun. They didn't even try to cover it up. And don't get me wrong, I've got my gripes with Pokemon, too. I didn't buy Scarlet/Violet, and I'm not really ever planning on playing Pokemon again in the future unless something significant changes. And I used to be a big Pokemon fan, too, heck I even really loved Sword/Shield. So, that Pokemon is a franchise that's now in my "not gonna play this again bin" sucks, and then finding a replacement only for that replacement to get met by legal action, yeah, that also sucks. But, all I'm saying is: A. Put the blame in the right place. Gamefreak is responsible for Pokemon's decline in quality, not Nintendo. B. Nintendo isn't suing Palworld for petty reasons. The lawsuit is 100% justified. Palworld should've put in a little bit more time and effort into not, y'know, be a blatant Pokemon ripoff. Copyright can suck from the perspective of the audience, but it's very important from the perspective the creator. Without it, someone could take my book, publish it as their own, and then they could hypothetically go on to make millions, and I, the original creator, would be out of luck. Without copyright laws, there would be nothing I could do. It may [i]feel[/i] different when the one suing is a big company, but ultimately the underlying principle is still the same, and still just as important. And, hey, even if Palworld does get taken down, there are still plenty of good non-Pokemon monster catchers out there. My personal favorite is World of Final Fantasy--and I'm not even a very big FF fan! [spoiler]*I don't actually know what their most iconic monster is, but it's the one I've seen the most, so I assume it's their poster monster?[/spoiler]

In regards to monsters they are not going after them because they can't you can't copyright a dragon or a unicorn or a bear or any mythical or cryptid...ff has ixeion Pokemon has zebstrika no lawsuit there is too many to count across hundreds of games but only palworld got bug enough to be a threat plus pokemon actively copied dragon quest monsters... it's not the monsters...and yes copy right is good same with patent laws but it's the active abuse of them to run over other creators that's bad it's not different than theft big companies buy all the ideas and wait for something to make money and legal them in to the ground because technicality....look at all the "kart" games if Mario cart had a serious competitor they would pull the same bs....and all the papers I've seen have Nintendo not game freak in the applications... pokemon one of if not the biggest cash cow in gaming and Nintendo will suffer no threat to that it's not what palworld is it's what it could be they directly compete for the same audience and if it gets big enough it can and probably would cut any money pokemon makes in half and that us a lot of zeros....

See, you kind just undermined your own argument by bringing up kart racers. Because there have been plenty of successful kart racers out there. But none of them got sued. Why? Because even though they were similar to Mario Kart, they weren't direct ripoffs. Team Sonic Racing took inspiration from Mario Kart, yes, but it also made sure to differentiate itself in substantial ways. Nintendo has *plenty* of rival games that don't get sued, plenty of whom do eat into their profits. Palworld didn't get sued just because it's a rival to one of their big IPs. It has nothing to do with Palworld "getting big", it has to do with the fact that Palworld infringed on copyright. Yes, abuse of copyright laws is definitely bad. Nintendo suing Palworld is not an abuse of copyright law. I don't know what to tell you if you don't see how Palworld is a direct ripoff of Pokemon. It is, like, blatantly obvious. If you like the game, that's fine, but you shouldn't use that enjoyment of the game to gloss over its flaws, gameplay wise, or law wise. Maybe they made a good game, sure, but they also infringed on copyright. Those two things are not mutually exclusive, and trying to paint Nintendo as the bad guys just falls apart under the slightest inspection, because if Nintendo really was that petty, there would be tons upon tons of these copyrights. Like, what about Hollow Knight? if Nintendo was as petty as you say, they'd have surely sued Hollow Knight for copying Metroid, and Hollow Knight got quite big as well. [quote]and all the papers I've seen have Nintendo not game freak in the applications[/quote] Nintendo--to my knowledge--is the one handling the lawsuit. Because they're the publishers, that's their job. But Gamefreak are still the developers. Any development problems you have with Pokemon--like the newer games not being up to snuff--is on them.

Have you played palworld? It's nothing like any pokemon game outside of vaguely resembling monsters and throwing a ball... systems are pulled from many games... breeding from arc...base building resembling fortnight..skill trees...needing to eat sleep stay warm or cool several level up systems it's a survival game open world with catchable monsters with a cartoony theme...pokemon is ingrained in the media every thing that is a monster can resemble a Pokemon as pokemon is the most prevalent over a thousand of them you can only make a monster in so many ways that make sense that's why they don't make many new pokemon and a lot of pokemon are unoriginal them selves or are literally living trash bags and a keyring or an ice cream cone....like games being genre... soul's like...or a rogue like ... Or a metroidnvania..it's a genre named after their predecessors the start to build off of and advance past... never has there been a true pokemon like and it's still very different from pokemon in more ways than not...dragon quest...breath of fire..final fantasy...all copied each other over the years legend of dragoon..lost Odyssey....persona...grandia.. Xenoblade all built off one another... jrpg no legal BS all pretty much the same game with different flavors so what makes Palworld and pokemon such magnets for legal drama then? Cash money and the media crown of merchandising

There's a big difference between taking inspiration, and straight up copying. You're focusing on the mechanical aspect of Pokemon. That's not the point they straight up ripped off. Again, their poster monster is literally just Electrivire with a gun. I would even go so far as to say they may have straight up just asset-flipped Pokemon. As I said, if you don't see how they ripped it off, then I don't know what else to say, because it is very, very, very obvious. Denying it just feels like picking favorites and pretending your favorite is innocent. Other successful games have been similar to Nintendo titles just fine. The reason Palworld got sued is because it crossed a line. And it's not a player threshold, it's a copyright threshold. It was too similar, not too big.

The asset flip was debunked and was falsified by a fan boy they came out and admitted it after all if it was blatant copying that would be the lawsuit if that were the case but it's not... I was on the fence about that early on but it was disproven and Nintendo only acted after the popularity boom...when if it was truly on there radar from a legal standpoint it would have been day one not after....but they waited to try to back sue for 'damages' further proving it's a money issue...Nintendo has shutdown True asset flips slower than palworld the case and many more blatant rip offs are still alive and well the only constant is the money....most fan games are a labor of love and provided free but as soon as they get popular or make any money they get lawsuits that's why Nintendo attacks streamers and YouTubers you are less likely to buy a game if you watch it played through... money.... emulators on games they sell or could sell but don't...money...I've been following this from day one and seen arguments for both sides and it's boiled down to Nintendo losing player and money Nintendo track record proves this and openly bullies and gatekeeps in the Japan gaming market weponizing loop holes just like Disney dose in the usa

you know, you don’t have to just use ellipses

I never said it was actually an asset flip, I said I wouldn't be surprised if it was. And if your designs are so reminiscent of the original that people are willing to believe it's just an asset flip, that's already indicative of a problem. It is true, that it's not 100% on either side of the spectrum. Nintendo is not omnipresent, and the game wasn't on their radar until it gained some popularity. Nintendo isn't vigorously scanning the storefront, looking into every single game they see to make sure nothing in there is derivative of their work. Unless you're dealing with some sort of supernatural deity, the popularity of the copy is going to come in to play, just because that's how it gets brought to the original producer's attention. Like, if you were to go and copy my book, change the name of the main character and nothing else, and then put it on the Amazon store, I would have no way of actually knowing. However, if your hypothetical copycat book suddenly started earning thousands of dollars, then there's a greater chance of me seeing it, and likewise, suing you. So, it is somewhere in the middle. The bigger and more popular a game is, the more Nintendo is likely to see it. However, a lawsuit will still only follow if the game is considered derivative enough. Once again, see Hollow Knight as an example. Plenty popular, and is a competitor to Metroid. If Nintendo is viciously searching for anything and everything, finding the thinnest threads they can to run a lawsuit on, then why wasn't Hollow Knight sued? The answer is, of course, because while Hollow Knight did indeed take some cues from Metroid, the game is ultimately original enough that trying to call it a Metroid ripoff is ridiculous. Palworld, though... Once again, it's title monster is an Electrivire with a gun. Pretty sure I've seen one that was literally just Mewtwo Y, too.

I know the surface hook is the monsters yes there are many similarities sure I do not debate that...and it's all everyone sees and that's the problem...the lawsuit has nothing to do with the monsters...it's the technicalities of one or two mechanics and that's it...it's devolved in to a Media storm that has lost the plot like the plagiarism fiasco that Bungie is going through over the red war campaign...on or two details line up and now it's stolen media?

Officially, the lawsuit is about one or two mechanics, but I can guarantee if the general design of the game wasn't so derivative of Pokemon, the lawsuit probably wouldn't exist. Because Nintendo isn't going to walk into court and just say "vibes". They need to have concrete examples. It was so derivative on the surface that Nintendo felt compelled to give it a more thorough investigation. And, ultimately, if those one or two mechanics are copyrighted, then Palworld violated copyright. It's as simple as that. But, the investigation that turned that up wouldn't exist, if Palworld put in the effort to not just literally copy & paste Pokemon in the first place. I don't keep up on Bungie in the slightest, so no comment there.

Pokemon is still fun I just find the older ones better