41–50 of 89 posts
Isn't this impossible because you can't get a patent if there is prior art? So they shouldn't be able to use a patent against a video game that came out before the patent was filed right?
When the prior art is yours you can, the pocket monster company is a joint venture with Nintendo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The prior art restrictions are no longer in place, and the system has become first to file. The America Invents Act changed to the first to file from first to invent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leahy%E2%80%93Smith_America_In...
Your link shows that prior art is still a thing.
this seems to be overlooked and i'm not sure why. you're like the 3rd person
This is a sign of the beginning of the end for them. When you’re rotten to the core you do things like this instead of actually innovating and creating new great products. It doesn’t end well long term.
Is it not a bit difficult to patent game mechanics? Maybe I'm wrong but why wouldn't iD software just patented the concept of an FPS back when?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, not even close. Nintendo is not a VC funded startup fighting for their survival. The Nintendo switch 2 is right around the corner and looks like it is going to sell extremely well, after the massive success of the switch 1 Patents are not that expensive to file. They are not diverting any meaningful amount of cash flow to this. This is a side activity of a few employees
> The Nintendo switch 2 is right around the corner and looks like it is going to sell extremely well, after the massive success of the switch 1 Just like the Wii U sold extremely well after the massive success of the Wii.
The switch 2, as shown so far is much closer to the original switch’s design ethos than the Wii U was to the original Wii. In a clear marketing mishandling, many people didn’t even know the Wii U was something separate from the Wii. A lot of people thought I was an accessory
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One easy solution is to give such talks in primary/middle schools so children stop buying Nintendo games. Give them all bad publicity. I wouldn't care separating Nintendo lawyers and gamedevs. If the lawyers are shady then the whole thing is shady.
Ah, yes, that's how we solve pathological institutional problems. Use public education to convince kids not to play the video games they like.
Also it's definitely not part of public education. Not everything happens in a public school is public education. It can stay in the form of clus or forums.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The patented game mechanic I am most bummed won’t be appearing in other games is Death Stranding’s desire pathing. Having other players in an open word “wear” paths into the map was extremely cool.
I missed that one. For me it is the Nemesis System from Shadow of Mordor/War. They made 2 games and haven't done anything with it since but they still patented it.
This is a sign of the beginning of the end for them. When you’re rotten to the core you do things like this instead of actually innovating and creating new great products. It doesn’t end well long term.
No, not even close. Nintendo is not a VC funded startup fighting for their survival. The Nintendo switch 2 is right around the corner and looks like it is going to sell extremely well, after the massive success of the switch 1 Patents are not that expensive to file. They are not diverting any meaningful amount of cash flow to this. This is a side activity of a few employees
It seems truly absurd what you can patent nowadays. The system seems utterly broken for its original purpose which was to encourage ingenuity and inventiveness. It now does the exact opposite.
One easy solution is to give such talks in primary/middle schools so children stop buying Nintendo games. Give them all bad publicity. I wouldn't care separating Nintendo lawyers and gamedevs. If the lawyers are shady then the whole thing is shady.