Why wouldn’t they? I’m all for the fuck Sony train when they fuck up (like when they pushed PSN onto PC users and then blocked the sale of their games in countries that aren’t supported by PSN) but in this case Tencent is/was blatantly copying the Horizon IP.
It’s not copying it, it’s ripping it off, which isn’t illegal. Copying (i.e. copyright infringement) has a specific legal meaning, and it’s not being asserted by Sony. Sony is trying to claim that it being a ripoff means customers would be confused into believing it’s actually a Horizon game and purchasing it in error, which is stupid.
If Tencent had called this Horizons: Motiram, they’d be 100% in the right. But they are just trying to essentially claim they own the combination of style and theme of “colorful world with tribal humans vs robot animals”. That’s not how trademark works (this is trademark btw, not copyright, just in case anyone is getting them mixed up).
That was a random image from the trailer. You can stop the trailer at a random point and there’s like 90% chance you’re going to end up with an image that could easily be from the Horizon series. It’s also worth pointing out that the trailer has been removed from all official Lights of Motiram accounts along with a dozen images that looked like they were from the Horizon series.
I will also remind you that you said it would be absurd to take Sony seriously, which is not the same thing as stating “there’s no trademark violations here”. The latter is literally what the court has to make a decision on. The former is about whether there’s any basis to go to court which already means you think you know better than Sony lawyers and, if the court doesn’t instantly throw out the case, also better than the legal system. Maybe you are some godlike lawyer who knows better than everyone else, but if you are I think you can understand why I’m calling bullshit on that.
I will also remind you that you said it would be absurd to take Sony seriously, which is not the same thing as stating “there’s no trademark violations here”. The latter is literally what the court has to make a decision on. The former is about whether there’s any basis to go to court which already means you think you know better than Sony lawyers and, if the court doesn’t instantly throw out the case, also better than the legal system. Maybe you are some godlike lawyer who knows better than everyone else, but if you are I think you can understand why I’m calling bullshit on that.
I was/am responding to something you said in your comment, specifically that they were copying HZD.
I think it’s entirely possible that Sony wins, though they shouldn’t. But it will be about whether this constitutes an infringement on Sony’s Horizon trademark, not copyright. I don’t think it does, and I do think this amounts to Sony wanting to own the concept, like Nintendo wants to own creature catchers, but it is obviously possible another court would make another bad ruling in the IP space, especially if that means siding with the non-Chinese corporation.
But there’s no question about them copying the Horizon series. Whether they’re doing it as an IP infringement is up for the courts to decide. I also disagree with the Nintendo comparison because what Nintendo is doing far worse. Even though Nintendo is doing things in response to Palworld they’re trying to patent a rather generic mechanics, like summonings or calling mounts (in a specific way) which means their actions won’t just affect Palworld but also Cassette Beasts and maybe even Monster Hunter Stories.
Meanwhile Sony want to make sure someone isn’t making a not Horizon game. I can’t even make a realistic comparison to what couldn’t exist if Sony wins because I can’t think of another game that that slots exactly into what Horizon is. Fighting against robots is generic, ARC raiders does that. Tribals vs high tech is also pretty generic, that’s essentially Avatar. Post-apocalyptic worlds are also generic and you’d have to narrow it down to get specifically Horizon style post-apocalyptic which itself is also not unique as that’s essentially the same style The Last of Us uses (just to give the first example that came to mind). It’s only after you take all those individual generic components and mash them together do you get Horizon, and the original reveal of Light of Motiram.
Look at this from the other perspective. Why does Light of Motiram need the same kind of tribal aesthetic like the Horizon games? Why does Light of Motiram need robot enemies that imitate animals like Horizon games down to the same visual style of robots? Why does Light of Motiram need the same post-apocalyptic world like the Horizon games down to the same color palette? Each of those things are rather generic concepts and Light of Motiram could’ve made their own interpretation of each of those concepts. It could’ve been Na’Vi tribals fighting ARC robots in an TLOU world, but instead in those instances it chose to do exactly what Horizon does.
I cant remember what the letdown actually was that you got but getting cryptoscammed woud be even worse in any case, so thank goodness time traveling isn’t possible.
The “win” was to become the first god king in his next actual game, which let players compete/pay in a shared world for nobility/etc. The hook was that if you were god king, you got a cut of the money the game made.
That game was never released with the above feature, and they entirely ignored the “cube” game winner for years after the initial PR blitz. He got nothing at all besides some merch and a trip to their office. Eurogamer wrote a great piece about it years ago.
He did some revolutionary things back then, Populous, Dungeon Keeper, Theme Park and Black & White were truly great games.
I would say those earlier games were influental to the whole industry, but only if Molyneux dropped dead around 2012. He missed the chance to remembered as a legend by living too long to become the arse of the joke.
Oh man. Roberta Williams well and truly is a veritable legend in the field. Mad respect for her. I hope she gets enough to get treatment (though I hate that she has to)
It wasn’t terrible for what it was. I just remember being let down after years of listening to my best friend’s other friend telling me all of these promises he had fully subscribed to. It all sounded too good to be true, but both us and the industry itself were too young to have experienced overpromises like that. I thought maybe I just didn’t know how far technology had come, and we were about to see it fully manifest in all its glory…
But what we got was a fuck load of bloom and a few branching choices. And a marriage system that let you be gay. I definitely made my guy gay. Well, not at first. At first I married the barber because I thought I’d get free haircuts. That didn’t work. So I made my guy gay.
Fable 1 was a game I had lots of fun with. Being Brazilian, I was more or less immune to the hype buildup around the game, so I had no clue what was promised vs. what was delivered until years later
I have this clever idea for a starship game where you can explore the universe. What I’m going to do to fund development, and it’s totally not a scam, is to sell starships for real money. At first of course you won’t be able to do anything with the ships because I haven’t actually developed the game yet, but in just 10 to 15 to 20 to 30 years there might actually be a game, possibly.
Yup I recall a friend telling me of all these awesome things, not what the things were anymore but articles he read of Fable, and them not being there. He has a habit of over promising features while still making a decent (sometimes awesome) and fun game but it doesn’t help when he talks up about things that aren’t in the released version.
Molyneaux is of course an extreme case, but I do find it remarkable how many of these “legends” of old utterly failed to replicate their success later down the line. Romero, Mitsoda, Roberts, so many more, all in the lamplight for their success in the 90s to very early 2000s, but utterly unable to live up to their reputation for near 3 decades after.
I would not. Not a single success I wouid attribute to Chris Roberts, because each of his projects was Star Citizen. A studio exec had to step in tell him to actually finish up each time, and for Freelancer he was literally kicked off the project.
Star citizen could have been delivered by 2017 if they had stuck to their original goals. They could have always added more as updates. I guess he never learnt about mvp.
pcgamer.com
Gorące