Imo open sourcing is not necessary, as that is unrealistic depending on the licensing of libraries etc. Just distributing the server and making it possible to selfhost would be enough.
Or, built local network play in to the game itself (although this requires most of the work necessary for creating a selfhostable server anyway).
The industry rather wants to hire Troy Baker for every project. Also voice actors, even in animation, rarely get a career boost after a single popular project. Even for live action actors it’s rare. Like how many actors that played in Lost still play in high profile projects.
This is insane - Pokemon cannot trademark having mounts in games. Screw Niantic, the Pokemon company and especially Nintendo which basically controls the first two. Screw them
2 years seems like a nightmare for indie developers. Do you want a bunch of AI Chinese cash grabs pushing things out like Hollow Knight 2: Microtransaction Edition or Stardew Valley Romance Sims? Because without IP protection, indie developers will get creamed.
I don’t remember all of the differences, but I think you’re conflating copyright, patent, and trademark here. Software patents should almost not be a thing, but copyright and trademark should still exist.
in most countries, afaik, you actually can’t patent game mechanics, for the same reason you can’t patent rule sets for boardgames:
because they are essentially just logical connections. it would be like patenting math, which is also not allowed, for very obvious reasons. (with some very specific, very niche exceptions)
japan is just plain weird and wrong about their patent system.
that’s why all of the lawsuits about this stuff are happening in japan; not just because that’s where the companies are, but because japanese copyright law is (especially) fucked.
For trivial software features like these, definitely not. I think patents start to make sense in the area of really advanced algorithms, like SAT solvers, ML, and so on. So conditional on patents in general making sense, those kinds of patents seem legit to me.
I assume that the PS5 Pro is great for its target audience: people who care about getting the best possible graphics on a console. They bought it, they tried it, they loved it, and they praised it. The issue with the PS5 Pro is that not everyone fits into that niche. For people who are not playing on giant 4K TVs, what is the benefit? What does it provide that a regular PS5 (or even a PS4) does not? Sony has not provided an answer, from what I have seen.
So. You’re saying the developer and everyone that worked on the game are part of a crusade against a minority group?
Or is it just that you’re delusional enough to think that because the creator or the IP is a blowhard hag of a human being, everyone associated with her IP should be thoroughly punished?
Nah thats not what im saying. But the millions raked in by harry potter enterprises goes in to Rowlings pockets. Also, i dont weep for the devs, they were paid already…
The game allowed you to create a trans protagonist (male voice/female body, pronouns, …). It isn’t a crusade against them at all, it is empowering them. No matter what the author said.
I buy physical because I don't trust Nintendo's online services, but I'm not even going to get physical if it comes with DRM. I'm buying it expressly to dump it and run in an emulator eventually.
Not to mention that the Switch is already showing its age, so any added burden is going to come with noticeably performance loss.
I don’t play Palworld, but still hate firms that behaves like this. Not buying Nintendo anymore 🥳 Emulators from here on :)
Patenting common stuff like this is just stupid! Think I read somewhere that Apple patented squares with rounded corners 😂 Hope Nintendo doesn’t use rounded corners in any of their in-game menus.
I though patents were ment to protect important original ideas. Stuff with impact.
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne