Mafia 3 is the only nonlinear Mafia game, and ditching the open world sounds great. I just played the first game’s remaster and I was really annoyed by the futile open world of that game.
Mafia 2 did a similar thing. I like the games, they’re fun and interesting and all, but it’s kinda weird when you spread collectables throughout a map but they’re almost all in the opposite direction of any missions.
We are talking about gliding on a mount…a very common game feature…
"On November 30th, 2024, we released Patch v0.3.11 for Palworld,” it said. “This patch removed the ability to summon Pals by throwing Pal Spheres and instead changed it to a static summon next to the player.
Well I am talking about the blatant plagiarism, which is what the devs for Palworld did.
Summoning creatures from an object is hardly “blatant plagiarism”. Many, many, many games have the ability to summon creatures from an object. Pokemon was certainly not the first one to do it…
Summoning creatures from an object is hardly “blatant plagiarism”. Many, many, many games have the ability to summon creatures from an object. Pokemon was certainly not the first one to do it…
What will you argue if I bring up the fact that they ripped off countless Pokemon?
Oh wait.
I don’t care because I am not here to argue with someone who doesn’t understand what plagiarism is. Luckily the courts do, and ruled on the case. :)
What will you argue if I bring up the fact that they ripped off countless Pokemon?
The case case isn’t about character designs, the case is about patents Nintendo filed after PocketPair released a game with said mechanics. The idea that one should be able to patent a game mechanic someone else has already released in their games is BS. Japan’s patent system sucks and Nintendo sucks for abusing it.
The courts ruled it isn’t plagerism. So… You’re looking pretty stupid here.
The patents in question have nothing to do with creature designs. And neither would patent law be covering the design of creatures. That would be copyright law.
Buddy, quit while you’re ahead not too far behind. You’re just proving what @Tattorack said: you don’t understand the difference between patents, copyright, and trademarks.
I never claimed to be an expert, and mistakes happen. Good thing the difference between the three doesn’t matter when Palworld blatantly plagiarized the Pokemon games, and I have yet to hear an actual argument how it didn’t rip off another game.
But I get it. Pokemon can pew pew now and ignoramus’ eat up gun play.
You do you bud, but if you think this is me “acting tough” for telling you that your actions will eventually have consequences, you must feel constantly threatened.
the difference here is that a ton of other creature collector games have done something similar when it comes to summoning them. Coromon is the first one thst pops up in my head.
what makes palworld different? it genuinely sold well, enough to challenge Nintendo and it’s monopoly with their Pokémon games. Which they barely put any effort in nowadays because they sell regardless because of brand loyalty
What I will tell you is I live in Canada, I live in BC, and all of this can be gleamed from my profile. If you find yourself in my neck of the woods hit me up keyboard warrior.
Except it doesn’t. Nintendo was only able to do this by exploiting Japanese-specific patent law since Palworld is made by a Japanese company. They had no case otherwise.
OP, please do us a favor of titling post with the true thesis of the article, and not their disingenuous headlines. E.g.
Ziff Davis, Inc. $ZD has contracts with $NTDOY & ¥7974.T that it selected three people to blurb out things that aligns with their portfolios:
Stephen Kick, CEO of Nightdive Studios (which specialises in modern remasters of older, often out-of-print games) said that “seeing Nintendo do this is a little disheartening”, adding: “You would hope that a company that big, that has such a storied history, would take preservation a little more seriously.”
Videogame Heritage Society co-founder Professor James Newman is somewhat less convinced that Game-Key Cards will be a major issue, noting that it’s rare for a game on a cartridge to still be the same game years after release.
“Even when a cartridge does contain data on day one of release, games are so often patched, updated and expanded through downloads that the cart very often loses its connection to the game, and functions more like a physical copy protection dongle for a digital object,” he explained.
Meanwhile, Paul Dyson, director of the International Center for the History of Electronic Games at The Strong Museum in New York said the move to a future where all games are digital is “inevitable”, and that Nintendo has in fact been “in some ways, the slowest of the major console producers to be going there”.
Of course there's going to be one eventually, but if they're implying it's coming very soon that actually raises questions. Donkey Kong Bananza looks to have been developed by the team that did Odyssey, so if a 3D Mario was being developed in parallel, I'm curious who was on that project.
Needlessly absolute take. Yes, there’s going to be parents, who’d rather pay extra than look into what other games they could give their kid, as well as loyal Mario fans, who will pay pretty much any price. But there’s obviously also players who do weigh up their options based on price, and who will make different decisions when they have to decide between two titles, when one of them is cheaper. Especially with the additional invest for a new console and the more dire economic situation, I could see many players not buying into the Switch 2 at all.
It’s so stupid. I have literally plugged GC controllers into my Switch with an adapter hub, and they worked with non-GC games. This is deliberately worse.
“We’ve updated this article to note that Nintendo has made similar disclaimers with its previous retro controllers, which have ended up working with other Switch games.”
You just got done telling me they are reporting as fact something that is likely not so, and now you are scoffing at me for not having wasted my time. If there is any reason for this article to still be published or even discussed, it has eluded me.
Nintendo said it might not be compatible. People reported on what Nintendo said, with the caveat that they have said similar things in the past that did not turn out to be true.
No, they’re reporting that Nintendo is saying it, and also reporting that in the past it’s hasn’t been true. Consider it a warning, and to set your expectations if you buy a Switch 2.
We already know it’s going to be on Switch 2 and Xbox, including Game Pass day 1. It’s not going to be exclusive, but at the very least, Microsoft paid handsomely for it.
Microsoft is bringing their own games to PlayStation at this point. It’s possible it’s kept off PlayStation, but I doubt it. Team Cherry knows what their game is worth, and that would be a massive buyout.
The Nintendo GameCube (GCN) Controller – Nintendo Classics will be exclusively available for Nintendo Switch Online members and will initially only be offered to those invited to pre-order a Nintendo Switch 2 console
Does this suggest I can buy it later or am I going to have to pay scalper price if I want it?
I think you’ll always need NSO sub if buying directly from Nintendo, but pre-order rule only seems to be because of scalpers, so that only those who can actually use it, buy it.
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne