The studio also names the weirdly small damages Nintendo is seeking
Looking up those patents, the first alludes to a system where a player aims and fires an “item” toward a character in a field, and in doing so triggers combat, and then dives into extraordinary intricacies about switching between modes within this. The second is very similar, but seems more directly focused on tweaking previous patents to including being able to capture Pokémon in the wild, rather than only during battle. The third, rather wildly, seems to be trying to claim a modification to the invention of riding creatures in an open world and being able to transition between them easily.
Pretty sure 1 and 3 could be applied to many modern actions games. Software patents shouldn’t exist! Same with apple’s patents for specific menu animations. It’s fucking evil!
Any game with ranged weapons is literally this. If I’m playing Fallout 4 and shoot a raider in the head then combat is initiated. That’s literally his combat works. Fuck Nintendo and fuck bullshit patents.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Pretty sure 1 and 3 could be applied to many modern actions games. Software patents shouldn’t exist! Same with apple’s patents for specific menu animations. It’s fucking evil!
Any game with ranged weapons is literally this. If I’m playing Fallout 4 and shoot a raider in the head then combat is initiated. That’s literally his combat works. Fuck Nintendo and fuck bullshit patents.