With the implementation of Patch v0.5.5 this week, we must make yet another compromise. From this patch onward, gliding will be performed using a glider rather than with Pals. Pals in the player’s team will still provide passive buffs to gliding, but players will now need to have a glider in their inventory in order to glide.

How lame. Japan needs to fix its patent laws, it’s ridiculous Nintendo owns the simple concept of using an animal to fly.

  • Dr. Moose
    link
    fedilink
    English
    61
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    This is why I’ll never feel sorry for Nintendo - karma is long overdue for this company. In fact, I’ll download a switch emulator right now just to spite them.

    • @LSNLDN@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Nice, please share the link with everyone for ultimate spite (and cos I deleted yuzu once by mistake)

      /s

          • Dremor
            shield
            M
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Yeah, right… /s

            😂

            I have a private git copy of every recent open-source Switch emulator. I don’t have a use for them, for now at least, but at least their work won’t be lost.

      • @anarchyrabbit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        92 months ago

        I started using it last week. It works well so far although I have only played the new donkey Kong. Take note that Torzu has gone to the dark web, so if you want it you need to go through TOR. This is good because this makes take down near impossible.

        • @Tattorack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          I’m still using the latest version of Yuzu (the version shortly before the takedown). How does Torzu compare to that? And is it possible to add Torzu to Emudeck?

          • @anarchyrabbit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            42 months ago

            Torzu is a fork of Yuzu, so essentially the same thing, just being kept updated. I am not familiar with emudeck but I am sure it will be compatible. I know files like saves etc from Yuzu work with Torzu.

  • @Tattorack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    122 months ago

    The last Nintendo console I bought was the Nintendo DS lite. The last Nintendo product I bought was Age of Empires DS The Age of Kings.

    As you can probably tell, that was a rather long time ago. Since getting my first TTDS flash card I’ve more or less exclusively pirated Nintendo things. I’ll just continue doing that.

    News like this isn’t giving me any remorse.

    • @Yermaw@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 months ago

      I’ve only pirated old stuff, games from my youth that are collectible items now for silly money or a complete crapshoot on whether 30 year old tech has stood the test of time.

      If I had the time to play them I would definitely see my conscience clear on pirating new stuff from them now.

      • @samus12345@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 months ago

        I jailbroke my Switch after they went after Yuzu in March last year. Every time I read about them, it makes pirating new games on it more satisfying. I’m really gonna enjoy Metroid Prime 4 on it!

      • @gradual@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        I pirated breath of the wild years ago and still haven’t beaten it.

        I ended up replaying and finishing Wind Waker on Dolphin though.

  • @Saryn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    282 months ago

    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

    Do not support these companies.

    Sincerely, A life long Pokemon fan

    • @chunes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 months ago

      I don’t care about it either personally, but my wife really enjoys playing the game with friends, and I’m pissed on her behalf. Luckily, she’s told me the devs are being really good about making the changes feel good (not like a punishment).

  • @Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    172 months ago

    Why is there nothing in place to punish Ninendo for doing shit like this?

    Patent law is rigged. Legal monopolies shouldn’t exist.

    • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 months ago

      Legal monopolies shouldn’t exist.

      I agree IP law is messed up, but that doesn’t mean the idea doesn’t have merit.

      Having a temporary, legal monopoly on something that requires a lot of R&D and not much production cost (say, a novel or new kind of asphalt) allows the creator to make back their R&D costs before competitors come out with cheaper alternatives. Without that protection, companies would be less likely to invest in R&D.

      We need shorter durations and more scrutiny on scope. Also, patents should generally not apply to software.

      • @HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 months ago

        that doesn’t mean the idea doesn’t have merit.

        As an incentive structure for corporations and “people” purely motivated by avarice, sure.

        Most people naturally want to create and contribute as long as their needs and most basic wants are met. A monopoly as an incentive is not necessary.

        Without that protection, companies would be less likely to invest in R&D.

        There are many ways to motivate corporations to do R&D outside of offering them a monopoly on a silver platter. Incentives are only one half of the equation. Its really all about leverage.

        • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          There are many ways to motivate corporations to do R&D outside of offering them a monopoly on a silver platter

          The main alternative is offering them a subsidy on a silver platter, but then you’re making everyone pay for that R&D, not just the customers who want whatever that product is, and there’s no protection against IP theft unless the government owns and enforces the patents or something abroad.

          I personally prefer the IP law approach, but I think it needs significant reforms, both in duration and the approval process.

          • @HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            52 months ago

            With a monopoly, you may very well be making everyone pay for the increased price gouge that comes with monopolies. Not just the customer of that particular product. It depends on the nature of the product.

            If it is a component of a more common device or product, basically everyone ends up paying more (HDMI comes to mind). If its an innovation relating to a basic need and gets integrated with the majority of services, basically everyone ends up paying more. If its something that has external implications on the market or wider world that creates inefficiencies, then people functionally make less money because effect people pay more and thus long term this harms spending on a variety of products. If people can’t afford the price gouge and continue using less effective products (assuming they are even available) they likely long term spend more money to make up for the inefficiencies from that.

            Monopolies damage things beyond the product that gets monopolized and merely concentrates wealth.

            Regardless a subsidy is not the only alternative. That’s still thinking in terms of carrot, and you are forgetting the stick. You can also legislate mandatory R&D in budgets for large corporations based on revenue/profits just as much as you with the punishment of potentially being fined/taxed more.

            But outside of that, there is also government contracts. That is, a single payer, (monopsony) generally can get fantastic results out of competing firms. Its largely a major reason why the American Military has historically benefited from such significant technological advancements for nearly a century now.

            • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 months ago

              Not all monopolies are created equal. We’re talking about IP protections, not general monopolies, meaning these are new products, not some existing necessity. IP law on its own can’t kill existing products.

              An author having exclusive rights to a work doesn’t prevent other authors from making their own works. A pharmaceutical company having exclusive rights to a medication doesn’t prevent other pharmaceutical companies from making competing medications. Likewise for video games and whatnot.

              The problems with Palworld have little to do with IP law as a concept but with how broad the protection of patents is. IMO, video game mechanics shouldn’t be patentable, and companies should be limited to copyright protections for their IP. But IP protection is still important as a concept so creators don’t get screwed and customers don’t get defrauded.

              You can also legislate mandatory R&D in budgets for large corporations

              Yeah, that’s not going to be abused/scare away companies.

              Its largely a major reason why the American Military has historically benefited from such significant technological advancements for nearly a century now.

              It’s also why the US pays an obscene amount for its military. Defense contractors absolutely fleece the government because they are generally not allowed to contract with other governments, so they expect a higher profit from their one contracted buyer.

              • @HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Only have access to this account during work, so late reply.

                We’re talking about IP protections, not general monopolies

                It doesn’t matter, monopolization at any level has the effect I described.

                Yeah, that’s not going to be abused

                You’d need to elaborate I’m not clear what you mean by this.

                scare away companies

                There are ways to force this into not being an issue. We don’t have to suck a corporation’s dick to keep their productivity.

                It’s also why the US pays an obscene amount for its military. Defense contractors absolutely fleece the government because they are generally not allowed to contract with other governments, so they expect a higher profit from their one contracted buyer.

                It sounds like the military is still getting what they paid for and its worked out for them. They pay obscene amounts to get obscene results.

                Single payer also applies to healthcare proposals and is generally seen as a fantastic solution to keeping healthcare prices down.

                • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  12 months ago

                  You can also legislate mandatory R&D in budgets for large corporations

                  Yeah, that’s not going to be abused/scare away companies.

                  You’d need to elaborate I’m not clear what you mean by this.

                  A few ways:

                  • the term “R&D” can be pretty broad, so it’s unlikely to have the effect you’re thinking about - pretty much everything in a tech company is “R&D” whereas almost nothing in a factory is; making this somewhat fair is going to be very hard and will likely end in abuse
                  • companies are more likely to set up shop where such restrictions don’t exist
                  • enforcement could be selective to target companies that don’t “bend the knee” - esp true if the required amount is high enough that it’s not practical

                  force

                  Not a word I like to hear when it comes to government. The more power you give it, the more likely some idiot will come along and abuse it. Look at Trump, the only reason he can absolutely wreck the economy w/ tariffs is because Congress gave him that power and refuses to curtail it.

                  It sounds like the military is still getting what they paid for

                  Sure, but they’re getting a lot less of it than they could if it was a more competitive market.

                  They pay obscene amounts to get decent results. I think they could get the same (or better!) results with a lot less spending if the system wasn’t rigged to be anti-competitive.

                  Single payer also applies to healthcare proposals and is generally seen as a fantastic solution to keeping healthcare prices down.

                  I think that only works in countries w/o a large medical devices/pharmaceutical industry, otherwise you end up with ton of lobbying and whatnot. I don’t think the total cost of healthcare would go down, it would just shift to net tax payers and healthy people. Look at the ACA, it didn’t reduce healthcare spending at all, it just shifted who pays for it, and it seems healthy people ended up spending more (to subsidize less healthy people).

                  To actually reduce costs, you need to make pricing as transparent as possible, and I don’t think single payer achieves that. It can be a good option in certain countries, but I don’t think it’s universally a good option.

          • @SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            The main alternative is offering them a subsidy on a silver platter, but then you’re making everyone pay for that R&D

            R&D for many companies is taking the research done by underpaid graduate and PhD students and using that to create some sort of product or buying out the startups those students created and building from that.

            We already live in a system where the majority of costs are publicly subsidized (and that’s not mentioning the myriad of direct subsidies these companies receive, for an especially egregious example look at the amount Pfizer got paid to develop the Covid vaccine) and then the result is patented and privatized.

            • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 months ago

              underpaid graduate and PhD students

              They usually get grants, and frequently the student will get hired to follow up on that research. A lot of the research ends up unusable to the company as well, at least on its own.

              majority of costs are publicly subsidized

              I think that’s a bit extreme, but I’ll give you that a lot of R&D is subsidized. The COVID example, however, is an outlier, since the funding was to accelerate ending the pandemic, which was critical for the economy as a whole.

              • @SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 months ago

                the student will get hired to follow up on that research.

                You’re right that that’s an aspect I forgot about, however If the patent system worked as you envision it then those students would own the parent which they would then lease to those companies. The actual situation is quite legally messy because it’s usually the universities which own the IP produced, (which is then leased out via partnerships, grants etc ) and when those individuals lease themselves with the promise of producing more valuable IP they have to take cautions to not infringe on their previous work.

                I think that’s a bit extreme,

                Not really, using Covid as an example this paper details the pre and post-epidemic funding sources that went into the discovery, testing and production of the COVID vaccine. Do you have any other examples you’d like to use to demonstrate how it’s “extreme”?

                The COVID example, however, is an outlier

                Yes and no, but it is well publicized and documented which is what I was trying to communicate with that specific one as an example.

                • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  it’s usually the universities which own the IP produced

                  Which is totally reasonable. The student applies for a graduate program to get a degree, not get rich off a patent. Theoretically, any patent royalties retained by the university would go toward funding university activities. I don’t know how much this happens in practice though.

                  That said, there should be limits here. If a patent makes over a certain amount, the rest should go to the student.

                  it is well publicized and documented

                  Right, because it’s an outlier.

                  If you go to the patent office and look at recent patents, I doubt a significant number are the result of government funding. Most patents are mundane and created as part of private work to prevent competitors from profiting from their work. My company holds a ton of patents, and I highly doubt the government has any involvement in funding them.

                  Did Nintendo get government funding for its patents? I doubt it.

  • Gristle
    link
    fedilink
    English
    112 months ago

    I wonder how much of this game they can force them to change. I know Steam has a 2 hour limit for returns but at what point does this game become “not the game I bought”?

    • @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 months ago

      point does this game become “not the game I bought”?

      Anytime you can’t access the version of a game you spent money on

    • kadu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      362 months ago

      I mean, the game is in early access so if you bought it and are now complaining it changed… It’s a you problem, not something that should be refundable.

      • Gristle
        link
        fedilink
        English
        82 months ago

        Nah, not complaining, idly wondering. I made my bed, I’ll sleep in it, I’m just wondering how far a game can go to change a game and still claim it’s the same game.

        • @ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          There’s and endless list of games people have complained about changing during early access. It’s a stupid idea. Don’t preorder games.

          • Gristle
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 months ago

            Yuuup, Palworld was a rare early access buy for me. Burned too many times but a sale burnt a hole in my pocket after holding off for years and I got curious, I knew what I was getting into haha

    • @lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 months ago

      Pretty much anything so long as Palworld doesn’t have 1.- a backbone and 2.- a dictionary at hand. Because it is as simple as finding a picture of any of a long list of animals that can glide, state the words “previous art” and they should be free from this ridiculous demand.

      Mechanics that already exist in nature should not be copyrightable. Can you imagine if the first videogame company ever patented “character walking”?

      • @Ledericas@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 months ago

        they were pretty much in hotwater for copying pokemons likeness, they probably dint want to have more expensive legal and drawn out fight.

  • @kozy138@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    152 months ago

    Wouldn’t a game mechanic/animation like that be equivalent to a stunt in a movie?

    Like, imagine if a film director wanted to blow up a car in his movie, but was getting sued by Paramount because Michael Bay already blew up a car in Transformers.

  • @SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    742 months ago

    Nintendo ownes the IP of hangliders now.

    Nintendo will never see another cent from me for this petty bullshit. My kids will play with other toys.

    • @gradual@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 months ago

      This is why we should’ve been pirating from the beginning.

      All the money we give these scumfucks is being used against us.

    • Miles O'Brien
      link
      fedilink
      English
      132 months ago

      Nintendo can sue me any day, I’m out here making RC hang gliders and making tiny 3 second games where the only purpose is to pull out a glider and put it away instantly.

  • @Surp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    42 months ago

    Not that I matter being a single person but cya Nintendo I won’t be buying anything from you ever again honestly unless its used and from someone on facebook marketplace or the likes of.

  • Destide
    link
    fedilink
    English
    392 months ago

    Nintendo are rightly losing their free pass with gamers.

    • @thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      202 months ago

      That is very true, but the Venn Diagram overlap between GamersTM and ‘Nintendo gamers’ is a rapidly shrinking area.

    • Dr. Moose
      link
      fedilink
      English
      102 months ago

      Where is that? Cause Switch 2 pre orders are sold out.

      • @demizerone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        That has happened my whole life, I’m 44. Nintendo supposedly does low first batch numbers so the can get in the news that they sold out. Then scalpers sell the machines for $1500.

        • Dr. Moose
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 months ago

          Sure but I don’t see any evidence of Nintendo’s decline. The truth is that gamers are incredibly spineless and will continue to bootlick corporate boot unless they put “something woke in the game” at which point they’ll leave a review somewhere and still clock in 300 hours if entertained enough.

    • tiredofsametab
      link
      fedilink
      122 months ago

      I’ve seen no evidence of this. People are clamoring for the switch 2 and talking about all they want to buy. Fuck Nintendo, but people keep giving them money so they’re going to keep doing anti-consumer shit with no sign of any government stopping them. The government isn’t going to attack one of the most beloved companies in Japan whose mascot they used at their olympics. A lot of Japanese are event against things like free, labour-of-love randomizers made for old games. People need to stop buying their shit globally if they want anything to happen.

      • @Ledericas@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 months ago

        that was the same issues with swsh all the way to arceus, people were repeatadly warned how half-assed the games were, and then complain later on the subs. they still bought it.

  • Caveman
    link
    fedilink
    English
    52 months ago

    So are they next going after unicorns that you capture?