'Gotta Catch Em All' -- Lawsuit Edition: Palworld vs. Pokémon

  • 17

Pocket Pair vs. Nintendo / The Pokémon Company
 


 

If you haven’t heard about the debate between Palworld developer Pocket Pair and Nintendo / The Pokémon Company, I hope your rock is doing well! Recently, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company filed a lawsuit against Pocket Pair, alleging patent infringements to their IP. This legal dispute centers around gameplay mechanics that both companies claim are proprietary to the Pokémon franchise. With Palworld drawing comparisons due to its creature-collecting mechanics, this lawsuit has sparked debate in the gaming community about the boundaries of intellectual property and innovation in this specific genre of game. 

At first, we weren’t sure exactly what patents Nintendo was pointing at; however, thanks to Pocket Pair’s post on socials dropping some juice to an update on the dilemma, The Pokémon Company have specifically pointed to three key patents that they believe Palworld violates: 

  1. JP7545191: A system for using capture items to catch characters. 

  1. JP7493117: A targeting system for deploying capture items. 

  1. JP7528390: A system for rideable characters. 

These patents are seen as foundational to the gameplay in Pokémon games. In response, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company are seeking at least ¥5 million ($33,683) in damages and an injunction to stop Palworld's distribution. Wow! Honestly, thought it was going to be more than that..
 


 

Despite the lawsuit, Pocket Pair stands firm, asserting that Palworld offers a unique experience, despite some similarities with Pokémon. This raises the question: how far can a game go in borrowing common features from a genre without crossing into patent infringement? Palworld blends creature-collecting with survival and open-world elements, and while the core concept of throwing balls at creatures to capture them is similar to Pokémon, it also includes distinct gameplay differences - like using the Nickit-knock-off as a flamethrower! Poggers! 

This lawsuit raises crucial questions about the balance between creative freedom and the protection of intellectual property. While Palworld combines elements of creature-collecting with a more open-world, survival-focused gameplay style, it still includes mechanics like throwing balls at animals and capturing them – tsk tsk, how dare they! If Nintendo and The Pokémon Company succeed in this case, it could set a precedent for future games across all genres, determining just how much borrowing from established titles is acceptable before it becomes infringement.
 


 

Now, if you have made it this far in the article, I think it's safe for me to say that I have about 35-40 hours in Palworld so I think I am well within my grounds to say that Palworld is everything we Pokémon fans wanted. Honestly, I would go as far to say that when Pokémon Legends: Arceus came out, Palworld was what I was imagining Arceus to be from those early gameplay reveals! Yes, I played all the way through Arceus and the small bits of instanced gameplay like the town and fast traveling to the various zones broke that immersion for me, the game was fantastic, don't get me wrong but I thought that open-world they were spouting, was going to be a bit more.. open? Let me be honest and say I didn't play Scarlet or Violet, those bugs looked too nutty, so I can't speak to the feel of those games - if you played and liked them, let us know your thoughts on them below! IMO, Pocket Pair took everything Pokémon hasn't been doing for our 90's babies lifetimes and crushed it! I am a big fan of Palworld and what they brought to the table for us gamers, their success was absolutely deserved! 

We will keep our eyes open to see how this lawsuit pans out! But we have to know:       

Did you play Palworld? What similarities do you find between the two games and does it matter to you as a gamer? Let us know your thoughts and opinions in the comments! 

Replies • 15

Interstellar

Temtem offers all of this and they've never got any lawsuit.  
Hope Nintendo loses, it would be very dangerous may they win


Planetary

That’s because Temtem isn’t a threat lol

AureasAetas said: 1m

Temtem offers all of this and they've never got any lawsuit.  
Hope Nintendo loses, it would be very dangerous may they win

 


Interstellar
GirBae said: 2h

That’s because Temtem isn’t a threat lol

AureasAetas said: 1m

Temtem offers all of this and they've never got any lawsuit.  
Hope Nintendo loses, it would be very dangerous may they win

 

That and the company behind Temtem isn't based in Japan. From what I understand the lawsuit is only based on Japanese patent laws.

All very silly and I don't care who wins or loses. Nintendo is lawsuit happy and for that reason I hope they lose. But I am no fan of Pocket Pair for other reasons, so I don't care if they lose either.


Solar

Tired of Nintendo going after everything for lawsuits. 


Pokemon fans have provided some pretty compelling evidence that not only are some monster designs VERY similar to some Pokemon, some of them could be straight up stolen assets. However I don't think they have much grounds based on what they provided. I mean, "a system for rideable characters" covers like 70% of games right now.


Chillmander said: 2h

Pokemon fans have provided some pretty compelling evidence that not only are some monster designs VERY similar to some Pokemon, some of them could be straight up stolen assets. However I don't think they have much grounds based on what they provided. I mean, "a system for rideable characters" covers like 70% of games right now.

You need to look at the specifics for the patent. It is rather broad but it isn't a generic "any rideable characters". It's also machine translated so I'm sure we're losing some nuance.

I've read some discussion about this to try to see if the outcome is predictable. The only one thing that seemed to be clear was: most everyone is viewing this from a Western perspective while these are Japanese patents and the lawsuit is in Japan. That could significant affect how the case is handled, and many people commenting and making videos about this aren't really considering that.

edited

Galactic
CitizenXLVIII said: 2h

You need to look at the specifics for the patent. It is rather broad but it isn't a generic "any rideable characters". It's also machine translated so I'm sure we're losing some nuance.

I've read some discussion about this to try to see if the outcome is predictable. The only one thing that seemed to be clear was: most everyone is viewing this from a Western perspective while these are Japanese patents and the lawsuit is in Japan. That could significant affect how the case is handled, and many people commenting and making videos about this aren't really considering that.

edited 1h

While the article feel bias, the 3 points feel valid. It's not like pokemon is the only franchise that does the whole "capture enemies in device to use in battle" in japan alone either. If we talking recently, there was that one game that release august on steam that did pretty well japan for at least the year it was released.

cough yarimon .


Night of the Living Fruit

That third patent is insane. It's literally mounts. Nintendo didn't make that, wasn't the first to do it, or even close. Why are people allowed to patent things that they didn't make or do first? This is why people say patents are bad for the video game industry. If things like this were always enforced, we wouldn't have things like horses in games. Honestly, if you looked through all the patents that exist, we probably couldn't have "movement based off user input" or some junk.

Even ignoring the fact they are being used to bully, the fact that the patents exist at all is just awful.


R4ndom1guy1 said: 9h
CitizenXLVIII said: 2h

You need to look at the specifics for the patent. It is rather broad but it isn't a generic "any rideable characters". It's also machine translated so I'm sure we're losing some nuance.

I've read some discussion about this to try to see if the outcome is predictable. The only one thing that seemed to be clear was: most everyone is viewing this from a Western perspective while these are Japanese patents and the lawsuit is in Japan. That could significant affect how the case is handled, and many people commenting and making videos about this aren't really considering that.

edited 1h

While the article feel bias, the 3 points feel valid. It's not like pokemon is the only franchise that does the whole "capture enemies in device to use in battle" in japan alone either. If we talking recently, there was that one game that release august on steam that did pretty well japan for at least the year it was released.

cough yarimon .

Of course they're not the only game that does "capture enemies in device to use in battle", but once again, look at the mechanics actually laid out in the patent. This is specific to Legends Arceus style capturing.

Yarimon is not the same. It's 2D while the patent isn't for 2D games...

edited