They are very different, not just between the two but even between the different iterations of each. They compete but not directly.

The lawsuit is about patents, not copyrighted designs.

I was not saying that this was retroactive. Merely that new games in the Mario Party series could be rated R18+ because of this, perhaps I was not concise enough. Of course, this also applies to any game, Mario Party was only an example because even if a casino is not explicitly used, gameplay which imitates gambling such as a slot machine or some other "randomized reward" element of a game, is gameplay that is pretty common to Mario Party's minigames.

Fire Emblem Heroes is a mobile gacha game by Nintendo that is still ongoing and was released in 2017. In just 3 years the game grossed $656 million USD globally, which makes it Nintendo's most lucrative mobile game. Gacha is considered gambling by this regulation.

I agree with engaging in discussion. I was voicing my frustration at a behaviour that was common to Reddit, and Lemmy is supposed to be different from Reddit. Better. So I was both disappointed and frustrated to see the exact same behaviour as what happened over there. Because someone will say something someone else follows it up and then everyone bases their entire opinion on the reply, then regardless of if the second comment is edited or not people.just completely disregard everything the first commenter says. Its a terrible way to foster a community and a behaviour I hope dies off very quickly. Unfortunately it would seem that social media is conditioning people to do the opposite.

60fps only in 864p though. If you want 1080p youll have to live with 30fps, of course.

Sony is a shareholder and Microsoft has also supportted PocketPair, it will be interesting to see how that works out with Nintendo.

I love when people comment and vote before they actually read the article.

Mario 64 DS had Luigi's Casino, and Mario Kart had the Wario (?) themed Casino map. Its not outlandish to think Mario Party could include such elements in the future.

Yeah, because the developers realized that the game being hard and unfun was hurting their player numbers.

Digimon did, right? Why didn't they ever go after that?

Since this is over patent and not copyright, wouldn't this have to be about patents filed after the year 2003 and before 2024? AFAIK, patents don't get extended and cannot be re-filed, and Pokemon has existed since the 1990s, where a lot of its patents would have been created. Unless for some reason Nintendo delayed filing the patents for more than 5-10 years but I don't know that patents are allowed to have such a time gap between publication and filing or not. Perhaps Japan has different patent laws, their laws notoriously favor businesses so I wouldn't be surprised.

Additionally, at least in the USA, some things like gameplay elements cannot be patented if they are necessary for the genre of the product. For example, a first person camera, guns, shooting, etc. are not elements that can be patented as they are necessary for FPS games in general, but some kind of specific new technology like the way Doom draws its 3D world could be patented.

For a Creature Catcher game like PalWorld, devices (very vague and generic term that legally should not be patentable because it is too generic BTW) to catch, store, and deploy creatures is necessary to the genre. Unless it is specifically code or the same exact way that both PalWorld and PokeMon function, I do not see how Nintendo thinks they can win other than by bankrupting their opposition like usual.

Really hope this one turns out like Lewis Galoob Toys Inc v Nintendo of America, but the Japan version.

They had to wait for PalWorld to sell a lot and make a lot of money so they can financially ruin these people instead of just telling them "don't do that."

Literal Comic-Book Villain behavior.

"New Nintendo Switch XL"

Wait, purposely excluding sizable segments of the market led to less sales? No way. Someone should note this down.