this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
191 points (98.0% liked)

PC Gaming

8770 readers
193 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
191
Palworld ditches Pokéball-style summoning mechanic amid Nintendo legal battle (www.eurogamer.net)
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
93 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You wouldn't patent the "game" you'd patent the various forms of utility or designs within that game. So throwing a sphere at a life form to then capture it could be one patent, but maybe then you'd also file another patent to cover keeping it alive and caring for it inside the ball habitat. You might file the second off of what is called a continuation filling and in combination, as you need both actions to get the full effect, you might get a bit of extended coverage in practice.

But the bigger thing here would probably be trademark law, which is a whole different beast.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Sure, I hadn't implied that the game was patented, but the mechanics were present in a game that is over 30 years old.