There is zero evidence that they did that. This game has made at least $200,000,000 in less then a week. That’s serious cash - if there were a case to be made, Nintendo would make it.

Nintendo’s lawyers are better at this than you. Palworld sold seven million copies in five days. That’s more than a million a day. It has earned at least two hundred million dollars. Two hundred million dollars, in five days.

Here’s the beauty of it - it doesn’t matter. From my perspective? Yes, there’s more to it than that. The “Pokémon with guns” bit as an aspect of the satirical take on the whole idea of creature collectathon-style battle games crossed with a hyper-competitive modern world. Is it really novel or particularly deep? Nope…

It’s pretty clearly satirizing Pokémon and the whole “happy animal enslavement/combat” subgenre with legitimate commentary. Someone might not like or agree with it, but satire and social commentary are both valid forms of expression, even in video games.

I can see that perspective. I don’t think it’s valid because I don’t see it supported by numbers or even the preponderance of anecdotal evidence, but I’m open to being proven wrong on that score. I would suggest that, more likely, the number of avenues of communication that are available have increased and employees…

I know people in game development who will not mention that they work in game development because of the toxicity that they could then expose themselves to. These are people that love games - playing games, talking about games, thinking about games, building games - and yet, when it comes to dealing with online gaming…

I see what you’re saying, and I agree with the sentiment regarding broken or incomplete products. The same is true, obviously, in any industry.

You don’t toss death threats, hurl insults, verbally abuse, and stalk people who worked on a small part of a game you don’t like. I mean, that seems like it should be blindingly obvious.

It’s a strong opening. The judges seem impressed. Admiral Asskicker certainly knows how to begin a routine. If they continue like this, they could get gold.

The key distinction is right there in what you wrote - Microsoft and Sony have known exploits that allow it. The use of exploits is not endorsed by either company and, to the contrary, can lead to repercussions for the user.

If they decide to go after Valve for copywrite issues, they’re not going to go in “soft.” Again, I’m not a lawyer, just someone who has an interest in how copywrite helps and hinders, but when you look at previous circumstances you tend to see a larger filing then just the isolated instance.

I’m not an expert in international copyright law, but I am fairly certain that the many international treaties and agreements signed over the years covers the “well we’re not selling it there” defense.

I’m not a lawyer, but looking at it from the cheap seats - all of this work was happening in a legal “gray” area. The use of Valve’s IP, the use of Nintendo’s API even in a third-party SDK, etc., is still somewhat legally murky.

Nintendo is a Japanese company, Japan has different laws regarding copyright, Valve does business in Japan, has Japanese customers, and works with Japanese companies.

It was a poor choice to only allow limited number of media and “content creators” to comment in the first place. If you’re going to let people talk about a part of your closed alpha, let people talk about it.

Right? It’s almost as though no one has ever explained background processes.

So dude in the first video, I know that you want internet points by loling at a cyberdouche, but PUT THE FUCKING PHONE DOWN and WATCH THE FUCKING ROAD. Seriously, holy shit people. It’s not that complicated.

I mean, sure, shit happens, but you don’t have to throw it around like an angry monkey.

Right, misread it - I thought you were saying that he could have stayed quiet regarding the cash demands and then been able to court the connection to the game anyway because he’s being gifted another 15 seconds of fame. I pulled the trigger on snark too quickly, damn it.

Yes, the person who covered their face in tattoos should have shown some restraint and stayed quiet. Because staying quiet is something that a person who covered their face in tattoos is likely to do. I mean, when I think of a person who will make the most rationale decision at any given moment, I picture a person…