Comments 1,678

Re: Select Pokémon Card Pre-Orders Cancelled After New Expansion's Disastrous Launch

Chocobo_Shepherd

I'm obsessed with collecting Pokemon cards, but I'm never going to let the hobby turn into a stressor. When the cards are on the shelf, at a reasonable price, I will gobble them up. Otherwise, I can wait.

I enjoy them for the cool art, the glimpses at the lore, and that dopamine hit from opening randomness.

I don't treat Pokemon cards like a stock market or a retirement plan, so, stressing about stuff like this, while it is a bummer, would defeat the purpose of my hobby. (imo)

Re: Forget The Lawsuit, Pocketpair Says Palworld On Switch 2 Is "100% Worth Considering"

Chocobo_Shepherd

They are just straight up trolling at this point. They never really had a game to begin with, it's all been a scam to get attention and money for "bending" the rules (breaking imo), and then crying victim when they were punished for it.

If they are serious about being game devs, make original designs, tweak the capture mechanic, and stand on your own merit. Stop kicking a bee hive and complaining about stings.

Re: Random: Local Supermarket Wins Trademark Battle Against Nintendo

Chocobo_Shepherd

Yea, y'all don't understand trademark law. Which is especially clear when you use words like "patent" and "copyright" interchangeably with it. You must defend any noticed trademark or risk LOSING IT. So, challenging this store and then losing the case is the best possible outcome for the store, the sanity of the world, AND Nintendo.

All they did was legally distinguish the video game franchise and its character from the supermarket. In so doing, they get to keep their trademark — that's how it works. No more or less. Shame on anyone trying to make it into something more for the sake of some clicks (not that this article is really doing that, but you can see the outcome in the comments).

EDIT: Case in point: The Washington Nationals baseball team and Walgreens had to go to court some years ago to hash out whose stylized, swoopy W was whose. I believe a regional grocery chain (Wegmans) was also involved. No one is confusing a baseball team for a convenience or grocery store, but it's the same legal ground.

LINK: https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/466191/the-law-of-the-letter-could-nats-curly-w-be-taken-away/

Re: Square Enix May Withhold Its Own Products If You Harrass Its Staff

Chocobo_Shepherd

@eduscxbox You are correct, on the other end, people shouldn't mix things like voicing opinions, inquiries, and criticism with harassment. Freedom of Speech (at least in America) does protect being annoying, obnoxious, and even offensive. Because those are subjective things.

If I said I thought the (I don't know) outfits in a SE game were offensive, that would not give me the right to have that game removed. But I could voice my opinion about it as often and as obnoxiously as I wanted. And everyone else would have the right to ignore me, block me or just tell me to shut up. ^_^ They wouldn't even have to be nice about it!

Of course, people should be kind in how they voice their displeasure, but it can't and shouldn't be enforced because, again, it's subjective. Policing true harassment is great; policing politeness or opinions is tyranny.

Sadly, online culture has gone off the rails at both ends of this topic.

Re: Square Enix May Withhold Its Own Products If You Harrass Its Staff

Chocobo_Shepherd

First, where is the evidence that this kind of thing is happening with any kind of predictable consistency? Where is the data that this is happening to Square Enix more than other companies? Where is the proof that Square Enix treats its own employees so well that they can start pointing the finger at their audience?

Second, a lot of these classifications are incredibly vague and one-sided. "Persistent inquiries"?? So people can't ask frequent questions.. like what? When a game is coming out? How much it will cost? Why the DLC is structured like it is?

People can't ask for apologies from SE?? What deems a request for staff reprimands being "unreasonable"?? What if the SE employee does something truly detestable to the audience member? They have immunity??

~~~

TL;DR Yea, everyone should be cool to everyone else. But this feels really defensive, flimsy, and ultimately performative.