Wexter

@SpinEnDash Yes and no. When you answer a question off the record it can still be published as it is a non-blinding agreement between you and the journalists. Most journalists won't publish information you give them off the record to keep you as a source (and to maintain their own reputation). But, still people can and have been burned in the press by not being careful even when they were "off the record" as you don't have legal protection even when off the record. It is just a case of be extremely careful if ever approached by the press and you know you can get into deep trouble if you say the wrong thing.

Kids here is a piece of life advice. When asked to comment on something by anyone in the press about information you should not have access to (especially if it can get you or your sources into financial or legal trouble), do your CYAs. You either answer with "no comment," or "Is it okay if I run your questions through my lawyer first." You answer with those two phrases and you will never be caught with your pants down with a journalist. Even if you say this is "off the record" a journalist can still run and publish your answer as it is a non-binding agreement. Most journalists won't, but you never know and even then it can still get back to you if you're not careful.

NEVER and I repeat NEVER answer a journalist's questions about something that can get you into legal problems unless you speak to your lawyer first.

Not saying all journalists will do this, but you need to do your legal CYAs.

@-wc- now that is way better!!! I can cheers to that one! And yeah Konami during the SNES-PS2 released so much amazing games! A few stinkers like Zone of the Enders and Castlevania 64, but damn were they kings!

I think Rocket Knight could had been a real banger of a franchise too. Imagine a Banjo inspired platformer with the jetpack allowing you to hover or rocket up in the sky. Would had been awesome!

I just hope they never release another Metal Gear Survive again... Shutters... Hopefully Konami is turning a corner.

@-wc- That's fair. I read it more as like in comparison to other 16-bit darlings like Super Mario World, Sonic 1-3, Donkey Kong Country or Mega Man X, it was overlooked? I dunno I just remember Konami was really pushing Sparkster as a brand back in the day. But, it was pretty forgotten after that... maybe I'm just overthinking it at this point.

Real shame Konami never tried to do more with it, but if Castlevania or Metal Gear Solid is any indicator it might be a good thing they didn't. I dunno.

@WaveBoy I think you'll have a great time with the SNES version of Sparkster, the Genesis version has some issues, but the SNES one slaps!

@-wc- I think overlook as over the years Rocket Knight as a brand as kind of been forgotten. It was pretty big in the 90s, but outside of the odd Happy Video Game Nerd video, I can't really name a lot of love online for the series post the "Angry Video Game Nerd/Nostalgia Critic" internet reviewer-ear on YouTube. The video game reviewer scene of the late-00s and early-2010s pumped out a ton of recognition for the 16-bit gems of old... but today a lot people don't really talk about Rocket Knight or Gunstar Heroes sadly.

Though that is probably because big YouTubers now are kids from the 00s who grew up on the GameCube and 360 and probably only really focus on that era of gaming now.

@KoopaTheGamer In my opinion it is a good thing they didn't or they'd be locked into things they (Retro Studios) don't want. Go read some Final Fantasy XV interviews and you'll notice a trend of the director and staff being locked into parts of Versus XIII that they had to include because it was shown off in early builds. I'd much rather Retro being free to do their own vision than locked into what the original devs wanted to do and failed to achieve. It's unfortunate that Retro is bagged with the "long development cycle" even though they have hardly had anytime with the game in comparison to other comparably sized releases.

Realistically the game has only been in development for 4 years. And this is not the most outlandish wait for a game I've ever seen. Elder Scrolls 6 was announced in 2018 and it's still apparently no where near done. Dragon Age Dreadwolf was announced in 2018 and is only getting released now as Veilguard. Games take time to develop and I hardly count the first 3 years of Prime 4's development as it all got scrapped 4 years ago.

@Zeebor15 Good point... yeah in that case Just Cause makes the most sense.

@Keyblade-Dan He creates some pretty cracked IPs and stories. His games tend to be a mixed bag due to budget and scope, but he has made some insane franchises like No More Heroes, Killer is Dead and Shadows of the Damned. That and he is just an amazing writer when he actually wants to sit down and make an extremely engaging story.

I recommend checking out the The Silver Case as the story is just 10/10 chef's kiss! It is a lot more serious than his other stories, and far less whacky than what he is known for. After that you will probably understand the hype around him.

@Zeebor15 It could be a new Deus Ex or Legacy of Kain game. I think Embracer and Eidos expressed interest in going back to those franchises a couple years ago.

Would not be surprised to see a port of the 2008 Turok happening and not a new game. But, I don't fully expect much more outside of that as despite the excellent remasters I highly doubt we'd get a new Turok game as I don't think Turok has had a new comic in almost a decade so the franchise is pretty dormant. I could be wrong and would be pleasantly surprised, but I doubt it.

@gsilver they own the game the mod is modifying and legally mods are in a dubious grey area. Here's an article that generally explains the situation. https://iplaw.allard.ubc.ca/2023/11/24/legal-risks-for-modding-in-video-games/

@GoshJosh We can like and respect the individuals in the company or even how said company generally operates, but companies will never be your friend. At the end of the day the only people they report to are their shareholders and employees. But, realistically they only care about their shareholders.

I generally respect Nintendo for treating their employees well, being against crunch culture and generally releasing games in a humane way. But, I generally don't agree with their treatment of emulators and mods. Even though they're in their legal right to do so.

Not everything is black and white, but indeed companies are not your friend.

@-wc- Anyone who claims Nintendo is even comparable to the evils Microsoft and even Sony are out for lunch. Nintendo may do some shady things or even anti-consumer practices at times... but Microsoft is in a different league. Even Sony themselves are much worse than Nintendo. Such as Sony basically parading around Michael Jackson who has been long dead to sell more singles of songs he never consented to publish... or how they tried to strong arm him in negotiations to scoop up his and the Beatles discographies. Or those really embarrassing leaked Sony cooperate emails from a decade ago showing the massive mistreatment and contempt they had for their own creators and IPs... yeah Sony is pretty damn evil.

@Cut3Panda-SNES64DD While Microsoft now owns some very strong IPs (they pretty much have always had strong IPs since the 360 generation with Halo, Gears and the Rare catalog) they've never been in a position to capitalize on it or keep a certain level of consistency with them. The fact that Halo Infinite crashed and burned and the really mixed reception around Gears 5 really shows the cracks in Microsoft's management.

Bethesda has been struggling with audiences in recent years and was not in a position to capitalize on the Amazon series success, not even with a Fallout 3 or New Vegas remaster. And while yes Id kills it with Doom, but Rage and Wolfenstein still struggle with audiences and critical reception.

Activision is a beast of a publisher, but we once again come to the issue of capitalizing on legacy IPs that are not CoD. The lack of Crash and Spyro games despite the huge numbers the remakes brought in is concerning. That and the disaster around Overwatch 2.

While I think Microsoft put out an amazing show with some amazing games, let's not pretend that Microsoft does not have an extremely spotty track record with asset management. The fact they closed down Tango Gameworks after the smash hit that was Hi-Fi Rush should be a massive example of this. Or even the criminal treatment of Arkane Austin which was tossed into development hell with Redfall and never given a chance to fallow-up on the critical smash hit or Prey is another highlight of IP mismanagement.

@AverageGamer Rareware was at their peek with the N64 KI2/KI Gold, Goldeneye, Banjo Kazooie & Tooie, Conker, Diddy Kong Racer, Donkey Kong 64 and Perfect Dark (plus the sprinkling of other neat smaller titles). It would be hard for any developer to keep pumping out bangers like those at that rare. Rare's first few years with Xbox was solid with Grabbed by the Ghoulies, Conker Live & Reloaded, Viva Pinata and Kameo. But, after the bungle of Perfect Dark Zero it felt like every title was in development hell... Sea of Thieves has been a success, but not near their 90s peek.

I'd argue if it were not for the sale Star Fox Adventures would had been a much better game. But that's really the only blemish on their time with Nintendo and it's not entirely the developers fault.

@Boston_J that is beyond beautiful! I'm beyond happy you got to experience that! I actually got teary eyed reading that. Love Mass Effect as well because it really let Shepherd be whatever you wanted them to be and it's beautiful!

@EVIL-C clearly you missed several of my follow-up responses.

1) niche titles with limited physical releases is extremely common. Try finding a copy of Xenosaga 3 for less than $200 or even the Final Fantasy Pixel Remaster collection for less than $120. These were not done by Limited Run. Or let's jump to the 3DS want Yokai Watch 3, that will $300, or Professor Layton vs. Phoenix Wright can run you north of $100 easy. So no, this isn't Limited Run exclusive problem.

2) if you read my follow-up comments you'd notice I'm also not a fan of Bethesda or Konami using Limited Run's services. But, is that Limited Run's fault or is it large publishers using Limited Run's service? And to be fair to Limited Run if they said no to those games, would physical copies even exist? Seems like Bethesda and Konami didn't really care to release the games physically in the first place and if they what would stop them from just doing what Square Enix did with Pixel Remaster? Or what Atlus does with every title not Persona or SMT mainline titles. Is your issue with Limited Run or the publishers who really shouldn't being using them.

Secondly as a Canadian myself I know your full or crap when it comes to Amazon. I can go get a copy of Ricky's Revenge for $60 (PS5) which is around the price I would had paid through Limited Run. Or even the Castlevania Anniversary Collection for roughly the same price after shipping through Limited Run (both the regular and collectors editions) instead I'm saving money with Prime shipping rates.

Yes, some games are going to be pricier than others, but that happens with every Physical game after their out of print. I've been a retro collector and trying to get a copy of Devil's Third (US) for less than $200 was like pulling teeth for years. That and Limited Run also does not make the digital copies disappear. You can still get these games off digital storefronts. Physical releases through Limited Run are more collectors items than mass consumer items just due to the nature of their business.

And if you think Limited Run is awful don't look at TCG games. Wizards of the Coast and the Pokemon Company make Limited Run look like saints.

@echoplex because the N64 had very limited memory and storage space so a lot of textures (and UI assets by proxy) had to be extremely condensed. This is different from GCN and Wii where they had more space to use higher-res assets. So a lot of UI elements like buttons and icons are just really fuzzy and pixelated when blown up on HD/4K screens exposing their low-res/compressed origins.

In the case of GCN and to a lesser extent 3DS there are a number of HD texture packs that focus on just UI elements that people use. Currently recomp projects don't have access to texture packs, but that will be ironed out in short order.

Hope this helps explain things a bit.

@Azuris I'm inclined to agree. I do think a lot of the people complaining about FOMO don't really understand Limited Run's business model. A LOT of these releases would had never happened without them as they take on the bulk of the costs. Doing physical releases is expensive, it is why so many indie and AA games are exclusively digital because the overhead is that much less when you don't have to ship a physical product.

Yes larger companies like Konami and Bethesda should not be using Limited Run, but if Wayforward or another company can't invest in doing a physical release Limited Run is fantastic for them.

@Thmystic you hit the nail on the head as to why Limited Run is better for the consumer than the alternatives. If you want to preserve games an arbitrary "only small batch of physical releases ever" is the worst way of doing things.

@EarthboundBenjy any game can be ported using this project. However, you'd still need to have an understanding now how to code in C to actually get the game working. This took just rapidly speeds up the process.

I'm going North America because it reminds me of the classic Final Fantasy boxarts. Love how the Bravely series is an homage to that series so makes sense the boxarts would be like that.

@Spider-Kev the main point was even if you don't get your preorder in it's not like the games disappear and Limited Run even makes extra copies for Amazon and Best Buy. You can go on Amazon search Limited Run and get a ton of recent releases at MSRP. I know the early Switch games are above MSRP, but so is a lot of niche one print and done games.

So Limited Run really doesn't do anything specifically bad. They're upfront about how they only do the one run... Which a lot of companies do.

Is it FOMO? Sure, but it's way less FOMO than what other publishers do. If you're concerned about buying every Limited Run title... That's a different issue in my books especially if you can't financially afford to.

@EVIL-C it's not really FOMO though. The games tend to hold value on the secondary market yes, but they give you a bit over a month to order the release. They're not a true limited release of only 50k being printed, it's more print by demand. If 20k people order the game they'll print 30k and the other 10k will be shipped to Best buy and Amazon.

You can still easily get a number of their releases on Amazon as well. It's not like they pull an Atlas where they'll also only ever do one print run of a game and just not tell anyone. The thing is niche games will always only ever get one print run, LRG is just upfront about it

I think the hate you have for them is a bit overblown.

Wish Liam nothing but the best... but the series really dropped off after Season 1. I was even okay with Season 2, but Season 3 was just pretty all-round bad. You have a mega-fan of property who plays the role perfectly and even he didn't want to stick around... just glad the show is being put out of its misery after season 5. So much wasted potential.

@Ryu_Niiyama I think I get where you're going now with the idea. I will say though I think part of the reason God of War worked so well with the trio of Kratos Mimir and Atreus was the solid banter, which I personally think unless you seriously rework Link to be less of a blank slate Zelda could fall into the same trap Navi, Tatl and Fi fell into. I think the only time the companion character worked was with Midna.

Then again I really enjoyed the 2008 Prince of Persia, I thought the Prince and Elika where really enjoyable, and I liked how Erika was integrated into the gameplay. But, again a lot of that was because of the Prince's banter and how he and Elika bounced off each other extremely smoothly. I think if Nintendo went that direction it could work.. they kinda of experimented with that before with Spirit Tracks. But, unless Link speaks it might get grating with Zelda doing all the talking and Link just grunts.

I also, don't want Link to be diet-The Prince either... that would be pretty boring as well as that snarky adventurer archetype has thoroughly outstayed their welcome. Which is why I think a female Link could work better, because you don't even need to rework the character and lore wise, you can handwave it with "well this time the spirit of the hero incarnated as a girl or a boy." It doesn't really change the lore, as each Link is not directly related to the last (except maybe Minish Cap LInk, and Windwaker Link) so who says the Spirit of the Hero has to incarnate as a man every time.

Which is why I think the issue is less Zelda and more what do you do with Link that holds the idea back. I'm not against it, just not for it either. He just doesn't work as a side-character or really a duel protagonist without reworking him seriously.

@Ryu_Niiyama I was referring to the mainline series. Side games Zelda being playable makes perfect sense... I'm more looking at the main series and how Link is namely used to represent the player and the courage to overcome the trails. I just don't see a scenario where Link can really function as a side character as they don't really have an interesting enough... Well character to work as he is right now.

I'm not going to really be upset if they go the direction of Zelda being a playable lead, I just don't see how they can make the dynamic really work as Link is a silent character. What makes the current God of War games work is it feels natural for Kratos to go in that direction, Link is a very static character unlike Kratos so it's hard to say how It'll work. I get I may sound odd, but I just not sure how it will work to take Zelda as a series in that kind of direction without majorly revamping Link to be more than a player avatar with some unique characteristics. I'm sure it can work, but I feel you need to basically completely revamp Link and I feel that would end up being more controversial than Zelda being playable as Link is a blank enough slate that each player projects something different on to him.

The issue for me is less Zelda and more what do you do with Link.

Might be a hot take, but nah I don't want Zelda as the main playable character. She works best as a side character, and that was kind of the point when naming The Legend of Zelda was that it wasn't the name of the hero. Link is supposed to be the player avatar (which is why I think I'm more okay with the option of a female Link). If you're playing as Zelda it gives Link nothing to do as they've never been a fully fleshed out character. They are a character and has some character attributes, but not a fully baked three dimensional character unlike Ganon and Zelda. They are the hero as they embody the courage to go and adventure to save the Kingdom. The humble everyman who takes up the magical sword to save the people. That's what works best as it's the most relatable part of playing Zelda. Anyone can be the hero not just people born in the magical bloodline.

I know they've kind of broken that reading a tad, but Link is meant to embody that archetype.

But, Zelda for sure should be playable in side games. But, Zelda as the playable character kind of makes Link redundant.

@gcunit I miss the 3DS dearly! Never got into the DS when it was out (outside of the handheld Castlevanias), but the 3DS was my jam! Loved the games from launch-ish titles like Kid Icarus, Animal Crossing New Leaf, to the 3DS Pokemon games and I've probably sunk hundreds of hours combined in the 3 (or 5, I guess) Fire Emblem games on the system.

I really hope the Switch 2 (or Attach whatever it ends up called), will give us DS and 3DS games on Nintendo Online. Would love to relive these games again without having to find my old 3DS.

Moved a few times, so it is in a box somewhere. I might finally Homebrew it now that the servers are offline so I can still enjoy online trading in Pokemon when that gets going again.

@Olliemar28 Yeah, this article does make tons of sense to post considering these are two former Nintendo employees. I'm sure if Scot the Woz or RGT85 had worked at Nintendo and sharing insights of working at the company they'd be highlighted.

But, I do believe the NintendoLife editors made the right choice here, considering this is a wholesome article highlighting the post-Nintendo careers of two long standing Nintendo employees (combined 25 years with the company)... I don't get why some people don't get the difference between these two kinds of creators.

PS. Great article enjoyed the content and do miss seeing Kit and Krysta during Nintendo Treehouse showcases and other events.

@dtlux1 the question is why bother? Nintendo is not providing a service for Wii U online anymore, odds are the severs are completely offline so no cost either. This will probably get at most a shrug at Nintendo HQ as it doesn't require modding the system or allows piracy. It's pretty much user's personal private servers which have existed fine on PC and older consoles for decades with no issues from right holders.

@JohnnyMind @FirstEmperor I have a strong feeling BDSP was only made to please fans and GameFreak probably didn't trust ILCA to make too much original content for the game. Rather the Legends games are the region revisits that GameFreak wants to focus on moving forward, but have built such a strong expectation for remakes that it's a catch-22.

A) They make the remakes moving forward due to fan expectations and divert attention from their passion projects that would push the series forward, but continue the stagnation of the franchise in fans and critics eyes. That and further dilute their manpower to focus on the polish of said projects.

B) Don't do the remakes, but disappoint fans of regions like Johto, Unova, Kalos and Aloha as their favorite regions won't get the same love as previous ones. Or they get another company to do them as straight remakes, and possibly disappoint the fans anyways.

It really is a no-win scenario. And while I was fine with BDSP, I do have to admit compared to FRLG, HGSS, ORAS or even Let's Go, it really was lacking overall. So, I'd personally be more than okay if they allowed other companies to do them and just give them a looser leash to be more creative. Allow them to incorporate mainline mechanics even if they might be seen as a little silly, but maybe just include them in the post-game.

Either way much like most things Pokemon despite the popularity of the franchise there is no winning for GameFreak in this scenario.

@Preposterous That was a yikes right there. Yeah, if they were sharing pirated copies with each other to develop Yuzu (especially copies that broke streetdates), then they would not enjoy a discovery process. That and advertising the methods to circumvent Nintendo's copy protection is not going to end well.

This entire scenario could had been avoided for them if they were just a bit more less public with this information.

@Narrator1 agreed. Those are solid points that I think put Yuzu in check from Nintendo's side.

I think the biggest lesson learned here is don't monetize your emulator. Dolphin has been fine because they don't monetize and only got Nintendo's lawyers attention (and was more flagged by Valve) when they tried to get it up on Steam. Dolphin has not been taken down or sued by Nintendo only blocked from Steam and Xbox. And Nintendo only took action when they absolutely has to.

Seems like not taking action against TotK pirates in addition to monetizing their emulator is what finally got Nintendo to take action against Yuzu. Don't poke the bear's tentpole releases is probably the best policy.

Nintendo seems willing to play dumb when money or official releases are not on the table.

@naxuu indeed. This does not change legalities at all! Settlements are more optic victories than anything as Nintendo gets a "win" in the sense that it will deter people from making emulators for their consoles in the future.

Based on the results seems like Nintendo was more interested in the optics than the legal precedent. They would still need to overcome previous precedent if they sued another developer in the future.

@Frailbay30 Oh I very much agree! I remember owning a bunch of awesome retro games that got damaged in a flood. Since then, I've been far looser with how I play these games and tend to get re-releases through Steam (or Switch if a collection isn't on Steam). It is just easier that way. And far less costly then re-investing $1000+ dollars into my hobby for games I was probably not going to play anyways.

As for preservation standpoint, I think as an overall industry and audience we should collectively be doing better. Which is just educating ourselves on how we can best preserve how these games were intended to be played and be more willing to reach out to preservationist groups and see what we can do to help. Even if it is just sending in old strategy guides, magazines, etc to help them not just preserve the games, but also the context around them.

@Vexx234 It's all good! This is just a very complicated subject so word usage is important! Glad you enjoyed my word vomit.

And yeah I wish more games I loved got re-releases like the N64 Bomberman games. I miss them dearly...

@Vexx234 There is one thing here I think we need to set straight. Preservation is not availability, availability is only an aspect of preservation.

Let's look at Star Wars for a moment. You can go watch Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope right now!!! The film is available, there is a catch though, it is not the original cut of Star Wars. Now, if we put the original cut up on Disney+ that would be awesome, but there are about two other cuts of the movie that are not available. Those too would need to be made available even if the differences can be seen as minor. And there are other aspects of the original movie that we need to look at outside of just the film.

i.e. the props, interviews with news papers, TV spots, magazines, toys, comics, behind the scenes information (such as presented through documentaries) etc. as these were all parts of the film outside of just the film itself. And is watching the film on the Disney+ the "intended way" for it to be watched? Star Wars as a Hollywood blockbuster was meant to be watched in theaters. So, is it preserved if the only way to experience it is through a streaming app? Because studies have been done and depending on the setting and environment of how you consume the media, the media is interpreted differently by the viewer. And some directors have been very clear like James Cameron that home video is not how he made his films to be watched.

What about directorial intent? George Lucas is a perfect case study here as every release of Star Wars had some change to it. Like the opening crawl, effects works etc. Lucas was very clear that he was never 100% happy with how Star Wars was released in the 70s as he kept tweaking it for years!! And he is not the only director who did this so many movies have had alterations and changes that you would never know happened unless you look at them side-by-side. This is why film preservation is a complicated conversation on its own.

Now if we go to video games there are a bunch of comparisons we can make to Star Wars alone. Persona 3 is a perfect example here. Persona 3 has four versions of the game, the original PS2 version, the FES edition, Portable and Reloaded. Atlus is only currently selling Portable and Reloaded on modern consoles. FES is only available to purchase on PS3. And the PS2 original is just stuck in physical only PS2 jail.

Now, in the aspect of game preservation from your definition of it. Persona 3 is "preserved" because Reloaded and Portable are available. BUT, Persona 3 is not preserved by your own definition as well. Because Persona 3 and Persona 3 FES are not on modern systems. But, by directorial intent Portable and Reloaded are the "definitive" ways of experiencing Persona 3 despite being radically different from the original game from a mechanics, visual standpoint and even story differences. Persona 3 is getting to a point where it is impossible to preserve the traditional way as the original game and how it was intended to be experienced is being lost despite Persona 3 being one of the most released games in gaming. And, in an era of patches, DLC, and "definitive editions" this is an extremely complicated issue that is almost exclusive to this medium.

Notice how this is starting to give you a headache. IF we look at game preservation only from availability standpoint how flawed this perspective is? Because we can argue that most games even re-released ones are not the original versions, and are not being played how they were intended to be played (arcade games are a MASSIVE preservationist headache). This is more than just owning the rights to the games, as even the best "re-releases" are not what you think they are.

This is not a simple issue of just make it available therefore it is preserved.

@Dr_Lugae Let's ignore emulation atm. I agree, availability =/= preservation. And preservation encompasses far more than just the game itself like source code, development documents, development builds etc. And Nintendo has proven to have the best track record of preserving that information, compared to contemporaries like Konami, Capcom, Square Enix and even western publishers like Atari. Now, is Nintendo obligated to release that information? No. Should they preserve it? Ooooh yes! Even if it is just to make future titles easier to release on modern systems.

I do get tired of arguments like "they should just release the entire insert console here backlog on NSO then they wouldn't have this problem." As if that is remotely reasonable expectation. Between music licenses, engine licenses, hardware compatibility or even just simple things like publishing agreements; video games are one of the hardest mediums to make available on modern eco-systems. It isn't as simple as music or film to find the rights holders (even in those mediums good luck with some of that) and put it on a streaming service or burn it to a blu-ray/DVD. Even emulators require meticulous testing to make sure things are working correctly and even then there can be problems (just look at some PSOne remasters, they got problems like the infamous Final Fantasy IX jump rope minigame). From a technical, and legal standpoint making games available on modern consoles and storefronts suck!!! for any interested party.

Do I agree with what Nintendo is doing here? Hard to say as I don't have all the information. But, I do think people overly simplify the "preservation issue" at bit too much where it becomes a disingenuous debate of nonsense.

@Faruko I dunno if I agree. Xenoblade games are extremely deep, but they function well and Xenoblade 3 made a lot of progress to make the combat more accessible (and Xenoblade 1 & X are pretty damn straightforward, just have a ton of daunting depth).

I think if they do a more action oriented Xenoblade I'm okay with that, but I don't want them going Final Fantasy on us where the series has a fractured identity and insists on completely ripping the ground up and redoing the gameplay every main entry (this has been the case since FFXII some 18 years ago).

I think they just need to explain the basics of their mechanics better and allow people a more easier way of accessing that deeper combat progressively. Kinda like what they did with Future Redeemed.

@LikelySatan I'm curious as well. It's a pretty fun fan game! Though yeah, I can understand why fans are upset, and Palworld is a good game so I can see why people defend it. It's a weird situation.

@LikelySatan oh 100% it's a weird issue that has emerged and a weird dissonance. If the creatures didn't look like Pokemon I doubt this would even be a headline. Monster collection games have been around since what Shin Megami Tensei? But, what's weird is Pocketpair says they took no inspiration from Pokemon, but you look at the UI for their box and party system and it's basically ripped from Legends Arcus, and a number of Pals are clearly based on Pokemon (you can't tell me you don't see the similarities between Dark Mutant and Mewtwo Y).

It's so weird, and interesting, just bizarre. It's clear that PocketPair can make a good game, but they clearly don't care as soon as you look at their previous games it's clear that to them "inspiration" is just lifting whole art designs, mechanics and even fonts from other games.

Such a disappointment as on principle this would be a lot of Pokemon fans jam.

@pupypup you understand though that the issues people have with Palworld is the designs legit lift a number of Pokemon and just remix them. There is no parody to it either as confessed by the developers. It's legit just lifting a design due to lack of creativity and/or lack of artistic integrity. Which is what is pissing people off as outside of that it's a really well made game which means the developers are capable of making something legitimately good! And they are not just doing this to the big mean Pokemon Company they are apparently also lifting Fakemon and other fan designs... So what about that? This isn't a copyright issues for writers and artists this is an artistic integrity issue. No one wants their hardwork lifted for someone else's profit. And if they have the balls to do this with the Pokemon Company then what about smaller indi devs who don't have the resources to investigate and possibly sue? Try thinking about that scenario.

@pupypup I wouldn't say they're in the legal clear. We are talking about two Japanese companies that will need to settle this in Japanese court if it comes to it. As for North American court we do have examples of issues like this such as Disney's objections to "Howard the Duck" from Marvel. We could see a similar settlement here where they'll need to change the infringing Pals. But, this is Japanese court so this could go very south fast for Palworld.

As for morally speaking... It's very ill-moral to do this. You can't deny just lifting Pokemon designs and "remixing them" is very sus and not really what game creators should be doing.

@MegaVel91 I think you hit the nail on the head. I was a little skeptical at first over the similarity of designs... but Anubis is 100% a Lucario knock-off. People say, well they are both based on the Egyptian god Anubis, so that is why they look similar. Well, no... look at the design language of both creatures, they look way too similar to say they both took inspiration from the same source.

There is even an unreleased Pal in the code of the game, that is legit just Mega Mewtwo Y!!! You can't look at the two and not go "well, Dark Mutant and Mewtwo Y look the same because they're both based on cat embrios... " if you're making that argument you're just being disingenuous.

The comparison between well Pokemon and Digimon are both similar looking and well, they are never gotten into legal dispute... well have you seen what Digimon look like? They are not even close to Pokemon in design and have very few design overlaps. And both have been around for 30 years! One would think with the amount of Digimon and Pokemon there are they'd have far more overlap.

So, if anyone is making that argument they can't make it in good faith. Palworld clearly ripped some Pokemon designs and remixed them. If that be because of laziness, for controversy, or just simply using AI to design their Pals... it's not a good look from just an artistic integrity lens. And, from a legal standpoint that is for a judge to decide. But, bringing Digimon or even TemTem into this is sheer laughable. If it were that easy to just have monsters look like Pokemon because "from the same inspiration" we'd have far more examples from similar franchises that overlap with Pokemon then we do just from the numbers game.

While we can talk about the merits of Palworld and there are a number of good points. Its a good game despite being extremely derivative by design. Let's not lie to ourselves as the developers are not shy about what kind of games they make. But, some of the designs do lean way too hard into Pokemon. There is taking inspiration from the same sources, as I've heard people say Pokemon took inspiration from Dragon Quest, and Dragon Quest took the same amount of inspiration from DnD. Inspiration is great! Palworld seems to have used direct assets from Pokemon which is a HUGE legal no-no.

But, even then while we can talk about legal no-nos in the West, both companies are Japanese. This will be resolved in a Japanese courtroom if it comes to legal action and if we have learned anything about Japanese copyright law is that it is FAR more strict than US, EU or UK copyright laws. So, it would had been beyond dumb for Pocketpair to directly crib direct assets from the most popular IP in the world. I hope they haven't, but if they used even a whiff of Pokemon assets (even if their CEO says they didn't take inspiration from Pokemon... yeah right) then this is an open and shut case as far as a Japanese judge is concerned.

That's my 2 cents as I don't see this going anywhere good for Palworld if this lands in a Japanese courtroom.

@Kevlar44 I honestly finally understand why Greg requested the content he was in gets pulled from the channel. The way Jirard did him dirty, made him sign and NDA and gave him no cut of the business he helped build is disgusting. Greg always hit me as very genuine and Jirard not so much... Which is odd considering I felt like this since I first watched the show. This just confirmed that guy feeling.

@themightyant Persona and well Shin Megami Tensei in general are really niche games. Persona 5's popularity is a pretty major outlier in the series as generally they're pretty underground games despite the hype. Granted Persona 4 did widen the reach pretty massively and P5 made it even bigger. We'll see how the series does when the P3 remake comes out.

@LikelySatan that would be for the best. I'm okay if it went the Metroid Prime route too. Considering the team members that made Turok went on to to make Prime. It be poetic and make logical sense for the franchise... But a big dumb shooter like the new Wolfenstein or Doom games would be perfect too!!