Looking up those patents, the first alludes to a system where a player aims and fires an “item” toward a character in a field, and in doing so triggers combat, and then dives into extraordinary intricacies about switching between modes within this. The second is very similar, but seems more directly focused on tweaking previous patents to including being able to capture Pokémon in the wild, rather than only during battle. The third, rather wildly, seems to be trying to claim a modification to the invention of riding creatures in an open world and being able to transition between them easily.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] icogniito@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Its a very lazy mediocre game that only got recognition because it was ”Pokémon with guns”

I don’t like what Nintendo is doing, but I also thing palworld is a crap game

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It definitely only got popular because of the hype re: "Pokemon with guns," but it's legitimately better than the game it actually copied, which is Ark. You know what's cool about Palworld? Me and my coplayer were able to stop playing without losing everything we've built

Anyone who thinks Palworld is actually a Pokemon ripoff either hasn't played Palworld or hasn't played Pokemon

[–] icogniito@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

Gameplay wise palworld has nothing to do with Pokémon, it was simply a marketing tool for em.

As for the ark comparison I can’t comment, the one time I played it was on the early access launch day during which I refunded it within 45 minutes because it performed horribly, that was almost 10 years ago though so not sure how the current game compares