Palworld is a different game using similar mechanics. This game looked like the same game. I think the cases are different and I think basically trying to make the same game is not fair.
Sure no one cares about tencent vs Sony but what if it was tencent vs a smaller dev? Derivations are fine but ripoffs really probably should be limited.
Not to mention the original looked like they basically stole designs lol
I didn‘t see footage or screenshots where they literally stole the likeness of a character. It would be bad if they did that but I‘ve seen no evidence of it. As far as I know mixing generic tribe aesthetic with generic sci-fi aesthetic can‘t be protected either. I don‘t want to repeat my previous comment but I don‘t see the issue here. It would open a barrel of worms for the entire industry if vague aesthetics are suddenly protected. The lawsuits would never stop and small dev teams would make concessions left and right to fence off armies of lawyers.
Palworld is a different game using similar mechanics. This game looked like the same game. I think the cases are different and I think basically trying to make the same game is not fair.
Sure no one cares about tencent vs Sony but what if it was tencent vs a smaller dev? Derivations are fine but ripoffs really probably should be limited.
Not to mention the original looked like they basically stole designs lol
I didn‘t see footage or screenshots where they literally stole the likeness of a character. It would be bad if they did that but I‘ve seen no evidence of it. As far as I know mixing generic tribe aesthetic with generic sci-fi aesthetic can‘t be protected either. I don‘t want to repeat my previous comment but I don‘t see the issue here. It would open a barrel of worms for the entire industry if vague aesthetics are suddenly protected. The lawsuits would never stop and small dev teams would make concessions left and right to fence off armies of lawyers.