Literally, read some of their patents. Its all shit like “System For Switching From Character To Vehicle In Top-Down 2D Environment”. Like how tf can you actually patent a model and (software) controller swap? Shits basic AF I have done that before.
At one point didn’t a company have a patent over an interactive loading screen?
Which is why loading screens in games have been boring for years, because actually having any kind of thing to do while the game loads is apparently banned.
It applied only to “auxiliary games” so anything using the primary engine was ok e.g. running in the fog for assassins creed or practicing moves in a combat game.
It applied only to US and Japan so anywhere else was unrestricted. The entire PAL region was unaffected.
But also:
The patent was held by Namco / Bandai Namco, they are a prolific publisher but made very limited use of their ability to use loading screen mini games freely.
The patent expired in 2015, despite this very few games have used loading screen mini games since.
Patents are about how you achieve a goal, not the goal itself. You can have multiple parents on "switching for character to vehicle on top down 2D environment" as long as the means to do so are not the same.
VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
on 12 Dec 07:39
nextcollapse
threaded - newest
Because I guess Nintendo has now trademarked the act of “throwing” in a videogame
Literally, read some of their patents. Its all shit like “System For Switching From Character To Vehicle In Top-Down 2D Environment”. Like how tf can you actually patent a model and (software) controller swap? Shits basic AF I have done that before.
At one point didn’t a company have a patent over an interactive loading screen?
Which is why loading screens in games have been boring for years, because actually having any kind of thing to do while the game loads is apparently banned.
This wasn’t as general as many people think:
But also:
patents.google.com/patent/US5718632
I can only conclude that the industry just wasn’t that interested in the idea.
Patents are about how you achieve a goal, not the goal itself. You can have multiple parents on "switching for character to vehicle on top down 2D environment" as long as the means to do so are not the same.
In theory. In practice, software patents have pretty consistently been about the outcome and it’s held up in court. This expired patent on sanity systems, for example.
Sega had a patent on the transition between camera perspectives in a 3d racing game.
Everyone got around it being making the transition instantaneous.
Just change it to a Pal Cube or some other shape that’s more fun than a fucking sphere. Problem solved.
ETA: Also, fuck Nintendo.
Pal pear, something that almost a sphere.
What’s the 3D version of an oval?
Spheroid
Pal egg
I’ve said it before. Well they need to replace it with a “pal decahedron”. You have to get real close to realize it isn’t a sphere.
What about a pal boomerang? The retrieval would make more sense too.