Sadness

[Drewbacca]

Intellectual property. In gaming, it usually refers to a setting and group of characters and imagery that constitute a franchise, but it can also be used in a more technical sense to refer to any copyrightable material that has no physical existence but is unique to its rights holder.

In this instance, if I make a game about soccer, Nintendo can't sue me. If I rip off their play mechanics, Nintendo can't sue me. If I make a game about Mario, Nintendo can sue the pants off me. Mario is really the IP here, unless you want to include the Mario Strikers logo and artwork, by which definition every game is a 'new' IP. Even Madden has a unique copyright every year.

If they patent an in-game mechanic you rip from their game they can still sue you.

Too bad, its on rails. Its been confirmed by seven sources. Or not, considering every ounce of info on the game is in the very first post and does not contain the word "rail" anywhere in it.

I can't stand rail shooters.

[StriderKyo]

If they patent an in-game mechanic you rip from their game they can still sue you.

Name a single instance where this has happened. They can only sue if they can prove you stole the actual code, not because you gave your guy the ability to pick up a flower and shoot fireballs.

[Diff-chan]

No... game mechanics can be patented.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...S=PN/6,935,954

[StriderKyo]

Okay, and Call of Cthulu does almost the exact same thing without Bethesda getting sued. Unless that patent is ripped off note for note, I don't see how that patent ever holds up, given that the history of gaming is one of derivation and building on the backs of the mechanics of others. I can't think of a single succesful lawsuit ever launched over game mechanics.

[Drewbacca]

Nintendo just recently patented something called the Insanity System, which is how the game changes based around a game players sanity (monsters getting scarier, effects changing, etc.) I can't remember any company openly suing someone for crossing these lines, but I don't doubt it's happened.

edit: diffusionx's link is to the exact patent I'm talking about.

[Diff-chan]

Okay, and Call of Cthulu does almost the exact same thing without Bethesda getting sued. Unless that patent is ripped off note for note, I don't see how that patent ever holds up, given that the history of gaming is one of derivation and building on the backs of the mechanics of others. I can't think of a single succesful lawsuit ever launched over game mechanics.

Just because they don't doesn't mean they can't, and who knows if Betheseda didn't pay Nintendo some cash for the rights to use it. And if they didnt then Im sure they had their lawyers looking at it for weeks and telling the developers how they can design their insanity system without getting in trouble.

[Jetman]

No... game mechanics can be patented.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...S=PN/6,935,954

I didnt even know that was possible. crazy.

Nintendo must have been really proud of that Insanity thing.Maybe Bethesda payed some kind of royalty to Nintendo to use that similar feature in their game?

[Drewbacca]

I think Nintendo owns a lot of the gameplay RPG elements found in Paper Mario 2 as well. They did a really good job with the battle system in that game (reminds me of Fight Night where they include a lot of mini-games to help keep a challenge to doing monotonous things) and nobody since has stolen the ideas and implemented them in to a more mature environment.

It sucks but that's the world of business I guess.

[MechDeus]

Sony patented Mark of Kri's battle system. Just saying.

[StriderKyo]

Just because they don't doesn't mean they can't, and who knows if Betheseda didn't pay Nintendo some cash for the rights to use it. And if they didnt then Im sure they had their lawyers looking at it for weeks and telling the developers how they can design their insanity system without getting in trouble.

The thing is that you can't patent insanity. You can't patent hallucinations. Like I said, I believe the only way they could succesfully launch a suit is if you could prove they stole the system condition for condition, and I believe (one of TNL's lawyers can feel free to correct me here) that precedent says that involves proving they've co-opted the actual code or logic tree involved.