【ポケモンに似てる？】パルワールドが炎上した理由を考察
This time, I would like to write honestly about what I thought about Pal World as a game creator and a game fan. I hope I can tell you that I felt this way for this reason objectively, not in the sense of putting it down.
I am aware that I am only trying to be neutral, but there is a possibility that I will not be on the affirmative side when I include or explain the borderline.
I hope this is helpful for those who want to know the background of how the flameout is happening and how the users feel about it, etc. From now on I will give you information that is down on the Internet and preliminary information. Pal World is a recent hot game developed by Pocket Pair.
It is said to be similar to the system of a game called Ark, where you collect Pokémon-like characters in the game. The game is also controversial because of its cruelty and the heavy workload it places on the monsters. Is it similar to Grand Theft Auto? Some people have said that it is.
The development company is “Pocket Pair”. I’ve never heard of the company before, but they make several indie games. The representative of the company is a graduate of Tokyo Institute of Technology, works for Morgan Stanley, and is the founder of Coincheck. A true elite…! On the topic of the allegations
The following post looks like an existing Pokemon character. Comparison images and such are similar, and there are a few scattered ones that look like chimeric Pokémon, mixing Pokémon and other Pokémon parts. I have a great sense of deja vu. People who say, “Well, the game’s pacifier in the first place.”
There are also a number of posts that seem to be a bit of a stretch, such as “Games are almost all paclitic. There was a post by someone who felt uncomfortable with that The one that was put out by a nurturer to the Pal World comparisons, saying “This one’s a cliche too, right?”
It’s still totally different, the features are not even snatched I’ve never seen Pokemon or Dracula and never thought of both games… Are the 3D models similar? It seems that an international user posted this And if you Google translate the quoted English post
It is virtually impossible to “accidentally” create a complex model mesh with nearly exact ratios. Repeating that improbability across the entire roster…does not pass the sniff test. It’s a little confusing, but it sounds like it’s not a coincidence level…
I think it is unlikely that they would be nearly the same if they were made from scratch, such as the number of mesh divisions, but it may be possible that they happen to be the same, and since it is unclear where the data came from, it seems hard to say that they are the same.
It seems that international users are also discussing it on YouTube Japanese purchases are not as high as expected We tend to think that the majority of people play Pal World because of the large number of units sold, but in fact, it seems that the number is not that large.
The Steam version of “Pal World” sold 3 million units in the first 48 hours of its release. Calculated from the reposted country percentage estimates, 78,000 units in Japan. 3 million in 2 days, 78,000, which is 2.6% in percentage terms. Less than I thought..! And it looks like sales have now reached 6 million.
We’ve reached 6 million units sold in the first 4 days of release! The momentum is just too great. But if you think about it that way, simple math doubles it and it’s about 150,000 units.
According to Dr. Google, the gaming population in Japan is 54 million, so it does not seem to be a majority. I am aware of this from prior interviews There was an interview where the developer himself was aware of the similarity.
We are serious about making games and, of course, we have no intention of infringing on the intellectual property rights of other companies. We have received legal reviews and have not received any specific action from other companies at this time.
There are many rumors floating around on the Internet, but we hope you will feel secure in your purchase. We have already confirmed through legal that there is no problem and we have checked with each company and they seem to be OK with it because there is no reaction.
But with this text, I think it’s possible that I haven’t received a clear OK response, so it’s hard to say that I have permission to say “no problem” or “you can use it” as I generally think.
It’s also possible that the companies couldn’t say no to game development, and they didn’t have time to deal with companies that didn’t have that much money to spend, so if there was a problem they could sue later to get it back, and they didn’t dare to say anything about it. Official Pokemon statement
A statement was later issued by Pokémon Inc. which owns the rights. Pokémon Inc. issued a statement saying that it “does not license any use of Pokémon” for similar third-party games. Stated that it “will investigate and take appropriate action against any infringement of intellectual property rights related to Pokémon.
It seems that clear permission was not obtained. Is this a response to the concerns of the fans? I saw some of the descriptions in English, so there must have been a lot of inquiries from overseas… Concerned opinions in the business community
Even in the business community, which tends to be more capitalist than gaming, some people have complained bitterly.
I think that every manager or businessman has at least once or always experienced the inner “struggle” against ethical “temptations” that are not regulated by laws and regulations, such as “pakku” (taking a crack at something). I think it is an act.
You said, “Those who create something are not tempted, they strive to create something new. I think the act of acknowledging this case is the same as denying the whole history of the past. Yes, we should not forget to thank our predecessors… And it also states this
It’s hard for Japanese venture capitalists to praise these things, because they should bow down to the greatness of Nintendo, the global economic impact, and the Japanese national interest and the human resources it has produced.
You have conveyed some of what Pokemon advocates and I have been trying to say. (more on Nintendo’s accomplishments, etc. later) As for me, I can’t say that cracking up is a bad thing, but the more sensitive it is to the content that has fans, the more sensitive it is.
I sometimes think that we need to show good faith in our actions, such as borrowing IP from Nintendo’s side, or making an effort not to be blatantly similar.
I don’t see a lot of criticism of Palworld in the game development and industry community because of this, but there seem to be few positive posts or a lot of people who try not to mention it. Indie games to begin with? (small game)
By the way, some people are treating it as an indie game, but I think it’s not, because in an interview they said they had a budget of billions of dollars. The definition is vague, but Wikipedia had this Game software developed by a small number of people and on a low budget
I don’t think it applies because it says Aside: promotion by indie games (sales promotion) Indie games are often created by small developers who are dedicated to their own particular interests, and they tend to be interesting and rarely good games.
Recently, there seems to be a case that just putting on an indie game has a certain promotional effect, and the reality is that some games are developed on a non-small scale, or are even considered suspicious.
I’ve seen videos on YouTube overseas that look like another indie game scam, so maybe the trouble is increasing all over the world. Defenders and pointers are battling There seems to be a battle going on between advocates and pacifist pointers purchased on Twitter and YouTube around the country and abroad.
It’s a bumblebee even overseas. The comment section is just as bickering as in Japan Amidst the firestorm and controversy, threats are being made Flame marketing seems to be helping sales, but at great risk. We are currently receiving slanderous tweets against our artists, some of which appear to be death threats.
The users who have supported Pokémon for a long time are, so to speak, some of the investors who have helped Pokémon grow to this point. Maybe there is a level of people who feel that their handiwork has been desecrated. I just hope it doesn’t turn out to be a big deal.
To be honest, from someone who has experience in game development, it’s not just for Palworld. I sometimes think that no matter what the law says, when something is considered pacri, it’s “pacri” to that person.
When I’ve done corporate or original work, I’ve inevitably been pulled back to past work, so I try to keep that impression out of my head as much as possible, and I try to distance myself from the image.
Even if a game is somewhat similar, if there is no effort or sincerity in the effort to avoid similarity, it is disrespectful to the development company and the fans, and it is also a part that makes me very nervous, because if all games were to be classified as pacri, no one would be able to make games.
It’s sometimes scary because you can be lightly covered in games that you’ve never actually played or don’t know about, even if you’re making them for a company. Is the problem that this work is clearly made to look like it?
But in the case of this work, you can tell just by looking at it that it is “made to make Pokémon come to mind”, perhaps for promotional purposes. The lack of glimpses of effort to avoid resemblance may be the fundamental psychological problem.
I guess you could call it an effort not to infringe on the rights, but it seems to me that it is in good faith to the creator, and to do so with a title that also has some cruel expressions such as this one, it seems that it is not surprising that fans and rights holders feel that their feelings are being disregarded.
Even though words may say that there is sincerity and respect, if it is so blatant, they may feel that they have earned it by playing a game that you guys can’t ethically make. Image of copyright and patents in the gaming industry
This is just my level of perception, but copyright is a right to the creator of the work, whenever you create something new, that thing has a right to the creator.
Copyrights can be copyrighted works in the case of games, almost anything that is created, from the graphics of the game itself, to the program, to the music, and so on. There are many ways to determine that. This post verifies that for me.
Palworld, I remember a TV show once about how far you can go to get people mad at you for copying Pokémon designs, and I remember the “lawyer-supervised line to make a Gachapin pirate version that can’t be sued” that was crazy funny.
Maybe we can’t deny that it’s gray when we say it’s de-legalized or legal after all.
Although it is set by law, it was originally decided by the people to protect their individual rights, and now that we are in the age of generative AI and content warfare, there may be a possibility that laws that have never been a problem may become inadequate or change.
The game industry is a fan business I feel that games in particular are not just a service or a product if it’s available, but there’s a big aspect of the fan business.
I think many people want a painting because it was painted by “Van Gogh”, like a work of art, and they don’t want a forgery or a copy. In the same way, games are often content that we play with feeling because it was made by that company.
I guess that’s why I would buy something unconditionally if it was made by a manufacturer I like… Posts like this. I played “Pal World,” which has sold 4 million units, and found it immersive and fun, but felt “sorry” from the bottom of my heart.
In short, it’s interesting and fun, but it’s so similar that it makes you feel sorry for playing it.
I know that there is nothing wrong with the users who purchased the product, but maybe the reason why there are some aggressive people in the positive camp is because they don’t want to be made to look bad because they are part of the problem.
So I would not pick it up until there is a clear statement from a company such as Nintendo or until public opinion calms down.
Considering that famous and influential “Hikakin-san” and “Hajime Shacho-san”, who are famous and influential game players, haven’t played the game yet, maybe they’re waiting to see how it goes (and they seem to owe me a favor by letting me distribute Nintendo games so far). Did you copy Genshin’s marketing?
There are rumors that the game title Genshin mimics the successful case of free large-scale marketing due to its similarity to The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (henceforth, Brewwire). I wonder if it’s called a “flame sale”… Yes, it can be done on a zero budget, so maybe it’s more efficient.
But what I’m concerned about here is that the similarities are just the game design and art of just one of the pieces of the game. Pokémon has imitated the consistent design of the series’ works, so maybe the fans have a different voltage of anger. Pokemon is loved by many generations, young and old…
Pokemon’s IP revenue is No. 1 in the world Moreover, Pokémon is number one in the world in terms of revenue from intellectual property (IP) rights, including copyrights.
Even Mickey, who is very strict about that copyright, is ranked third, so the seriousness may not be the same when compared to how many fans exist, the amount of responsibility, and the degree to which it resembles one of Zelda’s works.
Yes, it has the potential to sell millions of units if it has a reputation for being “similar to Pokémon & fun”! I remember when I was a kid
And I think there are a lot of people who have grown up with Pokémon, like their siblings since they were kids, and the cartoons and the movies and all of that. Maybe they feel like they are making fun of the family they grew up with.
I only played a few games when I was a kid, so not so much, but I sometimes felt sorry for Pokemon fans who looked a little small
I think Pokémon developers have been dealing with children and fans for decades, which is why they have survived so far while many other character contents are disappearing. I feel a little pain in my heart when I think about it… I now understand how sorry I was earlier in my post…
I understand the developer’s desire to affirm the game’s pacification In gathering information, I found cases in which even game creators are in favor of taking down their works. However, I can see the aspect of position talk (I have no choice but to say so from my position) when game creators allow pacifiers.
I guess it’s more convenient for you professionally… In fact, if you’ve been in the game industry for a long time, there have been cases where we have created games that are somewhat similar to games in the past or borrowed some features from existing games.
So, the game creator’s opinion may be for self-preservation, so it is necessary to listen to it with that understanding. Perhaps, if any game creator is cajoled or coarsely scrutinized, we may not be able to deny the possibility that he/she has created a small but pioneering work for someone else!
I think it’s the design that users judge pacri I think a big factor in determining whether it’s a pacri or homage is the design.
I think it is easy to be identified as pacri, especially if the main characters or main content characters are similar, because we are always made aware of what is always on the screen in terms of appearance.
Rarely, music and other things are also discussed as being pacri or not, but I think similarities in appearance are much easier to recognize because many people are mainly dependent on their sense of sight.
I think we talked about that in a previous article that I told you about, where I thought about how far you should go in creating assets if you want to create a highly original work of art, and I think we talked about that closely. Side note: paid assets are permitted
When you’re using somebody else’s stuff, you might say, “Well, aren’t the assets the same thing?” You might say, “Well, when you’re using somebody else’s assets, aren’t the assets the same?
We are often allowed to use them for a fee, and as a result, the person who created the data is compensated, or there is a form of prior consent. So even if there are fans, they are satisfied because the creator himself is satisfied.
But if clear permission is not taken, “Sir, is that OK?” I think it is a state of affairs. And the quality of the game itself is good, so the style of the game is such that it affirms the users to continue to sell the game on their side.
Personally, with that background, it’s possible that he’s moving this intentionally. hmmm….speaking of good On top of that, what put Pokémon fans and antagonists on edge was the fact that it “sold” so well that it was on par with the original.
No, “sold out” might be a misnomer, since I get the sense that they’re very motivated to sell a lot, given the amount of marketing effort they put into it in the first place!
I don’t deny that this is an interesting piece of work if you look at the content alone, but I think that if this had been an original design, this would not have happened. What a waste! It would have been a gee-whiz masterpiece even if it had a slower initial launch…
But considering the aforementioned marketing, it’s possible that they are intentionally creating this situation, so it may be hard to say. The more it sells, the more the original fans get mad.
Generally, similar games just quietly disappear because they do not surpass the original work, but this work is a good work, so it sells more and more. So I think the voltage of anger of the fans of the original is rising proportionally.
I don’t see any clear permission for this, so I don’t think there is any reason to be angry. Besides, it’s a historic title. Once you get past the original family, you get the impression.
For example, one of the main reasons why some sales of doujinshi works are tacitly approved is because “sales are small. If sales exceed those of the original work, it is hard to deny the feeling of being used as a stepping stone.
There may also be an aspect that users have sidestepped and realized what they expected from the Pokémon developer in the future. I feel that if they had at least been willing to pay Pokémon a fee for the use of the sales, fans would not have been so upset.
I know you said in the interview that you didn’t have any problems around the rights, but maybe there are a few factors that could cause a flame war, like not being clear to the point where you had a response or something.
There’s a lot of backlash from game developers and people in the industry. We’re actually seeing a lot of pushback from industry professionals who are not Pokémon fans.
I myself honestly don’t care whether or not it is a pokemon, as it is subjective, I am just concerned about the future order of the gaming industry because of this case. In the age of AI, I believe that Japanese game companies with many IPs can compete with the best companies in the world.
Does that set a bad precedent? If a precedent like this is set, there is a possibility that a large number of clone-type games of existing IPs will be created, and companies outside of the country may imitate them.
Also, the international profits from the Pokémon IP I mentioned earlier are quite large and have a significant impact on the Japanese economy.
It may be hard to say that the profits that used to be concentrated only in Pokémon will now be distributed among smaller clone games, and that this will not cause the Japanese economy to deteriorate, albeit in a small way… maybe.
Maybe Nintendo’s attitude would be different if the developer was a foreign company since the content no longer supports the country. Aside: does it affect the lives of ordinary people?
I am not a scholar, so my knowledge will be shallow, but Japan’s export industry, including the Japanese video game industry, is also greatly affected by the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the yen.
The reason for the high prices is that the exchange rate between the yen and the dollar is fluctuating and the value of the yen is decreasing more than that of the dollar.
When determining the value of that yen, Japan’s exported money (the amount sold overseas) and other factors also have an impact, so it is not impossible to say that the loss of profits from Pokémon content in the future could accelerate the further rise in prices in Japan
So, to put it bluntly, the electricity bill could go up, the cost of food and prices could go up Will this spill over to other works? Because the revenue from other Japanese content, such as Mario, Zelda, Sonic, and many other character content, could be dispersed.
I am concerned that this case has bent the “rules for protecting Japanese treasures” and will lead to an increased risk of infringement in the future. That’s why I feel like people in the gaming industry and developers are watching developments very carefully. Japanese games have a history of being protected by Nintendo
If you know about the Coloplast case, you know that Nintendo is very strict about obtaining patents and so on. The reason why Nintendo gets upset when you try to get a patent is because you risk monopolizing the market for free game making. It would destroy the possibility of making new games in Japan.
Game production patents are allowed to be used by Nintendo out of the warmth of their hearts. Basically every game can infringe on various patents to make games. Patents exist in a variety of areas, including game systems.
Charge Attack with Touch Panel Patent No. 4262217, Nintendo Corporation, Joystick-like Operation with Touch Panel Patent No. 3734820, Nintendo Corporation
This feature has been implemented in many games, but the games that have not been sued are made with Nintendo’s kindness. There are so many more patents than this that I can’t even begin to count! Why can’t individuals or companies be offended if they use it?
The reason why people are not offended when they infringe on it is because Nintendo, which holds many patents, is in part protecting the culture of game making by allowing it.
So other well-established game companies may have patents, but perhaps the main use is to offset each other’s patent infringement if there is patent infringement in their own titles.
This is because we were protecting “honor” between companies in the gaming industry. You may have violated my patents, but I may have violated yours. Or I may invade yours in the future. So the value of “mutuality” was at work.
I have the impression that it is really kept in a perfect balance. It seems to me that the nuclear powers are using it to check each other rather than to attack each other. Many game developers and game users owe a debt of gratitude to Nintendo.
Because of these things, I feel that there is an unspoken rule in the industry that because we are indebted to Nintendo, we should refrain from intentionally infringing on their rights.
By the way, even though they are allowed to make games, Coroplast was given a penalty of over 3 billion yen because they tried to make money from the rights beyond getting the patent and making the game. The deep humanity is scary when you make them angry…! How we sued Coroplast
Why did Nintendo sue Coloplast? Because they tried to patent it. The technology was open, so there was no problem, and then they abused it and went so far as to take away Nintendo’s patents. The amount of compensation Nintendo/Coroplast lawsuit settled for 3.3 billion!
It seems that even small software companies and small game developers have been able to create games freely until now because of Nintendo, which has tolerated them in the hope that the Japanese game industry would grow. I also feel that it is because of Nintendo that the world-class gaming powerhouse, “Japan,” was born.
Some may see this explanation as a dictatorship of Nintendo, but I also feel that it is wrong at this stage because Nintendo has only “more merits than demerits” at this point in time.
Considering the trust that has been placed in them for nearly half a century now, creating and protecting a market for free games, it seems better than leaving it to other companies! Is Nintendo on the board?
And it seems that Nintendo, the keeper of order in the video game industry, is being watched to see how it will fare.
And as the watchdog of order, they may be caught between a dilemma of whether they have to act for the good of the industry or whether they can stop a game that is actually considered fun.
However, if this is left unchecked, there is a possibility that fans will be betrayed and similar works will proliferate in the future, so even if copyright is difficult, there seems to be no possibility of collecting at least a usage fee for patent infringement or the like after a few years.
By the way, the aforementioned trial with Coroplast was filed after two years of evidence. I think they will probably move quietly after game sales and public opinion settle down. Maybe they are working behind the scenes to gather evidence now. Theory that I was originally going to pay
I had the impression in the interview that the company representatives had done a lot of legal work beforehand, so it’s possible that they originally intended to pay for that copyright or other infringement.
But unlike Coloplast, I think it is up to Nintendo to decide how much they will be penalized for damaging the brand image that Nintendo has. The patents are so stretched over so many games that I can point to a number of them, so it might depend on Nintendo’s stance. The “creepiness” I feel
I myself am not concerned about whether it is a pacifier or not, as it is a legally ambiguous area, but rather I feel creeped out by some public opinion.
It is that the idea that “as long as it’s good for me, it doesn’t matter if someone else loses money” is starting to infest the world. It’s like bullying, you don’t do to others what you don’t want to be done to you, it’s a natural thing that you learn in moral classes.
For example, if you are praised for copying something you worked hard on in class from the side, and you win an award for using it, it is unlikely that anyone would not be offended. I am concerned that many people cannot replace that simple feeling.
I feel that perhaps the recent completely free culture and the taker culture where AI copyright infringement is the norm has now sprouted. By the way, a taker is someone who gives you something and you feel no debt or gratitude and keep demanding one reward after another.
The “taker” always acts to receive more. This is the type of person who will take what is more beneficial to him or her and put his or her own interests ahead of what the other person wants. The same can be said for AI technology
I’ve long thought that I don’t deny AI technology, but that it should be structured in a way that the rights holders are rewarded and rationalized. Sometimes it’s because we believe that the person who worked the hardest in the creation of the work should be rewarded.
So it seems to me that probably most of the people who are reacting against the pacifier allegations are reacting against the trend of AI robbing others of their efforts because they feel threatened.
It is often disregarded when it is digital, but when you put it in the real world, it is no different than robbing your hard-earned paycheck from the side! It comes down to a question of ethics.
Perhaps many people can’t verbalize it because the explanation would be as long as this article, but in the end it doesn’t matter whether it is pacri or not, and many people are concerned with the order and ethics of those who consume and those who create.
I feel that there is something at stake in this public opinion because the laws that are not functioning to protect the rights of those who have worked hard may fundamentally negate hard work and effort. If you think that Palworld made us aware of that, then maybe there was some good cause.
The conclusion I think I sometimes feel that it is worthwhile to present the possibilities of the Pal World game, but also to point out the vulnerability of the current copyright.
If this work cannot claim rights under the current copyright, it is possible that a game company in another country could make the same thing and get away with it.
On the other hand, I also felt that this was a “regrettable work” considering how good it would have been if it had been a work with an atmosphere that did not clearly infringe on the rights of other companies. The better the work, the sadder it is..! We have no right
The important thing is that it is Nintendo and Pokémon Inc. who are the watchdogs of the gaming industry who have the answers.
If you really want to express your dislike as a fan. It might be better to express your feelings to the people who own the rights to this game rather than the developers of this game so that you don’t get in trouble.
If you are the person concerned, you may get an understanding response. Of course, please keep your feelings in order, don’t be rude and don’t cause trouble! Reading deeper, is this trend as expected?
This is just my deep reading from here, but I have a feeling that if the problem becomes bigger, there is a possibility of re-releasing with a different design. The development company is a doer, so maybe we can’t rule out the possibility that they are working with that in mind.
I feel that this is the kind of process that I would have envisioned for myself. I’ll show you the order of the rumors that I overheard, since the free version was initially released
1. video released, free to play, 2. YouTuber bites on the buzz that it looks like Pokémon, 3. mass production of YouTube videos for free, first free marketing success, 4. playable, work catches fire for being a Pokémon parody, 5. general users purchase out of curiosity, second free Marketing success.
6. Users “too interesting”, 7. Fans and public opinion won’t allow it? ←Im here, 8. Company “sorry” OR if no problem, go to 11. 9. design is reviewed, 10. still regarded as an interesting game, 11. Nintendo forgives, 12. only bigger sales remain, 13. happily ever after
If this is the case, it could be a great success for the company or business. (This is just my imagination) He was at Morgan Stanley, which is the second largest company after Goldman Sachs, which is a very large company.
It seems strange to say that I don’t expect this much, and maybe the fact that I’m putting up this video is in itself a sleight of hand! Do you happen to feel the same way? I found some people who feel the same way.
Per the president of the development company of Palworld, who is also the founder of Coincheck, it seems like they’re planning this project based on a decision that anticipates criticism like the current one.
As for the future of the development company, billions of dollars will be left in their hands from this sale, and if Nintendo can’t get an injunction, they can use this number of users for additional content. It could be a game of tsunamis…!
On the other hand, as I mentioned earlier, fans have stronger feelings for Pokémon than others, so there may be more than a few people whose names are etched in their heads at a level they will never forget.
However, there is no doubt about the development skills of the network and graphic aspects of the development company, so I think they can do well as a subcontractor for big titles, and considering the demand, I think they can mass produce good games as long as they take care of copyrights and other intellectual property.
I wonder if they are actually a strong company when they involve the users who are playing whatever they are playing and create an atmosphere where they are on their side and the current situation where it is hard for Nintendo to move. Is the future the “age of trust”?
Ultimately, it may be up to the consumer to decide how this fire affects the future of gaming companies. However, as other developers have said, not a few people have a good impression of this case in the gaming industry, so we cannot deny the possibility that it will cause harm somewhere.
I myself believe that in the age of stiff AI, anyone can make mass-produced games, and I feel that trust and ethics with consumers will be rather important, so I think I will make games in a muddy way. I would like to do my best in a way that I can support myself.
How was it? In this issue, I introduced “Palworld and Pokemon on Fire”. This article was introduced in a lighthearted manner, but as I myself know how hard it is to develop games, it was sometimes mentally hard for me.
Through this article, I think I was able to organize my feelings and stance, and I hope that I was able to help Pokemon fans who are labeled as “old-fashioned, ill-informed, or just jealous” without any evidence. After all, it is Nintendo that decides in the end.
Just don’t be annoying and abusive to both the positive and negative groups! I know it’s hard for the fans, so please be careful not to hold it in too much. I would like to end this video here. If you have any comments or concerns, I would appreciate your comments.
Well, thank you very much for watching this far.
今回はパルワールドについて、一人のゲーム業界人、ゲームファンとして思ったことを素直に書こうと思います。炎上がどのような経緯で起きているか感じているかの背景を知りたい方などの参考になれば幸いです。
今回の炎上の原因は類似マーケティング方法が露骨過ぎたことだと考えています。
そして皆さんが心配されている訴訟されるリスクは著作権はおそらく問題なく、たくさんの特許を持つ任天堂サイドを怒らせたかどうかだと考えています。
寛大な任天堂が滅多に怒ることはないかと思いますが、過去の事例と併せて紹介しています。
また本動画を通して今現在も世界最先端のゲームを作ることができる国を作った任天堂の知られざる功績も知っていただけますと幸いです。
【元記事】
https://tedenglish.site/game-news-pworld/
【クレジット】
VOICEVOX:ずんだもん
©株式会社ポケモン
©ポケットペア
※本動画はパルワールドや開発会社を否定する意図は含んでおりません。なぜファンからの反発があるか、開発者側の心情やゲーム業界の現状や将来などを私の推測で解説したものです。それをご理解のうえご活用いただけますと幸いです。
#ゲーム #ポケモン #パルワールド