706
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 176 points 1 month ago

Nintendo should've innovated more than sticking controllers on an extra-large phone and squatting on their old IP like a dragon's hoard.

[-] prettybunnys@piefed.social 85 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The switch was/is a giant hit though.

[-] sepi@piefed.social 9 points 1 month ago
[-] Landless2029@lemmy.world 9 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

In a console age of chasing only graphics it was definitely a creative approach.

They just saw how bad the Wii-U did and went "what if the console was inside the screen instead?"

[-] prettybunnys@piefed.social 9 points 4 weeks ago

The Wii-u crashed so the switch could fly.

[-] Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 4 weeks ago

Surely they're referring to the Wii-U. The Switch is not innovative. It's a Wii-U derivative.

[-] Carrot@lemmy.today 23 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

The Switch was innovative? So much so that, upon seeing it's success, literally everyone copied them in one form or another?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] raman_klogius@ani.social 41 points 1 month ago

Yakuza and innovation don't mix. Yakuza and rent-seeking however...

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kurmudgeon@lemmy.world 129 points 1 month ago

Just goes to show, game exclusivity on a shitty overpriced portable console is a bad business practice.

People would love to play Nintendo games on PC. Nintendo is screwing themselves with their arrogance and greed.

[-] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 84 points 1 month ago

Nintendo is doing and will continue to do gangbusters. They’re the Apple of video games. They aren’t screwing themselves, just you.

[-] EnsignWashout@startrek.website 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I bought a shit ton of games from Nintendo until their legal department went rabid.

Untouchable companies do fall, when they manage to alienate diehard fans, such as myself.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] greenskye@lemmy.zip 30 points 1 month ago

Isn't Pokemon like... The biggest IP ever? Way bigger than Star wars or marvel or pretty much anything else? Not sure they're actually hurting. At all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ChilledPeppers@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 month ago

Thats me. Pokopia looks so fun, but I can barely afford a PC, which I can use for other things, no way in hell that I am buying a switch.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] OwOarchist@pawb.social 10 points 1 month ago

People would love to play Nintendo games on PC.

And I already do, lol, for every Nintendo console/handheld up to the original Switch.

And I'm sure Switch 2 emulation won't be too far behind now.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Guitar@lemmy.world 77 points 1 month ago

Good that Nintendo lost the lawsuit. They should have to compete. But honestly everyone in here calling for Nintendo to port their games to PC is being ridiculous. Nintendo as a company would be stupid as hell to ever do that. As soon as you can buy their stuff on steam, there is immediately no reason to ever purchase their hardware.

Microsoft was the perfect example of this. Xbox embraced putting their games on PC and it was one of the worst mistakes they ever made. It's one of the biggest reasons Xbox is on life support right now. Nintendo doing that would basically be suicide. As nice as it would be for them to do it, it will never ever happen as long as they still make hardware.

[-] HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org 22 points 4 weeks ago

Microsoft (and Sony) have done a terrible job of understanding the console market.

They sell consoles so they can loss-leader you into making it up on licensed games.

You buy a console so you can get a canned consistent experience for less than a PC. In the past, it was also for bespoke hardware that could do something a random PC couldn't easily and exclusive titles.

In 2026, these advantages are gone. Since Xbone/PS4, you're just looking at a standard AMD desktop in a funny box. It comes in too many flavours with real performance differences. Only a few titles are still exclusive. You can spend $500 and still not have the Best Console Experience, so why not spend $700 for a PC?

Of course Xbox and PS are flailing in that market.

Nintendo hardware avoids those pitfalls. There's no "Switch 2 Pro" scenario where some games are meaningfully jankier. The hardware is profitable, and it's still comfortably less than a basic dGPU computer. So there's still a niche for it below the full gaming PC buyer.

They've also been more willing to exploit "we control the hardware and software together" opportunities for only-here experiences. Since the Kinect died, has there been a major gameplay paradigm that required an Xbox or PS to deliver?

Nintendo could port games to the PC but they won't exploit the detachable controllers or portable aspects of a Switch, so many of the ports would be lesser.

[-] lyralycan@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I usually detest exclusive releases, as it feels anticonsumer to make people use a console/UI that they don't like in order to have a chance of buying/playing a game they might like, but I've recently thought about a good copiumcoded excuse for it: Exclusives incentivise me to not keep all my games with one supplier, so when one corporation inevitably crosses a moral line that I cannot accept, I don't have to sacrifice all my purchased ~~games~~ licences.

That and I honestly believe that owning games developed initially for x platform, on that platform, usually results in the best experience. Usually.

[-] Zacryon@feddit.org 8 points 4 weeks ago

A handheld and highly integrated device where games released for are basically guaranteed to run still has some appeal over the wide sea of PC s. Especially since the share of handheld PCs like the Steam Deck is still comparably small.

I'd also argue that one can get more customers by supporting PC due to those who wouldn't buy a console anyway. It sounds reasonable though that the incentive for buying a console is gone if you already have a sufficient PC where you can play the game on.

But I wonder whether this is really the case. Do we have actual numbers from market studies or alike on this?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 71 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This whole thing is silly.

Palword isn't a Pokemon competitor. It's an Ark/Valheim-like on PC; it has nothing to do with the Switch, it's nothing like Pokopia or most Pokemon games. Nintendo doesn't sell PC games!

This would be akin to Skyrim being an Xbox exclusive, and BGS suing Stardew Valley for "dynamic NPCs" on the Switch version.

...Why? It's not a competitor at all; what's the business motivation?

Palworld marketing certainly leaned into the controversy, but honestly Nintendo is stupid for starting this, even from a pure business perspective.

[-] jacksilver@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago

I think it's silly to think that this has nothing to do with pokemon. Palworld basically came out of nowhere and made the pokemon game a lot of people have been asking for. I haven't played a Pokémon game in years because they felt held back from modern game design.

I'll admit it has similarities to Ark, but it's a lot more PvE and approachable, not to mention the creature design and capture mechanics.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] chunes@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago

Many of the designs are blatant ripoffs of specific pokemon. Here are a few examples

Nintendo went after patent angle in court because it's easier than proving the ripoffs are a copyright violation. But make no mistake, the ripoffs are the primary reason for the legal action. They really got under Nintendo's skin.

[-] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's not like Pokemon's designs are unique either.

They didn't go that route because they also did the same shit. And that definitely wouldn't be a viable defense in court.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 13 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

A lot of Pokemon are generic tropes, but some really are blatant ripoffs. I think it's pretty scummy of Palworld, actually.

But.

If Nintendo don't think they can prove a copyright violation, they shouldn't try to get them with some tangential thing, especially those crazy software patents of all things.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] EnsignWashout@startrek.website 59 points 1 month ago

Yes. Nintendo's lawsuit was what made me decide to buy Palworld. Fuck Nintendo's lawyers.

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I sold my Switch and switched to emulation when they went after Yuzu and Ryujinx. Nintendo will never get another penny from me and I get to play all their games for free now. Stupid dumbfucks. Can't wait for the inevitable Switch 2 emulator.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] nullspace@lemmy.world 45 points 1 month ago

Maybe we'll gets some mainline Pokemon games that don't suck absolute ass since they'll have to compete.

[-] OtakuAllTheWay@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 month ago

Will never happen until people stop buying the games. And no it’s not the fault of adult Nintendo fans. The vast majority of buyers are just parents buying games for their kids who don’t read reviews and just buy the game because their kid nagged for it. Palworld doesn’t even really compete in that market.

[-] bandanawearingbanana@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

I work with kids. Almost none of them are interested in the Pokemon games and only few in the cards. I'm pretty sure the audience is Millenials and older Gen Z's. Not many under 25 I'm willing to bet.

[-] Airfried@piefed.social 10 points 1 month ago

Pokemon is in the merch and nostalgia business, not the gaming business.

[-] FatVegan@leminal.space 9 points 4 weeks ago

Pokemon fans are like fifa fans. They buy ecery game no matter how shit it is. There is absolutely no reason for them to even try to make a playable game.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ms_lane@lemmy.world 32 points 4 weeks ago

Nintendo looking outside Nintendo's walls

Unlikely.

[-] jtrek@startrek.website 28 points 1 month ago

If they released PC ports of Nintendo games I would play a lot of them.

[-] OwOarchist@pawb.social 12 points 1 month ago

Imagine the sales they'd get if they ported older Game Boy/DS/3DS games to Android/ios phones and tablets.

[-] jtrek@startrek.website 10 points 1 month ago

Right? Emulators are pretty popular. Piracy is a service problem.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Smoogs@lemmy.world 19 points 4 weeks ago

And all these games are compatible with Linux.

Humm

[-] ApplyingAutomation@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

I'm out of the loop, could someone explain?

[-] runner_g@piefed.blahaj.zone 43 points 1 month ago

Palworld is basically live action pokemon with guns and crafting/survival mechanics, and just launched 1.0 a couple of days ago. Nintendo sued Palworld's dev's over IP infringement during early access for the capture mechanism used in the game (throwing spheres at pals). Here's a quick summary of the lawsuit and where it stood about a month ago. https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/palworld-lawsuit-nears-end-with-nintendo-reportedly-poised-to-gain-almost-nothing/

The intent of this post is to show that Nintendo's policy of not releasing 1st party games on other consoles/PC has hurt them in the long run, as shown by the player count of Palworld right now.

Wasn't IP infringement, but patent. That was one of the big things pointed out when this all started, if there had been any IP theft they would have led with that.

[-] jdr@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 month ago

My brother in law, what is a patent if not intellectual property?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] OwOarchist@pawb.social 9 points 1 month ago

Don't patents expire after 20 years?

And isn't Pokemon's ball-capturing game mechanic well over 20 years old? I seem to remember it existing prior to 2006.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] goodboyjojo@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

Yeah the lawsuit was dumb. Nintendo doesn't own the concept of creature capture. You can't own concepts as far as I know

[-] pirate2377@lemmy.zip 13 points 4 weeks ago

Streisand effect go brrrrrr

[-] ICastFist@programming.dev 9 points 4 weeks ago

As someone with a bit over 800h in Palworld, fuck Nintendo and their shitty attitude to Pocket Pair.

I like Nintendo's games, but I never in my life bought one legally, since they completely pulled out of Brazil after the N64. NES and SNES were gray market items, while the GameCube nobody really cared about, since the PS2 completely dominated the market. The Wii was similarly a gray market item.

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 month ago
[-] EnsignWashout@startrek.website 14 points 1 month ago

Btw, Zelda on PC when?

Any time you want, if you float in the right ~~seas~~...uh...circles. Or so I've heard.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2026
706 points (100.0% liked)

memes

22371 readers
2077 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS