The Pokémon Company and Nintendo have never been shy about guarding their IP, but their latest legal manoeuvres against indie developer Pocket Pair are raising eyebrows across the gaming community, and not for the usual reasons.
At the centre of the storm is Palworld, the wildly popular “Pokémon with guns” survival game. Nintendo claims the game infringes on several core Pokémon mechanics, specifically patents related to creature-catching, combat interactions, and mount-switching behaviour. But rather than letting the suit play out as-is, Nintendo has taken the unusual step of rewording one of its active patents mid-case, prompting critics to call it a stretch, or worse, a strategic smokescreen.
Shifting Patents and Strange Moves
The revised patent now includes language like “even when,” which might sound harmless, but in legal circles, it’s seen as slippery phrasing. Florian Mueller, a respected IP specialist, described the wording as “extremely contorted,” suggesting the rewrite weakens the patent’s clarity. It seems designed to broaden the scope, possibly snagging more games and mechanics in the legal net.
It’s a rare move, and one that signals Nintendo may lack confidence in the original claim’s enforceability.
Pocket Pair’s Response and Tweaks
Pocket Pair isn’t exactly folding under pressure. They’ve already rolled out updates tweaking creature animations, removing gliding features, and altering the Pal Sphere system, all in an effort to distance Palworld from direct comparisons with Pokémon.
Their defence also points to design precedents from games like Titanfall 2, Rune Factory, and Monster Hunter Stories, arguing that these mechanics existed well before Nintendo’s patents were even filed.
What’s at Stake
Beyond Palworld and Pokémon, this case raises deeper concerns about how game mechanics are treated under intellectual property law. If broadly worded patents are used to gatekeep systems like mount-switching or monster catching, staples across gaming genres, then smaller studios may start avoiding innovation out of fear, even when the mechanics aren’t proprietary.
Legal overreach like this creates a chilling effect. It’s not just about protecting IP, it’s about deciding who gets to build on shared design foundations and who doesn’t.
Mechanics at Risk – Shared Ideas, Not Stolen Designs
To put things in perspective, here’s a breakdown of how common gameplay mechanics have been used across AAA titles and indie projects alike, often decades before Nintendo’s latest patent revisions:
| Mechanic | AAA Examples | Indie Examples | First Appearance (Approx.) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Creature Taming | Pokémon, ARK: Survival Evolved | Palworld, Temtem | 1996 (Pokémon Red/Blue) |
| Mount Switching | Breath of the Wild, World of Warcraft | Chocobo GP, Palworld | 1994 (Final Fantasy VI) |
| Inventory Crafting | Fallout 4, Skyrim, Minecraft | Valheim, Don’t Starve, Core Keeper | 2007 (Minecraft) |
| Ricochet Shooting | Titanfall 2, Max Payne | RoboCop: Rogue City | 2001 (Max Payne) |
| Companion Upgrades | Mass Effect, Dragon Age | Into the Breach, Wasteland 3 | 2006 (Mass Effect) |
| Environmental Healing | Borderlands, Fallout | Palworld, The Long Dark | 2008 (Fallout 3) |
| Turret Hacking | Watch Dogs, Deus Ex: Human Revolution | RoboCop: Rogue City, République | 2011 (Deus Ex: HR) |
| Safe Cracking | Thief, Fallout: New Vegas | RoboCop: Rogue City, The Escapists | 1998 (Thief: The Dark Project) |
These mechanics aren’t owned, they’re iterated, evolved, and borrowed like ingredients in a shared design pantry. Claiming monopoly over them risks turning creativity into a courtroom formality.
Final Thoughts
Whether Nintendo’s approach is a defensive overreach or a justified reaction to imitation, one thing’s clear, this case could reshape how we define ownership in game mechanics. As for Pocket Pair, their willingness to adapt without folding completely sets a bold precedent. Indie devs, take notes.
It’s a crossroads moment for game design: protect innovation, or bury it under bureaucracy. Fans, critics, and developers alike should be paying close attention, because the outcome could impact how we play for years to come.
Until next time, stay sharp and keep gaming, Panda out.
Reference List
Legal Case and Patent Details
- PocketGamer.biz – Nintendo and The Pokémon Company vs. Pocket Pair: Understanding the details
- Global Law Today – Nintendo vs. Pocketpair: Legal Battle Over “Pokémon With Guns” Raises Critical IP Questions
- Pocketpair Official Statement – Report on Patent Infringement Lawsuit
- Outsider Gaming – Nintendo Lawsuit Against Palworld Faces Major Setback as USPTO Rejects 22 Out of 23 Patent Claims
- Gfinity Esports – Nintendo’s Legal Strategy Against Palworld Is Starting to Backfire
- Nintendo Life – Nintendo’s Lawsuit Against Palworld Is “A Clear Case Of Bullying”, Says Analyst
- Peter A. Allard School of Law – Nintendo v Palworld: Global Implications for Patent Law (Term Paper)
Gameplay Mechanics Precedents
- Steam Community – Titanfall 2 Advanced Movement Guide
- Game8 – Rune Factory: Guardians of Azuma – New Gameplay Features and Mechanics
- Game8 – Monster Hunter Stories Walkthrough & Guides Wiki
- Steam Guides – Monster Hunter Stories – Steam Community
