Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It’s basically a non-sequitur.
A mod isn’t a standalone game, sure. It requires the base game to have meaning. Unitl it gets spinned off and becomes a “real” (standalone) game.
However, that has no connection with the original problem: Did anyone who isn’t Nintendo ever animate a cartoony person throwing a ball that does something, before Nintendo filed for a patent?
Of course they have. That’s prior art, and the patent itself is under serious question - whether the animation was in a “real” game, a “fake” one or in a Blender animation has very little influence on that fact.
cmhe@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Many standalone games are nothing without the game engine, which many developers have bought/licensed.
In this case the “standalone game” can be considered the game engine, which allows the modder to create their own game, within the limits of that engine.
From the point of the player, they need to pay for the game engine and the game/mod in any case, either by paying with one transaction, or, incase of payed mods, in two.
To play a specific DLC, you also have to pay twice. And I am pretty sure that Nintendo will argue that game mechanics in DLCs developed by them can be patented as well…
Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Sure. It’s just that the user doesn’t install Unity (or any other engine) themselves when installing a game. They install the game and “it just works”.
For a mod, you have to either have the game, or go get it before you can play a mod.
I know what a game engine is. A court clerk or judge most likely - doesn’t.
And it’s in Nintendo’s interests to paint mods as something lesser - that’s why they take this strawman angle to mods. They couldn’t care less about “games” or “mods”. They care about protecting their IP with any groin punches and baby mario noises they can get their divorced-from-reality hands on.