Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

2014 VIDEO GAME CATCH-ALL THREAD


RIPPA

Recommended Posts

Mock it all you want but their trademark on "Candy" for games and clothing was approved by the US Trademark Office.

And this of course has lead to Apple sending out notices to all the other "Candy" apps.

 

So I don't fault them for trying - I fault the Trademark Office for approving it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On one hand, it seems absolutely petty and more than a little specious.

 

On the other - have you SEEN how many games there are "based on" Candy Crush that exist for the sole reason of confusing the rubes looking for Candy Crush? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Joe said.

 

http://www.gamezebo.com/news/2014/01/20/king-has-trademarked-word-candy-and-youre-probably-infringing

 

 

 

Lots of devs are frustrated cause it seems so ridiculous” says Benny Hsu, the maker of All Candy Casino Slots – Jewel Craze Connect: Big Blast Mania Land. Benny’s game, which shares no similarities with King’s properties aside from the word ‘candy,’ is one of a number of games that have been targeted by King.

 

So awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Now its either mass effect trilogy or lego marvel.

 

Let's be Lego Marvel Super Heroes buddies!

 

 

 

...I went with Mass Effect. sorry brudda. It was there just looking at me, saying play me, play me. you've read the reviews, listened to the hype - play me.

 

Enjoying the hell out of it though, if that's any consolation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Candy Crash stuffs are extra silly when you consider how much of the apple store is filled with actual unashamed cash grab rip-offs. If anything, appstore game lawsuits need to be encouraged and don't need this negative press.

 

 

Now you're just being blindly apologetic for Nintendo. ALL shareholders want "profit and growth," that's the very nature of the capitalist system. Without writing up a synopsis of Das Kapital, Marx's equation still holds: Money --> Capital --> Money'. Capital seeks its highest return, etc. etc. Sitting on $8B of cash while you're in the red and earning zero return on the cash balance is what pisses off shareholders, not using it to bolster advertising and R&D in times of need.  The 70% short number just came out this week, and the WiiU has only been out for a year. So to argue that if Nintendo thought a strategy of more advertising would've worked when the system was first released a year ago, prior to knowing the extent of the short fall, is absurd.

 

Nintendo only barely made a profit the previous year and for the first six months of 2013 the Wii U sold a lot closer to nothing than many would find plausible having already forced Nintendo to cut their sales expectations because of under-performance in 2012. 2012 was also the year when Iwata announced an expansion/restructuring that is soon to come to fruition judging by the new buildings popping up in Kyoto and Tokyo that would fit the description of R&D bolstering you mentioned. This has not proved in any way to be a happy substitute for profitability, and as I understand it the outlay is handcuffing them from doing more about the situation by bringing down their bottom line. Microsoft can and did loss-lead for year after year to try and get momentum behind the Xbox brand, because it didn't put the company as a whole in the red. That is not an option for Iwata and people are already calling for his head.

 

Or maybe I'm completely wrong, but the reason they aren't doing something straightforward which we'd think would help a lot will still be either a] it's not that straightforward, b] it won't help as much as we think or c] some another good reason we aren't aware of because we're just plebs on a message board. The reason will not be laziness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL tried to trademark the term The Big Game despite it (1) sounding pretty generic (2) having existed as something totally unrelated to football in Vegas for like 40 fucking years.

 

But, they failed, so I guess the trademark office was awake that day.

Yeah, the Cal & Stanford folks were a little upset when the NFL tried to trademark the name of THEIR game.  Sorry NFL, you don't get to try and trademark every possible euphemism simply because you don't want people saying "Super Bowl".  Especially when that euphemism is already in wide use to refer to ANOTHER football game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I think if you worked at it you could compile a list of maybe 50 things that have some claim to the term The Big Game.

Nope, there's just one.  That's why the NFL tried to trademark it.  There are no others.  [/snark]

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

less cool is them going after Stoic, the developers of The Banner Saga, on the same claims of brand confusion. Grim norse strategy epic, candy puzzle game... I could see how that kind of confusion could happen.

Undoubtedly, especially since The Banner Saga is a really cool game.

 

Reminds me of Bethesda giving shit to Notch about a Scroll item in Minecraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I thought Bethesda issue was the next project Notch was working on was/is called Scrolls. There issue from my understanding wasn't confusion as much as not knowing if people would understand it wasn't an Elder Scrolls game.

That's pretty much the definition of a valid "confusion in the marketplace" claim, though.  (See also: Bethesda suing Interplay, or whatever agent repackaged Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics as the Fallout Trilogy, Marvel suing Dave Sim for putting his parody character Wolveroach on a cover in such a way that he was indistinguishable from Wolverine, etc.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...