This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Kickstarter by Keiji Inafune, Megaman Like game for the PC!

#51OmegaDL50Posted 9/2/2013 8:20:22 AM
900,000 funding goal has been reached!

Now let's see how many of those stretch goals are actually reached.
---
A fan is confident in the game they prefer being able to stand on its own merits.
A fanatic attacks the opposing game showing insecurity in the game they like.
#52Wario_manPosted 9/2/2013 8:51:53 AM
Made it in what, two days? Noice.
I threw $40 in. Was tempted for more but have no use for physical game stuff. Hope it works out :)
---
If they won't sell it to you, it isn't piracy.
#53DartkunPosted 9/2/2013 12:10:38 PM
I put in $20

I like the Megaman games but don't really love them. But given how much Capcom screwed over Megaman, I just had to support it. Glad to see it's already funded
---
GameFAQs where mods are allowed to troll
youtube.com/user/Shinius
#54darkstar4221Posted 9/2/2013 12:30:44 PM(edited)
Dorami posted...
OmegaDL50 posted...
Being similar is not warranted enough to be considered for copyright violation. Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something.

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html - sourced from here.

It isn't using Megaman characters or names or even the licenses. While it may have similar character designs (This is because Inafune does the designs himself and his art style is noticeable in this regard).

There are two problems here:
1. the doctrine of substantial similarity: a test that the court can apply by showing the jury the two works then gauging their reaction (there are other methods. The appropriateness of the method I described is strongly questioned, but it hasn't been overturned).

2. Copyright extends to the rendered display, the underlying object code, and the source code. It's common for software companies to put programmers on projects not exactly the same as their previous ones from other companies, because it is difficult for programmers to avoid reusing parts of the code they used before and liked. This is a project that shares a lot of the staff with Mega Man.

And remember, Capcom doesn't have to win. They just need to present enough of a case to make the project financially unfeasible.


There shouldn't be copyright or patents at all. And don't me wrong, it's not that I support piracy, but I believe without copyright law there would be more people buying games. I say that because video games would be significantly cheaper and there would be more developers who would self-publish. The best way to beat off piracy is to lower prices, not sell video games and console hardware at inflated prices.
#55Treason686Posted 9/2/2013 6:13:19 PM
darkstar4221 posted...


There shouldn't be copyright or patents at all. And don't me wrong, it's not that I support piracy, but I believe without copyright law there would be more people buying games. I say that because video games would be significantly cheaper and there would be more developers who would self-publish. The best way to beat off piracy is to lower prices, not sell video games and console hardware at inflated prices.


0. Piracy isn't part of this topic.

1. That's a ridiculous and stupid idea and makes absolutely no sense. If there are no copyright laws, there's nothing to protect software from being distributed freely. How much cheaper can games be? New releases are $50-60, sure, but Steam sales frequently put high quality games on sale for $2-10.

2. What is the correlation between self-publishing and copyright?

3. Console hardware isn't inflated in cost. R&D costs money. Licensing technology costs money. If it costs me one billion dollars to produce an item that costs me $1 to make, I still need to recoup the billion dollars I spent. Ignoring patents, what am I going to do if I need certain technology? Reverse engineer another company's hardware? Then what? I still don't have source code to make the hardware work.


This is all assuming that copyright ONLY involves games. Without copyright, I could literally buy a printing press, print out a thousand copies of Harry Potter to sell, and there would be no legal recourse. What would the value of Harry Potter be then? Why would the author bother to continue with the Harry Potter franchise at all?

Innovation would be stifled. What would be the point of putting your time into something creative? After all, someone else is just going to fire up their printer and print ten thousand copies of my work to sell, and I'm not going to see a dime.

One person. That's all it takes to blow a hole in your whole stupid idea.
---
PC: Core i7 920 || 6GB DDR3 || GTX 660 Ti || HP w2408h
#56darkstar4221Posted 9/2/2013 6:59:25 PM(edited)
Treason686 posted...
1. That's a ridiculous and stupid idea and makes absolutely no sense. If there are no copyright laws, there's nothing to protect software from being distributed freely. How much cheaper can games be? New releases are $50-60, sure, but Steam sales frequently put high quality games on sale for $2-10.



Gamers understand that in order for developers to continue creating games they need to be funded. If games are so cheap, there would be no need for piracy. The best way to fight off piracy is to lower prices. Just look at the PS2, it's very easy to pirate PS2 games, but because the games were so cheap (well much cheaper then they are now) there was no need to pirate PS2 games. Just look at indie games, those games are dirt cheap, who would bother pirating indie games? And there would be a lot more indie japanese developers without these draconian copyright laws.

It's not just about piracy, it's about people wanting to make video games of established franchises like Megaman. Capcom wouldn't be able to own the rights to Megaman and they wouldn't be able to shut down some video game company from making a Megaman like game. Keiji's Inafune's video game is just proof that copyright isn't really necessary for a video game to be funded. If a movie, song, or software is valuable it will be funded no matter what even if there was no copyright law.


3. Console hardware isn't inflated in cost. R&D costs money. Licensing technology costs money. If it costs me one billion dollars to produce an item that costs me $1 to make, I still need to recoup the billion dollars I spent. Ignoring patents, what am I going to do if I need certain technology? Reverse engineer another company's hardware? Then what? I still don't have source code to make the hardware work.


Without copyright and patents there would be no such thing as "licensing technology", as a matter fact MANY of the licensing agreements that are associated in cpus, gpus, and software would evaporate thus it would be cheaper for manufacturers to produce an electronic hardware. For example Intel has a monopoly in the desktop cpu marketbecause in order to produce and sell x86 cpus you need to get a license from Intel first, and Intel's licensing agreements are protected by patent/copyright/sui genrus law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor_Chip_Protection_Act_of_1984


One person. That's all it takes to blow a hole in your whole stupid idea.

It may seem crazy, but I believe many of the problems are technology is because of copyright and patents. If copyright and other ip laws like patents are so important why are corporations such as Microsoft and Intel are monopolies because of these laws?
#57Pale Horseman(Topic Creator)Posted 9/2/2013 8:24:03 PM
Does anyone else think this will get to the 2.5 million mark?
---
BreadGolem: We never killed Native Americans, they got sick!
#58Arya1Posted 9/2/2013 8:59:50 PM
Pale Horseman posted...
Does anyone else think this will get to the 2.5 million mark?


I hope so, this is coming from someone who will play this game on PC.
#59DerPancakePosted 9/2/2013 9:08:43 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]