My thoughts on fan-made suggestions

[Your Local Wild Child]

You know, if you go on Reddit a lot of the time you’ll see these amazing ideas being brought up about new characters and new mechanics (a fossil-buying dog and a florist hummingbird comes to mind). Most of these posts come with a litany of commenters saying that the OP is a genius and should be on the development team (if not saying snide remarks about the real developers). I always get a little sad when I see this. The reason why? By our copyright laws, Nintendo CANNOT use these ideas (the main idea, anyways) because the fan who made up the idea could theoretically sue Nintendo. I’m not 100% sure of the laws, but I know that once a suggestion like a new character comes up, big N can’t use that main idea anymore.

Edit: I do want to emphasize that I’m not talking about vague little ideas like paintings fences, fossil buyers or florist services that could give benefit of the doubt where the idea came from. I’m also not saying that making these character concepts are bad (I’m a fanfic writer myself with a whole Pokémon region concept). I’m talking about when someone makes a full on character concept and everyone says it needs to be introduced into the main game. This is a bigger problem in Pokémon (have ya seen how many people say that their conceptual evolutions are way better than the actual product? Not saying that it is or isn’t) but I’ve seen a couple on Animal Crossing as of late.

 

[satine]

I've always been so paranoid about saying anything because of this lol. Not that it's guaranteed they'd even want to use my idea, but I've always wondered if that's what keeps them from listening to fanbase input. Hopefully that doesn't apply to smaller detailed ideas. Like the "cooking" and the idea to paint fences. Those are impossible to trace back to someone who originally "owns" the idea as intellectual property anyway since they're so widely speculated & discussed.

 

[Your Local Wild Child]

I've always been so paranoid about saying anything because of this lol. Not that it's guaranteed they'd even want to use my idea, but I've always wondered if that's what keeps them from listening to fanbase input. Hopefully that doesn't apply to smaller detailed ideas. Like the "cooking" and the idea to paint fences. Those are impossible to trace back to someone who originally "owns" the idea as intellectual property anyway since they're so widely speculated & discussed.

I don’t think little ideas like painting fences and cooking could be considered under what I’m talking about. What I’m talking about are posts like this:

Cute, amazing concepts for characters that cannot be used by Nintendo now.

 

[ReanimatedSorceress]

Consider that many fan made characters are not intended to be requests. While I'm sure Nintendo is aware of such fan art and probably even uses it for reference, I don't think people need to suppress their imagination to see the series move in positive directions. And when it comes to simple ideas (such as my thread about the setting of the next game) that's not really how copyright works.

 

[Your Local Wild Child]

[

Consider that many fan made characters are not intended to be requests. While I'm sure Nintendo is aware of such fan art and probably even uses it for reference, I don't think people need to suppress their imagination to see the series move in positive directions. And when it comes to simple ideas (such as my thread about the setting of the next game) that's not really how copyright works.

I don’t have a problem coming up with fan ideas. I’m a fanfic writer myself. I just have a problem when people say wholeheartedly that this should be sent to Nintendo, because the fans have way better ideas than the creators. That might be the case, but it doesn’t mean that Nintendo can use the idea.

 

[daringred_]

I don’t think little ideas like painting fences and cooking could be considered under what I’m talking about. What I’m talking about are posts like this:View attachment 287875
Cute, amazing concepts for characters that cannot be used by Nintendo now.

obviously i'm not a lawyer so i could be completely wrong, but i'm pretty sure nintendo couldn't be sued for "fossil buying dog" since it's too vague an idea to be sued over just like the other person said.

also, nintendo might not be able to use that exact idea but, again, they're completely free to be inspired by it and/or take the barebones concept since you can't be sued over simple concepts.

 

[Your Local Wild Child]

obviously i'm not a lawyer so i could be completely wrong, but i'm pretty sure nintendo couldn't be sued for "fossil buying dog" since it's too vague an idea to be sued over just like the other person said.

also, nintendo might not be able to use that exact idea but, again, they're completely free to be inspired by it and/or take the barebones concept since you can't be sued over simple concepts.

The barebones idea I agree with ya. I just know that if we do get a lot of these ideas in the game but not exactly like how fans talk about it, there will be some minority saying that a fan did up the idea better.

Post automatically merged: Jul 16, 2020

Also, when I read on the hummingbird concept, the content creator even mentioned that the exact idea couldn’t be used anymore because of copyright issues (they worked on a popular app, even)

 

[daringred_]

The barebones idea I agree with ya. I just know that if we do get a lot of these ideas in the game but not exactly like how fans talk about it, there will be some minority saying that a fan did up the idea better.

Post automatically merged: Jul 16, 2020

Also, when I read on the hummingbird concept, the content creator even mentioned that the exact idea couldn’t be used anymore because of copyright issues (they worked on a popular app, even)

hummingbird specifically, maybe, just because there wouldn't be as much leeway. with dogs, there are dozens of different breeds that you could pick from and dogs are so widely linked with bones (i.e. fossils) that it would be near impossible to prove they didn't come to that idea on their own. if the florist hummingbird was used on said popular app then, yeah, it would definitely be out of the question, but i don't think it would be enough to rule out florist hummingbird or even just a florist NPC altogether because, again, the ideas are so vague that you'd never be able to prove it was x person they were inspired by and gardening + bird characters are already featured in AC so it's easy to argue they got to that idea on their own.

 

[Your Local Wild Child]

hummingbird specifically, maybe, just because there wouldn't be as much leeway. with dogs, there are dozens of different breeds that you could pick from and dogs are so widely linked with bones (i.e. fossils) that it would be near impossible to prove they didn't come to that idea on their own. if the florist hummingbird was used on said popular app then, yeah, it would definitely be out of the question, but i don't think it would be enough to rule out florist hummingbird or even just a florist NPC altogether because, again, the ideas are so vague that you'd never be able to prove it was x person they were inspired by and gardening + bird characters are already featured in AC so it's easy to argue they got to that idea on their own.

I feel like big N would just wrap up the florist stuff into Lief anyways. I myself would prefer a hummingbird (I love ‘em) but I know they’d take the path of least resistance.

 

[daringred_]

I feel like big N would just wrap up the florist stuff into Lief anyways. I myself would prefer a hummingbird (I love ‘em) but I know they’d take the path of least resistance.

i'd prefer if they wrapped it into lief anyway. no point making unnecessary NPCs and it's always fun to "evolve" current ones. let that sleepy boy take up the art of flower arrangements and make you cute flower crowns + other floral accessories if you bring him x amount of y flower(s).

 

[Belle T]

You can't copyright an idea; only the specific execution of the idea. So no, Nintendo couldn't use specific iterations of any idea (i.e. the fan art posted above) but they can implement it in their own way. Even if a fan did decide to pursue legal action, unless they're inexplicably filthy rich, the courts would almost definitely rule in Nintendo's favor, and the costs of hiring a lawyer among other legal fees would definitely be worse for the person suing them than it would ever be for Nintendo even on the 0.001% chance that they lost. If they made a dog character that could hunt fossils, the burden would be on the plaintiff to prove that 1) the idea is similar enough that there could be no doubt that Nintendo lifted the idea from a fan's suggestion, and 2) that Nintendo's doing so resulted in financial damage. (For example, see the 1997 lawsuit surrounding the game Awesome Possum)

Honestly, beyond copyright infringement, it would just be kind of immoral for Nintendo to incorporate highly specific fan ideas like that without compensation anyway. Even if they can get away with it legally, it would do absolutely no favors to their public perception to do so. It's why showrunners and writers aren't allowed to read fan fiction. It would only serve to muddy the creative pool.

 

[Your Local Wild Child]

You can't copyright an idea; only the specific execution of the idea. So no, Nintendo couldn't use specific iterations of any idea (i.e. the fan art posted above) but they can implement it in their own way. Even if a fan did decide to pursue legal action, unless they're inexplicably filthy rich, the courts would almost definitely rule in Nintendo's favor, and the costs of hiring a lawyer among other legal fees would definitely be worse for the person suing them than it would ever be for Nintendo even on the 0.001% chance that they lost. If they made a dog character that could hunt fossils, the burden would be on the plaintiff to prove that 1) the idea is similar enough that there could be no doubt that Nintendo lifted the idea from a fan's suggestion, and 2) that Nintendo's doing so resulted in financial damage. (For example, see the 1997 lawsuit surrounding the game Awesome Possum)

Honestly, beyond copyright infringement, it would just be kind of immoral for Nintendo to incorporate highly specific fan ideas like that without compensation anyway. Even if they can get away with it legally, it would do absolutely no favors to their public perception to do so. It's why showrunners and writers aren't allowed to read fan fiction. It would only serve to muddy the creative pool.

I agree that it would be majorly scummy if Nintendo used an idea without compensation. I’m just talking about the people who say to send these concepts to Nintendo without knowing the legal ramifications.

 

[Belle T]

I agree that it would be majorly scummy if Nintendo used an idea without compensation. I’m just talking about the people who say to send these concepts to Nintendo without knowing the legal ramifications.

I mean, even if they actually sent the concept to Nintendo themselves, the same general thing applies. They'd have to prove that the execution is similar enough that there's no way they could have been inspired to make it without looking at it, and they'd have to prove financial damage was incurred as a result of them using it, which for most random people on the internet isn't really something they could do to the satisfaction of a real life court, even if they did have the financial means.

Mostly I think people sending fan content to Nintendo like that ranges anywhere from well meaning and enthusiastic albeit a bit naive to downright arrogant and extremely naive. The chances of their pitch even reaching the eyes of someone at Nintendo with enough authority to matter is beyond slim, and unless you're a business that's willing to make an investment on the idea, most companies (ESPECIALLY Nintendo) aren't really open to feedback, so I tend to presume that a majority of these letters just wind up in the suggestion box and saved for future reference. And by that I mean...

Basically, my issue with people who [unironically] say "send this to Nintendo" (or replace "Nintendo" with any major game studio) or "Nintendo hire this man!" or whatever is mostly that they're kind of annoying. Like even ignoring copyright issues, there's an entire host of legal matters that would have to be settled aside from that, and even if those could be settled, it takes a lot more than good ideas to make it in the video game industry. It's essentially like saying, "This person makes a good hamburger, perhaps even tastier than McDonald's, therefore this person should be given a high-paying job at McDonald's," which doesn't account for the fact that McDonald's hamburgers tasting terrible is an intrinsic part of their business model. Honestly, when it comes to these sort of things, the very last thing I would worry about is Nintendo being unable to use what might be a legitimately good idea due to copyright infringement. If it's really such a good idea that Nintendo simply has to have it in a future game, they'll find a way to make it happen. They have more than enough money to do so. But it's more likely that Nintendo simply wouldn't be interested to begin with.

 

[CrestFallen]

when it comes to things like character designs there’s also the possible problem with art theft. Say we could actually submit ideas to Nintendo and have them implemented with reasonable compensation. If Person A designs a character but Person B steals it and recommends it to Nintendo Person B with get the recognition/compensation. It’s nearly impossible to prove art theft without the original artist (and sometimes even with!) so it’s just much easier for Nintendo to keep using their own ideas.

 

[Hobowire]

There are a ton of great ideas on Reddit from new villager to new designs. Nintendo won't do it though. They don't rely on community feedback like some games and the games balloon to new level. AC already has an establish fan base and they know it so their effort is minimal at best.

Aside from release to draw a crowd all updates have been ports of previous gen. Every new item/furn existed at one point or another in an AC game.

 

[Mick]

People are always going to fantasise about what should be added to the games and in what form, but usually their ideas aren't as great as the comments make it out to be. Many of them are minor, or obvious ideas that have probably already been considered, or features that wouldn't even be practical from either a gameplay or development perspective.

The "You should be hired by Nintendo" is an especially funny comment, because the skill of being able to create a good-looking concept art drawing is definitely not a skill that they are lacking with their developers. I'm sure the many of them are creative and more than capable of thinking up good ideas. The real problem is the neverending battle against time that game developers are constantly facing. Someone spending several days on perfecting their single concept art idea just isn't fast enough for that setting.

For pokemon this has to be especially brutal. Imagine your task being to create several dozens of proposals for new ones, with a deadline. I know for sure that my creativity would run a bit dry after enough of them.

Then the art still has to be modeled, rigged, animated, scripted and put into the game as well, again within a certain time frame. Because at the end of the day, game studios want to make money, not art.

They will usually settle with "good enough."