This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/games by /u/One_Telephone_5798 on 2025-02-26 16:20:45+00:00.

First, I want to say that I only work in tech, I am not a lawyer myself so there may be details I’m not correct on. But understanding software patents to a certain extent is an important part of working in tech because there are a lot of software patents out there.

Link to the Nemesis System patent:

What bothers me about the discourse around this is that people say that the “gameplay mechanic” is patented and think that no one can make anything like the Nemesis system because of the patent.

This is untrue. Just like I wouldn’t be able to patent the concept of a car, you can’t patent the concept of a gameplay mechanic. You have to patent a blueprint, a specific execution of the concept.

Even if you aren’t able to understand the jargon in the Nemesis System patent linked above, just by quickly scrolling through, you can see how specific and detailed the patent is. The patent gets as specific as the exact way that the developers use computer memory and processors to manage the Nemesis System.

To infringe on this patent, you would have to be similar to a significant portion of this patent. Because of this, it’s actually a universal rule among programmers to never read software patents so you don’t end up subconsciously being inspired by a patent you read. The main purposes this patent serves is:

• Someone from Monolith can’t just go and make the Nemesis System somewhere else.
• Any developer that wants to make a similar mechanic has added challenges because the patent stops them from implementing it in certain ways.

This does not mean that no one is ever allowed to have a similar gameplay mechanic in their game.