Sony accuses Tencent of copying the Horizon series with its new game and demands compensation in court
Nuevo
Agregar La Derecha Diario en
Compartir:
Sony filed a lawsuit against Tencent for copying its successful Horizon saga in the game Light of Motiram.
The Japanese company claims that it is "blatant plagiarism" and demands millions in compensation for intellectual property infringement.
Sony presentó una demanda contra Tencent por copiar su exitosa saga Horizon
What is Sony claiming in the lawsuit?
The complaint was filed in a federal court in California and accuses Tencent of directly copying the gameplay, narrative, and visual aesthetics of Horizon.
According to Sony, Light of Motiram almost identically reproduces the distinctive elements of its franchise.
A collaboration that never happened
In 2024, Tencent reportedly proposed to Sony to jointly develop a new game based on Horizon.
Tencent habría propuesto a Sony desarrollar juntos un nuevo juego basado en Horizon
The offer was rejected, and shortly afterward, Tencent announced Light of Motiram, raising suspicions within the Japanese company.
The similarities that sparked the conflict
Gameplay focused on survival and combat in an open world.
Post-apocalyptic aesthetics dominated by giant mechanical creatures.
Narrative involving cultures in conflict and a ruined Earth.
Even specialized journalists dubbed the game Horizon Zero Originality, in direct reference to Horizon Zero Dawn, released in 2017.
Las similitudes que desataron el conflicto
What is Sony seeking with this lawsuit?
In addition to unspecified financial compensation, Sony demands that the distribution of the title be halted.
It requested a court order preventing Tencent from continuing to infringe on its intellectual property rights.
¿Qué busca Sony con esta demanda?
Meanwhile, what about the relationship with PlayStation?
In November 2024, Sony's Chinese subsidiary announced that Light of Motiram would also arrive on PS5.
At that time, no conflicts between the two companies were mentioned, which adds further confusion to the case.
