This set by Coey Kuhn is good too.

http://furry.science/#faq

Will [fetish] be in the game?

All non-essential fetishes will be hidden behind a settings menu. If you see anything on this list that concerns you, don't worry; it will be optional.
[...]
ABDL: Probably as a clothing option (40%), but with no real functionality

It's planned. If you can't read the text in the image:

Watersports: The use of urine during sex, either by urinating on a test subject, or by causing a test subject to urinate unwillingly.

That's from 1.7, in the preferences editor. Bold mine to show the omorashi bit.

OK, do you have a source on that? The original fanwork featuring anthro Pokemon might be free to use, but all the concepts involved with Pokemon are not. At all. They're heavily trademarked.

It's not solely the shapes of Pokemon that fall under intellectual property law. Just about anything based on a Pokemon is covered under the legal rights of GameFreak, Nintendo, Pokemon International etc etc.

"A look at the registered “BULBASAUR” trademark (U.K. Reg. No. 2250394) reveals that it has been registered for a wide variety of goods, such as video game software, decorative windsocks, mechanical toys, sports equipment, toy cookware, plush dolls and batteries. Such broad registrations afford Nintendo equally broad power to enforce its trademark rights against potential infringers."

(http://brandchannel.com/2016/08/08/pokemon-go-trademark-infringement-080816/)

So no, legally they don't care if your Pikachu walks on two legs or not, it's still their intellectual property. They allow it to be used but if you make any kind of money off it, they can (and might) sue you.

Oh definitely, the game's great like that. There's other monitoring you can't turn off though, which is why I said. Sorry if I was vague!

It's not about whether it'd be good/bad to include these characters. It's more like that the levels of interactivity, posability, reaction, character customisation etc in the game come from using a base model, and anything on four legs won't work with that model. It's an issue right back at fundamental mechanics, not at anyone making choices based on acceptability of or interest in a species.

It is, it's in the FAQ.

"Why no feral/taur support?

The game is built around a single animation skeleton that is shared by every character in the game, a massive library of programmatic animations for that skeleton, as well as a single bank of body parts that are designed to snap into place with each other on top of that skeleton.

This system allows a pretty good amount of flexibility, but it only supports characters that stand on two legs and adhere to the rough shape of the skeleton. In order to support feral / taur characters, I would need to create (and maintain) an alternate skeleton, an alternate set of programmatic animations, and an alternate library of body parts for each.

This would effectively mean building an entire second game from scratch. The only parts of the game I'd be able to reuse for ferals/taurs are the pleasure/orgasm mechanics and things like movement, dialogue, inventory, etc.

It's simply too much work. There might eventually be some sort of hard-coded interaction that caters to the feral/ taur crowd, but feral characters will not be fully supported."

I have no problem with other people having this fetish and welcome its inclusion because it's clearly popular, but I would request that it can be turned off along with other like, fantasy anatomy if it features some of the more hentai-style internals or filling balls with other sperm. Not a criticism of anyone into it in the slightest, just takes me personally out of a scene.

And yeah, I'm a fan of mouse people but not of gonads being portrayed as empty vessels, I'm not saying it makes sense at all. Just saying because I generally appreciate this game for not going super fetishistic and exaggerated in other ways.

Definitely not how copyright works.

Would it? They might mean something more like Anubis or a Minotaur, which would be good.