Hopefully some heads roll over at TPC/Nintendo/Gamefreak/Creatures. Pokemon is the highest-grossing media franchise ever and they can't produce a decent modern game. Meanwhile a startup studio (pocket pair) absolutely annihilates them by delivering an amazing Pokemon-inspired game.
I don't see why they would. Pokemon puts out slop after slop and sells like hotcakes. Scarlet and Violet was abysmal, lowest rated Pokemon game ever, full of bugs, glitches, the works. Over 23 mil sold, instant top 5 for Pokemon sales ever. Sword & Shield? Another cool 25+. How did PocketPair annihilate them?
Come Christmas time, kids want to play with Pikachu.
Pokémon has been awful after maybe emerald version. Crystal and that era was the peak. 3d Pokémon is just awful. This game however is awesome. It’s fun
With all due respect, this looks like a heavily unoptimized Unity game. My first guess is that everyone jumped on to play it because of a YouTube trend bandwagon. Is this actually fun at all? (Yes, I know fun is subjective, still)
It's unreal, and it actually runs pretty well. The devs seem to actually know how to use the engine. I've had significantly less stutters in it than in some other recently released AAA unreal games.
yeah it's the latest 'flavor of the month' game right now. This constant cycle of:
'new game is hyped up > new game gets ubiquitous popularity > new game has a major loss of hype > repeat'
Is why I stopped buying games until they've been out for a while. Not because I care about what's popular, but because my friends fall for this trend every time and I've bought hyped games before, but then everyone stops playing them after 3-4 weeks once their favorite streamer shills the next hyped game.
Given Palworld is the new thing I doubt its predecessor will ever exit EA by now. I hope the devs commit the new game to a full release instead of dropping support again after the hype dies down.
If you haven't been following, the game copies from several games, most notably Nintendo and Game Freak's Pokemon (but also Zelda, and several non-Nintendo games).
And when I say copied, they designed their monsters after the Nintendo IP directly [1,2,3]. Some are suggesting AI Pokemon generators were used given that the company has previously dabbled in generative art, though there isn't any evidence of this.
The mechanics of the game are obviously quite similar to Pokemon, except that Palworld adds guns and other unusual elements. But the similarities between their creatures and Nintendo's character designs are the most startling aspect of this.
There is currently no hard evidence that Palworld uses AI-generated designs. The primary evidence cited that AI generations were used is a tweet from the developer's CEO in favor of generative AI for creating Pokemon: https://twitter.com/urokuta_ja/status/1470996141949218816
Incidentally, that tweet was in response to my demo of AI-generated Pokemon. I've had a hard weekend.
Support for AI doesn't mean it's used it in a product, and Pokemon similarity doesn't require AI to copy it. IMO, it seems to be more frequently used as a scapegoat to justify hating on a popular game, which does a disservice to the anti-AI movement.
> Incidentally, that tweet was in response to my demo of AI-generated Pokemon. I've had a hard weekend.
Wow, kudos for both your experiment and the traction! I don't envy all of the AI hate you must be getting. I'm sorry that some people choose to misdirect their feelings of discomfort and angst.
> Support for AI doesn't mean it's used it in a product, and Pokemon similarity doesn't require AI to copy it.
Absolutely. And I hope this isn't the point that people latch onto. The interesting thing about Palworld and the thing people should pay attention to is the closeness of the IP and the art. It doesn't really matter what technique the team used arrive at that; it's still close enough to cause confusion and probably rile up Nintendo's lawyers.
I have only played Palworld for a couple hours, but so far it's completely different from Pokemon. The core gameplay loop involves building a base and capturing pals to help you gather food, stone, etc. It's more like Valheim or Ark with an anime-inspired aesthetic.
Those examples are quite a stretch as well. There are 900 Pokemon now, many inspired by preexisting animals, mythological creatures, etc. Nintendo does not own the concept of a sheep (Mareep) or pterodactyl (Aerodactyl). Or Ekans, which is literally just a snake with the name spelled backwards.
From looking at the screenshots of gameplay, a lot of the "monsters" look like straight up copies of pokemon. I don't think you can copyright gameplay, but those monster designs, one could argue are replicas of an established IP.
Readit News
https://twitter.com/Palworld_EN/status/1749252205423755460
Come Christmas time, kids want to play with Pikachu.
'new game is hyped up > new game gets ubiquitous popularity > new game has a major loss of hype > repeat'
Is why I stopped buying games until they've been out for a while. Not because I care about what's popular, but because my friends fall for this trend every time and I've bought hyped games before, but then everyone stops playing them after 3-4 weeks once their favorite streamer shills the next hyped game.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1307550/Craftopia/
Given Palworld is the new thing I doubt its predecessor will ever exit EA by now. I hope the devs commit the new game to a full release instead of dropping support again after the hype dies down.
If you haven't been following, the game copies from several games, most notably Nintendo and Game Freak's Pokemon (but also Zelda, and several non-Nintendo games).
And when I say copied, they designed their monsters after the Nintendo IP directly [1,2,3]. Some are suggesting AI Pokemon generators were used given that the company has previously dabbled in generative art, though there isn't any evidence of this.
The mechanics of the game are obviously quite similar to Pokemon, except that Palworld adds guns and other unusual elements. But the similarities between their creatures and Nintendo's character designs are the most startling aspect of this.
[1] https://gamerant.com/palworld-pokemon-controversy-stolen-des...
[2] https://twitter.com/onion_mu/status/1748108600935919688
[3] https://twitter.com/Yoriden150/status/1748135297471127693
Incidentally, that tweet was in response to my demo of AI-generated Pokemon. I've had a hard weekend.
Support for AI doesn't mean it's used it in a product, and Pokemon similarity doesn't require AI to copy it. IMO, it seems to be more frequently used as a scapegoat to justify hating on a popular game, which does a disservice to the anti-AI movement.
Wow, kudos for both your experiment and the traction! I don't envy all of the AI hate you must be getting. I'm sorry that some people choose to misdirect their feelings of discomfort and angst.
> Support for AI doesn't mean it's used it in a product, and Pokemon similarity doesn't require AI to copy it.
Absolutely. And I hope this isn't the point that people latch onto. The interesting thing about Palworld and the thing people should pay attention to is the closeness of the IP and the art. It doesn't really matter what technique the team used arrive at that; it's still close enough to cause confusion and probably rile up Nintendo's lawyers.
Those examples are quite a stretch as well. There are 900 Pokemon now, many inspired by preexisting animals, mythological creatures, etc. Nintendo does not own the concept of a sheep (Mareep) or pterodactyl (Aerodactyl). Or Ekans, which is literally just a snake with the name spelled backwards.