Palworld didn't rip off Pokemon in the way these Chinese clones are ripping off Palworld, though. Like, the marketing of the clones literally say players "survive with their pals," like theyre not even trying to hide it. Palworld was pretty careful to avoid terms like "pocket monster" or "pokemon" in its marketing.
Also, not sure if this really counts as accusing anyone of anything. He is pointing out that his game is successful enough to warrant multiple companies trying to rip off his own game. Honestly, you know you've made the big leagues when your products are getting rip offs in China.
The Amazing World of Gumball had to deal with a similar situation. This is how they handled it.
A series of Chinese cartoon shorts called Miracle Star is the culprit here. They hew pretty closely to Gumball’s animal collective comedy, with some very slight differences. For example: Instead of a kitten protagonist, they star ... a billy goat. It’s not just Miracle Star’s aesthetic that looks eerily like Gumball’s; the show also takes shots and scenes wholesale.
Fans picked up on this back in 2015, and the video above shows a direct comparison between the two. While Cartoon Network hasn’t taken any action against Miracle Star, it’s basically an open secret at this point that the Gumball lookalike exists.
It wasn’t until The Amazing World of Gumball’s newest episode, which made it online earlier this week, that Cartoon Network addressed the Miracle Star debacle more directly. An episode called “The Copycats” features a cartoon about a family remarkably like Gumball’s, made up of a mixed crowd of animals. (The one major difference? Gumball’s little sister is curiously missing from the family, which one viewer says may be a nod to China’s one-child policy.) Not only are these “copycats” very similar to the main cast, but they’re almost direct copies of the characters from Miracle Star.
That got dark quickly
I agree. Plus there’s a difference between ripping off and being inspired/influenced. Is palworld a Pokemon-esque game? Yes, but it’s not a rip off or clone since it’s different. Now if they gave the pals evolutions then yeah that would def be a red flag lol.
These actual clones are actually ripping off palworld.
Some of the models in Palworld look uncannily similar to Pokemon assets. Could be the result of AI being used though, can't really remember the details of the controversy back when it came out.
Edit:
Like these models seem to have similar designs for example
Pokemon has so little artistic identity anymore that I literally cannot tell you which of those two is from Pokemon and I play Pokemon literally every day.
Oh boy, wait until you discover real fucking animals
The dude sounded excited that his games really really popular and that it might inspire some other cool games he might like.
Slow day at the news desk there I see.
In the days leading up to the game's release, I was flooded with ads calling Palworld "Pokemon with guns". They kind of brought it upon themselves.
Next year, we might see many...bishojo...raising games... These are incredible times.”
Uh. Let's, for the sake of discussion, hypothetically assume that 2025 is the Year of the Bishojo Raising Game.
That isn't what your game is, right? What's the connection?
Wait, your pals arent cute girls? You must be doing it wrong.
How quickly they forget their origins...
In case you are curious, the downvotes are cuz the headline was a lie. Not only did they not rip off pokemon, they are happy to see clones of their game. They want to try them all and see if any are fun to play. They love these kinds of games, after all.
If you're calling palworld a ripoff, then pokemon is a ripoff. Which puts them on par with each other at the bare minimum.
Making cute monsters and taming them is not new and just because pokemon has a bajillion mons to find similarities in, doesn't mean everything is ripping off of pokemon.
Sure, Pokémon ripped off that or whatever the first monster catching game was.
But if you're telling me any of those examples look half as much of a complete copy paste and recolor as the "designs" in Palworld, you're either arguing in bad faith or blind. Most of those examples look absolutely nothing like their supposed counterpart.
complete copy paste and recolor as the “designs” in Palworld
If this statement was even close to factually accurate you realize that Nintendo would have sued and taken down Palworld already right? I can't be arguing in bad faith if Nintendo's litigious lawyers basically agree with my statements.
Come on now. Anyone can tell they're knockoffs and I'm sure you do as well. Just cause they're technically legally distinct enough doesn't mean they're not obvious copies.
Then I'll have to refer you to this comment. And we're dead set into circular logic land. Congrats! Enjoy your stay.
Just because Pokemon was legally distinct enough from Dungeon Quest doesn't mean they're not obvious copies. What you need to realize is that there's only so many ways you can draw a "fire-based dog", "grass-based turtle", or "electric mouse" before you run into something that looks similar to some other IP.
Like I said before.
just because pokemon has a bajillion mons to find similarities in, doesn’t mean everything is ripping off of pokemon.
What you COMPLETELY miss out on... Dragon Quest is an old enough series that people who worked on the original Pokemon would have been highly influenced by the series as kids. Much like Palworld developers likely grew up on Pokemon to some extent. You're going to see similarities... that doesn't mean it a knock off... and if it was a knock off, Nintendo would have killed it long ago. Any other "belief" doesn't matter.
What the hell are you talking about, there are infinite ways to draw a fire dog, Pokemon alone has like 5 of them (at least 2 of which "inspired" Pals lol) When you take into account all the kind of dogs there are and the infinite flourishes an artist could make its shocking anyone would think their design doesn't look like a rippof. One might even say thar someone is arguing in bad faith again.
Just... come on now.
Just because you don't like the argument doesn't make it bad faith. Considering that 100% of pals are distinctly different enough that Nintendo cannot go after them and win is sufficient evidence that they've made enough of the "infinite flourishes" you claim to exist. Yet here you are claiming that they're ripoffs.
Didn't we just go over this? You're right, we are in a loop.
Didn’t we just go over this? You’re right, we are in a loop.
Yup... Because the only opinion that matters is Nintendo's and a courts. Not yours. But you don't seem to recognize this.
You don't have to like it or buy the game. Not sure why people like you love to sit there and make claims that PalWorld is a problem when clearly it's not. The loop will end when you recognize that fact and move on. Stop being one of those people that backseat lawyers on behalf of a mega-corp.
Every shoe made is a knockoff of the original shoe, but some look slightly different but we aren't calling every new shoe release a knock off.
Pokémon haven't been part of society tens of thousands of years. A better example would be someone taking a Crocs shoe and making it even worse. Each specific reason those things are ugly is probably not their intellectual property, and there's probably knockoffs they haven't sued into oblivion, but everyone knows what a Crocs is.
Palworld didn't rip off Pokemon in the way these Chinese clones are ripping off Palworld, though. Like, the marketing of the clones literally say players "survive with their pals," like theyre not even trying to hide it. Palworld was pretty careful to avoid terms like "pocket monster" or "pokemon" in its marketing.
Also, not sure if this really counts as accusing anyone of anything. He is pointing out that his game is successful enough to warrant multiple companies trying to rip off his own game. Honestly, you know you've made the big leagues when your products are getting rip offs in China.
The Amazing World of Gumball had to deal with a similar situation. This is how they handled it.
https://www.polygon.com/tv/2017/2/7/14524680/the-amazing-world-of-gumball-the-copy-cats
That got dark quickly
I agree. Plus there’s a difference between ripping off and being inspired/influenced. Is palworld a Pokemon-esque game? Yes, but it’s not a rip off or clone since it’s different. Now if they gave the pals evolutions then yeah that would def be a red flag lol.
These actual clones are actually ripping off palworld.
Some of the models in Palworld look uncannily similar to Pokemon assets. Could be the result of AI being used though, can't really remember the details of the controversy back when it came out.
Edit:
Like these models seem to have similar designs for example
Pokemon has so little artistic identity anymore that I literally cannot tell you which of those two is from Pokemon and I play Pokemon literally every day.
Oh boy, wait until you discover real fucking animals
The dude sounded excited that his games really really popular and that it might inspire some other cool games he might like.
Slow day at the news desk there I see.
In the days leading up to the game's release, I was flooded with ads calling Palworld "Pokemon with guns". They kind of brought it upon themselves.
Uh. Let's, for the sake of discussion, hypothetically assume that 2025 is the Year of the Bishojo Raising Game.
That isn't what your game is, right? What's the connection?
Wait, your pals arent cute girls? You must be doing it wrong.
How quickly they forget their origins...
In case you are curious, the downvotes are cuz the headline was a lie. Not only did they not rip off pokemon, they are happy to see clones of their game. They want to try them all and see if any are fun to play. They love these kinds of games, after all.
Come on now
Cool. Then Pokemon ripped off Dungeon Quest.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GEYrZuzXUAAjpkB?format=jpg&name=large
If you're calling palworld a ripoff, then pokemon is a ripoff. Which puts them on par with each other at the bare minimum.
Making cute monsters and taming them is not new and just because pokemon has a bajillion mons to find similarities in, doesn't mean everything is ripping off of pokemon.
Sure, Pokémon ripped off that or whatever the first monster catching game was.
But if you're telling me any of those examples look half as much of a complete copy paste and recolor as the "designs" in Palworld, you're either arguing in bad faith or blind. Most of those examples look absolutely nothing like their supposed counterpart.
If this statement was even close to factually accurate you realize that Nintendo would have sued and taken down Palworld already right? I can't be arguing in bad faith if Nintendo's litigious lawyers basically agree with my statements.
Come on now. Anyone can tell they're knockoffs and I'm sure you do as well. Just cause they're technically legally distinct enough doesn't mean they're not obvious copies.
Then I'll have to refer you to this comment. And we're dead set into circular logic land. Congrats! Enjoy your stay.
Just because Pokemon was legally distinct enough from Dungeon Quest doesn't mean they're not obvious copies. What you need to realize is that there's only so many ways you can draw a "fire-based dog", "grass-based turtle", or "electric mouse" before you run into something that looks similar to some other IP.
Like I said before.
What you COMPLETELY miss out on... Dragon Quest is an old enough series that people who worked on the original Pokemon would have been highly influenced by the series as kids. Much like Palworld developers likely grew up on Pokemon to some extent. You're going to see similarities... that doesn't mean it a knock off... and if it was a knock off, Nintendo would have killed it long ago. Any other "belief" doesn't matter.
What the hell are you talking about, there are infinite ways to draw a fire dog, Pokemon alone has like 5 of them (at least 2 of which "inspired" Pals lol) When you take into account all the kind of dogs there are and the infinite flourishes an artist could make its shocking anyone would think their design doesn't look like a rippof. One might even say thar someone is arguing in bad faith again.
Just... come on now.
Just because you don't like the argument doesn't make it bad faith. Considering that 100% of pals are distinctly different enough that Nintendo cannot go after them and win is sufficient evidence that they've made enough of the "infinite flourishes" you claim to exist. Yet here you are claiming that they're ripoffs.
Didn't we just go over this? You're right, we are in a loop.
Yup... Because the only opinion that matters is Nintendo's and a courts. Not yours. But you don't seem to recognize this.
You don't have to like it or buy the game. Not sure why people like you love to sit there and make claims that PalWorld is a problem when clearly it's not. The loop will end when you recognize that fact and move on. Stop being one of those people that backseat lawyers on behalf of a mega-corp.
Every shoe made is a knockoff of the original shoe, but some look slightly different but we aren't calling every new shoe release a knock off.
Pokémon haven't been part of society tens of thousands of years. A better example would be someone taking a Crocs shoe and making it even worse. Each specific reason those things are ugly is probably not their intellectual property, and there's probably knockoffs they haven't sued into oblivion, but everyone knows what a Crocs is.