Palworld

[drahkon]

5 minutes ago, ViPeR said:

Sorry meant to say the streamers 😀

Yeah, they just play games that are trending because more views = more money. At least most of them do
As soon as interest in Palworld drops or there's a new big thing, they move on.

 

 

Edited January 23 by drahkon

[Glen-i]

1 hour ago, ViPeR said:

I know I'm making judgments on a game I've not played so might have to Game Pass it just so I can have a more informed opinion but I honestly don't get it.

First of all, the concept of "Pokémon, but with guns" is what initially drew people in. The initial trailer went all in with that.

Other factors include the fact that Survival games are huge with the PC crowd. They can't get enough of them. "Streamer bait" is another contributing factor, as has already been mentioned, with viewers of said streamers going on to buy the game themselves.

Then, as it became apparent that plagiarism has occured, some people have jumped on to "stick it to Nintendo". Yes, it's incredibly immature, but that's console warring for you.

And I'm willing to bet a not-insignificant number of people have bought it, because they believe there's a real chance that it could get delisted because of said blatant theft.

Edited January 23 by Glen-i

[ViPeR]

2 minutes ago, drahkon said:

Yeah, they just play games that are trending because more views = more money. At least most of them do
As soon as interest in Palworld drops or there's a new big thing, they move on.

 

 

Very true. It's certainly going to be interesting to watch how this pans out. Nintendo have gone after more small fry than these guys before.

I guess I'm not going to be objective anyway as I don't really play this genre 😜

I showed my boy and the first thing he said is it was a new Pokemon game haha

[Happenstance]

I do like a good survival game from time to time. This one looks like it could be fun but the plagerism is just way too blatant for me to reward the devs by buying it.

[Hero-of-Time]

1 hour ago, ViPeR said:

I showed my boy and the first thing he said is it was a new Pokemon game haha

Yesterday, I was reading a thread about this. It certainly seems to have piqued the interest in the younger generation. Apparently the game is the hot topic in the playground at the moment, with lots of kids either playing it or wanting to play it.

[bob]

Man, I bought an imported copy of this, and it won't run.

It gets to the title screen but then just nothing happens.


What a waste of money.

The title screen says NTSCWorld as well, but I think that's just locational differences.

[Cube]

It's strange seeing the same websites and social media accounts that complained about the likes of Alan Wake 2 and Hellblade 2 setting a "dangerous trend" go on to celebrate the success of an unfinished digital-only game (incidentally, Baldur's Gate 3 also tends to not get mentioned, despite it being an example to publishers that digital only can be a huge success).

I also think that "Early Access" (or Game Preview) is a completely irrelevant designation. If a game is being sold, then it has been released and should be judged the same as any other game being sold (after all, the updates are just promises and not guaranteed). 

As for the game itself, it looks completely and utterly unappealing. Just seems like just another average game in a genre that itself is rather tedious, just endless grinding to be able to grind more. Its popularity seems to be entirely based on the Pokémon rip-off side of things.

[Dcubed]

Agreed.  The notion of a game being released in “Early Access” is entirely a misnomer.  Your game is “done” as soon as it’s available for sale; and should be judged accordingly.

Besides, most AAA games are released in such a blatantly unfinished state that they may as well be called Early Access anyway

[Sheikah]

1 hour ago, Dcubed said:

Agreed.  The notion of a game being released in “Early Access” is entirely a misnomer.  Your game is “done” as soon as it’s available for sale; and should be judged accordingly.

Besides, most AAA games are released in such a blatantly unfinished state that they may as well be called Early Access anyway

Absolutely, early access is basically a scam that allows people to charge for their game while avoiding the usual responsibilities of making sure the game is relatively glitch free and functional. There's no condition that they even have to go on to fix it or do a full release, either. Glad consoles (mostly) don't seem to do it.

Regarding Palworld specifically though, I'm actually kind of glad it's happened. Game Freak have run Pokemon into the ground and do a poor job of actually investing some of that ridiculous capital into making the best games they can. I mean, their games look like ass. Something like this couldn't ruffle the feathers of a more deserving chicken.

Edited January 23 by Sheikah

[Glen-i]

30 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Game Freak have run Pokemon into the ground and do a poor job of actually investing some of that ridiculous capital into making the best games they can. I mean, their games look like ass. Something like this couldn't ruffle the feathers of a more deserving chicken.

Dangerously close to the slippery slope of claiming "Game Freak's output has been bad, so they deserve to be plagiarised" there.

[Sheikah]

Dangerously close to the slippery slope of claiming "Game Freak's output has been bad, so they deserve to be plagiarised" there.

Close? That's what I was outright saying.  Won't somebody think of the multi billion dollar corporation?

Really though, if anything this shows them how hungry people are for a big 3D open world that actually makes use of the hardware somewhat. Basically what people have been asking for for ages (minus the guns). Perhaps them seeing these ridiculous sales figures is a more effective message.

[Glen-i]

Just now, Sheikah said:

Close? That's what I was outright saying.

Well, there goes me hoping to give you the benefit of the doubt there.

Quite frankly, I think that's a disgusting viewpoint. Actual talent worked on the models that got stolen. You do realise Game Freak commission a lot of freelance artists to design Pokémon for them, right? It doesn't matter one jot if you think GF's output is below acceptable these days, plagiarism only truly hurts the bottom line. Because if this BS is allowed to stand, then it'll only encourage other companies to follow suit.

Why hire artists to design things for your product when you can just take models from a highly successful product, tweak it a bit, and present it as your own work?

Oh, and seeing as you're OK with Pokémon being the target of theft? How about Team Cherry, the creators of Hollow Knight? Because that's the next "inspiration" Palworld's company is looking to use next.

[Sheikah]

Well, there goes me hoping to give you the benefit of the doubt there.

Quite frankly, I think that's a disgusting viewpoint. Actual talent worked on the models that got stolen. You do realise Game Freak commission a lot of freelance artists to design Pokémon for them, right? It doesn't matter one jot if you think GF's output is below acceptable these days, plagiarism only truly hurts the bottom line. Because if this BS is allowed to stand, then it'll only encourage other companies to follow suit.

Why hire artists to design things for your product when you can just take models from a highly successful product, tweak it a bit, and present it as your own work?

Oh, and seeing as you're OK with Pokémon being the target of theft? How about Team Cherry, the creators of Hollow Knight? Because that's the next "inspiration" Palworld's company is looking to use next.

I think you are jumping the gun a bit here. Either one of two things will likely happen:

 

Either it's plagiarism and it will be taken down/the developers sued, but the message of what people want should have gotten through to Game Freak.

 

Or it's not actually going to legally be considered plagiarism (they seem pretty confident they were legally shored up, and it got this far), and millions get to carry on playing a game they seem to be enjoying. Game Freak learn something either way.

 

If you step back and take the emotion/morality out of the situation I think it's very interesting. I'm not someone who is going to play it either way, just someone frustrated with how lazy a job Game Freak have done in the past years and interested to see how this plays out.

[EEVILMURRAY]

I'm intrigued as to how the Fortnite style shooting is going to work. Why capture them in balls when you just shoot the shit outta them.

[Glen-i]

1 minute ago, Sheikah said:

In this case it's an ends justify the means situation.

Either one of two things will happen here:

Either it's plagiarism and it will be taken down/the developers sued, but the message of what people want should have gotten through to Game Freak.

Or it's not actually going to legally be considered plagiarism (they seem pretty confident they were legally shored up), and millions get to carry on playing a game they seem to be enjoying. Game Freak learn something either way.

If you step back and take the emotion/morality out of the situation I think it's very interesting. I'm not someone who is going to play it either way, just someone frustrated with how bad/lazy a job Game Freak have done in the past years and interested to see how this plays out.

It is most certainly not an "ends justify the means" situation! It's blatant theft, and it'll just open the floodgates for similar games with blatant theft of models to surface if it goes unchecked. Artists who get paid to design for games already have it rough with AI threatening to cost them work, they don't need this BS to suddenly become fine.

It doesn't matter if people enjoy the game or not. It doesn't matter if you've become disillusioned with Game Freak's output. It doesn't make profiting of other people's hard work okay.

Oh, and let's not forget the very real possibility that fan artists have had their ideas cribbed for this game as well. Or do they deserve it, because they're Pokémon fans?

And as for your claim that Game Freak will learn something, the only real lesson to take from this is "People will buy anything if our designs are in it". And that's the kind of thinking that can hurt the quality of the games even further.

[Sheikah]

3 minutes ago, Glen-i said:

It is most certainly not an "ends justify the means" situation! It's blatant theft, and it'll just open the floodgates for similar games with blatant theft of models to surface if it goes unchecked. Artists who get paid to design for games already have it rough with AI threatening to cost them work, they don't need this BS to suddenly become fine.

It doesn't matter if people enjoy the game or not. It doesn't matter if you've become disillusioned with Game Freak's output. It doesn't make profiting of other people's hard work okay.

Oh, and let's not forget the very real possibility that fan artists have had their ideas cribbed for this game as well. Or do they deserve it, because they're Pokémon fans?

And as for your claim that Game Freak will learn something, the only real lesson to take from this is "People will buy anything if our designs are in it". And that's the kind of thinking that can hurt the quality of the games even further.

Like I said, if legally it's found to be plagiarism then it'll be taken down. If it isn't, it won't be. You're describing basically a miscarriage of justice in which apparently it's already determined to be plagiarism but for whatever reason it isn't taken down and/or the developers won't be sued. This situation hasn't happened so...what's the commotion?

Also I really disagree that Game Freak learn nothing. This game has sold millions - other Pokemon "clones" haven't, or have for whatever reason been taken down quicker (perhaps suggesting that this game actually is sufficiently different after all). This game is doing a lot of things that Pokemon games aren't but people want them to, and people are lapping it up.

[Glen-i]

13 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

You're describing basically a miscarriage of justice in which apparently it's already determined to be plagiarism but for whatever reason it isn't taken down and/or the developers won't be sued. This situation hasn't happened so...what's the commotion?

It's not as simple as taking down something that flat out reuses exact characters in something and charging for it.

Case in point, that mod on the previous page that replaces things with the actual Pokémon? Well, it turns out that modder was charging people for it, and now it's been given a cease and desist. That's the kind of thing that doesn't need lots of prep to prepare a case for. It's clear-cut.

Palworld itself is not as easy to prove as that. I imagine TPC is working on gathering evidence of asset theft. It's not an easy thing to prove, and it takes time to prepare a case. Naturally, they've been asked about Palworld, but have declined to comment, which might be a sign of things to come? I don't know about that, but general practice seems to be you don't talk about any potential lawsuits you may be working on. So it is a possibility.

Quite frankly, it's not been taken down because lawsuits like this take time. But we are seeing more and more evidence that asset theft has occurred in Palworld.

EDIT: I do find it strange that people think that this is what Pokémon needs to be in future. It's like asking Call of Duty to be more like Baldur's Gate 3, because BG3 was crazy successful.

Edited January 23 by Glen-i

[Dcubed]

1 hour ago, Sheikah said:

Close? That's what I was outright saying.  Won't somebody think of the multi billion dollar corporation?

Really though, if anything this shows them how hungry people are for a big 3D open world that actually makes use of the hardware somewhat. Basically what people have been asking for for ages (minus the guns). Perhaps them seeing these ridiculous sales figures is a more effective message.

I hope you won't be saying anything then when your precious Sony start getting assets stolen from their games; while their competitors flip them for millions of dollars in profit without repurcussions.

If Pocket Pair get away with it here with Palworld, you bet that this is going to start happening on a much wider scale with other IPs elsewhere.

It's almost as if there's a parable to go along with what's happening here...

Edited January 23 by Dcubed

[Sheikah]

10 minutes ago, Dcubed said:

I hope you won't be saying anything then when your precious Sony start getting assets stolen from their games; while their competitors flip them for millions of dollars in profit without repurcussions.

If Pocket Pair get away with it here with Palworld, you bet that this is going to start happening on a much wider scale with other IPs elsewhere.

It's almost as if there's a parable to go along with what's happening here...

"Your precious Sony". Tell me you cringed at least a little while typing that. Just a little!

Let's see how any potential legal case progresses before we jump to conclusions. If they really have stolen assets and it can be proven then that's one thing, but taking very heavy inspiration without actually lifting files is another thing entirely, even if looks like a ripoff. One thing never changes though - Nintendo fans have exactly zero chill. 

Quote

EDIT: I do find it strange that people think that this is what Pokémon needs to be in future. It's like asking Call of Duty to be more like Baldur's Gate 3, because BG3 was crazy successful.

There's no reason that Pokemon needs to become this, having a full size open world game could become a side series just like Pokemon is often known to do with its various spin offs. Not with guns, obviously, but certainly there could be different flavours of game (like Monster Hunter and Zelda have done by having both handheld and main console versions of their games). At the very least, Game Freak could up their game on their main titles. Certainly this is something a lot of people have been wanting for a long, long time.

[Dcubed]

Also, I'd just like to point out that it's absolutely possible for assets to be ripped and then later modified, but still found to originally be rips...

https://www.eurogamer.net/orion-dev-admits-his-game-ripped-off-call-of-duty-assets

This has never been tested in court however, and this has also never specifically been tried in Japanese courts before.  The closest that we have to this situation is Nintendo VS Enterbrain (Tear Ring Saga), where Nintendo failed to prove that the game to be performing copyright infringement, but did win a settlement where they got Enterbrain to pay a fine for "unfair competition".  The kicker here was that no actual assets from a Fire Emblem game were proven to be stolen, but the game was deemed to be close enough to be stealing its trade dress for the purposes of unfair competition; particularily because it was being released on a rival system.  I would also like to point out that this particular case is the Japanese legal precedent that allowed for games like Mighty Number 9 and Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night to be made and released.

I do think Nintendo have a case here.  However, it would be risky because if they lose? It sets a very bad legal precedent not just for them, but for the entire Japanese video game industry; because the Japanese video game industry will shortly become an asset theft free-for-all.  This is probably why they're being so slow to respond publically.  Their case will need to really be watertight as the cost of failure would really be severe... However, this is industrial espionage/asset theft on a scale that the industry has simply never seen before, so I think Nintendo will have no choice but to respond with legal action.  Palworld is simply too big for Nintendo to consider turning a blind eye to at this point, because the cost of allowing this to happen is at least as bad as what would happen if they were to lose said case.

Edited January 23 by Dcubed

[EEVILMURRAY]

If you're a fan of very close looking games, check out Super Win

https://store.steampowered.com/app/310700/Super_Win_the_Game/

[Sheikah]

2 hours ago, Glen-i said:

Palworld itself is not as easy to prove as that. I imagine TPC is working on gathering evidence of asset theft. It's not an easy thing to prove, and it takes time to prepare a case. Naturally, they've been asked about Palworld, but have declined to comment, which might be a sign of things to come? I don't know about that, but general practice seems to be you don't talk about any potential lawsuits you may be working on. So it is a possibility.

 

2 hours ago, Glen-i said:

It's blatant theft, and it'll just open the floodgates for similar games with blatant theft of models to surface if it goes unchecked. Artists who get paid to design for games already have it rough with AI threatening to cost them work, they don't need this BS to suddenly become fine.

On the one hand you say it's difficult to prove and they need to gather evidence, but on the other you say it's "blatant" theft.

My guess? It's not blatant at all if Game Freak/Nintendo have to really dig to make a case, blatant is what the Pokemon mod was which was immediately shut down. The game has probably been designed carefully and with legal consultation to be just the right amount of mimicry without actually amounting to theft. This whole conversation actually reminds me of the Digimon vs Pokemon conversation of the 90s.

Either way, interesting to see how this goes. Pokemon as a franchise will be fine and continue to sell like gangbusters regardless of what happens with this.

Edited January 23 by Sheikah

[Glen-i]

17 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

This whole conversation actually reminds me of the Digimon vs Pokemon conversation of the 90s.

Don't insult Digimon like that.

Digimon actually has artistic integrity to it. I don't like a lot of the monster designs they go with, but I will happily accept that it's it own thing.

Digimon hasn't ever stolen the models from a Pokémon game and repurposed them for their own products. That's the difference here.

[Sheikah]

Don't insult Digimon like that.
Digimon actually has artistic integrity to it. I don't like a lot of the monster designs they go with, but I will happily accept that it's it own thing.
Digimon hasn't ever stolen the models from a Pokémon game and repurposed them for their own products. That's the difference here.

Digimon will cope.

[Dcubed]

3 hours ago, Sheikah said:

On the one hand you say it's difficult to prove and they need to gather evidence, but on the other you say it's "blatant" theft.

My guess? It's not blatant at all if Game Freak/Nintendo have to really dig to make a case, blatant is what the Pokemon mod was which was immediately shut down. The game has probably been designed carefully and with legal consultation to be just the right amount of mimicry without actually amounting to theft. This whole conversation actually reminds me of the Digimon vs Pokemon conversation of the 90s.

Either way, interesting to see how this goes. Pokemon as a franchise will be fine and continue to sell like gangbusters regardless of what happens with this.

Trademark infringement is much easier to prove than copyright infringement, and Nintendo have already (inadvertently) set a legal precedent that allows for plagerism to take place with so called "spiritual successors", so long as assets are not stolen.  Nintendo were able to DMCA take down the Pokemon Palworld mod almost immediately because it was a blatant and inarguable infringement on their existing trademarks, but that's not something that can be applied to Palworld proper because it does not explicitely feature the actual trademarked characters seen throughout the Pokemon series.  Even though anyone with a working brain can see what Pokemon characters are being ripped off with Palworld, they're not actually the same characters and thus are technically legally distinct as far as trademark is concerned.

Now.  There is legal precedent that protects the infringement of Trade Dress with video game mechanics and design, specifically Tetris Holding, LLC v. Xio Interactive, Inc., but Palworld would be unlikely to fall under this form of infringement, because its gameplay mechanics do not steal from Pokemon; only its character designs and models.  And as previously determined by Nintendo VS Enterbrain? Similarity in visual design is not enough to prove copyright infringement.

If they want to make a legal case, they need to prove that actual Pokemon game assets were stolen or appropriated in such a way that the models seen in Palworld could not have been made in any other fashion.  That's not an easy thing to prove, and also comes with potential serious commericial ramifications for them, as well as the entire Japanese video game industry, if they fail to win such a case.

It's not impossible though.  But it's something that will take time for Nintendo to dig into Palworld's assets and build a legal case against.

Edited January 23 by Dcubed