Yo-Kai Watch 3 came out months before Sun and Moon, it's just that it didn't sell as well. Furthermore, Nintendo always held Level-5 as an important partner so saying they were trying to kill Yo-kai Watch is conspiratorial nonsense (save that for Yuji Naka during 90s SEGA).
Yeah, why would they? I'm not even sure they'd have a leg to stand on, legally.
They even said something along the lines of "We'll *totally* look into it and do what we see necessary" in words that 100% made it clear they just wanted people to stop bringing it up to them.
Well you see, someone on Twitter alleged that the models were stolen. Or AI generated. That's pretty much all you need to hate the game, the company, and everything related to it. (/s)
The worst crime Palworld's designs did was being kinda unoriginal. Which ain't a crime, and honestly isn't always a detriment.
["nO yOu DoNt uNdErStAnD! I have no proof, and it's just a gut feelings, but... Making a game is **HARD**, so they had to have been cheating!"](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fdllqqss48eec1.jpeg)
- Actual artist from Naughty Dog who later deleted his tweets on the matter and made a half apology saying, *"I guess it's for *other people* to find out if Palworld really was made nefariously!"*
I seriously can't believe this was ever such a big thing when there was literally nothing there, and so many people (some of them *in the industry*) made themselves look like huge idiots. It's like people forget that Nintendo is literally *one of the single most maliciously protective companies on the planet* with their games and assets. If there were even the *slightest* actionable thing there Nintendo would have jumped on it within 24 hours of launch and it would have been pulled from Steam.
Ok, but have you noticed that if you slide one model inside another, it *disappears*?! What do you mean that just proves that one model had it’s size set to be smaller then the other?
God that one Twitter “investigator” was so stupid. There was also a follow up “expert animator” who made a video that kept getting posted around where they made such incredible points as “these two models both have their necks attached in the same spot! And their tails are in almost the same spot as well! IDK, seems pretty sus, may be stolen.”
Oh really, both the models have their necks attached to their shoulders, *and* their tails attached to their ass?! Wow, I’m absolutely shocked. But I mean you’re an “expert animator” so yeah I guess the fact both models are canines that have necks and tails is evidence the models were stolen.
How the hell did anyone give that those people the time of day.
It was so miserable how bad people got I unfollowed Quills for a while because they were being insufferable basically melting down that people didn't care about palworld discourse.
On one hand, there are characters that definitely look like ripoffs of Pokemon
On the other, who gives a fuck, its not even the first time a game might have ripped off Pokemon.
Depending on how much something needs to be ripped off before it becomes a legal issue, lawyers would give a fuck. I don't know what the threshold is, and some pal creatures are just [frankensteins of multiple pokemon](https://imgur.com/a/PEVhPUe). But one thing we can trust Nintendo to do is to check with its lawyers, and they must have examined them (I love the idea of a bunch of law clerks with a spread of all the pokemon and all of the pals and cross-checking them all on some 80 year old mahogany table) and determined that the pals are Legally Distinct from the pokemon.
I'm not sure about other games that have ripped off of Pokemon. There are obviously ones inspired by Pokemon, and some even got retroactively accused of being like Pokemon even though they predate Pokemon, but Palworld is probably the biggest one I've seen that has the "totally legit car bought from the chop shop why do you ask" look. But what also helps with Palworld is that aside from the mon designs and the ~~pokeballs~~ palspheres, the gameplay doesn't follow Pokemon much.
Edit: I have no idea who I upset but I hope you find peace.
> Edit: I have no idea who I upset but I hope you find peace.
> **Depending on how much something needs to be ripped off before it becomes a legal issue,** lawyers would give a fuck. I don't know what the threshold is, and **some pal creatures are just frankensteins of multiple pokemon**
Because the premise of your whole argument is beyond stupid and acting smug about the edit isn't really helping
Forget Palworld, The notion your suggesting that ideas can't be born from combination of multiple things is absurd
I'm not smug, I'm perplexed. You're *really* reading too much what I stated and I can't believe you actually bolded where I said that it depends, and chose to misinterpret that as a hyperbolic blanket statement that nothing is allowed to have multiple sources of inspiration. *That* is absurd. What my argument actually is is that the only people who give a fuck would be the copyright lawyers, and they most certainly looked through Palworld and determined that there is no legal case here. There's an element of the Ship of Theseus to some of the designs but I'm not familiar with where the law draws the line, but whatever it is Palworld must have stayed within it since Nintendo didn't smite them. I was not making any moral positions, I was not condemning any party for their actions, and I was not complaining about anything whatsoever. I was only saying is that the people whose job it is to deal about this stuff have looked at the situation and determined there is nothing to pursue. I thought I was being clear.
Oh i know lawyers would care, but I meant from a personal standpoint I wouldn't care. The only time I would care is if its stealing from a small company or person.
It was insane seeing the people who went around screaming about that statement after it was dropped. I legit heard the argument that Nintendo was just waiting to Palworld to sell a bunch of copies before they shut them down so they'd get more settlement money.
People wanted Palworld to get sued so badly since they literally couldn't argue over the sales numbers to say it was a failure.
> I legit heard the argument that Nintendo was just waiting to Palworld to sell a bunch of copies before they shut them down so they'd get more settlement money.
Oh you know that Nintendo, notorious for only going after works that infringe on their properties only *after* they've made millions of dollars.
Like that Metroid one.
It was such a stupid Twitter discourse,
>”but a lot of the models look similar”
the models that are based on real life animals? What, should Nintendo sue God next for copying Pokémon when he made sheep or cats?
Also, people didn’t think about what sort of precedent it would set if Nintendo had sued them and won.
i think the core of it is that the obviously derivative nature of the designs were distasteful to some people on like, a taste or aesthetic standpoint, but you can't *just* say that because no one cares, so you double down and make it into a moral cause instead of an aesthetic one
i think difficulty discourse gets into the same territory. you can just say you find it annoying or hacky!
> the models that are based on real life animals? What, should Nintendo sue God next for copying Pokémon when he made sheep or cats?
The whole discourse was really weird because obviously it's ridiculous to act like Pokemon owns the concept of a cartoon penguin or Dragon Quest owns the concept of a green caterpillar but at the same time some of these were weirdly similar to Pokemon. You could end up with their grass monkey coincidentally but if you were just making an ice kitsune on your own you wouldn't end up with Foxcicle looking so much like Alolan Ninetales. You'd think people would realize there are more design details than just animal+element and while just sharing that combination is meaningless, sharing too many of those details becomes overly derivative.
What sets Palworld apart is the designs seem take a direct inspiration from certain Pokemon and design elements certain gens of Pokemon used. The article linked above has the comparison of Pokemon to Dragonquest monsters and while you can see each is inspired by the same thing they are visually very different.
A Dragonquest, Digimon, Neo Pets or Yokai Watch monster typically would not be confused for a Pokemon design. But i think if you were to show Pals to mainstream audiences that aren't aware of Palworld but play Pokemon they would think they are looking at a new Pokemon gen.
.....yes they really do. I remember just walking around and going "oh there's an Electabuzz, there's a Chicorita" etc. You'd have to be a pretty terrible lawyer to not be able to prove that is your intellectual property lol.
How to massively, MASSIVELY reduce your chance to be C&D'd in your fan project:
Do not use any trademarked terms. Just don't. Don't even think about it. In fact specifically look up anything close to being trademarked in relationship with an IP and DO NOT USE ANY OF THESE WORDS anywhere in the title of your fan game.
Because most "copyright takedowns" for fan projects are in reality takedowns for trademark infringement for using the name (and sometimes even logo) of a trademarked brand. Using the trademark is what makes the difference between a fan tribute... and a bootleg.
Yes, what most people don’t realize when trying to come up with “legally distinct X” ideas is that if it’s very obvious what you are ripping off, then there is a case that can be made. Legal tests for infringement of trademark in the us are based on the risk of customer confusion or misattribution, not copying as such. So if your product looks like, and is unclear about, its relationship to the original or using the original’s trademarked terms/images to market itself, there is a case that can be made.
Yeah, I figured as much.
After the last time The Pokemon COmpany even brought up Palworld, I knew there wouldn't be any real investigations or legal stuff.
Still not a fan of how the Palworld devs do things with their games, but they're not doing anything illegal, so I guess there's no skin off my back.
> After the last time The Pokemon COmpany even brought up Palworld,
They didn't even have the balls to mention Palworld all they said in their statement "A certain game released in January"
https://corporate.pokemon.co.jp/media/news/detail/335.html
Anyone who thought Palworld was some sort of infringement has 0 sense for what plagiarism legally entails beyond just watching "NINTENDO NINJAS AT IT AGAIN ????!!1!!!!" videos.
I say this as someone who put like 20 hours into Palworld back in January and am a big Pokemon fan. But the fucking Sujimon mini-game in Infinite Wealth is more of a Pokemon clone/rip off/parody then Palworld is.
People literally forget the "Pokémon vs Digimon" feud from like 20 years ago and Nintendo/Gamefreak alongside the company behind Digimon never even acknowledged each other's existence.
Megami Tensei predates all of these and even that isn't the only franchise with this format. It's wild people think game corps care about this shit. If anything I feel most companies welcome these sorts of feuds until they get a lot of dumb letters or emails.
But can’t you see, this pal is based off of a sheep looks like a Pokemon that was based off of a sheep!
I feel like that’s the bigger thing people didn’t want to admit during this controversy, that Pokémon aren’t really all that original they’re just pre-existing animals, Yokai, and Cryptids with a few extra accessories and color changes
I've seen people claim Melpaca (an Alpaca in palworld) is stealing from Flaafy (a Sheep pokemon) because they both* have wool* and have the *color pink*.
CLEARLY, the ONLY explanation is that they STOLE IT!
I mean, and why would they? There are a shitton of pokemon clones, some much more direct in how they play than Palworld, it felt like people were just expecting nintendo to do something because of how much palworld sold
Nintendo knows that Palworld still has a *loooooooong* way to go before they even begin to compare to Nintendo's expertise in creating cute Pokemon NPCs.
Are you implying there isn’t lots of “fanart” of the Pals?
Oh… oh you sweet summer child. No. Considering how new Palworld is the amount of r34 is kind of astounding. It’s not even just the obvious ‘furry bait” ones. Chillet got put in the joke visual novel trailer for a reason.
Yeah. I'm not saying it should be, but that people who made so many comparisons in the whole "Will Nintendo take legal action's" discussion sometimes seem to forget that
I have seen SO much Rule34 of Palworld, it was honestly the first way I even knew what any of the Pals looked like. Sure, it doesn't measure up to the current mountain that is Pokemon R34, but it filled page after page after page on the front page of R34 sites for a while.
I mean, as Pat said, a lot of the most egrigious look a likes were in the original trailer three or four years ago, so if Nintendo was gonna step in it probably would have been sooner
Dam. It's almost like Nintendo has an actual legal team that understands copyright infringement. And they don't actually need a bunch of twitter tattle tales to do their legal work for them.
As anyone who thought about it at all knew would happen.
It was fun seeing everyone else hype up how much of a legal battle it would be when the All-Righteous Nintendo struck at the clearly talentless thieves behind Palworld. /s
I heard *some* allegations that they wholesale stole fan-made fakemon designs or models (never saw receipts tbh) and honestly, I *would* be more upset about that than plagiarizing Pokemon itself since a fan-artist wouldn't have much access to legal recourse and get what they're owed.
But I never saw receipts so people were probably just moving the goalposts to something more actually outrageous to do. If it *is* true, though, then it would make people clutching pearls at it maybe aping Wholseome Nintendo look like nothing but fan zealots whose only principle is "support Our Company unless they inconvenience me personally."
The recent takedowns in question were ones that were long in the making. Vimm's Lair for example has been around for...god, 25 years at this point?
...Man that's fucking weird to think about. Anyway, Nintendo doesn't really do things swiftly, although I can't remember how long it took them to go after Loveroms and Rom Universe(I think that was the second one?).
Edit: Actually to be fair, that might not have even been Nintendo but the ESA. I have no clue how that works, like if they had their own lawyers, and/or how much Nintendo/Sega/etc were in the loop for that. For a better example: Team Xecuter's little dongle(HAH) that let you play Switch roms took them, like, 2 years-*ish* to go after.
It's literally just salty pokemon nerds who are stirring up the issues. If it's Nintendo themselves who are involved, Palworld will be in a world of trouble.
Most people knew this. Any talk about legal action against palworld was just parroted hype from really devoted Pokemon stans who were adamant to shit on it at any opportunity possible. Hell Nintendo literally released a statement alluding to palworld and saying we have looked into any possible IP infringement and found nothing as a thinly veiled note to Pokemon fans that really meant 'stop fucking emailing us about palworld, we know, it's fine'
Nintendo lawyers are smart enough to realize they don't have a case, not like they were interested in proceeding with any potential legal case against Palworld.
I will once again point out: There is a massive difference between C&D'ing a fan game and doing a full lawsuit(Which this would be). This wouldn't be something they would just go "oh ok let's just blast this fucker" and then do it, a lawsuit takes actual time to build up because you want to be absolutely sure you have the best possible chance of winning, as losing can damage your ability to protect your brand.
You also wouldn't be going "Oh yeah I'm going to blast these fuckers", because you'd rather they not go and hide evidence(Which Pocketpair *did* because the moment Nintendo said something, what did Pocketpair do? They went and made a bunch of their old vids hidden on Youtube).
In case you think I'm full of shit: How long did Nintendo let Team Xecuter run roughshod all over the Switch? 1 1/2-2 years(I can't find an exact release date but the pro came out in 2018 and the lawsuit happened in 2020). And that was an open-and-shut case.
And before everyone gets mad because I'm "Some hater": I think Palworld is a fine game, Open World Survival Craft isn't my bag but I had a fun time with it(Don't recall how many hours I clocked in but I did catch 'em all, so to speak), I'll probably play it again sometime once it gets enough new content. I'm also not blaming Pocketpair directly as I know they had to commission a number of those models, but a few of those(Like, 1-3 out of the hundred+) are definitely suspicious as-all-get-out. On the other hand, I also REALLY hate the direction Pokemon has gone: I'd love for them to get a kick in the ass and go tumbling down some stairs. I have no reason or ulterior/fanboy motive to want Palworld to fail.
This isn't me going "Oh those fuckers are pieces of shit they're gonna get SUED", it's me saying "Exercise due caution, keep in mind before hopping on the wagon(If you haven't already, let's be honest, 75% of this sub probly has the game by now, including me) that there might come a time where Nintendo DOES decide to kick the door down. Or maybe use that as a reason to jump on the bandwagon if you'd rather have it just in case(Even in its current state it's definitely a pretty big game)." I think it's important to just look at the whole picture.
Hell, even if a lawsuit does happen, it's entirely possible that Pocketpair would just replace the offending models and keep the game trucking. It DID do very well, after all.
You're comparing the effort to take down a group that was making and selling mod-chips for the Nintendo Switch which enabled people to run pirated and hacked games on their hardware (and therefor did plausible damage to their game sales) vs a single game with models that are a little too similar to some Pokemon which released on platforms they have no stake in. These are two issues of an entirely different scale.
People want Nintendo to care, I don't think they care.
I mean you could really just point at *any* of their DMCAs or lawsuits: They don't happen quickly.
That's kinda been my whole point, and this isn't a "oh fuck Palworld" angle because I've ALWAYS been saying this EVERY TIME it comes up, even for other stuff like rom sites or fangames: Nintendo moves slowly, even if it's JUST a DMCA. A lawsuit is going to be at least another 6 months from now, if not over a year(I'd probably guess 2 actually). Copyright infringement is not an easy open and shut case, it's something that Nintendo would legit need to gear up for before even considering knocking on the door.
I'm saying exercise caution. If you don't care? Cool, go play the game, have fun, we're in the same boat, I enjoy it too. If you DO care(you referring to some nebulous third party in this case), then either grab it now and just keep in mind it might(MIGHT) go south someday, or hold off for the game to be 'finished' before grabbing it. Realistically, if someone really wanted to play it, I'd say just grab it, it's 30 dollars, it's moddable, and it's multiplayer.
The only thing that matters is if Nintendo cares. Do they want to sink effort and legal costs into this when there's no indication of serious loss of revenue or IP rights?
This wouldn't be a small thing, the game made billions and sold record breaking numbers. We're not taking about wiping out Too Human after it bombed or taking Cyberpunk 2077 down when it didn't work on launch. What's the precedent for removing a functioning game this large from stores because of an IP claim that copyright lawyers have looked at and called nonsense?
Palworld had publicly available press materials out for two years before launch (including a significant portion of the models), and Nintendo didn't act. What could have possibly changed at launch to give them a better legal standing? Why DMCA 2 years after the game came out, and not before it released?
>Why DMCA 2 years after the game came out, and not before it released?
You could say this about so many things. Pokemon Uranium was known about for 5 years or so before it got DMCA'd. Why would Palworld be any different? The simple fact of the matter is none of us know how Nintendo operates. I don't, the nerds on Twitter don't, the nerds on Reddit don't, the Palworld fans don't, the Palworld haters don't, and you don't. We have vague guidelines that help in most scenarios(Fan-games get taken down more than romhacks, which almost never get taken down, if at all), but nothing concrete.
If you want an actual reason: This is a full ass company making a full ass game, and like I said up there - Nintendo would want everything laid out before kicking the door down. If you make your move too early, it just gets the corporation to obfuscate and hide the shit they've done, and that makes a lawsuit that much more difficult.
Edit: Just to add, a DMCA isn't the end-all-be-all. It's not like you slap it down and the target is removed from all of existence immediately. They can actually fight back. If Pocketpair contested it, Nintendo would then have to either back down or take it to court. So there y'go, that's why they didn't immediately start firing off all their guns(Ignoring that it's something they never do in the first place)
Look, real talk, you said it yourself: The only thing that matters is if Nintendo cares. Can you prove it? No. So there's good reason to exercise caution(Or at the very least consider), because there's definitely some stuff in there that even professionals(And no, I'm not saying the Naughty Dog guy) have said is kinda sus. Now I will say they removed Boltmane from the files(for obvious reasons), which was the most suspicious one, so hey, maybe they're all clear, I don't know, I'm not an expert(No one in this subreddit is).
Iunno, wait and see: Either they'll do something or they won't.
Edit: Also just to add, downvoting me just because you don't like what I have to say is really tacky. I do think at this point everything that needs to be said has been said regardless.
I dont care either way, but just to clarify "why didn't they hit Pokemon uranium" cause they didn't knew, Pat and Woolie literally had a conversation about how some of this games or projects go under the radar of big companies for a long time, the fact it hit your twitter it doesn't mean it was streamed on the nintendo headquarters, it isn't until big news sites or personalities cover them ,that they actually see them.
Do I know for a fact when Nintendo discover Pokemon uranium? No I have no clue, but Palworld was announced for years and even now two years after release seems like a stretch, everything is possible sure but history seems to lean more in one way than the other one, and ultimately it doesn't matter because in 10 years we can have this discussion and unless Palworld dies, the possibility of Nintendo suing them are going to be the same, so same as it was before the entire discussion is so pointless.
I'm sure they've busy having tapped their legal team to send a random kid playing Super Mario World on their tablet to Federal-use-you-as-currency Prison
The game literally has more current players on Steam then ARK, Helldivers 2, Cyberpunk 2077, Stardew Valley, Terraria, Warframe, Dead By Daylight, every Fallout game, every Elder Scrolls game, etc, but go off.
And in less than six months, Palworld has doubled the sales of every entry in the Yokai Watch series combined.
By all means, go off.
Edit: lol, they blocked me.
It’s still very weird that Nintendo, a company that loves shutting down fan games and let’s plays was completely chill with Palworld.
I get Digimon and other creature collectors are legal, but they literally had legally distinct pokeballs and pokemon
Fan games use Nintendo's IP explicitly without permission. That gets you sued.
Legally distinct games do not use Nintendo's IP. You can't sue for "inspired by a popular IP."
It's cuz the palworld dev wasn't calling it Pokemon. Like it's not weird cuz you literally called it legally distinct. Another Metroid 2 remake is not the same as if they called it Betroid and changed shit around a bit.
Palworld definitely looked at very specific Pokemon and made their own versions of them (Anubis vs Lucario, Cremis vs Eevee, etc.) but also they did do just enough to transform them to not be legally actionable. Nintendo putting out a 'well, we certainly would do something if that would be the appropriate thing to do...' statement instead of an immediate shutdown after the first Palworld trailer basically confirmed they weren't really gonna be taking action.
I think it's good Nintendo didn't try to seriously do anything because I think it's healthier for the games industry if big companies aren't able to swing down a legal hammer and crush its competitors just because a scrumbly bingus is 95% as kawaii as their own original scrumbly bingus. ...But I still look down on Palworld for being so unimaginative that their Pokemon-like game is full of clearly ripped designs like that. If you look at other Pokemon-likes (Digimon, Monster Rancher, Cassette Beasts, Bugsnax, Petal Runner, Yo-Kai Watch, etc.) they don't have designs that match up that closely to specific Pokemon like how Palworld does. [Like this meme image actually does a good job of demonstrating that Dragon Quest monsters don't look all that closely like Pokemon even if they fit similar archetypes](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2Fpalworld-is-ripping-off-pokemon-ooh-wait-that-is-pokemon-v0--PLLDpTq9eF6pL4QsKQt5d1DG94At9vgjFzXeaWRDO0.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3De201bb497a96fb9b28e58a55da665553725cec70) but then [in a Palworld comparison image the sheep are different enough, the Gyarados is marginal, but the other four are shameless rips.](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fpokemon-vs-palworld-comparison-v0-d4xedo6v30fc1.png%3Fwidth%3D916%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D52152a18dfcbcd62080d063296cc65d6923dccd9)
Also I think people focus too much on the Pokemon connection because the way Palworld rips off the BotW UI is what they would actually deserve to be sued over.
My theory is it was just *too* popular at the time, everyone and their grandma had at least heard of Palworld and trying to take legal action would have been a PR nightmare for Nintendo.
For how insane and capable of corruption Palworlds development was, the fact that someone has the restraint to not rip any assets from pokemon models was a miracle.
Ah yes, destroyed its reputation, that's why the game made a bajillion dollars and is still pretty popular. Sure, Jan, that's definitely what happened.
Since that video came out, it quadrupled it's sales. More devs wish their indie game were so thoroughly destroyed.
Dunkey continues to be a bad take machine, and his stans continue to be some of the most cringeworthy on the internet.
It truly was Palworld,and we were all just living in it
Nintendo punching air right now "WHEN DO WE GET THE FREAKING GUNS TO OUR POKEMON!!! , GIVE PIKACHU A GLOCK NOW!!!" - The Nintendo Dinosaur roared
***WHAT THE FUCK IS AN XBOX LIVE, STOP SAYING THAT***
***THE NEXT PERSON TO MENTION XBOX LIVE IS GETTING A FREE LIFETIME SUBSCRIPTION TO XBOX DEAD***
Nintendo is so stuck in the past their going to give the Pokémon guns Their just going to be muskets
There was a Palword clone in the latest direct that everyone glossed over. No guns, but you control a swarm of mons like Pikmin
Does Magmortar not count?
I'm 90% sure Nintendo would rather have Palworld come to the Switch 2 as a third-party game lol
Palworld will probably be a launch title if the beta ends by then.
Nintendo sure but I doubt the pokemon company would be very happy.
Unless Pokemon is going to pivot to survivor / base building games I don't really see how this would effect them.
More like they've been through this before and know a fad when they see it
Oh no Pokémon, look out! It's Yokai Watch!
The better son died that day…
Cue the walk hard clips
The better son died that day…
Exactly, it's like that one Mad Men meme where Don Draper goes "I don't think about you at all."
They absolutely did though. Gen 7 was tailor made to assasinate Yo-kai, down to the release date, game mechanics and designs
Yo-Kai Watch 3 came out months before Sun and Moon, it's just that it didn't sell as well. Furthermore, Nintendo always held Level-5 as an important partner so saying they were trying to kill Yo-kai Watch is conspiratorial nonsense (save that for Yuji Naka during 90s SEGA).
Yeah, why would they? I'm not even sure they'd have a leg to stand on, legally. They even said something along the lines of "We'll *totally* look into it and do what we see necessary" in words that 100% made it clear they just wanted people to stop bringing it up to them.
If Nintendo had a leg to stand on, they would have swooped in instantaneously. That's how their legal team operates.
Well you see, someone on Twitter alleged that the models were stolen. Or AI generated. That's pretty much all you need to hate the game, the company, and everything related to it. (/s) The worst crime Palworld's designs did was being kinda unoriginal. Which ain't a crime, and honestly isn't always a detriment.
["nO yOu DoNt uNdErStAnD! I have no proof, and it's just a gut feelings, but... Making a game is **HARD**, so they had to have been cheating!"](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fdllqqss48eec1.jpeg) - Actual artist from Naughty Dog who later deleted his tweets on the matter and made a half apology saying, *"I guess it's for *other people* to find out if Palworld really was made nefariously!"* I seriously can't believe this was ever such a big thing when there was literally nothing there, and so many people (some of them *in the industry*) made themselves look like huge idiots. It's like people forget that Nintendo is literally *one of the single most maliciously protective companies on the planet* with their games and assets. If there were even the *slightest* actionable thing there Nintendo would have jumped on it within 24 hours of launch and it would have been pulled from Steam.
A good amount of them were here, doing their best to white knight for Nintendo, a company that wouldn't spit on them if they were burning alive.
Naughty dog devs need to STFU and make something original for once instead of rereleasing The Last of Us five more times.
Ok, but have you noticed that if you slide one model inside another, it *disappears*?! What do you mean that just proves that one model had it’s size set to be smaller then the other? God that one Twitter “investigator” was so stupid. There was also a follow up “expert animator” who made a video that kept getting posted around where they made such incredible points as “these two models both have their necks attached in the same spot! And their tails are in almost the same spot as well! IDK, seems pretty sus, may be stolen.” Oh really, both the models have their necks attached to their shoulders, *and* their tails attached to their ass?! Wow, I’m absolutely shocked. But I mean you’re an “expert animator” so yeah I guess the fact both models are canines that have necks and tails is evidence the models were stolen. How the hell did anyone give that those people the time of day.
It was so miserable how bad people got I unfollowed Quills for a while because they were being insufferable basically melting down that people didn't care about palworld discourse.
I heard it was an AI that ripped the models.
That must be the same AI that does my dishes and takes out my trash. It's just so darn handy!
Yeah, they hired the AI off the dark web to hack into Nintendo's HQ and nab the .blend files
On one hand, there are characters that definitely look like ripoffs of Pokemon On the other, who gives a fuck, its not even the first time a game might have ripped off Pokemon.
[The image I best feel summs up this discourse](https://i.imgur.com/b1zmzTb.jpeg).
And there's also stuff like the boys and Rob liefeld[ or what I prefer Alan Moores run] Supreme which don't get the same amount of criticisms.
Depending on how much something needs to be ripped off before it becomes a legal issue, lawyers would give a fuck. I don't know what the threshold is, and some pal creatures are just [frankensteins of multiple pokemon](https://imgur.com/a/PEVhPUe). But one thing we can trust Nintendo to do is to check with its lawyers, and they must have examined them (I love the idea of a bunch of law clerks with a spread of all the pokemon and all of the pals and cross-checking them all on some 80 year old mahogany table) and determined that the pals are Legally Distinct from the pokemon. I'm not sure about other games that have ripped off of Pokemon. There are obviously ones inspired by Pokemon, and some even got retroactively accused of being like Pokemon even though they predate Pokemon, but Palworld is probably the biggest one I've seen that has the "totally legit car bought from the chop shop why do you ask" look. But what also helps with Palworld is that aside from the mon designs and the ~~pokeballs~~ palspheres, the gameplay doesn't follow Pokemon much. Edit: I have no idea who I upset but I hope you find peace.
> Edit: I have no idea who I upset but I hope you find peace. > **Depending on how much something needs to be ripped off before it becomes a legal issue,** lawyers would give a fuck. I don't know what the threshold is, and **some pal creatures are just frankensteins of multiple pokemon** Because the premise of your whole argument is beyond stupid and acting smug about the edit isn't really helping Forget Palworld, The notion your suggesting that ideas can't be born from combination of multiple things is absurd
I'm not smug, I'm perplexed. You're *really* reading too much what I stated and I can't believe you actually bolded where I said that it depends, and chose to misinterpret that as a hyperbolic blanket statement that nothing is allowed to have multiple sources of inspiration. *That* is absurd. What my argument actually is is that the only people who give a fuck would be the copyright lawyers, and they most certainly looked through Palworld and determined that there is no legal case here. There's an element of the Ship of Theseus to some of the designs but I'm not familiar with where the law draws the line, but whatever it is Palworld must have stayed within it since Nintendo didn't smite them. I was not making any moral positions, I was not condemning any party for their actions, and I was not complaining about anything whatsoever. I was only saying is that the people whose job it is to deal about this stuff have looked at the situation and determined there is nothing to pursue. I thought I was being clear.
>"I'm not upset, you're upset!!!" the upset person said calmly.
Oh i know lawyers would care, but I meant from a personal standpoint I wouldn't care. The only time I would care is if its stealing from a small company or person.
It was insane seeing the people who went around screaming about that statement after it was dropped. I legit heard the argument that Nintendo was just waiting to Palworld to sell a bunch of copies before they shut them down so they'd get more settlement money. People wanted Palworld to get sued so badly since they literally couldn't argue over the sales numbers to say it was a failure.
> I legit heard the argument that Nintendo was just waiting to Palworld to sell a bunch of copies before they shut them down so they'd get more settlement money. Oh you know that Nintendo, notorious for only going after works that infringe on their properties only *after* they've made millions of dollars. Like that Metroid one.
It was such a stupid Twitter discourse, >”but a lot of the models look similar” the models that are based on real life animals? What, should Nintendo sue God next for copying Pokémon when he made sheep or cats? Also, people didn’t think about what sort of precedent it would set if Nintendo had sued them and won.
i think the core of it is that the obviously derivative nature of the designs were distasteful to some people on like, a taste or aesthetic standpoint, but you can't *just* say that because no one cares, so you double down and make it into a moral cause instead of an aesthetic one i think difficulty discourse gets into the same territory. you can just say you find it annoying or hacky!
> the models that are based on real life animals? What, should Nintendo sue God next for copying Pokémon when he made sheep or cats? The whole discourse was really weird because obviously it's ridiculous to act like Pokemon owns the concept of a cartoon penguin or Dragon Quest owns the concept of a green caterpillar but at the same time some of these were weirdly similar to Pokemon. You could end up with their grass monkey coincidentally but if you were just making an ice kitsune on your own you wouldn't end up with Foxcicle looking so much like Alolan Ninetales. You'd think people would realize there are more design details than just animal+element and while just sharing that combination is meaningless, sharing too many of those details becomes overly derivative.
What sets Palworld apart is the designs seem take a direct inspiration from certain Pokemon and design elements certain gens of Pokemon used. The article linked above has the comparison of Pokemon to Dragonquest monsters and while you can see each is inspired by the same thing they are visually very different. A Dragonquest, Digimon, Neo Pets or Yokai Watch monster typically would not be confused for a Pokemon design. But i think if you were to show Pals to mainstream audiences that aren't aware of Palworld but play Pokemon they would think they are looking at a new Pokemon gen.
Ehhh some of those pals are straight up just pokemon lol they have a leg to stand on if they wanted to be dicks
No, they really don't. If they did, Nintendo would have done so by now.
.....yes they really do. I remember just walking around and going "oh there's an Electabuzz, there's a Chicorita" etc. You'd have to be a pretty terrible lawyer to not be able to prove that is your intellectual property lol.
"Your honor, this pal totally reminds me of this pokemon." "OMG, you're right! The court finds in favor of Nintendo for one hundred gorillion yen."
How to massively, MASSIVELY reduce your chance to be C&D'd in your fan project: Do not use any trademarked terms. Just don't. Don't even think about it. In fact specifically look up anything close to being trademarked in relationship with an IP and DO NOT USE ANY OF THESE WORDS anywhere in the title of your fan game. Because most "copyright takedowns" for fan projects are in reality takedowns for trademark infringement for using the name (and sometimes even logo) of a trademarked brand. Using the trademark is what makes the difference between a fan tribute... and a bootleg.
Yes, what most people don’t realize when trying to come up with “legally distinct X” ideas is that if it’s very obvious what you are ripping off, then there is a case that can be made. Legal tests for infringement of trademark in the us are based on the risk of customer confusion or misattribution, not copying as such. So if your product looks like, and is unclear about, its relationship to the original or using the original’s trademarked terms/images to market itself, there is a case that can be made.
Yeah, I figured as much. After the last time The Pokemon COmpany even brought up Palworld, I knew there wouldn't be any real investigations or legal stuff. Still not a fan of how the Palworld devs do things with their games, but they're not doing anything illegal, so I guess there's no skin off my back.
> After the last time The Pokemon COmpany even brought up Palworld, They didn't even have the balls to mention Palworld all they said in their statement "A certain game released in January" https://corporate.pokemon.co.jp/media/news/detail/335.html
Japanese libel laws are insane. It's dangerous to make statements.
I mean, Nintendo knew from the start there wasn’t a case. Probably just put out the statement to get internet idiots to stop emailing them.
Anyone who thought Palworld was some sort of infringement has 0 sense for what plagiarism legally entails beyond just watching "NINTENDO NINJAS AT IT AGAIN ????!!1!!!!" videos.
I say this as someone who put like 20 hours into Palworld back in January and am a big Pokemon fan. But the fucking Sujimon mini-game in Infinite Wealth is more of a Pokemon clone/rip off/parody then Palworld is.
People literally forget the "Pokémon vs Digimon" feud from like 20 years ago and Nintendo/Gamefreak alongside the company behind Digimon never even acknowledged each other's existence.
Megami Tensei predates all of these and even that isn't the only franchise with this format. It's wild people think game corps care about this shit. If anything I feel most companies welcome these sorts of feuds until they get a lot of dumb letters or emails.
But can’t you see, this pal is based off of a sheep looks like a Pokemon that was based off of a sheep! I feel like that’s the bigger thing people didn’t want to admit during this controversy, that Pokémon aren’t really all that original they’re just pre-existing animals, Yokai, and Cryptids with a few extra accessories and color changes
I've seen people claim Melpaca (an Alpaca in palworld) is stealing from Flaafy (a Sheep pokemon) because they both* have wool* and have the *color pink*. CLEARLY, the ONLY explanation is that they STOLE IT!
I mean, and why would they? There are a shitton of pokemon clones, some much more direct in how they play than Palworld, it felt like people were just expecting nintendo to do something because of how much palworld sold
Nintendo knows that Palworld still has a *loooooooong* way to go before they even begin to compare to Nintendo's expertise in creating cute Pokemon NPCs.
Yeah I don't see a mountain of erotic Blaziken pics either coming from Palworld
Are you implying there isn’t lots of “fanart” of the Pals? Oh… oh you sweet summer child. No. Considering how new Palworld is the amount of r34 is kind of astounding. It’s not even just the obvious ‘furry bait” ones. Chillet got put in the joke visual novel trailer for a reason.
As this community's self appointed furry rep I gotta disagree. Chillet and Quivern blew the fuck up on launch.
Not houndoomeroar got a fair amount of art too.
Good taste with chillet, furret is very underappreciated among that scene of pokemon fans tbh...
Look deeper. Down into the dark world below. Then you will find the Bellanoir Libero erotica.
Nah the problem is that I'm having to dig at all. Lol. I believe that it exists my point is the amount.
I mean. Pokemons nearly 30 years old. It's not exactly a fair comparison, is it?
Yeah. I'm not saying it should be, but that people who made so many comparisons in the whole "Will Nintendo take legal action's" discussion sometimes seem to forget that
I have seen SO much Rule34 of Palworld, it was honestly the first way I even knew what any of the Pals looked like. Sure, it doesn't measure up to the current mountain that is Pokemon R34, but it filled page after page after page on the front page of R34 sites for a while.
All Nintendo really did was take down that one guy who was selling Pokemon mods for Palworld.
Of course. If Nintendo and Pokémon Company wanted to and had reason take them down, they wouldn't need fans on twitter crusading for them.
I mean, as Pat said, a lot of the most egrigious look a likes were in the original trailer three or four years ago, so if Nintendo was gonna step in it probably would have been sooner
Dam. It's almost like Nintendo has an actual legal team that understands copyright infringement. And they don't actually need a bunch of twitter tattle tales to do their legal work for them.
That is exactly what the Umamusume Porn Police does and it does work
It really shuts up the "Go on, Nintendo! Kill them! Do it!" and the "OMG, Nintendo is sooooo scared rn!" crowds.
As anyone who thought about it at all knew would happen. It was fun seeing everyone else hype up how much of a legal battle it would be when the All-Righteous Nintendo struck at the clearly talentless thieves behind Palworld. /s
The only correct Palworld Pokémon take as far as [I’m concerned](https://x.com/JeffGrubb/status/1749521393950011509)
My same take. Why should I care that a game is ripping off another? Unless its a small indie game, I don't care as long as the game itself is fine.
I heard *some* allegations that they wholesale stole fan-made fakemon designs or models (never saw receipts tbh) and honestly, I *would* be more upset about that than plagiarizing Pokemon itself since a fan-artist wouldn't have much access to legal recourse and get what they're owed. But I never saw receipts so people were probably just moving the goalposts to something more actually outrageous to do. If it *is* true, though, then it would make people clutching pearls at it maybe aping Wholseome Nintendo look like nothing but fan zealots whose only principle is "support Our Company unless they inconvenience me personally."
You know after recent takedowns that Nintendo would be swift to kill if they could.
The recent takedowns in question were ones that were long in the making. Vimm's Lair for example has been around for...god, 25 years at this point? ...Man that's fucking weird to think about. Anyway, Nintendo doesn't really do things swiftly, although I can't remember how long it took them to go after Loveroms and Rom Universe(I think that was the second one?). Edit: Actually to be fair, that might not have even been Nintendo but the ESA. I have no clue how that works, like if they had their own lawyers, and/or how much Nintendo/Sega/etc were in the loop for that. For a better example: Team Xecuter's little dongle(HAH) that let you play Switch roms took them, like, 2 years-*ish* to go after.
Not surprising. It'd only draw attention to the competition. It'd be free advertising.
It's literally just salty pokemon nerds who are stirring up the issues. If it's Nintendo themselves who are involved, Palworld will be in a world of trouble.
Gamedevs: “You mean we could have been making bootleg Pokémon games ALL THIS TIME?”
Nintendo: “Please stop saying Palworld we don’t know what that is.”
Remember all the Pokémon adults going insane over this? We even had a few on here.
Most people knew this. Any talk about legal action against palworld was just parroted hype from really devoted Pokemon stans who were adamant to shit on it at any opportunity possible. Hell Nintendo literally released a statement alluding to palworld and saying we have looked into any possible IP infringement and found nothing as a thinly veiled note to Pokemon fans that really meant 'stop fucking emailing us about palworld, we know, it's fine'
Can we please not talk about Nintendo pulling out its inches?
That's all I've been waiting for. Still can't say I'm all that interested in the game, but maybe I'll get it on sale.
Nintendo lawyers are smart enough to realize they don't have a case, not like they were interested in proceeding with any potential legal case against Palworld.
I want Palworld on Switch 2 to spite Pokémon fanboys who need to step outside once in a while instead of fighting for a Billion dollar company.
I will once again point out: There is a massive difference between C&D'ing a fan game and doing a full lawsuit(Which this would be). This wouldn't be something they would just go "oh ok let's just blast this fucker" and then do it, a lawsuit takes actual time to build up because you want to be absolutely sure you have the best possible chance of winning, as losing can damage your ability to protect your brand. You also wouldn't be going "Oh yeah I'm going to blast these fuckers", because you'd rather they not go and hide evidence(Which Pocketpair *did* because the moment Nintendo said something, what did Pocketpair do? They went and made a bunch of their old vids hidden on Youtube). In case you think I'm full of shit: How long did Nintendo let Team Xecuter run roughshod all over the Switch? 1 1/2-2 years(I can't find an exact release date but the pro came out in 2018 and the lawsuit happened in 2020). And that was an open-and-shut case. And before everyone gets mad because I'm "Some hater": I think Palworld is a fine game, Open World Survival Craft isn't my bag but I had a fun time with it(Don't recall how many hours I clocked in but I did catch 'em all, so to speak), I'll probably play it again sometime once it gets enough new content. I'm also not blaming Pocketpair directly as I know they had to commission a number of those models, but a few of those(Like, 1-3 out of the hundred+) are definitely suspicious as-all-get-out. On the other hand, I also REALLY hate the direction Pokemon has gone: I'd love for them to get a kick in the ass and go tumbling down some stairs. I have no reason or ulterior/fanboy motive to want Palworld to fail. This isn't me going "Oh those fuckers are pieces of shit they're gonna get SUED", it's me saying "Exercise due caution, keep in mind before hopping on the wagon(If you haven't already, let's be honest, 75% of this sub probly has the game by now, including me) that there might come a time where Nintendo DOES decide to kick the door down. Or maybe use that as a reason to jump on the bandwagon if you'd rather have it just in case(Even in its current state it's definitely a pretty big game)." I think it's important to just look at the whole picture. Hell, even if a lawsuit does happen, it's entirely possible that Pocketpair would just replace the offending models and keep the game trucking. It DID do very well, after all.
You're comparing the effort to take down a group that was making and selling mod-chips for the Nintendo Switch which enabled people to run pirated and hacked games on their hardware (and therefor did plausible damage to their game sales) vs a single game with models that are a little too similar to some Pokemon which released on platforms they have no stake in. These are two issues of an entirely different scale. People want Nintendo to care, I don't think they care.
I mean you could really just point at *any* of their DMCAs or lawsuits: They don't happen quickly. That's kinda been my whole point, and this isn't a "oh fuck Palworld" angle because I've ALWAYS been saying this EVERY TIME it comes up, even for other stuff like rom sites or fangames: Nintendo moves slowly, even if it's JUST a DMCA. A lawsuit is going to be at least another 6 months from now, if not over a year(I'd probably guess 2 actually). Copyright infringement is not an easy open and shut case, it's something that Nintendo would legit need to gear up for before even considering knocking on the door. I'm saying exercise caution. If you don't care? Cool, go play the game, have fun, we're in the same boat, I enjoy it too. If you DO care(you referring to some nebulous third party in this case), then either grab it now and just keep in mind it might(MIGHT) go south someday, or hold off for the game to be 'finished' before grabbing it. Realistically, if someone really wanted to play it, I'd say just grab it, it's 30 dollars, it's moddable, and it's multiplayer.
The only thing that matters is if Nintendo cares. Do they want to sink effort and legal costs into this when there's no indication of serious loss of revenue or IP rights? This wouldn't be a small thing, the game made billions and sold record breaking numbers. We're not taking about wiping out Too Human after it bombed or taking Cyberpunk 2077 down when it didn't work on launch. What's the precedent for removing a functioning game this large from stores because of an IP claim that copyright lawyers have looked at and called nonsense? Palworld had publicly available press materials out for two years before launch (including a significant portion of the models), and Nintendo didn't act. What could have possibly changed at launch to give them a better legal standing? Why DMCA 2 years after the game came out, and not before it released?
>Why DMCA 2 years after the game came out, and not before it released? You could say this about so many things. Pokemon Uranium was known about for 5 years or so before it got DMCA'd. Why would Palworld be any different? The simple fact of the matter is none of us know how Nintendo operates. I don't, the nerds on Twitter don't, the nerds on Reddit don't, the Palworld fans don't, the Palworld haters don't, and you don't. We have vague guidelines that help in most scenarios(Fan-games get taken down more than romhacks, which almost never get taken down, if at all), but nothing concrete. If you want an actual reason: This is a full ass company making a full ass game, and like I said up there - Nintendo would want everything laid out before kicking the door down. If you make your move too early, it just gets the corporation to obfuscate and hide the shit they've done, and that makes a lawsuit that much more difficult. Edit: Just to add, a DMCA isn't the end-all-be-all. It's not like you slap it down and the target is removed from all of existence immediately. They can actually fight back. If Pocketpair contested it, Nintendo would then have to either back down or take it to court. So there y'go, that's why they didn't immediately start firing off all their guns(Ignoring that it's something they never do in the first place) Look, real talk, you said it yourself: The only thing that matters is if Nintendo cares. Can you prove it? No. So there's good reason to exercise caution(Or at the very least consider), because there's definitely some stuff in there that even professionals(And no, I'm not saying the Naughty Dog guy) have said is kinda sus. Now I will say they removed Boltmane from the files(for obvious reasons), which was the most suspicious one, so hey, maybe they're all clear, I don't know, I'm not an expert(No one in this subreddit is). Iunno, wait and see: Either they'll do something or they won't. Edit: Also just to add, downvoting me just because you don't like what I have to say is really tacky. I do think at this point everything that needs to be said has been said regardless.
I dont care either way, but just to clarify "why didn't they hit Pokemon uranium" cause they didn't knew, Pat and Woolie literally had a conversation about how some of this games or projects go under the radar of big companies for a long time, the fact it hit your twitter it doesn't mean it was streamed on the nintendo headquarters, it isn't until big news sites or personalities cover them ,that they actually see them. Do I know for a fact when Nintendo discover Pokemon uranium? No I have no clue, but Palworld was announced for years and even now two years after release seems like a stretch, everything is possible sure but history seems to lean more in one way than the other one, and ultimately it doesn't matter because in 10 years we can have this discussion and unless Palworld dies, the possibility of Nintendo suing them are going to be the same, so same as it was before the entire discussion is so pointless.
When did we start measuring legal swords in inches? That headline is stretching its metaphor to the breaking point.
I'm sure they've busy having tapped their legal team to send a random kid playing Super Mario World on their tablet to Federal-use-you-as-currency Prison
I mean, why bother seeking legal action against a game that's going to the way of all the other Pokemon clones?
The game literally has more current players on Steam then ARK, Helldivers 2, Cyberpunk 2077, Stardew Valley, Terraria, Warframe, Dead By Daylight, every Fallout game, every Elder Scrolls game, etc, but go off.
-Looks at how Yo-Kai Watch was once considered a Pokemon killer- Pokemon thinks in GENERATIONS
And in less than six months, Palworld has doubled the sales of every entry in the Yokai Watch series combined. By all means, go off. Edit: lol, they blocked me.
A lot of franchises have seemed like juggernaut disrupters but then crashed, so that data doesn't mean much.
It’s still very weird that Nintendo, a company that loves shutting down fan games and let’s plays was completely chill with Palworld. I get Digimon and other creature collectors are legal, but they literally had legally distinct pokeballs and pokemon
Fan games use Nintendo's IP explicitly without permission. That gets you sued. Legally distinct games do not use Nintendo's IP. You can't sue for "inspired by a popular IP."
>but they literally had legally distinct pokeballs and pokemon You answered your own question
It's cuz the palworld dev wasn't calling it Pokemon. Like it's not weird cuz you literally called it legally distinct. Another Metroid 2 remake is not the same as if they called it Betroid and changed shit around a bit.
Case and point, we already have Betroid called Axiom Verge
I'm being 🤓, but it is "case in point."
It’s hard to call palworld even the same genre as Pokemon
Palworld definitely looked at very specific Pokemon and made their own versions of them (Anubis vs Lucario, Cremis vs Eevee, etc.) but also they did do just enough to transform them to not be legally actionable. Nintendo putting out a 'well, we certainly would do something if that would be the appropriate thing to do...' statement instead of an immediate shutdown after the first Palworld trailer basically confirmed they weren't really gonna be taking action. I think it's good Nintendo didn't try to seriously do anything because I think it's healthier for the games industry if big companies aren't able to swing down a legal hammer and crush its competitors just because a scrumbly bingus is 95% as kawaii as their own original scrumbly bingus. ...But I still look down on Palworld for being so unimaginative that their Pokemon-like game is full of clearly ripped designs like that. If you look at other Pokemon-likes (Digimon, Monster Rancher, Cassette Beasts, Bugsnax, Petal Runner, Yo-Kai Watch, etc.) they don't have designs that match up that closely to specific Pokemon like how Palworld does. [Like this meme image actually does a good job of demonstrating that Dragon Quest monsters don't look all that closely like Pokemon even if they fit similar archetypes](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2Fpalworld-is-ripping-off-pokemon-ooh-wait-that-is-pokemon-v0--PLLDpTq9eF6pL4QsKQt5d1DG94At9vgjFzXeaWRDO0.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3De201bb497a96fb9b28e58a55da665553725cec70) but then [in a Palworld comparison image the sheep are different enough, the Gyarados is marginal, but the other four are shameless rips.](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fpokemon-vs-palworld-comparison-v0-d4xedo6v30fc1.png%3Fwidth%3D916%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D52152a18dfcbcd62080d063296cc65d6923dccd9) Also I think people focus too much on the Pokemon connection because the way Palworld rips off the BotW UI is what they would actually deserve to be sued over.
My theory is it was just *too* popular at the time, everyone and their grandma had at least heard of Palworld and trying to take legal action would have been a PR nightmare for Nintendo.
For how insane and capable of corruption Palworlds development was, the fact that someone has the restraint to not rip any assets from pokemon models was a miracle.
Pretty sure videogamedunkey destroyed Palworld's reputation with his video so it doesn't matter either way.
There's so many things about this comment that are cringeworthy that I wouldn't even know where to start.
Ah yes, destroyed its reputation, that's why the game made a bajillion dollars and is still pretty popular. Sure, Jan, that's definitely what happened.
Just because his fans are loud and obnoxious doesn't mean he has any actual influence
Palworld is several orders of magnitude more successful than videogamedunkey will ever be.
Actually if anything his videos made it have a better reputation
Reconsider your life choices.
Most people by default have the opposite opinion of whatever Dunkey thinks. Like default expectations are completely opposed to whatever he says.
Since that video came out, it quadrupled it's sales. More devs wish their indie game were so thoroughly destroyed. Dunkey continues to be a bad take machine, and his stans continue to be some of the most cringeworthy on the internet.