Nearly 6 months later, Palworld devs confirm Nintendo never drew so much as an inch of its legal sword over bootleg Pokémon allegations
Nearly 6 months later, Palworld devs confirm Nintendo never drew so much as an inch of its legal sword over bootleg Pokémon allegations
Of course not. The plagiarism comparisons were overblown and no one can copyright the basic idea anyways.
They are also just a fad and generally a boring game with a lot of faults. They aren't a threat.
generally a boring game
I and lots of other people like it quite a lot.
I'm not saying Palworld is a bad game, but people like terrible things all the time. I like Mortal Kombat: Annihilation for instance.
Exactly! How else can science explain the creation and continued existence of Mountain Dew?
I was going claim it was marketing not the terrible product... but the marketing is usually terrible too.
Did they ever increase flying or running speed? About the time I got the saddle for flying I realized how painfully slow max movement speed was.
Now I don't know if they ever changed anything since launch. But if you judged the max speed by the first flying saddle you got you didn't actually experience anything close to max speed. Pals that have their saddles unlocked at a higher level (usually) have a much higher speed when mounted.
Dunno if you were aware, but there's an easy tech you're able to use to get actually good travel speed. Slide down a hill, any slight decline really, and jump into a glide. Slide momentum is maintained into the glide, and any glider will give high speeds. It's the best way to explore by far.
I'm not entertaining the idea that shifting to a critique of a specific aspect of the game is the same as claiming it's "boring".
Also, I think the way they paced out the increases in mobility is one of the game's stronger aspects. In the context of a large explorable world, making walking speed too high will destroy the challenge and pacing of the game like nothing else. The overworld is enormous with appropriately scaled terrain that's magnificent and glorious to behold. If you're not taking the time to look around and appreciate the scenery, I can understand why you'd say it's "boring", but maybe consider that it's not for you and move on instead of pretending your opinions are able to predict how appealing people find it.
it's yet another open world survival craftathon with fortnite building and a gimick. If you like the gimmick, then good for you, don't let me tell you not to like the thing you like.
I've seen a number of these games come and go. Ark survival, raft, conan exiles, rust, and more that I've forgotten the names of. Obviously there's a demand for a game like this, but none of them stand above the rest. If you ignore the aesthetic, then they're all the same. Play one and you've played them all, and to me that's boring.
I've played Ark, and I think the places where Palworld is most similar to it are where it's weakest.
no one can copyright the basic idea anyways
I can think of a couple companies that would try anyway :P
Agree that the actual monster designs looked dull. Funnily enough in a "new pokemon" kind of way. Other monster collecting games like SMT and Digimon seem to manage to produce more interesting monsters/pals/demons.
Why did you so casually dismiss it? Just because you don't like a game doesn't mean it's boring with a lot of faults. The game was at 20k players average on steam last month, putting it above valheim, bdo, rimworld, risk of rain 2. That doesn't really speak to me as a boring game.
Are you somehow equating my opinion with an objective fact? Boring can't be objective, it's different for everyone.
I mean you basically stated it as a matter of fact. You didn't go into any explanation of your thoughts and just dismissed the game as buggy and boring in a single sentence. On a post about how they potentially plagiarized pokemon that seems to be a little inflammatory.
Did they say "buggy"?
I took faulty to mean buggy, but that's really just semantics. Either would affect your view of the game pretty similarly.
Bugs are a specific kind of fault, it could be that or they might think that any number of aspects (e.g. plot, ui, gameplay loop, animations, crafting tree, character progression, quest structure, world layout, etc, etc) are flawed in any number of ways.
As an example If someone says that modern ubisoft open world games "have a lot of faults" its unlikely they are complaining about bugs per se.
The related their view of it to the game not being a threat which would lead me to see them presenting their opinion as fact.
It doesn't really matter but starting a two sentence paragraph with a subjective view and ending with a completely unrelated conclusion doesn't make sense so it would only be natural to relate them.
Just because it has a lot of players doesn't mean it's good. I mean, recently, one of the top 5 games on Steam just a few days ago was a literal scam. (The Banana game)
I mean i enjoyed palworld quite a lot. Id consider it a good game. Generally player counts come from either enjoyable gameplay or brain manipulation tactics like dailies/FOMO - palworld doesnt really have the latter from what I see. It checks lots of boxes for enjoyable gameplay - rpg elements, open world with exploration. meaningful collection, creativity options via base building, and some level of tactics/strategy in teambuilding and combat.
They weren't just overblown. They were literally made up.
My opinion, but I like Palworld more than any of the 3D Pokémon games since X/Y. It's not really the same style of game when you really get into it, but the things that make Palworld different make it outright better to me. I don't plan to buy Pokémon games at all anymore, and Palworld is a significant reason why not. It's a little dismissive to suggest they aren't a threat.
They wouldn't have a leg to stand on legally, but it puts me off that a lot of the designs are just blatantly copycats. There are great monster catching games out there with actual original designs that would kill for 5% of the attention Palworld got.
Copycats of designs of real animals in a similar art style?
C'mon dude, cartoon animals doesn't cover the amount of suspiciously similar Palworld color schemes and proportions we've seen compared to Pokemon like Cobalion/Lilligant/etc
Every complaint I saw was real world proportions that were similar to actual animals.
But I straight up don't care even a little bit. You're fully legally entitled to have characters that resemble someone else's characters. There's no "suspiciously" anything because being inspired by someone else's characters with your own flavor is entirely legitimate and legal.
