I genuinely love the internet gaming community for many reasons—but one area where it falls big: people have a lot of all or nothing opinions. With Palworld, I feel like there are two extremes people are choosing: it’s better than Pokémon and it’s a knockoff of Pokémon.
That’s the trouble with extremes: you don’t see what’s in the middle.
Is Palworld fun?
Absolutely.
Is it better than Pokémon?
A subjective question. We can’t compare both games in their entirety. Pokémon, yes, has adapted the open world concept with its recent entries, but there’s no survival mechanics, building features, and certainly no third-person shooter mechanics. So I think “better” isn’t a fair thing to compare without considering these elements. Both games have similarities but don’t fall under the exact same genre and subgenre.
Is it a ripoff of Pokémon?
I argue it’s an amalgamation adaptation of both the monster capturing genre—in which Pokémon has remained dominant for decades—and the open world survival genre, notably Ark: Survival Evolve and Craftopia, the latter being made by the folks who made Palworld.
There are clear original designs but the similarities between creatures in Palworld and Pokémon can’t be ignore—however, there are enough changes to say they are original though with heavy similarities. Though, the same can be argued—as some folks have pointed out—between Dragon Quest’s monsters and Pokémon's creatures. But is Palworld a Poke ripoff? I don't think so, but it’s clearly heavily influenced. I do argue some designers could have been made to differ from Pokémon—but ultimately, I think what Palworld has crafted is fine.
Is Palworld a Pokémon killer?
LOL no. Pokémon has been around for decades and stands firm with a solid fanbase. It’s more of a 'Pokélike' void killer. By that I mean said fan base has craved a bit more from The Pokémon Company (TCP) over the years (a true multiplayer open world experience, polished environment designs, etc.) but Palworld isn’t enough to—as a whole—flip the Pokémon fanbase and make Palworld a monster capture genre usurper.
Should The Pokémon Company be worried?
Absolutely not. As I mentioned, Pokémon has such a solid standing with a proven track record of satisfying fans in many if not all regards. However, I will say, TPC would be foolish to pay attention to how Palworld is being received. The game is good. It's not perfect but still good. It succeeds in so many ways, such as a smooth monster capturing experience, polished ease-of-access crafting interface, and incredibly fun mounting and flying mechanics. However, it also fails to deliver in other ways, such as a less-than refined building mechanic, dissatisfactory enemy and friendly AI, and regularly occurring gameplay glitches, but I should note the game is in early access, which is to be expected. Palworld storming the gaming world is less of a worry and more of a watch-and-learn scenario for TCP.
"But TCP is investigating infringement!"
Duh, nerd. Wouldn’t you look into something that could be encroaching and possibly infringing on something that's made you a lot of money over the years? There's also been many people claiming infringement with examples of this claims? Wouldn’t you want to make sure your intellectual property was not infringe upon? You’d be foolish not to. It’s your investment. It's your business.
Conclusion
You don’t have to like Palworld. You don’t have to think it’s the best game ever. You also don’t have to think it’s superior to Pokémon, but to not examine what’s happening from a middle of the road approach versus one way or the other I think isn’t the right move. I also have a feeling many people who don’t like either option, or one over the other hasn't actually played both. As for Palworld, experience it. Do your research. Make an informed conclusion.
Comments