Ah, yes, let's talk about
not-Pokémon with guns. But first, before that, in case y'all aren't acquainted, let me introduce the "original" Palworld...
Robopon was released in the West nearly seven months after Pokémon Crystal in 2000, riding off the wave of the originals as well as Gold and Silver, and the overall premise of the game was identical: collect, trade, battle, and compete in a tournament. The game was seen as a knockoff from the get-go given the feel and, most obviously, the look, because not only did it retain certain aspects—a similar amount of creatures, evolution, type matchups, more than one version and trading between them (in Japan, at least), an "Elite 8" instead of an Elite 4—but the apparent similarities some Robopon had with other Pokémon "sweetened the pot" and, in turn, made many hold the game in contempt, a fact that could possibly still be argued, even though the similarities, as implied, may end up being vague at best and, in most cases, not even related to design. At the time, many fans, of which I knew a few, took issue with the game and criticized it just about the same as we've seen for Palworld, although I have to say that not as rabidly to the point they were frothing at the mouth, which I'm inclined to say for this particular instance is more a byproduct of the times we're currently in. The thing is, Nintendo Power also said their piece that contributed to the narrative, however small; they gave the game a lukewarm review with some contentious points, awarding it a 2 out of 5 while also drawing comparisons to Metal Walker, even writing a walkthrough for both in the same issue, while adding a note at the end for Robopon with a rather dismissive tone that, I think, acted as further bitterant to the discussion. Of course, this was the same issue where they gave Pokémon Puzzle Challenge a perfect score.
Quite frankly, though, Robopon was and still is one of the few competent clones that came out during what could be considered the golden era of the creature collector genre; it brought some unique ideas to the table that haven't been thought of and I don't think we'll ever see in a Pokémon game, and, even if it was "borrowing" the formula, it knew how to use it, although, for fairness sake, the game has more in common with Robotrek for SNES. In short, the game had soul and enough promise to spawn two sequels, even though we only got one of those. All in all, quite an underrated game.
Now, as far as Palworld is concerned, it looks "cool", for sure; it certainly ticks all the boxes for what kids like these days, shininess and all (it's Fortnite x ARK). I'm not going to lie: I followed the game's development on and off ever since I came across a post about it somewhere on the Internet a few years or so ago and thought it seemed fun at first, but the more I kept seeing of the game, the less enthused I got. That, and as
kamikazekeeg said, the team behind the game seems rather sleazy with the way they approach game development, AI notwithstanding. If the way they have handled Craftopia is any indication, then it's safe to say that this game will remain in early access for a really long while, right until they start a new project and stop pushing updates or straight up abandon it. I did have a hearty chuckle when I saw that a few of the Pals, aside from the obvious given the context, happen to have names that are either identical or similar to some I've made up for Pokémon I've developed over the years, which, not surprisingly, has also been a thing with the official games.
And speaking of things that make my giblets tingle:
that Naughty Dog developer whinging over the game sure was something, eh? The controversy surrounding this game has been quite savory, actually.
[...] The studio makes primarily knock off games [...]
What is
Craftopia?
I understand wanting to stick it to Game Freak and their crappy dev cycles, but to me, this isn't the game.
Of course this isn't the game—not by a long shot! There's quite a number of fan-made games, including a bunch of ROM hacks, that do that already, not to mention there being worthwhile alternatives to Pokémon; the problem in this equation are the blind loyals who keep buying and are complacent with whatever they're given. If we end up getting the same shit come Gen. X, then there's no point bothering or caring at all anymore. Unfortunately, as much as I would like the franchise to hit a wall at full force, unless someone comes out of nowhere with a golden game that breaks the mold by improving the formula a hundredfold, Pokémon will continue to dominate. And as much as many people keep clamoring, Palworld isn't that wall; it's not a "Pokémon killer" by any means. It's essentially a melting pot of copy-pasted assets haphazardly thrown in, and it doesn't offer anything that a Pokémon game has throughout the years, mediocrity and all; it's essentially Craftopia, their other bootleg endeavor, but with Pokémon-esque creatures added to the mix for the sake of riding the wave. There's no story to speak of, which is a major part of a Pokémon game, and the battling is basic. What seems to be the major component and appeal of this game is the crafting feature and its one-sided satirical take on Pokémon, which is the "edgy" part many rave about that honestly falls flat in my honest opinion—the
"this is what Pokémon should be like" fatuity. The folks behind Pokémon have a lot to learn, and that's a given, but certainly not from a game like this, as there are plenty of other similar games out there that were made with pure dedication and passion that could prove a million times more inspirational for future generations than a game made by a group of people whose main intention is to hang ten on others' coattails. Palworld has a long way to go and a lot of work to do if it truly wants to supersede Pokémon, which we don't need to kid ourselves given that they will never do because their audience, in the end, isn't the same.
I'm instead going to be getting Cassette Beasts soon [...]
Très bien! Excellent game.
This is probably the best review ever given for the game on Steam:
"You team up with bisexuals and turn into pokemon in order to destroy both biblically accurate angels and the housing market.
If that doesn't convince you to buy this game idk what will" [sic]Thumbs up!
I haven't because at it's core it is a Survival game which just seems like needless busy work to me.
Aside from my initial take on the game, pretty much this, too. Games like Survival Kids and Lost in Blue, for example, I've no problem getting into, however.
If anything, I hope this causes GameFreak to step up their game. We've all wanted to see a proper Triple-A Pokemon game to the scale of the recent Zelda games and it just hasn't happened. Now that this PalWorld game has presented a different game but on much bigger scale the demand will be there and I don't think they can get away with such a medicore offering like last time.
Seeing is believing, as they say.
Look, I get it. I know that's what everyone is hoping, because the betterment of Pokémon is something we can all agree on, but there's really nothing Palworld has to offer: it's not an innovator in any sense of the word; there's nothing it has "presented" that would make Game Freak take a seat and take notes from. I'm going to quote what someone said in an article I read a while ago because it really says it all:
"Pokémon taking inspiration from Palworld would be like Marvel taking ideas from The Boys". Palworld may be the "new" hot commodity, but it's just a shiny trinket, and that's all it will ever be, like Craftopia before it.
[...] Cause in all seriousness switch pokemon games even if you where to ignore all the bugs and perfomance issues look like cheap mobile games, the animations are very limited and it's super kiddy handholdy. There is no soul left, even some of the good N64 games look better if you'd ask me it's that mid. [...]
In my humble yet very biased opinion, Pokémon Battle Revolution, albeit nothing more than a battle simulator, which, by that I mean and for the sake of emphasis, lacks some of the core features that structure a Pokémon game (i.e., story, exploration, additional modes in the case of Stadium), is one of the better 3D Pokémon games. In fact, I think it's quite telling that before the main series officially jumped to 3D graphics with the release of X and Y, most of the better games in that regard weren't made by Game Freak, although, in fairness, I think most would agree that the decline in quality isn't entirely their fault. Game Freak has stated before that they want to work on something other than Pokémon, and while they have in the past with varying degrees of success, the majority of what they do is Pokémon-related, so just give them a chance to come up with something else and give Pokémon to another studio in the meantime. Just imagine for a moment: what would a Pokémon game look like if given to From Software? Or give it to Capcom, and let's finally get a Pokémon game à la Monster Hunter. Or, heck, how about Monolith Soft? I think even Masuda was tired, especially given his disillusionment during and after Gen. V, which I think contributed to his "departure", so in all honesty, giving the franchise a break could be the greatest decision they make; their multi-media empire won't even suffer, as they can still pump out the usual suspects even if they're not behind the wheel. But, of course, we might as well be dreaming about chimeras.
And yes, Legends: Arceus, even with its faults, was a step in the right direction, followed by a leap backward. But hey, maybe after making the wrong turn with Scarlet and Violet, whatever comes next will be a leap forward. I want to remain optimistic, but it truly isn't easy.
