[VGC] Palworld embroiled in AI and Pokémon ‘plagiarism’ controversy
- Thread starter Red Kong XIX
- Start date
I played Ark in early access. Like very early access. This is the same thing.
3日後に命運が決まる、パルワールドという偶然の物語｜ポケットペア
1. 金さえあれば、面白いゲームが作れる訳ではない クラフトピアを開発してから3年間、パルワールドというゲームを作り続けてきた。 それがようやく3日後、リリースされる。 Steam：Palworld / パルワールド 広大な世界で不思議な生物『パル』を集めて、戦闘・建築・農業を行わせたり、工場で労働させたりする全く新しいマルチ対応のオープ store.steampowered.com ここまでの道のりは長かった。 振り返ってみると、凄く回り道をしてきた気がする。 する必要のない失敗の連続だ。 知っていれば、躓く必要のない場所で、何度も躓いた。 業界
note.com
Quoting the bit most relevant for the AI discussion, about an artist they had previously rejected when recruiting and then received another application from later:
So it at least seems a real human being actually designed the Pals in the game so far, unless this is misleading - if anyone who actually reads Japanese could weigh in on the accuracy, I'd appreciate it. I noticed it swaps around whether the artist is referred to as they/it/she depending on the line which I think might just be a quirk where their gender is unstated so the machine TL is unsure what pronouns to use in English.
Courts can decide whether they're similar enough to be considered plagiarized or not if Nintendo feel like they have a case for it I guess.
Creative bankruptcy in monster design is nothing we need to reflect on. The game tries to do too many things, also, and none of them well.
Plagiarism complaints for these type of monster catching games always seems silly to me. There are tons of similarities between all the "legitimate" ones.
I don't know why people here champion the idea of Winnie the Pooh and Mickey going public domain then raising fists once another company makes a parody of Pokemon.
I don't know why people here champion the idea of Winnie the Pooh and Mickey going public domain then raising fists once another company makes a parody of Pokemon.
No one is saying Temtem or Cassette Beasts are infringing on Pokemon. There's a matter of design quality and uniqueness that you're ignoring with Palworld that Pokémon's imitators and peers try to avoid so they can stand on their own two feet.
Ironically, if Disney didn't champion those changes to copyright law, they could have straight up used the original 151 for this game.
Oh no, I love palworld. I haven't stopped playing it since release and i'm going to get all the achievements. I fully support this game. Just find it funny.
It is obvious that they have not used AI. They simply hired a recent graduate and she made the 100 designs manually in record time by copying Pokémon parts and other stuff (like Totoro)Someone found a blog post put out by the studio talking about the development of the game and their history. I ran it through machine TL and found some info relevant to the thread.3日後に命運が決まる、パルワールドという偶然の物語｜ポケットペア
1. 金さえあれば、面白いゲームが作れる訳ではない クラフトピアを開発してから3年間、パルワールドというゲームを作り続けてきた。 それがようやく3日後、リリースされる。 Steam：Palworld / パルワールド 広大な世界で不思議な生物『パル』を集めて、戦闘・建築・農業を行わせたり、工場で労働させたりする全く新しいマルチ対応のオープ store.steampowered.com ここまでの道のりは長かった。 振り返ってみると、凄く回り道をしてきた気がする。 する必要のない失敗の連続だ。 知っていれば、躓く必要のない場所で、何度も躓いた。 業界
Quoting the bit most relevant for the AI discussion, about an artist they had previously rejected when recruiting and then received another application from later:
So it at least seems a real human being actually designed the Pals in the game so far, unless this is misleading. Courts can decide whether they're similar enough to be considered plagiarized or not if Nintendo feel like they have a case for it I guess.
I don't know why AI has become the center of the conversation, people were copying before it existed.
I don't know the first thing about plagiarism, specially when you take the law into account, going by the way some ppl are posting I am assuming we have experts here, what I do know is that my eyes are telling me some of these designs are flying waaay too close to the sun. Out of all ways you could've chosen to design a specific animal, you really had to go the route that blatantly mimics Pokemon.
lol Thank you, I needed a good laugh.
I can't think of a single useful thing about NFTs except for maybe getting super lucky and selling one for a profit.
AI and/or Machine Learning on the other hand is something we all know is fantastically useful in myriad of different ways. There's a reason it's threatening people's jobs - and not just artists, either. You can hate or love AI and still understand the obvious fact that it's here to stay.
It may as well be relevant to share it in this thread as well since this tweet didn't make the rounds as much, but here the company CEO talks about implementing AI into their company workflow to improve efficiency which was back in 2023. As far as I can tell it isn't for visual work, but they seemingly make a point about how they perceived the quality of output to be high.
View: https://twitter.com/urokuta_ja/status/1631547671273152512
I personally don't believe Palworld's designs used AI because so much of it is so blatantly cribbed from official and fan designs alike, and it buries the lede on what doesn't need a convenient scapegoat in order to criticize creative bankruptcy, but if people really are concerned about whether or not AI was used at all during Palworld's development, then the likelihood of that having been employed in other areas isn't out of the question. Unfortunately if said work is merely at a text or script level that becomes even harder to prove beyond tweets like these, but it helps paint a picture of where the dev's priorities are at overall.
View: https://twitter.com/urokuta_ja/status/1631547671273152512
I personally don't believe Palworld's designs used AI because so much of it is so blatantly cribbed from official and fan designs alike, and it buries the lede on what doesn't need a convenient scapegoat in order to criticize creative bankruptcy, but if people really are concerned about whether or not AI was used at all during Palworld's development, then the likelihood of that having been employed in other areas isn't out of the question. Unfortunately if said work is merely at a text or script level that becomes even harder to prove beyond tweets like these, but it helps paint a picture of where the dev's priorities are at overall.
the bedrock argument here is that Pokemon themselves mimic real world animals. That's why most of these designs can't be trademarked, but yeah if you literally recreate a design from that franchise they can hit you with copyright infringement.
Like yeah their ice fox and Anubis hand fighter and flame ram share clear design ethos but like, so? lmao
It's clear what they're doing here so this will be adjudicated in the court of public opinion. and obviously Pokemon's prodigious institutionalization in pop culture is almost impossible to topple given that myself and I think many people discussing this can't name a single Pal off the top of their head. but it's still fascinating
The only thing relevant about the AI in this thread is that the director has said that he hopes it will modify copyright laws in the future, which tells us a lot about the director's attitude towards copyright, but nothing more.
Yeah, since the AI concerns started I've thought it was premature to go rushing to blaming it and basing discussion of whether it counts as plagiarism around it - totally fine to have doubts and ask questions, but jumping to assuming it is true seems rash imo. Artists designing pokemon knockoffs for fan projects or just to work their design skills has been going on for decades, the idea they hired a real artist and had them do the Pals from scratch over three years really isn't that outrageous.
This game has crossed into a venn diagram of "Pokemon haters/disgruntled pokemon fans/console warriors" that makes objective discussion of it impossible. People want to hate on Gamefreak/Nintendo so, so bad because of how well the pokemon games sell despite being a technical mess. At some point it becomes "justified" in their eyes that someone is taking them down a peg.
It's not though. This developer makes games by looking at games they like and copying them wholesale. That is their entire MO. Their first game was Slay the Spire x Clash Royale, because the CEO really liked Slay the Spire and Clash Royale. But there's no thought put it to it beyond that, just "I like these two things, I'm going to make something that looks like these two things combined" by quickly buying assets and taping them together in Unity. Craftopia was meant to be BOTW x Battle Royale, but got shifted into just open world crafting because making video games is hard. But still very clearly and liberally taking from BOTW, to the point where the "assets" they bought were clearly meant to be knock-off BOTW models.
Palworld isn't a "meme" game, it was someone's earnest attempt at making a 3D action monster collecting game. And it just became Ark + legally distinct pokemon because the studio has only ever known how to tape other ideas together.
Except no one is ever saying that Temtem or Cassette Beasts or any of the various monster collecting games over the years (DQM, Digimon, SMT, etc.) are straight up copying creature designs from each other. They can have similar thematic options, but they are all original designs in each game, visually distinct from each other.
The complaints against Palworld is that they are very clearly taking the actual designs of pokemon, and then moving parts around enough to be legally distinct. But they didn't do it enough to not have it pointed out that some of them still have the face/body/parts of the originals. That's the plagiarism. Not that they're coping the "idea" of a pokemon. That they're using the actual pokemon as a base, then modifying it enough to be legally distinct.
I feel like these designs are very heavily inspired, perhaps even to the point of crossing some lines. Plagiarism might be an appropriate word in some cases, and in those cases the devs might be best served to alter them.
I don't think Nintendo has a case here and you can take their lack of action pre-launch as a sign. Or perhaps now they see the game exploding might prod them into action, so we'll see.
Personally, I am okay with most of what I've seen ( as in - maybe not all of it, don't @me on this). I feel this way because they're not trying to be Pokemon, as in this is really appears to be it's own game (I haven't played it yet, might check it out on game pass). They also appear to have created their own assets, which to me aim to capture their own versions of Pokémon. Some elements being the same is not necessarily copyright infringement, nor is it unethical to me. Just to contextualize this paragraph clearly, it's not from a legal perspective - it's just my own opinion.
I don't think Nintendo has a case here and you can take their lack of action pre-launch as a sign. Or perhaps now they see the game exploding might prod them into action, so we'll see.
Personally, I am okay with most of what I've seen ( as in - maybe not all of it, don't @me on this). I feel this way because they're not trying to be Pokemon, as in this is really appears to be it's own game (I haven't played it yet, might check it out on game pass). They also appear to have created their own assets, which to me aim to capture their own versions of Pokémon. Some elements being the same is not necessarily copyright infringement, nor is it unethical to me. Just to contextualize this paragraph clearly, it's not from a legal perspective - it's just my own opinion.
Ultimately I want people to admit exactly what their problem with AI art is. Because people have been insisting for a while it's about artistic integrity, art theft, "we stand with artists" and yadda yadda. But it seems none of that matters as long as it's a human hand doing the deed and not a computer.
Seriously just look at this debate. People on both sides praying that the game uses/doesn't use AI art like that's the most critical distinction. But from my point of view... what's the difference?
Seriously just look at this debate. People on both sides praying that the game uses/doesn't use AI art like that's the most critical distinction. But from my point of view... what's the difference?
That it threatens to replace jobs and is in fact employed specifically for the purpose of doing so at a massive scale, and that society is currently organized so that people need jobs in order to survive, so the threat of elimination of job also directly threatens the ability of many people to survive.
If it were using AI Ninty might actually have a case, which is all there is to the console war.
"people only say AI is bad because of console wars" is certainly one of the takes of all time
A recent graduate was hired to copy Pokémon.
With AI, they wouldn't even need to hire anyone.
It's the only difference here. But most studios in the industry don't copy like this.
I'm an expert on plagiarism after taking a 4 hour class, and I can verify that since no one's essay was copy pasted and read into a YouTube video with minimal changes, this isn't plagiarism. Legally speaking, plagiarism is only worth getting angry about if it's YouTubers. If it's video games then nothing ever matters, and if it's the Pokemon Company then they had it coming.
And if they hadn't resorted to taking from Pokemon they would have almost certainly have had to hire extra manpower to create so many designs in record time (like one of you pointed out)
So again, what's the difference? Just a matter of numbers, really?
If Nintendo were to sue, then during the trial process the judge could ask them to show the concept art. I think.
Yes, I have the controversial idea that hiring more artists to have an original game is better than hiring fewer people to copy. That's why this studio creatively sucks. They don't need AI to suck in that, but they are going to suck even more in the future.
And their director is proud of that. He is the only saying "I don't like to be creative, I like to copy".
Last edited:
Everyone saying it's a ripoff of Pokémon when clearly its mismatch of cartoon characters with Unreal asset flip environments is a carbon copy of Sonic Frontiers.
I mean, maybe I'm weird, but the idea of more people having jobs and also allowing the game to have more creative and differentiated monster design seems like a positive thing. I'm not going to gnashing my teeth at the idea of more people being paid and also games being improved at the exact same time.
I dunno that anyone is hoping/praying that it is or isn't using AI art because at the end of the day you can clearly see Pokemon assets directly lifted for the design for a large amount of Pals shown thus far. AI coming into the conversation is certainly a possibility, especially based on comments from the CEO of the developer to use it in ways to escape legality; but that's not really the crux of the dispute between Pokemon designs and their Pal analogues. Before all the AI talk started it took nothing to look at some of those Pals and immediately think, that is "[insert Pokemon here]". That was the case when the game was shown off later in development last year and people immediately picked up on that game's Wooloo, Leafeon, etc.
However wobbly people want to see the AI accusation is nothing more than a diversion from what has always been there. It's not a reach, you don't even have to connect the dots, most of these Pals we're looking at we have already since seen before because they are lifting Pokemon elements (if not assets) wholesale to cobble together Palworld's creatures.
To people who read the actual article, people aren't outright saying the game is using generative AI to copy things.
Just that the pal designs are incredibly derivative of certain pokemon designs, and that the company has a history of championing AI use, which would give credence to the idea that they have no issue with plagiarism, and it's use in this game wouldn't be that much of a shock.
in my POV this isn't really much different than games like Stumble Guys except at least Palworld isn't even the same core gameplay as the game its aping. Lot of games are pretty derivative or unoriginal in aspects.
I remember when Lies of P was announced/had gameplay shown people were REALLY fixated on the exact big door opening animation. Like if it was an animation stolen from Bloodborne, etc. As if it and every other soulslike with a maiden level upper, estus charges, souls and death mechanics, and UI and whatnot aren't essentially doing the same derivative spin on things. Palworld isn't a whole lot different - except being in a completely separate gameplay genre vs Pokemon.
Kit bashing pokemon features and palettes and stylization is arguably creatively bankrupt, sure, but they are distinct in numerous ways and the end product is completely separate.
It is by definition soulless - there's no meaning or inspiration whatsoever driving it, it's just pointless sludge created by shitty tech bros who don't have the talent to draw and can't be bothered learning.
Only thing definitive is that it's inspired by Pokemon including it's designs.
So decided to do a quick 5 min experiment and like...
Like, I legit think it's almost FUN to see how many existing Pokemon motifs Pals seem to exhibit. It's so weird... like unused Pokemon concept art. Of course Pokemon fans would notice it lol
C'mon lol
The Primanira Hair is the obvious giveaway. There are -some- tweaks so the parts are NOT exact. But this one in particular is using the same models.
Design wise, as I am strongly guessing, is they just bashed models together, and went with what worked. This is why you will likely not see actual concept designs.
This isn't a comment on whether the game is good or not etc. That's irrelevant. It seems people think the game is fun and seems to also work unlike many other games of this type. But yeah, they grabbed a bunch of models and made creatures out of them, and IF there is a lawsuit, it may be because of that. Though to be perfectly honest I don't fully know what the legality is regarding that. It's not illegal to rip models, as it's under fair use. But i can't think of lawsuits that have happened due to using rip models in an unauthorized way. So *shrugs*
Yup, lmao. It's led to some of the worst takes I've seen on gaming side in years.
Okay but the game design is ripped from other games like Ark, right? It took game design from one game, monster designs from another game, slapped it all together with some store-bought assets, and somehow is the biggest game of the year. Now yeah Lies of P is very derivative also, but you can tell it is still made by incredibly talented people who put a ton of passion into the game. I can't see any of that in Palworld.
and this isn't even true. people who hate AI treat it as a foregone conclusion that it's illegal but nothing's been ruled on yet. it's possible the courts will side with the AI companies and say that training is fair use and all you'd be left with at that point is if the results are close enough to violate copyright. on the other hand, if they were actually taking models ripped from pokemon games and modifying them, that seems like it would be a problem under existing precedent, no? like isn't that just bog-standard infringement, directly lifting someone else's copyrighted material and incorporating it into your own
Game mechanics are reused all over. And store bought assets or foundations are there for a reason. You don't have to like it, but if a team uses the marketplace for the purpose its there for and makes something appealing out of it all, then they clearly did something right. Games that popularize some mechanic like base building ala Fortnite/ARK, whatever, will have those mechanics built out as plugins/assets because.. they're popular. And teams will want to quickly get that functionality in-engine. Not everything HAS to be made from scratch.
The Day Before was an asset flip/marketplace filled game that was completely misleading, broken, and just a downright scam. But buying marketplace assets was the least of its problems. Palworld doesn't seem to be anywhere like that. It's a functional game.
I'm not sure what it says about gaming that you can just slap stuff together like this and somehow make a fun game out of it.