Pokémon
is an undeniable success in the world of video games.
In fact, it is an indisputable success in the world in general: not in vain, it is the most successful media franchise in history.
In part, this success is due to transmedia capillarization, which perhaps it did not inaugurate, but which it has known how to exploit like no one else: one can play Pokémon video games, but you can also watch its movies, buy its cards, get all kinds of toys and
merchandising
, reading his comics... in short, his success can only be compared to his omnipresence.
And yet, what should be the franchise's raison d'être—video games—have long suffered from an immobility that is irritating more and more players from all over the world.
The latest installments, on Switch, are crude in terms of playability, unimaginative in the creation of monsters and uninspired on a general level.
Perhaps the lack of creative originality has to do with the ownership of the franchise itself: the Pokémon universe belongs to The Pokémon Company, a Japanese company created to control the merchandising and licensing of the franchise and which is made up of three equal parts that belong to Nintendo, to Game Freak and to Creatures.
This tripartite way of operating can work as a business – if the three companies have something in common it is the logical desire to make money – but the truth is that it significantly hinders the creative development of the franchise.
If there is an adjective that cannot be used with the latest video games, it would be revolutionary.
Be careful, maybe that's the way: the latest installments of Pokémon (
Sword
and
Shield
;
Scarlet
and
Purple
) are among the best-selling of the entire franchise.
And yet, in almost all the reviews they have notes unworthy of such an important saga.
The fact is that
Pokémon
has developed a rare twin.
It's called
Palworld
, it appeared almost suddenly and has been a resounding success.
But wherever people talk about the game, words like “plagiarism”, “copy”, “imitation” inevitably arise.
Because?
Well, because three minutes of play serve to see its obvious references.
Palworld
is, broadly speaking, a mix of
Fortnite
and
Pokémon
, in which our character (human) captures creatures (the pals) in spheres and then puts them to fight with other creatures.
It didn't take long for montages of suspicious similarities between Pals and Pokémon to appear all over the Internet.
The possibility of building and using conventional weapons (pistols, shotguns, rocket launchers) make the game aesthetically related to Epic's
shooter
, in a crazy aesthetic twist that seems straight out of a bad Pikachu dream.
Comparison between some pals (left) and pokémons (right).
The Pokemon Company was silent at first.
A week and eight million copies of
Palworld
sold later, he finally ruled on the resemblance of the pals to his creatures.
“We have received many inquiries about another company's game that launched in January 2024,” the company said in a statement.
“We have not granted any permission for the use of Pokémon intellectual property or assets in that game.
"We intend to investigate and take appropriate action to address any acts that infringe intellectual property rights related to Pokémon."
For his part, the CEO of the company behind
Palworld
responded in an interview that they have never had “the slightest intention of infringing the intellectual property of other companies.”
Anyway.
We have already talked here before about how the video game ecosystem works: any game is nourished by the mechanical (even aesthetic) advances of other games in a dance of borrowed references that has made the medium evolve by leaps and bounds.
But sometimes companies go too far.
Is
Palworld
a plagiarism of
Pokémon
?
The comparison is so automatic that the question is laughable.
Will Palworld
's company get
a nasty call from some intellectual property lawyer?
There is not the slightest doubt.
Now: Is part of the merit of Palworld's success explained by the demerit of the
Pokémon
franchise itself ?
Among the millions of people who have bought
Palworld,
are there many
Pokémon
players who legitimately want their favorite franchise to dare to take a turn, to be disruptive, to look to the future, to introduce changes and new features that will get it out of stagnation?
That is to say, are there millions of players who want, ultimately and never better said, for
Pokémon
to dare to evolve?
The truth is that there is no doubt about these questions either.
Image from 'Palworld'.
You can follow
Babelia
on
and
X
, or sign up here to receive
our weekly newsletter
.