this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
161 points (96.0% liked)

Games

16758 readers
854 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
161
Modder Who Put Pokémon Into Palworld Says 'Nintendo Has Come for Me' (sea.ign.com)
submitted 10 months ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works
36 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com -4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's entirely missing the only reason Nintendo would actually pursue legal action. Many Palworld creatures appear to have literally identical base model proportions to Pokemon models. So exactly identical it's hard to believe it could happen once by chance, much less with over a dozen different creatures. It very strongly appears they took and modified straight Pokemon models, or at best used them as a direct reference.

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

It very strongly appears they took and modified straight Pokemon models, or at best used them as a direct reference.

No. Definitively no. The models aren't even remotely similar. Here's an example with Lycanroc vs. Direhowl, one of the contentious pairs:

  • different proportions: Direhowl is considerably bulkier. Lycanroc has thinner legs and belly
  • some parts don't have good analogues: Lycanroc's fang is missing, Direhowl has a rather detailed nose, tufts of hair on its back legs, and a tuft of hair between both ears.
  • analogue parts are shaped differently: best seen with the neck fur - Direhowl's is fluffy, Lycanroc's is spiky.
  • the number of points of any part simply does not coincide. And it's hard to claim that Direhowl's mesh was Lycanroc's minus a few points, because Direhowl has a lot more points near the extremities.

It would be literally easier to create a Direhowl-like model from the scratch than to distort Lycanroc's model this way. And that is likely what they did, they clearly did not copy Lycanroc's model. Similarities are simply easier to explain by the fact that both are inspired on wolves.

Same applies to other pairs of creatures.

If you want to see how reused/copied models would look like, check this. It's from an old controversy where GameFreak lied to the players that they had to redo the models from the scratch, to justify Dexit.