That "Palworld vs Pokemon comparison" thing has to be a joke, right? "These two creatures look similar, so obviously one of them is a blatant ripoff" and "these two creatures don't look similar, but obviously one of them is a blatant ripoff" lmao
Gonna buy another copy of Palworld just to spite Wesley Yin-Poole and Nintendo
I'm only a minor fan of Pokemon (in that I played them years ago and sometimes revisit an old one), and I've never played Palworld. I knew that it was accused of being similar with the catching critters and whatnot and always kinda scoffed at that idea too. But this article is the first time I've ever seen the designs side by side like that. Some of them are pretty egregious, imho.
Some of them are extremely similar, but there were over 3,000 existing Pokemon designs as of Palworld's release. It would be a statistical wonder if none of them looked similar, especially when our criteria can be as loose as "fire fox" and "Anubis"