It is not the same genre and therefore not the same target audience (Story Driven Turn Based RPG vs Base Building Survival)
Frankly, I think Pokemon's adult sales are mostly nostalgia and that the gameplay or genre matters very little. Turn-based RPGs can be a lot of fun, but Pokemon doesn't seem to have notably changed since I played it as a kid. It also exists in a world of competition; Baldur's Gate 3 and Warhammer 40k: Rogue Trader are both turn-based RPG's. The Divinity series as well.
Completed Pokemon Blue only using blastoise.
Played Sapphire as a rom
Bought Soul Silver at an airport to play on the plane to California to see a friend.
Never touched Pokemon again.
The mechanics and the balance got better (even if power creep is a very real thing). In fact, going back now, early pokemon titles are, mechanically, extremely weak (especially the ones before diamond/pearl).
The problem is that the single player experience is extremely lacking. The games were never hard, but as the player gained tools they became even easier. The story peaked at Black/White and then kept oscillating between forgettable and downright horrible.
The performance of the games has also steadily gotten worse, and Scarlet/Violet is the worst point in the series on that front. By a mile.
The problem for me, and for I assume many other players, is that it's sadly a one of a kind franchise. It's probably the one with the most content in its own sub-genre (there's very few catch-em-all type games that hold a candle to it), and it's also the only turn based rpg with a competitive scene on the market. I've probably collectively spent tens of thousands of hours on the franchise over a span of 16 years or so and unless something that can even get close to the experience pokemon gives me gets made, I'm kinda stuck.
To be clear, I don't think Pokemon is entirely the reason Palworld is selling. It's a reasonably well-made game for an early-access indie title, and it does pull the best parts of a lot of games.
My only gripe is that I don't love the capturing system and I wish they would re-work it a bit. Having to try to get them down to 1% HP without good control over how much damage you're dealing can be very frustrating, especially when you try to go back and capture things much lower level than you. It ironically becomes harder to capture low level things as you level up.
I prefer Ark's dual-HP system where HP going to 0 makes them die and torpor going to 0 (or max, can't remember which way it fills) makes them pass out so you can tame them. It feels like I have a lot more agency, and having to protect the dino while it tames makes it feel like a huge accomplishment to capture a high level dino.
The breeding system is also in dire need of some love, but I think that's more easily fixable. They just need to add some randomness when you're breeding two dissimilar species. I.e. you shouldn't be able to deterministically breed a level 43 boss (Anubis) out of two level 17 Pals. It's super cool that it can happen, but it should be like a 10% chance.
Don't know anything about pokemon aside from some yellow lighting bunny and an egg that you capture him in.
The day it changes will be the day it dies
Expecting an IP to change is selfish, because you want the experience to be different than the 1st time, but what you don't understand is there are new players every years who have never experienced that 1st time, that's called demography, that's what the pokemon's target audience is, they are constantly able to renew their player base, hence making it last over the decades, you are expected to play the game few times, then pass it on your kids, so they can experience the same magic too (similar to Disney)
Besides, they are already trying to explore different genres with multiple spinoffs: https://nintendo.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_Pok%C3%A9mon_games#...
That's not because the last game was met with performance issues that they have to reconsider the genre of their game, they still have sold millions of copies
You mention BG 3, but Larian studios did exactly that, their games haven't changed at all, it's still is the same formula, with a modern look, and it works, that's what Game Freak should keep doing
Hopefully with the Switch 2, they'll have a better time making it more modern, being held back by Tegra 1 was probably not fun for them
People love the concept of pokemon and monster collection, and it hasn't really evolved beyond the same RPG formula in 20 years.
Nintendo has utterly failed to deliver different experiences in the franchise. There's clearly an appetite for it.
I don't think different genres mean a completely different target audience. Most gamers play multiple genres, and there's a massive overlap of fans of Pokemon and fans of Palworld in particular.
- Open world
- Player leveling (via star rank in Arceus) to progress in the game
- Resource gathering and crafting
- Capture monsters with or without engaging in combat (stealth is a viable strategy in both as well)
Palworld is the RC cola of the game Pokemon fans have been wanting.
Edit: From another angle: what is it about palworld that couldn't have been delivered by a Pokemon(tm) game had Nintendo et al not been asleep at the wheel? (Costing them, so far, hundreds of millions USD)
An experience not bogged down by "brand safety"
Exactly. What I have seen from this game seems off-putting and distasteful for a universe ostensibly designed for children. I also do not buy into the Pokemon should grow up with its audience argument. There is another generation of children growing up, after all.
I guess it's distasteful how the game doesn't sweep the slavery aspect under the rug, but that doesn't make the original IP any less problematic
- Chinese developer with huge home audience
You get the evidence just by looking at what language people use in the reviews: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1623730/Palworld/#app_rev...
- The gimmick: Pokemon with Guns
- FOMO thanks to the press attention
The biggest reason:
- Base Building Survival game
At it's root it's a survival game, that genre is nothing new and is a hit maker, just look at the popularity of games like Ark and the upcoming Ark 2
And just recently: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1326470/Sons_Of_The_Fores...
People's hatred for Nintendo makes them loose sight, nobody will buy "Palworld" plushies or movies
If I weren’t already a Pokémon fan I wouldn’t have bothered with Palworld, because I don’t care much for Ark (the game whose loop it largely duplicates).
And the fact that Game Freak can’t seem to code a mainline Pokémon game that runs well on Switch certainly did help whet my appetite. If I’d been more satisfied with Sword/Shield or Scarlet/Violet, I probably wouldn’t have jumped on this one. Unfortunately, neither runs very well—particularly Scarlet/Violet, which was dumped rough and flat out abandoned for performance patches.
As the other commenter said, Palworld is not all that dissimilar to the open-world title Arceus, which is coded competently enough. But I like having more to do in my open world than just fulfilling challenge lists. If there’s story in Arceus, I peeled off out of boredom well before it presented itself. At least in Palworld I can build a base, etc.
So yes, my interest absolutely had something to do with the decline in Pokémon games for this latest generation.
It may surprise you to know that a) gamers cross genres on a regular basis and b) the Pokémon franchise itself is multi-genre (the card game, Snap, and Go! being big obvious examples). Genres basically just don’t matter to this equation. We’re here for the monsters.