《幻獸帕魯》自推出以來迅速引爆話題，但伴隨高人氣而來的，正是規模不小的抄襲爭議。這場風波的核心，集中在遊戲中名為「帕魯」的怪物設計，被大量玩家與業界人士認為與《寶可夢》系列角色在外觀、比例與整體輪廓上高度相似，引發是否侵害智慧財產權的質疑。部分帕魯被指出與特定寶可夢在視覺特徵上存在明顯對應關係，使得《幻獸帕魯》一度被戲稱為「拿著槍的寶可夢」，甚至背上「縫合怪」的標籤。

這類質疑不僅停留在風格雷同的層面，更進一步延伸到創作手段本身。有聲音懷疑開發團隊可能使用AI生成技術來設計帕魯，再透過調整細節規避版權問題。雖然目前並無公開證據證實帕魯是由AI直接生成，但在AI創作工具迅速普及、版權界線尚未完全明朗的背景下，這類猜測迅速在社群平台擴散，也讓爭議持續升溫。

除了角色設計，整體遊戲結構也成為討論焦點。玩法融合多款知名作品的核心元素，例如《寶可夢》的怪物收集與培養、《薩爾達傳說：曠野之息》的開放世界探索、《方舟：生存進化》的生存與建造系統，以及《Minecraft》的高度自由創作。這種高度混合的設計，一方面讓玩家感到新鮮且內容豐富，另一方面也被批評為缺乏清晰的原創定位，彷彿將多款成功作品「拼接」在一起，因此「縫合怪」的稱號逐漸定型。

面對外界質疑，開發商Pocket Pair多次公開回應，強調所有角色與系統皆為原創設計，並表示在開發與發行前已處理相關法律風險，否認有任何侵權行為。不過，隨著輿論發酵，部分團隊成員甚至收到極端玩家的死亡威脅，使事件不再只是單純的創作爭議，也演變為網路暴力問題，令官方呼籲外界理性討論。

相較之下，寶可夢公司的態度則顯得相對嚴肅。官方先是發表聲明，表明從未授權《幻獸帕魯》使用任何寶可夢相關內容，並將針對可能的侵權行為展開調查。隨後，任天堂與寶可夢公司更進一步聯合對Pocket Pair提起訴訟，指控其侵犯多項專利權，要求停止侵權行為並進行賠償。任天堂方面也公開強調，對任何侵犯其智慧財產權的行為絕不寬貸，此舉被視為對整個產業釋放強烈訊號。

在玩家與產業層面，反應呈現明顯兩極化。一部分玩家高度肯定《幻獸帕魯》的自由度與玩法深度，認為它成功彌補《寶可夢》系列近年在創新與系統演進上的不足，甚至視其為怪物收集類型的一次突破。相對地，也有不少玩家與業界人士認為，若創作僅建立在高度模仿既有成功作品的基礎上，將對遊戲產業的創意生態造成長期傷害，讓真正的原創更難脫穎而出。

從法律角度來看，這場訴訟的結果備受關注。外界普遍認為，其判決可能對未來遊戲開發、專利保護，以及AI技術在創作中的合法性產生深遠影響。《幻獸帕魯》的抄襲爭議，已不再只是單一作品的成敗問題，而是牽動整個遊戲產業如何在靈感借鑑、技術進步與智慧財產權之間，重新劃定界線的重要案例。

Since its release, Palworld has quickly become a major talking point, but alongside its popularity came significant plagiarism controversies. The core of the dispute lies in the design of the creatures known as “Pals,” which many players and industry observers believe bear a high degree of resemblance to characters from the Pokémon series in terms of appearance, proportions, and overall silhouettes. This has raised questions about possible infringement of intellectual property rights. Some Pals have been pointed out as having clear visual parallels to specific Pokémon, leading to jokes such as “Pokémon with guns” and earning the game the nickname “a stitched-together hybrid.”

These doubts have not been limited to stylistic similarities alone, but have extended to the methods of creation themselves. There has been speculation that the development team may have used AI-generated designs for the Pals, then modified them slightly to avoid copyright issues. While there is currently no public evidence proving that the Pals were directly generated by AI, such claims spread rapidly across social media amid the growing use of AI creative tools and the still-unclear legal boundaries surrounding them, further intensifying the controversy.

Beyond creature design, Palworld’s overall gameplay structure has also drawn scrutiny. The game combines core elements from several well-known titles, including monster collection and training from Pokémon, open-world exploration reminiscent of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, survival and base-building systems similar to ARK: Survival Evolved, and the high degree of creative freedom seen in Minecraft. While this extensive blending has been praised by some players as fresh and content-rich, others criticize it for lacking a clear original identity, arguing that it feels like a patchwork of successful mechanics from other games—hence the enduring label of a “stitched-together hybrid.”

In response to the criticism, developer Pocket Pair has issued multiple statements emphasizing that all characters and systems are original creations, and claiming that potential legal risks were addressed prior to development and release. The studio has firmly denied any infringement. However, as the controversy escalated, some team members reportedly received death threats from extreme individuals, turning the situation from a creative dispute into a case involving online harassment. The developer subsequently called for more rational and respectful discussion.

Meanwhile, The Pokémon Company has taken a notably serious stance. It first released a statement clarifying that it had never authorized Palworld to use any Pokémon-related content and that it would investigate potential infringement. Later, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company jointly filed a lawsuit against Pocket Pair, alleging infringement of multiple patents and seeking an injunction to halt the alleged violations as well as financial compensation. Nintendo publicly reiterated that it would not tolerate any infringement of its intellectual property, a move widely seen as sending a strong signal to the entire industry.

Reactions from players and the wider gaming industry have been sharply divided. On one hand, many players praise Palworld for its high degree of freedom and innovative gameplay, viewing it as a successful response to what they see as a lack of innovation in the Pokémon series in recent years. On the other hand, critics argue that if creative works rely too heavily on imitation of existing successes, it could damage the long-term creative ecosystem of the industry, making it harder for truly original ideas to stand out.

From a legal perspective, the outcome of the lawsuit is being closely watched. Many believe the ruling could have far-reaching implications for future game development, patent protection, and the legality of using AI technologies in creative processes. The plagiarism controversy surrounding Palworld is no longer just about the fate of a single game, but has become a landmark case that may redefine how the gaming industry balances inspiration, technological advancement, and intellectual property rights.