I hope Game Freak sees this as a wake up call. People will kill for a Pokemon game with a little innovation.
Why would they? It takes effort to make something innovative. They can make buckets of money by doing nothing. They might make more, but it's going to cost a lot more too.
This game literally cost 6 million though, that's nothing to the Pokemon company.
Pokemon Arceus had a little innovation. The thing is: a little innovation after decades of doing the same thing is like a textbook example of "too little, too late".
Also Pokémon Arceus was still empty and boring
So is Palworld if you played it. The island kinda lacks cohesion
Not even remotely the same level of empty. In Palworld there's 10-100x times the density of creatures and resources. Plus Palworld just looks better than Pokemon Arceus and also doesn't resort to fog to hide things popping into existence
Oh we wanna use graphics as an argument? Guess I should play Ark survival instead
Ok? Then go play Ark and leave the rest of us alone
Yeah. But it's also put together by a group of misfits that barely cobbled a game together. Not a decades long gaming empire.
" He built it in a cave, with spare parts!"
It's also worth noting, that this is an early access game.
Considering the studios treck record, I won't get my hopes up. I'll believe when I see
I don't think that GameFreak will see this as a wake up call. And even if it does, it might not do the necessary changes to Pokémon main series.
The stagnation runs deeper. It is partially caused by inertia ("we're selling well, why bother innovating?"), but also by GF's insistence on making the main series story-driven instead of gameplay-driven. Even if story-driven Pokémon goes a lot against the franchise's biggest strength - a wide, unique, and immersive universe to explore.
Except Palworld is insanely popular with essentially no story...
That's the point. Pokemon could be successful in the same way but they're saying Game Freak doesn't want to change how they do things.
Omg I'm an idiot, I completely misread what they were saying, I thought they were saying gf needed to focus more on story and the gameplay being stagnant doesn't help. I'll chalk that up to morning brain.
Shouldn't they have learned the lesson from Pokémon Go? That had absolutely no story that I was aware of.
That wasn't made by Game Freak, that was Niantic.
So? They proved first no one gives a shit about story
Why would they downgrade in terms of success?
Because it's gameplay-driven.
There's no Rotom bossing you around. No "sit down you player, as we tell you what's supposed to be your story". No unnecessary broken bridges forcing story linearity. The story that you see in this sort of game is the one that you build as you interact with the game, not the one that the developer wants you to watch.
More importantly: The Pokemon Company is a separate entity from Game Freak and Nintendo, with a third company also participating, Creatures Inc.
Pokemon games exist solely to drive people, especially the current younger generation, into the franchise. Licensed merchandise is THE money printer for them. In 2022, they reported 11.6 billion dollars in revenue just from that. They're at a point where they can literally ask "Why even bother with games?"
Yeah really goes to show just how massive this market is, and how horribly game freak has whiffed here
or just one available on pc
They're probably finding out all the ways to sue PalWorld in.
People will kill for a pokemon game that doesn't release broken as hell from bugs. Crazy idea I know
People will kill for a Pokemon game. Any Pokemon game. And gamefreak knows that
People like cathing cool animals and do thing with them valling it a pokemon like game is just weird. No one called pokemon final fantasy with animals.
Yeah it's obviously like Pokémon in several key regards but from what I've seen of it the actual game has a lot of originality and new concepts. We shouldn't need to completely reinvent everything all the time, when something has a big cultural impact on people as children they should be allowed to play with and evolve those concepts - I know Pokémon doesn't understand how evolution works but we as a society should take our cultural property seriously.
If you shove your ideas into kids brains then the adults who grow from those kids should own those ideas, the only reason we don't is because Disney wanted a monopoly on mouse picture.
Set copyright to something reasonable like twenty years and focus on making a better society with free growth of ideas and expression rather than protecting the profits of the richest few
Pokémon doesn't understand how evolution works
The wordplay... I love it. Haha
Honestly, I don't think it has any original concepts, but it does merge a lot of concepts from other games into a fairly cohesive package. There's nothing it does, from what I've seen, that isn't done in another game, but the fact that all systems connect with each other and work together is fairly impressive.
It's actually pretty good. there's a little jank but a lot of heart. I was surprised to see that Every pal had battle, working, eating, and petting animations.
and this doesn't even include any of the GamePass players, right?
The game wouldn't run for me on GamePass, crashes every 15 seconds... so I guess I'll on Steam.
I think it's only steam.
It runs on steam, i host a server and sometimes got some big old frame drops. Otherwise it runs pretty well for me.
No it's on Gamepass. I downloaded but haven't played yet
It's about the statistics from this post. And these only consider the steam players. :)
I have a minor conspiracy theory about the Game Pass launch: it almost seems like they made the game pass version intentionally worse/buggier. Still had fun gameplay but lacking features that a lot of people want, some odd oversights (e.g. no menu to quit the game in the PC game pass build, have to alt+F4) and more stability issues. That gives people a chance to try it, find out they like the game, learn it's better on steam, and then buy it there.
That's exactly what happened with my entire friend group (we also wanted a Private server for more people and persistent world regardless of who is online, which GP version can't do currently).
Rationally, I recognize that it's probably a matter of the build being different, limitations when running in the Microsoft ecosystem (though other games are about to connect to private servers, even if it's less straightforward) and the GP version is primarily for console (runs on PC as well, but the menu screens feel like console ones). But it certainly didn't hurt their sales that the Steam version was clearly better.
Apparently the GamePass version is like 4 updates behind the Steam version. According the the developer this is because of Microsoft's certification process taking multiple weeks
30fps on lows from what I remember seeing others post. Allegedly there is a mod to help performance on Deck, too
Friend of mine joined my server from his steam deck, and was using the deck dock to a 52" TV, said it was running beautifully.
Lmao
30 fps on medium, 40-50 fps on low. Honestly not too bad.
Is it not a joke? I'm on another steam deck group where asking this question turned into a joke...
Could you explain the joke? I don’t get it
On every game platform community I'm privy to, asking if pal world runs on x system is a troll move..
I've been playing it for a while now, quite fun. It reminded me of tech modpacks that incorporated Pixelmon in Minecraft, although this is much more refined. It has much less of a Pokemon vibe as people give it credit for. Other than mounts, you have no control of what abilities your pal uses, and it is much less focused on rock-paper-scissors and more on the terrain and damage delivery because of its real-time FPS nature.
I honestly don't understand how people saw this slop and all just threw their wallets at it. The only way I can cope with this beating fucking Counter Strike is that it's "Adult Pokemon" premise was too interesting to pass up. I can't imagine it'll be like this in a month or several. As an outsider this is beyond bizarre to watch. Maybe PETA got to me but it turns my stomach watching people gleefully butcher and enslave Pokemon.
The uniformed virtue signaling is strong with this one...
All of the "butchering" is optional. Believe me, the game makes it much easier to set up a berry patch that auto-feeds everything in your base, rather than manually butchering everything.
And... Normal Pokemon is enslaving as well. You're literally catching them and forcing them to fight each other to the brink of death. Just to recycle the rhetoric of the crazies 20-25 years ago. It's akin to dog fighting. You're also a child in Pokemon..
Come on, at least try to make a good argument.
Maybe PETA got to me but it turns my stomach watching people gleefully butcher and enslave Pokemon.
So you gleefully play terrorism stimulator the game?
I'm anti-war and anti-guns, I play a lot of war games and shooters. It's a game.
You really don't see how "killing bad guys doing bad things" is a lot easier to stomach than walking up to a Miltank eating grass and blowing it's head off with a shotgun?
There's a way you do violence with cute characters and it's fucking called Pokemon. It's called Slime Rancher. I don't know who the fuck asked for Happy Tree Friends: The Game but congrats, you got it.
You really don't see how "killing bad guys doing bad things" is a lot easier to stomach than walking up to a Miltank eating grass and blowing it's head off with a shotgun?
Unless you're on the terrorist team, sneaking up on an agent doing his job and blowing his head off with a shotgun.
You've drawn a weird line in the sand here: shooting semi-realistic looking people with a gun and seeing their blood splatter? That's fine. Shooting a cartoon with a gun until it falls over? THE HORROR!
Are you up in arms over Zelda? Mario? There's no blood or dismemberment, they just fall to the ground. "Unconscious" if that helps you release the death grip from your pearls.
You clearly have no idea how the game actually behaves and have invented something you can be upset about. There are lots of videos of gameplay, please find me an example of the violence you find unacceptable.
Yeah you really can't seem to gather the difference between shooting dudes in military gear and squishy, colorful, harmless creatures. The fact you can't connect those two things with the last remaining brain cell you have left is enough for me to not want to continue this back and forth. Zelda doesn't have a Meat Cleaver you can take to your companions. Mario doesn't let you enslave the fucking Goombas.
You are beyond dense and I'm happy for you that you can cognitively disassociate from casually murdering what is essentially cats and dogs. Companions. If you're the kind of freak that gets off on killing their pets, do you, but I don't remember the part in Ark or really any game that gives you benefits for killing your buddies.
Maybe Nintendo will free you from the slop, little pig.
Are we talking about different games here? You've made it clear you have no idea what your talking about. If I'm wrong please show me a clip of what it is you have an issue with, because you're just making shit up.
So you're vegan but for a video game, basically.
Just think it's kinda fucked up to want to kill Pokemon after growing up with them. Think it's kinda fucked up to go "Man I wish I could shoot a Bellsprout in the face." No pearl clutching, just really don't get it whatsoever.
Do people riding horses gross you out too, or relying on dogs to find injured people in accidents? Animals have had jobs with people throughout history.
Do you not fight wolves, attack dogs, dragons, and other animals on any other game you've played?
You don't have to butcher your pals. There is no in game need for it. You have pals, you pet them and feed them and provide for their needs and they help you cut a tree down. Sometimes they don't feel like it and they just don't do it. What's the problem?
No, you have to butcher pals. It's the game
Yeah imagine still playing counterstrike on the same 3 maps and guns for 20 years and spend 1000 dollars on a cool knife.
I've never eaten meat in my life and still feel bad about accidentally sucking a little spider into the vacuum a few weeks ago but I much prefer it to Pokémon because it's saying 'oh this cute little sheep? You can kill it and it's horrible and cruel but it's ok because it's a game' where as Pokémon says 'oh this adorable little guy? Yeah beat him up, capture him and force him to fight for you entertainment, it's super cool and cute and fun just like in real life!'
(Note the only Pokémon game I played was on a Gameboy emulator in the 90s, I've also not played this but it does look more fun than Pokémon)
See I can disconnect from the animals in real life because we don't have a lot of alternatives to meat just yet. I'm not vegan, I eat chicken and burgers nearly daily, but if plant meat tastes the same and costs the same I do think it starts to become our responsibility to transition into that. The meat industry is a necessary cruelty for the moment. What fucks me up is people looking at characters designed to be cute, lovable companions and going "What if I could shoot it though? Capture it and cut it up?" like that's where I start getting a bit sick to my stomach. But people are eating it up so obviously I'm the weird one for not being into that.
The Pokemon 'fighting' never bothered me because there's never any deaths so in my head they're just friendly sparring. Childish veneer to an otherwise pretty messed up concept. Palworld shatters that veneer and I'm surprised more people aren't repulsed by it.
Interesting, you say you can't not eat meat but it disgusts you to think of a cartoon animal be being killed, I've literally never eaten meat and have a pet chicken which was rescued from being slaughtered after being in a better farm but I see it as silly fun when a game simulates it.
Do you think it's the fact that it forces you to think of the reality that a really lovely and cute creature that does silly little jumps to get your attention and has a real personality is being killed just for you chicken nuggets?
I own a few chickens for the sake of eggs, named them as well, and while I'd happily eat chicken and rice or any other derivative of eating chicken I wouldn't just go out back and carve up one of our hens. I definitely think it's because of the ascribed personality to the animal/creature. Pokemon are well established to be able to think independently, have their own personalities, and many are quite weak in the wild to the point of having near useless attacks. Introducing the ability to have those creatures die isn't bad on its own, there can be gameplay merit to that, but the line for me is when you make a visualization of it. When you take that feature and expand on it and advertise with it.
Sure, your pet will die someday, probably peacefully in its sleep but something like Palword says "What is we make it violent?" It's as visceral to me as someone saying to you that your pet chicken would make some really good nuggets and proceeding to butcher them in front of you, acting disconnected afterwords and saying something to the effect of "What? It's just a chicken."
I guess my brain works differently, I couldn't just ignore the fact that the animal I'm eating did have the personality of a real living cow or chicken, cows sing and play, they're curious and friendly and make friends - chickens mostly just recognise me as someone who carries food to them but they have personalities and emotions when you get to know them. I know that about them so if I was going to eat one of them I'd think about that and think about the brutality of their life and death.
Code is just code. It is (so far) just a series of logic choices that determine which pixel to light up or how fast to vibrate the speaker - it might look like personality but when you kill it there is no fear in it or pain, it doesn't feel anything when you kill it's children or it's friends. I guess I just see numbers when I look at a video game, when I look at a chicken nugget I see real suffering and real death
Careful, the palworld circle jerk machine is in full effect here.
Ah, the classic “people that disagree with me are circlejerking” defense
"could I possibly be wrong?
No, it's a circle jerk..."
I typically associate a circlejerk as a bunch of people who really like something not being open to outside critique and I'll keep it a buck that's exactly what I've experienced from the Palworld crowd.
Calling something “slop” isn’t a critique, and people downvoting it aren’t circlejerking
Calling it slop is shorthand for the critique, friend. I'm sure you're familiar with the term?
The game is a basic, watered down, cheap, imitation of something better. In this case, Pokemon and Ark. The developers had a small budget, have a history of ripping off other games, and is succeeding only off the novelty of the concept "Pokemon with guns" and "Adult Pokemon with slavery!". There is no depth, no substance, it's a sandbox they cobbled together and all of you lined up for your yummy slop and now defend it because god forbid you take a step back from the group circlejerk to analyze what it is you're beating it to.
You'll have post nut clarity in a couple months. Once you all get your fill a new game will take it's place. Among Us, Valheim, Fall Guys, PUBG, H1Z1, Fuck even Lethal Company which I'd consider pretty damn good. They're games that have massive surges but ultimately fall off. No staying power. They're not a Fallout: New Vegas with memes almost everyone can relate with (some exceptions with Among Us). They're not Counter Strike that keep people logging in and have a highly competitive community. They're not Warframe that develop their game in cool new ways to bring old players back. They're not Elden Ring with a story rich world hand crafted with quiet whispers of deeper lore scattered around. They're definitely not Baldur's Gate 3 with some of the most unique companions and interactions that have created memories which will last for years to come.
It's slop. A flash in the pan. Tasteless grool to tide you over until the next bowl, then the next, until someone makes another good game worth remembering. Worth talking about.
I hope Game Freak sees this as a wake up call. People will kill for a Pokemon game with a little innovation.
Why would they? It takes effort to make something innovative. They can make buckets of money by doing nothing. They might make more, but it's going to cost a lot more too.
This game literally cost 6 million though, that's nothing to the Pokemon company.
Pokemon Arceus had a little innovation. The thing is: a little innovation after decades of doing the same thing is like a textbook example of "too little, too late".
Also Pokémon Arceus was still empty and boring
So is Palworld if you played it. The island kinda lacks cohesion
Not even remotely the same level of empty. In Palworld there's 10-100x times the density of creatures and resources. Plus Palworld just looks better than Pokemon Arceus and also doesn't resort to fog to hide things popping into existence
Oh we wanna use graphics as an argument? Guess I should play Ark survival instead
Ok? Then go play Ark and leave the rest of us alone
Yeah. But it's also put together by a group of misfits that barely cobbled a game together. Not a decades long gaming empire.
" He built it in a cave, with spare parts!"
It's also worth noting, that this is an early access game.
Considering the studios treck record, I won't get my hopes up. I'll believe when I see
I don't think that GameFreak will see this as a wake up call. And even if it does, it might not do the necessary changes to Pokémon main series.
The stagnation runs deeper. It is partially caused by inertia ("we're selling well, why bother innovating?"), but also by GF's insistence on making the main series story-driven instead of gameplay-driven. Even if story-driven Pokémon goes a lot against the franchise's biggest strength - a wide, unique, and immersive universe to explore.
Except Palworld is insanely popular with essentially no story...
That's the point. Pokemon could be successful in the same way but they're saying Game Freak doesn't want to change how they do things.
Omg I'm an idiot, I completely misread what they were saying, I thought they were saying gf needed to focus more on story and the gameplay being stagnant doesn't help. I'll chalk that up to morning brain.
Shouldn't they have learned the lesson from Pokémon Go? That had absolutely no story that I was aware of.
That wasn't made by Game Freak, that was Niantic.
So? They proved first no one gives a shit about story
Why would they downgrade in terms of success?
Because it's gameplay-driven.
There's no Rotom bossing you around. No "sit down you player, as we tell you what's supposed to be your story". No unnecessary broken bridges forcing story linearity. The story that you see in this sort of game is the one that you build as you interact with the game, not the one that the developer wants you to watch.
More importantly: The Pokemon Company is a separate entity from Game Freak and Nintendo, with a third company also participating, Creatures Inc.
Pokemon games exist solely to drive people, especially the current younger generation, into the franchise. Licensed merchandise is THE money printer for them. In 2022, they reported 11.6 billion dollars in revenue just from that. They're at a point where they can literally ask "Why even bother with games?"
Yeah really goes to show just how massive this market is, and how horribly game freak has whiffed here
or just one available on pc
They're probably finding out all the ways to sue PalWorld in.
People will kill for a pokemon game that doesn't release broken as hell from bugs. Crazy idea I know
People will kill for a Pokemon game. Any Pokemon game. And gamefreak knows that
People like cathing cool animals and do thing with them valling it a pokemon like game is just weird. No one called pokemon final fantasy with animals.
Yeah it's obviously like Pokémon in several key regards but from what I've seen of it the actual game has a lot of originality and new concepts. We shouldn't need to completely reinvent everything all the time, when something has a big cultural impact on people as children they should be allowed to play with and evolve those concepts - I know Pokémon doesn't understand how evolution works but we as a society should take our cultural property seriously.
If you shove your ideas into kids brains then the adults who grow from those kids should own those ideas, the only reason we don't is because Disney wanted a monopoly on mouse picture.
Set copyright to something reasonable like twenty years and focus on making a better society with free growth of ideas and expression rather than protecting the profits of the richest few
The wordplay... I love it. Haha
Honestly, I don't think it has any original concepts, but it does merge a lot of concepts from other games into a fairly cohesive package. There's nothing it does, from what I've seen, that isn't done in another game, but the fact that all systems connect with each other and work together is fairly impressive.
It's actually pretty good. there's a little jank but a lot of heart. I was surprised to see that Every pal had battle, working, eating, and petting animations.
and this doesn't even include any of the GamePass players, right?
The game wouldn't run for me on GamePass, crashes every 15 seconds... so I guess I'll on Steam.
I think it's only steam.
It runs on steam, i host a server and sometimes got some big old frame drops. Otherwise it runs pretty well for me.
No it's on Gamepass. I downloaded but haven't played yet
It's about the statistics from this post. And these only consider the steam players. :)
I have a minor conspiracy theory about the Game Pass launch: it almost seems like they made the game pass version intentionally worse/buggier. Still had fun gameplay but lacking features that a lot of people want, some odd oversights (e.g. no menu to quit the game in the PC game pass build, have to alt+F4) and more stability issues. That gives people a chance to try it, find out they like the game, learn it's better on steam, and then buy it there.
That's exactly what happened with my entire friend group (we also wanted a Private server for more people and persistent world regardless of who is online, which GP version can't do currently).
Rationally, I recognize that it's probably a matter of the build being different, limitations when running in the Microsoft ecosystem (though other games are about to connect to private servers, even if it's less straightforward) and the GP version is primarily for console (runs on PC as well, but the menu screens feel like console ones). But it certainly didn't hurt their sales that the Steam version was clearly better.
Apparently the GamePass version is like 4 updates behind the Steam version. According the the developer this is because of Microsoft's certification process taking multiple weeks
Lol, that's terrible.
I wonder if it runs good on the steam deck
30fps on lows from what I remember seeing others post. Allegedly there is a mod to help performance on Deck, too
Friend of mine joined my server from his steam deck, and was using the deck dock to a 52" TV, said it was running beautifully.
Lmao
30 fps on medium, 40-50 fps on low. Honestly not too bad.
Is it not a joke? I'm on another steam deck group where asking this question turned into a joke...
Could you explain the joke? I don’t get it
On every game platform community I'm privy to, asking if pal world runs on x system is a troll move..
I've been playing it for a while now, quite fun. It reminded me of tech modpacks that incorporated Pixelmon in Minecraft, although this is much more refined. It has much less of a Pokemon vibe as people give it credit for. Other than mounts, you have no control of what abilities your pal uses, and it is much less focused on rock-paper-scissors and more on the terrain and damage delivery because of its real-time FPS nature.
I honestly don't understand how people saw this slop and all just threw their wallets at it. The only way I can cope with this beating fucking Counter Strike is that it's "Adult Pokemon" premise was too interesting to pass up. I can't imagine it'll be like this in a month or several. As an outsider this is beyond bizarre to watch. Maybe PETA got to me but it turns my stomach watching people gleefully butcher and enslave Pokemon.
The uniformed virtue signaling is strong with this one...
All of the "butchering" is optional. Believe me, the game makes it much easier to set up a berry patch that auto-feeds everything in your base, rather than manually butchering everything.
And... Normal Pokemon is enslaving as well. You're literally catching them and forcing them to fight each other to the brink of death. Just to recycle the rhetoric of the crazies 20-25 years ago. It's akin to dog fighting. You're also a child in Pokemon..
Come on, at least try to make a good argument.
So you gleefully play terrorism stimulator the game?
I'm anti-war and anti-guns, I play a lot of war games and shooters. It's a game.
You really don't see how "killing bad guys doing bad things" is a lot easier to stomach than walking up to a Miltank eating grass and blowing it's head off with a shotgun?
There's a way you do violence with cute characters and it's fucking called Pokemon. It's called Slime Rancher. I don't know who the fuck asked for Happy Tree Friends: The Game but congrats, you got it.
Unless you're on the terrorist team, sneaking up on an agent doing his job and blowing his head off with a shotgun.
You've drawn a weird line in the sand here: shooting semi-realistic looking people with a gun and seeing their blood splatter? That's fine. Shooting a cartoon with a gun until it falls over? THE HORROR!
Are you up in arms over Zelda? Mario? There's no blood or dismemberment, they just fall to the ground. "Unconscious" if that helps you release the death grip from your pearls.
You clearly have no idea how the game actually behaves and have invented something you can be upset about. There are lots of videos of gameplay, please find me an example of the violence you find unacceptable.
Yeah you really can't seem to gather the difference between shooting dudes in military gear and squishy, colorful, harmless creatures. The fact you can't connect those two things with the last remaining brain cell you have left is enough for me to not want to continue this back and forth. Zelda doesn't have a Meat Cleaver you can take to your companions. Mario doesn't let you enslave the fucking Goombas.
You are beyond dense and I'm happy for you that you can cognitively disassociate from casually murdering what is essentially cats and dogs. Companions. If you're the kind of freak that gets off on killing their pets, do you, but I don't remember the part in Ark or really any game that gives you benefits for killing your buddies.
Maybe Nintendo will free you from the slop, little pig.
Are we talking about different games here? You've made it clear you have no idea what your talking about. If I'm wrong please show me a clip of what it is you have an issue with, because you're just making shit up.
So you're vegan but for a video game, basically.
Just think it's kinda fucked up to want to kill Pokemon after growing up with them. Think it's kinda fucked up to go "Man I wish I could shoot a Bellsprout in the face." No pearl clutching, just really don't get it whatsoever.
Do people riding horses gross you out too, or relying on dogs to find injured people in accidents? Animals have had jobs with people throughout history.
Do you not fight wolves, attack dogs, dragons, and other animals on any other game you've played?
You don't have to butcher your pals. There is no in game need for it. You have pals, you pet them and feed them and provide for their needs and they help you cut a tree down. Sometimes they don't feel like it and they just don't do it. What's the problem?
No, you have to butcher pals. It's the game
Yeah imagine still playing counterstrike on the same 3 maps and guns for 20 years and spend 1000 dollars on a cool knife.
I've never eaten meat in my life and still feel bad about accidentally sucking a little spider into the vacuum a few weeks ago but I much prefer it to Pokémon because it's saying 'oh this cute little sheep? You can kill it and it's horrible and cruel but it's ok because it's a game' where as Pokémon says 'oh this adorable little guy? Yeah beat him up, capture him and force him to fight for you entertainment, it's super cool and cute and fun just like in real life!'
(Note the only Pokémon game I played was on a Gameboy emulator in the 90s, I've also not played this but it does look more fun than Pokémon)
See I can disconnect from the animals in real life because we don't have a lot of alternatives to meat just yet. I'm not vegan, I eat chicken and burgers nearly daily, but if plant meat tastes the same and costs the same I do think it starts to become our responsibility to transition into that. The meat industry is a necessary cruelty for the moment. What fucks me up is people looking at characters designed to be cute, lovable companions and going "What if I could shoot it though? Capture it and cut it up?" like that's where I start getting a bit sick to my stomach. But people are eating it up so obviously I'm the weird one for not being into that.
The Pokemon 'fighting' never bothered me because there's never any deaths so in my head they're just friendly sparring. Childish veneer to an otherwise pretty messed up concept. Palworld shatters that veneer and I'm surprised more people aren't repulsed by it.
Interesting, you say you can't not eat meat but it disgusts you to think of a cartoon animal be being killed, I've literally never eaten meat and have a pet chicken which was rescued from being slaughtered after being in a better farm but I see it as silly fun when a game simulates it.
Do you think it's the fact that it forces you to think of the reality that a really lovely and cute creature that does silly little jumps to get your attention and has a real personality is being killed just for you chicken nuggets?
I own a few chickens for the sake of eggs, named them as well, and while I'd happily eat chicken and rice or any other derivative of eating chicken I wouldn't just go out back and carve up one of our hens. I definitely think it's because of the ascribed personality to the animal/creature. Pokemon are well established to be able to think independently, have their own personalities, and many are quite weak in the wild to the point of having near useless attacks. Introducing the ability to have those creatures die isn't bad on its own, there can be gameplay merit to that, but the line for me is when you make a visualization of it. When you take that feature and expand on it and advertise with it.
Sure, your pet will die someday, probably peacefully in its sleep but something like Palword says "What is we make it violent?" It's as visceral to me as someone saying to you that your pet chicken would make some really good nuggets and proceeding to butcher them in front of you, acting disconnected afterwords and saying something to the effect of "What? It's just a chicken."
I guess my brain works differently, I couldn't just ignore the fact that the animal I'm eating did have the personality of a real living cow or chicken, cows sing and play, they're curious and friendly and make friends - chickens mostly just recognise me as someone who carries food to them but they have personalities and emotions when you get to know them. I know that about them so if I was going to eat one of them I'd think about that and think about the brutality of their life and death.
Code is just code. It is (so far) just a series of logic choices that determine which pixel to light up or how fast to vibrate the speaker - it might look like personality but when you kill it there is no fear in it or pain, it doesn't feel anything when you kill it's children or it's friends. I guess I just see numbers when I look at a video game, when I look at a chicken nugget I see real suffering and real death
Careful, the palworld circle jerk machine is in full effect here.
Ah, the classic “people that disagree with me are circlejerking” defense
"could I possibly be wrong?
No, it's a circle jerk..."
I typically associate a circlejerk as a bunch of people who really like something not being open to outside critique and I'll keep it a buck that's exactly what I've experienced from the Palworld crowd.
Calling something “slop” isn’t a critique, and people downvoting it aren’t circlejerking
Calling it slop is shorthand for the critique, friend. I'm sure you're familiar with the term?
The game is a basic, watered down, cheap, imitation of something better. In this case, Pokemon and Ark. The developers had a small budget, have a history of ripping off other games, and is succeeding only off the novelty of the concept "Pokemon with guns" and "Adult Pokemon with slavery!". There is no depth, no substance, it's a sandbox they cobbled together and all of you lined up for your yummy slop and now defend it because god forbid you take a step back from the group circlejerk to analyze what it is you're beating it to.
You'll have post nut clarity in a couple months. Once you all get your fill a new game will take it's place. Among Us, Valheim, Fall Guys, PUBG, H1Z1, Fuck even Lethal Company which I'd consider pretty damn good. They're games that have massive surges but ultimately fall off. No staying power. They're not a Fallout: New Vegas with memes almost everyone can relate with (some exceptions with Among Us). They're not Counter Strike that keep people logging in and have a highly competitive community. They're not Warframe that develop their game in cool new ways to bring old players back. They're not Elden Ring with a story rich world hand crafted with quiet whispers of deeper lore scattered around. They're definitely not Baldur's Gate 3 with some of the most unique companions and interactions that have created memories which will last for years to come.
It's slop. A flash in the pan. Tasteless grool to tide you over until the next bowl, then the next, until someone makes another good game worth remembering. Worth talking about.
…have you played it?