• PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        He also send message to me about good devs and evil marketing. Real g*mer moment. And the second dude is being ever funnier blaming it on… language barrier because it’s 1830 and obviously Japanese devs don’t know English.

          • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            5 hours ago

            The game had a 6 Million+ USD equivalent budget, they hired marketing. Banning people randomly looks stupid.

            With the context of discussion, it’s clearly just devs good and innocent, marketing bad. As if that main game page on the biggest game store in history wasn’t unchanged for months despite controversies. So the devs either are: a) hostages of their hired marketing people b) completely disinterested how their work is being advertised c) perfectly ok with it

            • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              5 hours ago

              I haven’t even looked much into Palworld, but what I did get from marketing blurbs was “what if Pokemon… but edgy and grimdark?”

              Those Schrodinger’s Asshole claims that the marketing isn’t the game’s intended way to play seem rather after the fact to me.

              I heard similar bullshit about the “Postal” series and how a player didn’t have to do any edgelord atrocity enjoying at all if they chose not to.

    • Smeagolicious [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I was interested in the concept at first but it’s the exact shit you mention that killed any enthusiasm I had.

      “It’s not optimal to be cruel” and “you can fight the poachers” c’mon now, they clearly know what they’re implying and to assert otherwise is dishonest.

      Maybe I’m “too sensitive” but them leaning into the vibe of cruelty and exploitation of deliberately cute, innocent sentient beings just made the whole thing feel gross to me. Personally I’d rather it not be an option at all but I’m clearly not the target demo, a not insignificant portion of which is irony poisoned chuds

      • IWantToMakeProgress [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        Check the trailers. I was put off at first but tried it after checking the trailer and read the reviews which most of them state that the exploit/slavery is not the focus. There is free straw-hat-pirates demo btw.

        • Smeagolicious [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 hours ago

          I am aware it’s not the focus - I just find it gross that 1) it’s an option in the first place and 2) that it was marketed on this and emphasized by certain streamers and LPers. I don’t have interest in the game, I know what it contains and I don’t want to play it even though slavery “isn’t the focus”. Just very much not my thing

    • homicidalrobot@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Ah yes, the storefront page. Definitely direct dev communication and not marketing.