62
Palworld boss says a Switch version ‘might be hard for technical reasons’
(www.videogameschronicle.com)
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
62 points (97.0% liked)
Games
16745 readers
857 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Would Nintendo even allow it?
Why not, they are one store front with prolific shovelware still.
I think Shadow is referring to Palworld's similarities to Pokemon. There had been a lot of tension over whether or not Nintendo would try to sue the Palworld dev, so it stands to reason that selling something so contentious on Nintendo's own platform might be a bit awkward.
It was only contentious among fans. Nintendo literally said they didn't give a single shit about Palworld.
Monster Hunter is on Nintendo. And Nintendo themselves make Pokemon. So I guess it's okay to have killing or enslavement, but allowing both is bad? 🤨
You telling me Monster Hunter Palicos aren't slaves?
Cats as slaves?
IDK about them being slaves... The last one I played, they were the merchants. 🤷🏻♂️
Nintendo doesn't really restrict things in that way. It would be very strange for them to block a game from publishing on switch for those reasons.
Right? Like they're not exactly the "family friendly" company just because they have simple games with cartoonish art styles.
Wasn't Leisure Suit Larry on GameCube? And there were a few zombie games for the Wii and Wii U.
Why not? Lots of games have that already.
What tension? Fans being stupid?
Nintendo is litigious yea, but there’s hundreds of emulators out there that haven’t been sued, they only sue people who do blatantly illegal stuff they can sue them for. What has palworld done that’s illegal?
Emulators are legal, so they leave the legal ones, they go after the ones perpetuating the illegal parks, like Yuzu.
Why is this even a question? Nintendo shouldn't have any say whatsoever on what people get to play on their own fucking hardware.
But they do because they control their developer ecosystem.
I agree that consoles should allow competing stores, but that's not the current reality.