You mean Digimon? Or Monster Rancher? Or Cassette Beasts? Or Temtem? Or Shin Megami Tensei? Or Kingdom Hearts DDD? Or Ark? Or Yo-kai Watch? Or Telefang?
They left it small so that it wouldn’t be worth it to fight in court and they’d either just settle for a license fee or pay the fine. But sounds like the best way would be to get the patents revoked, but that’s probably more expensive than just paying the fine due to the legal fees.
People who don’t like Palworld, maybe give a real reason? The AI stuff was made up by a salty troll who admitted later he made it up. It being “legally distinct from pokémon” isn’t a good enough reason. It having the ability to
Spoilerbutcher your Pals for resources
may be a reason to be upset about the gameplay, but then again, many, many, many RPGs have you culling the local wildlife and depopulating a nation for quests too. Neither is the Genshin Impact art style a reason to hate it. That’s just JRPG asthetics.
The butchering thing always bugged me. Where tf do you think your chicken nuggies come from? The only difference is that we don’t let real animals have friends before we kill em
I guess I should have said we don’t make friends with them. I could have also drawn attention to the awful living conditions, but getting all Dominion-y wouldn’t have the pizzazzy oomph that I was going for
Really buggy at launch (not sure if it still is). “Pokemon with guns” is the least creative direction to take the concept. Devs reportedly don’t know how to use any sort of SCM, a basic development tool
People say “Pokemon with guns” as if that was some kind of core gameplay. You can play through the game without ever using them. It’s a small feature, that absolutely is there, but reducing the game to that is missing the forest for the trees.
It’s an open world crafting base building game to enjoy with co-op, that has catchable creatures like Pokemon. There is no Pokemon game that fits this niche. The guns are not important to what the game is.
I would absolutely classify it as “core gameplay” given that it’s the primary ranged weapon of both the playable character and most of the NPCs, past the crossbow. Saying “oh just ignore the stuff you don’t like” is pretty dismissive of critique.
And don’t get me wrong - mons with base building is a good idea, which is why I played it. But IMO palworld doesn’t do much with it but put the two concepts together.
I’m not saying ignore it, it’s a valid reason to not like the game, like any other subjective reason.
I’m saying calling the game “Pokemon with guns” is dismissive of what the game is. It’s like calling Minecraft “Rust with animal husbandry”, which completely misses what the game is about.
It definitely only got popular because of the hype re: “Pokemon with guns,” but it’s legitimately better than the game it actually copied, which is Ark. You know what’s cool about Palworld? Me and my coplayer were able to stop playing without losing everything we’ve built
Anyone who thinks Palworld is actually a Pokemon ripoff either hasn’t played Palworld or hasn’t played Pokemon
Gameplay wise palworld has nothing to do with Pokémon, it was simply a marketing tool for em.
As for the ark comparison I can’t comment, the one time I played it was on the early access launch day during which I refunded it within 45 minutes because it performed horribly, that was almost 10 years ago though so not sure how the current game compares
Butchering your pals is less of a problem than enslaving other human beings.
More to the point it’s just bad. It’s incredibly grindy, has an incongruous tech tree, and the A.I. (both enemy and ally) is trash. It’s also mostly a copy of their previous game, Craftopia, which was also bad and has been in Early Access for 4 years now with no signs of ever leaving it.
I don’t hate Palworld because it’s a low effort Pokemon knockoff, I hate Palworld because it’s a low effort Ark knockoff following the same business plan of not finishing their previous game before abandoning it for their new game. At least with Ark you got to ride dinosaurs rather than store-brand Rapidash.
Pretty sure 1 and 3 could be applied to many modern actions games. Software patents shouldn’t exist! Same with apple’s patents for specific menu animations. It’s fucking evil!
Any game with ranged weapons is literally this. If I’m playing Fallout 4 and shoot a raider in the head then combat is initiated. That’s literally his combat works. Fuck Nintendo and fuck bullshit patents.
Software parents, specifically game mechanic parents, are fucking insane. You should see the stuff Square Enix has patented following death stranding.
I get the whole “they just reskinned my game mechanics!!!” but also: I don’t. It’s like saying Go, Draughts, Chess, etc. are copies or “infringing” on one another for being a board game set on a grid with black/white pieces.
Even the idea of intellectual property is shaky for me but at least it’s more clear cut whether you’ve directly copied or deceived someone with a similar design of a character.
And this is why commercial social media and the overarching idea that violence is a good way to solve most problems are both bad ideas.
It says something that folks reach for that instead of learning how to be calm about such things and tend to be supported for such behaviour instead of told it’s not a good idea, even worse that they never take such things down once posted, often.
All part of the patriarchal, oversharing that the internet loves.
“Be happy, be horny, be bursting with rage, we’ve got a million different ways to engage”. -Bo Burnham
I know of brothers creating Aldi North and Aldi South, at least here in Germany (Aldi Nord and Aldi Süd). I wasn’t aware of the history of Lidl being a direct competitor to Aldi. Just looked up on Wikipedia for quick reference.
Nope. Aldi was created by brothers who, after pioneering the discounter model and being quite successful with their stores, broke apart their empire over a disagreement – which was whether selling cigarettes was a good idea, in particular whether the theft rate would be too high. Completely fucking un-dramatic (very much in contrast to Puma/Adidas which is a feud that’s still going on), they always cooperated a lot in procurement etc, and definitely don’t compete with each other: The world is split into Aldi North and Aldi South, referring to their territories in Germany. The only other country where both are present is in the US because Aldi North bought Trader Joes, ages ago, it’s the only country where they’re technically competing but not really because they’re serving quite different market segments. Aldi South (under the Aldi brand) has been in the US for ages too, btw, but mostly kept a low profile. They both like to grow organically, no flashy fancy billion buck investments. In Aldi North stores at least in Germany Trader Joe’s is the store brand for nuts, dried fruits etc.
The two Albrechts got into the business because their father, a learned baker, got ill with baker’s asthma and turned to bread trading instead, they expanded the product range of the business, after the war focussed heavily on high throughput on low margins and opened more locations, then introduced the supermarket model in Germany. Even in Germany it took some people quite a while that their quality was never shabby, on the contrary, but combine their low prices with the back then right-out warehouse atmosphere and you definitely didn’t see rich people there.
Lidl is wholly separate and not founded by brothers. It technically predates Aldi and also the brother’s expansion before the split and rebrand (they were known as Albrecht Discount before), it was a small fruit trader which then got bought by Joseph Schwarz, then turned into a larger but still regional fruit trader. Lidl stores as we know them only go back to the 1970s when Dieter, son of Joseph, was already at the helm.
Lidl is much more common outside of Germany than inside, though, long story short establishing yourself as a hard discounter in a market where Aldi is already present is hard. They did make Aldi turn away from the warehouse aesthetic, though, yes you can have nice signage and lighting and stiff be efficient.
It’s like how back when the Euro or the Pound were worth nearly 2x what the dollar was, a new device or piece of hardware would sell for $399/€399/£399.
‘American gamers must return to buying American for their gaming needs. That’s why I have talked to Microsoft and they will lower their prices considerably. You are welcome, nerds.’ -DT, probably soon
We as leftists, must organize in ways that match the fascists. Subversion of their goals is our goal. The class and culture war is in full effect and we must not be complacent.
Apologies, I’m not on Lemmy very much, nor the gaming community. I’m an American distraught by Trump right now. I’m no communist. Just an impassioned and anxious progressive American. Thank you for telling me.
Yeah, gamer gate was one of the things that lead to Trump being elected in the first place. Plus the outcry that still happens when BIPOC, LGBT, or women protagonists are used. Hell, just look at any steam discussion board sometime and you’ll see it.
As someone who games, gAmERs are the fucking worst
I kinda missed the gamer gate thing, was distracted by other shit and wasn’t gaming at the time. Am I right in thinking it was some kind of misogynist incel bullshit? Like, girls aren’t allowed to play with the boys’ toys?
But yeah, I’ve seen enough stuff on discussion boards and heard enough anecdotes to see that there’s a lot of bigotry in gaming. The hard right are successfully using it as a recruitment platform for kids. Fuckin appalling, but they are well organised and fascists don’t have to worry so much about sectarianism.
I just don’t get how people can’t see that there’s strength in diversity. Like, in gaming you want a team with different skills, abilities, experiences, and characteristics. It’s the same IRL - a diverse community is a strong community.
It’s a shame. Seeing the bullshit companies have done to games for the sake of profit ought to be a pretty easy on-ramp to anti-capitalism. But just like in the real world, racist shit distracts them from any of that.
Won’t the tariffs incentivise domestic production and give work to more regular folks? There’s also less stuff to be hauled around the world so there’s environmental benefits too. Sounds like a leftist idea to me.
We don’t have infrastructure to produce a lot of the components in the things we buy, and even if we did, it would inherently cost a lot more to produce than in the countries that are about to have tariffs placed on them. That the US ever was a manufacturing powerhouse was, in my understanding, a very “place and time” sort of deal after World War II. Not only were all of our competitors recovering from being bombed, but we also advanced to a services based economy very quickly, raising the standard of living beyond a point that manufacturing jobs can typically afford to support. I’m no economist though; I just watch one on YouTube, and “the middle income trap” is a frequent topic.
Tariffs can serve as a stimuli to build out local manufacturing capacity, which sounds pretty leftist to me. I understand arguments for laissez faire policies but at heart they are liberal and not left. It’s the refusal to accept it that led to far right being as popular as it is.
Anyone promising to return people to previously prosperous economic conditions will be popular, even if people don’t know that the promise can’t possibly be delivered. Coal isn’t coming back either, and there’s no “clean” version of it, but if all you’ve done in your life is coal, you’ll vote for the guy who says he’s bringing coal back.
I’m not here to convince liberals that they should try to care for the poor. I’m here to argue that the jig is up - people are voting for literally anyone, including fascists, that promises to change the course.
That second part is exactly what I just said. Is it caring for the poor to lie to them about economic realities, or to raise the cost on everyday items via tariffs when money is already tight? Again, I’m no expert, but I’d rather vote for promised solutions that I understand to actually work rather than the ones that sound good and don’t work.
Are you arguing that tariffs and other market restrictions are ineffective at incentivising moving of production sites? I guess that’s why Biden lifted tariffs Trump imposed. Oh wait.
Or are you arguing that container ships full of plastic trash are good for the environment?
I’m sorry you’re right, the Republicans have always wanted to tackle that trash and plastic problem. Trump, of course, cares about that. He’s always talked about how much he wants to stop the production and import of plastic junk and pollution, oh wait…
Politicians lie so I’m mostly interested in outcomes, not the narratives that politicians use to make things happen. Why would I care that something I want and is mostly outside of my control happens for the wrong reasons?
If you gave it thirty years and the entire world paused and waited for us, sure,… but, we have a global economy and old people need medications, cars need chips and batteries. We all depend on each other. We can’t charge a toll and pretend everything won’t see any ill effects
If you proposed something else that would uplift lower classes sooner they’d probably vote for it. What Democrats were offering wasn’t credible enough because people have been deceived for too long.
It ain’t gonna cost me shit because I’m spending next to nothing for the foreseeable future apart from necessities, and what little I do spend is gonna be bought as locally as possible. Fuck this country.
kotaku.com
Najstarsze