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.
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.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
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.
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.
deleted by creator
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. 🤷🏻♂️
Why not? Lots of games have that already.
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.
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.
It does seem like it would be an amount of work.
It definitely is not an optimized game. It doesn’t run really well on my ROG Ally, so I can’t imagine trying to do it on a Switch.
To be fair to the ROG, it doesn’t run really well on anything
The technical reasons including but not limited to “Nintendo told us to go fuck ourselves.”
Because it has the graphical horsepower of an iPhone 4s