Some dickhead corporate journalist believes that the ~$30 indie sensation with zero microtransactions is a shallow product “designed to be sold rather than enjoyed.”
One of the largest and most influential shilling organizations for home consoles, Eurogamer, otherwise known as Digital Foundry in regards to tech based discourse has unleashed their game review for Pocket Pair’s indie offering in the form of “Palworld”.
And as you would expect given the severe amount of criticism the game has received in the week following its release you’d probably expect that corporate hacks have condemned it for being a soulless clone.
We’ve covered Palworld extensively, much like everyone else, I for one simply wish to see the world burn and nothing brings a smile to my face more than witnessing indie titles seemingly ignite and take off sporadically, upsetting fanboys and AAA industry hacks to no end.
Palworld has managed to achieve over seven million sales in just five days, a truly astronomical feat, no doubt accelerated from all the press this little indie title has received for giving consumers what they want.
And in such a short timeframe Palworld has managed to piss off a bunch of reject employees from Sumo Digital and Naughty Dog who relish the fact that they seemingly cannot provide consumers with what they genuine wanted, a more mature rendition of the stagnate monster-capture genre.
The game itself can be considered lousy, or lazy. But just because a game takes inspiration from other well liked and financially successful genres doesn’t mean that it isn’t fun.
Eurogamer on the other hand doesn’t see eye-to-eye with the vast majority of those who’ve played the game, as often the case with journalists versus the actual consumer, their takes on Palworld, written by “Chris Tapsell” demonizes the game for being unoriginal and a bland cash grab and of course he believes that the game as a whole isn’t very good.
Now, before I dissect his review, if you were to take a gander towards Chris Tapsell‘s Twitter account you’ll start to notice some strange things.
For starters, his tweets are protected, a usual trope with the likes of these progressive shmucks amongst any influential industry, simply because these corporate journalistic hacks seemingly cannot handle a bit of banter or criticism of their dogshit work or viewpoints on any given subject.
I for one don’t mind criticism, your anger and disgust only helps me grow and evolve, though of course I’d much prefer to clap back on my own accord because I simply don’t take shit from anybody.
Secondly Chris’ Twitter banner is actually a capture taken from the first Pokemon movie.
Though of course that was probably the first thing you’ve noticed from the image itself if we’re being honest, if you were to read his biography however things start to become much more clear. The fact that he himself has pronouns in his bio is a dead giveaway that his opinions aren’t worth jack shit, never mind the fact that his bio literally reads that his opinions are his own and his Pokemon’s.
Gee, I wonder if he has some sort of bias against Palworld, the game that Nintendo drones all over the internet have been demonizing as being a worthless Pokemon clone.
That would be preposterous. Eurogamer is an outstanding platform that adheres to journalistic integrity, I am sure that Chris Tapsell despite being a massive fan of Pokemon would review Palworld with an open mind and convey nothing but honesty and the truth.
Much like how Alex Battaglia from Eurogamer’s Digital Foundry criticized Stellar Blade for being “dated” and “problematic” that didn’t focus on “realistic” depictions of female characters.
Again it’s not out of the ordinary for publication outfits to house vastly different views and opinions versus the general public, simply because these so called journalists either get paid to promote something or rather are paid to create controversial headlines that generate “rage clicks”, to learn more about the impact of rage clicks see Kotaku.
Nobody outside of their woke-centric hivemind takes the opinions of a journalist seriously, they merely exist only for our personal enjoyment to laugh at their bullshit and celebrate their failures.
So, Chris’ article then.
Chris Tapsell describes Palworld as being “absolute rubbish”, the game as a whole is primitive and derivative apparently.
To me the game itself is a magnet for generic consumerism. Palworld is an open-world survival crafting game with cues and hints reminisent of the world’s best selling intellectual property in the form of Pokemon, except the monster capturing esapades inside of Palworld are a lot more mature and “edgy”.
Consumers typically flock to these sorts of open-world survival games time and time again, they all seem bland and uninspiring and yet there’s just something about them that keeps players engaged and enticed to buy whatever open-world survival rendition releases throughout the year.
Palworld combines elements of very popular and successful genres and of course the world’s most popular IP into a mature package that innovates upon what Nintendo has been able to provide with Pokemon for decades, and of course it’s not exclusive to Nintendo platforms resulting in a much greater reach for the small indie title.
What I generally don’t understand are why corporate journalist hacks seething so damn hard over an indie title simply because it takes elements of the world’s largest and recognizable franchise. Palworld has faced several accusations, including false claims of asset theft, discontent from those who oppose the involvement of AI in games, criticism from Black Lives Matter activists due to the ability to enslave both creatures and people, because enslaving critters and people in a video game is racist.
And of course the usual backlash from animal cruelty advocates because players can consume the in-game creatures.
In my view, the negative reactions from “urinalists” are because people are happy. Journalists are inclined to disapprove when consumers find satisfaction in a product, especially when it doesn’t align with a narrative they may be promoting.
Palworld seems to prioritize enjoyment over pushing specific agendas, excluding the whole Body Type A and B bullshit which has become normalized thanks to the likes of Pokemon Scarlet / Violet and Elden Ring.
Journalists have a history of engaging in such behavior, stretching back to instances with Senran Kagura and Xenoblade 2. This pattern of criticism has even extended to claims that children shouldn’t play Pokemon due to perceived demonic elements. It appears that every time something becomes popular and genuinely brings joy to people, journalists are quick to express disapproval and critique.
They just genuinely fucking hate it when you’re happy.
Because they themselves are incapable of such emotions, which is why I consider corporate journalists to be humanlike creatures, because they are clearly individuals who cannot function properly and are better off being ostracized away from the internet and society for that matter.
Chris makes a solid point here, Palworld is a game designed to be sold, because of course video games are a commercial entity and therefore all developers wish for them to be sold because financial success and appraisal generates income which goes into their pockets and is recycled into newer more advanced ventures to repeat the process.
Money isn’t inherently the main focus for all developers, but it’s up there. Palworld is a game that piggybacks off successful genres and tropes and combines them into a package that players have desired for years.
Pocket Pair haven’t done anything actionable in regards to a lawsuit from Nintendo, the absolute best argument fanboys have is that they traced over some elements and changed them slightly. Which isn’t illegal so Nintendo/The Pokemon Company can’t do shit even if they want to.
The only thing they could possibly get sued is if they were caught using ripped assets from the Pokemon INSIDE their game. Since using ripped assets in a for profit project is illegal. But no one’s been able to prove it.
The design is lazy, but the end result is simply what consumers want. The same cannot be said for the abundance of AAA dogshit we’ve been forced to endure for years on end.
For Chris to say that the game was a product designed to be sold is rather cute however, given that Palworld is an indie title that released for the low price of $30 with no abhorrent in-game microtransactions to swindle money out of player pockets, why haven’t we seen similar arguments made towards established franchises that have continually had the same generic format and gameplay loops across decades of installments.
Call of Duty, Far Cry, Assassin’s Creed, EA Sports.
Annual dogshit produced by massive conglomerate publishers clearly weren’t designed with minimal effort, recycling the same gameplay mantra and assets over and over again for profit.
Companies such as Ubisoft, EA and Activision truly care about the consumer, which is why they’ve continually ignored customer reception and included microtransactions on top of their annual $60 game releases, which have become stale and repetitive from a gameplay perspective alongside regressive in terms of actual polish and performance stability.
Those evil indie developers at Pocket Pair clearly made this game as a get rich scheme, taking away viable sales from earnest AAA publishers that haven’t changed their formula since inception, but rather progressively decline in terms of story writing while pushing live service themes such as microtransactions.
For instance, Activision will gladly sell you in-game cosmetic bundles inside of Call of Duty for the price it costs to play Palworld, objectively both games may be uninspired however that’s not to say that you are genuinely getting your moneys worth with theoretically infinite replayability inside of Palworld versus COD.
Simply because it’s what consumers want over cinematic rubbish pushing woke ESG agendas, it’s firms like Pocket Pair that the gaming industry desperately needs right now, rather than dogshit studios like Rocksteady pushing progressive rubbish such as Suicide Squad.
Western developers and journalists are expressing their hatred of Palworld simply because the game represents precisely what they have intentionally avoided delivering to consumers, aiming to maximize profits instead.
I might be a “mark”, but you on the other hand Chris Tapsell are a stupid cunt.
