Palworld! is the new mass phenomenon. [XBSX|S, PC, XGP]
- Thread starter Cyan
- Start date
Lines have got to be drawn somewhere between what's acceptable and what's not in games. I assume we all agree (without me having to give examples) that there are certain things that would not, and should not ever be acceptable in games, or in fact any entertainment medium. And so we all agree that lines are necessary irrespective of whether or not we consider them a slippery slope, and the only disagreement is where they should be drawn, not whether they should be drawn or not.
arandomguy
Veteran
Just to clarify I don't mean the specific game play differences as some of the games I listed aren't remotely similar. I'm not really looking to start some sort of game play discussion in terms of what makes the game specifically "fun."
That was a question in the context of how these out of nowhere phenomena impact the overall game industry. The poster I was quoting seems to be saying that this game would be good for the industry and I'm just interested in discussing why that would be case and any different from other examples.
From a personnel stand point I'm not interested in consumer game streamer content and actually don't like the focus on that segment from a marketing stand point. So if anything I feel successes that encourage that trend for example would be a direction that the industry would not go towards (or at least more towards).
Of course, we can't really know why this game is so successful. Personally I'd like to think that it's successful because it's fun, partly because I personally think it's fun. I don't know so sure why millions of other people bought it and play it. So I think it's also premature to claim its success is simply due to streamers, because I for one didn't do so because of streamers.
Furthermore, a game which is good to stream does not automatically translate to good sales. It's not hard to imagine that a game that's good to watch streamers play could be too good to be watched and people would simply watch other people playing the game, and not buy and play the game themselves. If a game itself is not fun to play, I don't think it can sell in this number and still be played by so many people, even if it's popular among streamers.
Furthermore, a game which is good to stream does not automatically translate to good sales. It's not hard to imagine that a game that's good to watch streamers play could be too good to be watched and people would simply watch other people playing the game, and not buy and play the game themselves. If a game itself is not fun to play, I don't think it can sell in this number and still be played by so many people, even if it's popular among streamers.
Yes, of course, but I just think this game is not even the worse to draw the line. If we use this game as the standard to draw the line, then quite a lot of games will be also "out of the line."
well, for people like, for instance, me, who don't follow streamers at all, the fact that they play a game doesn't matter. It's not like streamers don't play jewels like Alien Isolation, 'cos they do too. It's maybe that the game it's just good and fun, judging from my friends' words.
Also, Diablo 4 is another example of a successful game among streamers, and gamers overall, and no matter how much streamers played it, it got to a point where people grew kinda bored of the game and the streamers didn't have enough spectators.
That is an incredibly short early access honestly IMO. Was expecting it to be 6-12 months looking at their roadmap. This game is very early access. Lots of content still needs building out. Xbox One version is in shambles.
Last edited:
I think the implication was that it would release on Playstation three months before or after it leaves early access. Not that the game will be out of early access in three months. Maybe.
GhostofWar
Regular
I think they ment ~3 months after however long early access is, so 9-15 months using your estimation. I don't think it's just early access keeping it off, spencer was supposed to be in japan a while back courting devs remember. I think this has been locked down via gamepass contract and they probably never expected this result and got a bargain on this.
Changing to the other topic and not directed at anyone, Just a general comment on it. I do find the drama over animal cruelty interesting when I have to run around killing tigers and assorted other protected animal species to upgrade or make weapons in things like far cry 3. An interesting fact is crocodiles are a protected animal in Aus and I have to run around butchering them in assorted games (inc far cry 3) and it never seems to be an issue for orgs like peta. On the other hand the animal most people associate with Aus is the kangeroo and you can buy kanga steaks at retail for human consumption and it's also used in pet food.
I have trouble caring what peta think about things, their campaigns are so erratic it's hard to not see them as hypocrtits especially when they waste time/resources on a bunch of 1's and 0's in a computer. What are they actually trying to save here? I don't think I have ever seen them mentioned in relation to the Taiji dolphin hunts but holy shit they gotta save the little cute animals that don't even exist. Well on this planet anyway.
cheapchips
Veteran
It's about raising awareness of animal cruelty. It makes sense for them to hop on a bandwagon trending with the kidz to make that wider point. The risk is looking silly defending virtual animals (that are actually evolved people
)
Last edited:
It's about raising awareness of animal cruelty. It makes sense for them to hope on a bandwagons trending with the kidz to make that wider point. The risk is looking silly defending virtual animals (that are actually evolved people
I'd say it's pretty silly creating a "vegan guide" which focusses not eating the Pals when you can also work them to death if slave labour camps lol.
I need the speedrun community to create a "slaveless" category for this game.
GhostofWar
Regular
Couldn't relate to that palworld video at all until she said not in the mood, then it became too realistic.
their engineer must keep the servers up at all costs
dotesports.com
Palworld devs may be paying almost $500K a month to keep servers up 'no matter what'
Palworld continues to reach new heights, but with equal costs.
dotesports.com
GhostofWar
Regular
I know nothing about server costs, but does that sound realistic? If we take valheim and look at it peaking at 500k ccu you could maybe assume they were having to pay 125k a month on servers? I'm not even sure the gamepass version even has access to dedicated servers yet either?
