The technical reasons including but not limited to “Nintendo told us to go fuck ourselves.”
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?
IDK about them being slaves… The last one I played, they were the merchants. 🤷🏻♂️
Cats as slaves?
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.
It does seem like it would be an amount of work.
Because it has the graphical horsepower of an iPhone 4s
