What if someone did a takedown of Pokemon that fully explores the implications, but the thing is that a takedown of Pokemon cannot be fun. If its fun then its just grimdark Pokemon. Its “do not do this cool thing” ludonarrative dissonance. Youre not getting anything truly cool out of that.

We it would need to be a pain to play. Like Spec Ops: The Line, but Pokemon. Or maybe Undertale: Genocide Run but Pokemon specifically instead of JRPGs generally?

Palworld is definitly not that lol. It revels in the fucked upness as far as i can tell. It doesnt even shame you so you dont even get the “do not do this cool thing” aspect. And it endevors to be fun (ymmv on success).

But Im wondering if a game that says to Pokemon what Spec Ops: The Line said to military FPSes is possible?

  • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    5·
    5 months ago

    When Spec Ops says “Actually you’re a bad baddy because you did the murder thing” they’re putting the player in a position where they’re being scolded for trying to enjoy the product. What, exactly, is the player expected to do? What is the “Good” or “right” choice. The game doesn’t have a “Go AWOL” button or a “refuse to fight” button or a “frag your officers” button. If you want to continue to play the game you have to go forward and do the atrocities. You don’t have a choice.

    Your entire rant is something that I’ve written in /r/truegaming almost a decade ago. And I’ve always hated that “you could always just quit the game” copout horseshit because that is easily countered by, “Well, these are just pixels on a screen. None of this shit is real.” And I’m glad someone else made the “MGS2 did what Spec Ops did but better over a decade ago” observation, which I’ve also made unhinged rants about in /r/truegaming back when I was still on Reddit.