Seriously, people getting their knickers tite over that shit still?

What exactly are they advertising?

Jeez that’s just crazy, probably don’t want hosting liability or something, but that’s hilarious.

Can’t link to a hoster, even type it out to avoid a hyperlink blocker?

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 not, they are one store front with prolific shovelware still.

Makes it’s harder to replace vs stapling it on, but it should also last longer since a little damaged part can be shaved down and it won’t make a section loose.

Eh, I know a bunch of people who left Lemmy just because they did this, I’m not gonna do something else, but they should also realize people don’t want a Reddit clone and this stuff will make people leave.

People left Reddit to get away from this stuff, try being unique instead of emulating what you left. Like the tired old trope of your very “unique comment” as well…….

Why doesn’t Lemmy find something else than copying what Reddit did?

ADHD is just a bunch of symptoms in a trench coat.

Yeah everyone pees, but if you do it 60 times a day, you should probably ask why, no?

I agree, those are those play for the gameplay games, I don’t want to sit in a menu for 20 hours reading lore and still don’t know that I’m missing the necklace that explains why the jesters head was cut off or some stupid shit.

These games are made for some passionate fan to explain the lore in a way for others to grasp and that’s not always a bad thing. Still friggen stupid though.

The story/lore is from reading all the item descriptions and talking to everyone, gotta find it yourself unlike most games.

Isn’t that the point of him saying about “the consumptive nature”? They couldn’t do what they wanted to, because they were doing a live service (that a large portion of people do want) so concessions had to be made.

I don’t think they are saying they tried doing it, it’s just the two ideas couldn’t coexist.

YES. AND THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THOSE PEOPLE WOULD GET JOBS AND PAY TAXES AND GROW THE ECONOMY. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY WELL STUDIED AND UNDERSTOOD PHENOMENON.

SO IS PEOPLE COMING IN AND FORCEFULLY TAKING OVER YOUR COUNTRY, THE BORDERS ARE ALREADY THERE FOR THAT. IT CAUSES BOTH, YOU CANT BURY YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND AND IGNORE THE REST LMFAO

WHY DID YOU IGNORE THE MAIN POINT AND THE ONE DETRIMENTAL TO YOUR POINT……? THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS ALREADY THERE AND MUST STAY THERE TO PROTECT FROM ITHER GOVERNMENTS, ITS A TRIVIAL COST FROM THERE TO SUPPORT OTHER MEASURES, ITS CALLED FUCKING EFFICIENCY YOU KOOK.

And no, they did try to save the boat in distress, they always do. You keep looking at this with biased glasses, if you can’t discuss this in good faith get fucking lost. Theres already enough trolls here.

Why do you think border enforcement is expensive? Because so many people would cross (also war protection… so it’s already established infrastructure actually) that it’s a necessity. Or you know an army covertly moves in with arms since you foolishly had open borders and take over your entire country. Think past your nose.

relatively small handful of people who are capable of traveling across the world

I don’t think you realize how small a lot of European countries are, you could cross multiple in one day of travel. And why do you think so few people try? Because of the consequences.

People die even trying to flee their country, and you want to say only a handful are capable?

Yeesh give that empty head of yours a shake bud.

Uhh no it doesn’t, why are you assuming that? How does preventing people coming in spend millions and save thousands?

There’s lots that do, and not everyone will be capable of contributing. What about a mother of two kids with autism? She can’t work, will spend all her time caring for her kids who will into ever be a burden on the system.

Every system is abused, that’s why they have limitations.

I did, there’s lots of people explaining the same thing to you……

https://lemmy.zip/comment/11051328

It’s a very simple concept, using income as a limitation, is a free way to discriminate against anyone you want who would be a burden. And you get people like you, who justify it, so they get to continue to do it. You want less, raise it, want more, lower it. They picked a specific number for a reason……

Look we explained it, and we didn’t even need to get your opinion, since it’s just plain wrong…. Shocker….

If you have money, you’re not a burden… as we established back at comment 2… yet you continued to argue this same asinine point.

You provided an article, or do simple words confuse you thus?

And what facts? More claims, let’s see these facts that have now claimed have been provided.

Why can’t you answer simple questions? You want to claim the income limitations aren’t discrimination, yet you won’t explain how… what a shocker.

If you do, we can easily explain how it isn’t, but clearly you have trouble accepting that your opinion can’t be wrong.