>>93886
>Good enough. Shitty games just don't get purchased.
They occupy space. You're an idiot if you don't see how every somewhat novel or thoughtful videogame that gets released immediately getting buried under a mound of worthless shit may harm sales. If you believe this, then I'm sure you wouldn't have anything against the idea of moving the entire population of India into your country.
>Such as? Were these games not allowed onto the market or something? I'm genuinely confused here. If they were allowed but "orgasm lab simulator" sold more copies that's not the platfurm's fault. Either the less popular game was just inferior or the creator did a bad job promoting it.
If sales correlate at all to any objective or subjective metric of quality, that must mean that NBA 2K26 was the second-best videogame of 2025. Bad faith niiiiggeeerrrrrr.
>What would have happened if he were to just ignore the naysayers? Would they complain to his manager or something?
Games have gotten pulled from Steam over moral outrage campaigns befure, Steam was targeted in the payment processor boycott too, he's big enough that he probably COULD ride out any future controversies, but most people AREN'T. And many people WOULD buckle and take everything they've ever made down if enough people start screaming incoherently at them.
>Do you travel abroad often? Most of the planet is rural areas populated with people who use the internet to chat, order stuff and email each other funny cat videos. They have no interest or time to indulge in discovering quirky niche subcultures. Being terminally online is something people who have other basic needs covered can affurd to do.
What's the point of bringing up functional non-entities in an argument which has nothing to do with them? Everybody with an internet connection who uses it fur more than talking with old people in their village Facebook group and ordering products, is that better? Fluffing pedant.
>Zootopia is well-received by kids, adults and furfags around the world as testified by the amount of official merch and fan tributes.
This argumentum ad populum means absolutely nothing on it's own, as we are talking explicitly about furfags and media pertinent to furfags, NOT WHETHER RANDOM CHILDRENS FILMS WERE COMMERCIALLY SUCCESSFUL OR NOT. Zootopia was the most relevant and interesting film you mentioned, so I singled it out.
>>Zootopia 1 was ostensibly about animals so that the screenwriters could feel comfurtable "tackling the topic of race".
>So that negates all it has going fur it, I see, what a curious take.
And that doesn't negate anything it has going fur it other than the claim that it's a deliberate work of furry commercial art. NYAGGER.
>>Obviously the people in the West who watch anime don't use fluffing Metacritic.