It’s very similar to a clickbait article. I mean, it worked because I clicked on it to see what people said, but man, that title is super corporate.
It’s very similar to a clickbait article. I mean, it worked because I clicked on it to see what people said, but man, that title is super corporate.
atomicpoet@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
No, a super corporate title would be “Analyzing the Platform Disparity: The Unconventional Release Trajectory of The Simpsons Arcade Game Across Home and Console Systems”
Which you’d probably find less clickbait but would be absolutely perfect for aligning synergies.
If your critique is that I tried to wrote an interesting title, guilty as charged. But who doesn’t try to be interesting?
Thing is, this being Lemmy, there’s no incentive to click. Clickbait literally implies a reason to click. The pertinent thing worth seeing is already in your feed.
HATEFISH@midwest.social 2 weeks ago
Not that guy but you have to admit it’s a bit silly, nobody’s talking about it because it’s pretty clearly obscure knowledge for an old videogame on a system that not many people played.
Good post content tho.
atomicpoet@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
A lot of people did play this, though. It’s a pretty major arcade game—I remember it being everywhere.
To me, the oddness isn’t just that the only home ports were for computer systems but that it was published by Konami.
It’s not unreasonable that a few arcade games would be computer-only, but it’s wild that the releases were computer-only on Western computer systems. Specifically for the North American market, not European.
The ports were not farmed off to a Western developer but developed and published by Konami—which was atypical for them. The DOS and C64 ports of Castlevania, for example, were not made by Konami.
Keep in mind the arcade game was released in Japan, so there could have been a port for PC-98 or Sharp X68000.