Also, while I think there will be a clear appeal of the game which Xseed is heavily banking on, I believe it's reasonable for many to bring up genuine concerns about its content, and I will be very surprised if few people touch on the subject in the next couple weeks as it releases overseas.
I can understand seeing a game based around assaulting people by tearing off their clothes and beating them with things as being a bit unsettling for some. Their potential objections are not unreasonable, and any of my defenses of the game's odd, silly charm do not deny how problematic parts of it may be. I am both turned away and intrigued by its absurdity, and Xseed appears to believe they have a winner here.
From what I've seen, it's an interesting little game that attempts to ride a line between parody and sincerity, and as people start playing the final overseas version, I hope we'll get some nice discussions around the different ways that different people respond to the game.
@afrofools: Sure! And then write a blog post about it so that people can get a better impression of it. :)
(I in no way vouch for the relative quality of Akiba's Trip, but most indications I've seen are of a quirky game that's more about a kind of juvenile frivolity ala Saints Row than something outright disturbing)
It's weird for sure, but from what I've seen, it's actually tamer than many will likely expect. It's more odd or silly than disturbing.
Yeah. That horror game (Blackbay Asylum) on the front page looks more disturbing to be honest.
Easily. There will probably be a dozen Steam games more disturbing.
Honestly, I haven't seen anything from the game that is really disturbing as much as it is silly or absurd. I mean, if I see Dan doing Dan stuff, I don't consider it disturbing. It's more "I feel like face palming but it's also kinda amusing in an endearing way". The developer has clearly been having fun with making Akiba's Trip, and like Conception II before it, it will likely have its quirky appeal.
@mb: I think the appeal of Soylent is scientifically getting down a drink for your specific need. It's ever-evolving, but unlike many kinds of food replacements, it's meant to be most or all of your meals. Meal replacements tend to be supplements to ordinary eating or temporary, while Soylent is intended to be a long term solution for you in particular. Instead of trying to replace foods, it's trying to get at the very root of chemical needs. Functionally, it's very similar, but it's more like a different approach than something completely different.
I agree, though, that a lot of this is the pitch. My brother can't eat normal food due to his disability; so, he lives solely off of a Nutren variant through a feeding pump to his stomach. He has no other food, and he has lived that way for over 13 years. It works. The big apparent difference here is in that approach. Finding a nutrition solution not because you can't have food but because you want to replace food. Functionally similar but with a different intent.
Also, I'm glad my brother doesn't have to actually taste his food replacement. Just from years of putting it in the pump and occasionally getting it on me, it's not great. ha. But it gets the job done when pumped right to him; so, I'm really glad it's around.