Disappointment with the Pearl's eviction is now even stronger after devs acknowledged the importance of player made builds in regards to the lost Y-axis mechanic

[Hungry French]

But you won't have to swim to Pearl. Convenient!

[Sephirona]

I personally don't mind that I can move Pearl to my base now, actually I quite like it. My island wasn't very far from base but I've set up little towns in my base with merms/bunnymen//pigmen and having her there really adds to it. I like the idea that she's moved on in a healthy way from a relationship that wasn't going to go anywhere anymore. That said, I also do not like seeing peoples' creative efforts wasted. It's unfortunate that it wasn't clear that the island wouldn't be safe to build on and that it was around for long enough that people have spent years irl on it already. Something like this could do with more telegraphing from the story in the future. There's also the fact that the island itself had a lot of charm and character. Perhaps the developers underestimated the level of attachment people would have for that island, I did find it very cute and it's a compliment to whomever designed it. Even though we've lost it, I'd like to see more locations like that around the map that we can keep in the future.

And yeah, I'm not very pleased to see that the thread about toggling off electric fires from moongleams was closed without warning, either. Perhaps devs didn't think the continued arguments there were fruitful anymore, but I hope that it's also because there are plans to implement a toggle and that maybe they're trying to add a bunch of toggles all at once so it's just not something we'll see immediately in the next few updates. Would certainly have liked some acknowledgement about that as well though. We have lots of things in toggles that allow us to customize the danger of the world and although I know rifts warn you that the world will be irrevocably changed, moonstorms are technically pre-rift and already give us plenty of hazards anyway.

[Primalflower]

If i'm being honest with myself I think it's a litlle bit messed up that the island had to be turned into this whole boss arena from a perspective that plays into the hundreds of thousands of days, but I wish that every post you made on the topic didn't pretend as if this wasn't a pretty much entirely healthy thing for Pearl and almost go through revisionist lengths to push that angle, it makes me not want to agree  with you even though aside from the lore perspective your position is sympathetic

[Mike23Ua]

I don’t like idea of being able to move Pearl into your base, simply because it removes my need to go somewhere that isn’t base to do something.

I like having to build a boat and sail out to “pearls place” and along the way: Dealing with whatever oceanic wildlife, weather or sanity mechanics that may arise on my way getting out there to her.

And yes I’m fully aware that I can just place Pearl out on some random island to still do that, but it’s the fact that I (or other players) can relocate her at all that upsets me.

In this case: Klei should have been more creative, by perhaps letting the hermit crab “temporarily” burrow her home into the ground during the boss fight before resurfacing afterward..

However, What’s done is done & it would be a waste of development time & resources to go back and change it when they could move on to something else.

[Lovens]

10 hours ago, Primalflower said:

If i'm being honest with myself I think it's a litlle bit messed up that the island had to be turned into this whole boss arena from a perspective that plays into the hundreds of thousands of days, but I wish that every post you made on the topic didn't pretend as if this wasn't a pretty much entirely healthy thing for Pearl and almost go through revisionist lengths to push that angle, it makes me not want to agree  with you even though aside from the lore perspective your position is sympathetic

I'm pragmatic. To me the lore is the least appealing part of the game, and the gameplay is the primary thing that drives my enjoyment. The lore is half made up by players, half scattered in the game by devs like little breadcrumbs, but it's vague, inconsistent and should not be the defining feature of the game. Lore should never be in the way of the gameplay. It could be amusing but I dislike when people start bringing up lore to justify questionable gameplay changes. To me this gameplay change heavily impacted the enjoyment of my favourite game. So when I'm being told "But hey it was a good thing for Pearl, now she can move on from the whole Crab King drama" I shrug. I don't see it as the significant enough reason. And yes I can and will point out flaws in the "lore-driven" support of this stupid eviction arc. 

People brought up here earlier that with rifts enabled in the settings the eviction can happen before player even does any of the Pearl's tasks. How is that ever explained in relation to the Crab King drama? The Pearl who hasn't seen the broken pearl yet is just being kicked out of her favourite place then randomly to Moon Quay. She is not over Crab King drama and she still hopes players will see him when she gives them the pearl. Ok, here's another inconsistency in the lore. We know Pearl throws bottles in the ocean in hopes of reaching "her sweetie". Why does she continue throwing them at all (from the lore perspective) even after she is "over" Crab King? Why does she still throw them even after she is moved to live next to the player? I know the gameplay answer to this: so players can keep finding treasure in the ocean. I know the logical answer to this from the coding point of view: the bottles are not actually thrown by Pearl. They are spawned by the game independently of her, an invisible spawner (and not Pearl directly) generates them around the players when they are on the ocean. But how does the lore explain this never ending flow of messages (which are usually sent by someone in distress asking for help) if the person sending them lives next door to the player? Could it mean *GASP* that she is not over Crab King, perhaps? Or that she is still not happy even after moving next to the player and want to be rescued from it? 

Edited October 4, 2025 by Lovens

[Primalflower]

2 hours ago, Lovens said:

People brought up here earlier that with rifts enabled in the settings the eviction can happen before player even does any of the Pearl's tasks. How is that ever explained in relation to the Crab King drama? The Pearl who hasn't seen the broken pearl yet is just being kicked out of her favourite place then randomly to Moon Quay. She is not over Crab King drama and she still hopes players will see him when she gives them the pearl. Ok, here's another inconsistency in the lore. We know Pearl throws bottles in the ocean in hopes of reaching "her sweetie". Why does she continue throwing them at all (from the lore perspective) even after she is "over" Crab King? Why does she still throw them even after she is moved to live next to the player? I know the gameplay answer to this: so players can keep finding treasure in the ocean. I know the logical answer to this from the coding point of view: the bottles are not actually thrown by Pearl. They are spawned by the game independently of her, an invisible spawner (and not Pearl directly) generates them around the players when they are on the ocean. But how does the lore explain this never ending flow of messages (which are usually sent by someone in distress asking for help) if the person sending them lives next door to the player? Could it mean *GASP* that she is not over Crab King, perhaps? Or that she is still not happy even after moving next to the player and want to be rescued from it? 

theres so little way i can take this that isn't just straightup you being facetious/being willingly obtuse because you are (understandably) frustrated about this game mechanic, because if this is not the case, then the misunderstanding of how video games work runs deep, it's really messed up. Your argument here is predicated on a world setting that is off by default and acts as a sort of chapter select with consequences. What you are saying here is not just similar, but pretty much exactly as valid as setting hounds to none and being confused as to why hounds show up in shorts. The chests that spawn around the player point of origin, if you turn the world preset to Plus are never depicted in any short, because they're canon divergent inherently because they're not the default world setting

Edited October 4, 2025 by Primalflower
added a word or t wo to signify that i still relate to the base thought even if i find this particular strain meaningless

[Lovens]

2 hours ago, Primalflower said:

theres so little way i can take this that isn't just straightup you being facetious/being willingly obtuse because you are (understandably) frustrated about this game mechanic, because if this is not the case, then the misunderstanding of how video games work runs deep, it's really messed up. Your argument here is predicated on a world setting that is off by default and acts as a sort of chapter select with consequences. What you are saying here is not just similar, but pretty much exactly as valid as setting hounds to none and being confused as to why hounds show up in shorts. The chests that spawn around the player point of origin, if you turn the world preset to Plus are never depicted in any short, because they're canon divergent inherently because they're not the default world setting

All I was trying to say is that lore in this game is vague and inconsistent and should not be the defining mechanism to drive the gameplay (and in this case, worsen it). I can understand how people can like lore and how they enjoy theorizing about everything and finding a reason for all things happening in the game. But no matter how much lore is presented to "justify" Pearl's eviction, I still don't like how it ruined the gameplay when it was completely avoidable. It's not the abstract "lore" that made Wagstaff evict Pearl because he's evil. It's an unthoughtful decision by the developers who did not consider there's a portion of the player base who likes to build on Pearl's island and likes it as an established landmark. There was first developer's decision (very likely forced by the lack of time invested into said beta and its feedback analysis), and then a weak attempt to shape the lore around it to explain this mess.

There's not a single valid reason explaining why Warbot/Scion fight couldn't have happened literally anywhere else. On a separate own new island, or on Lunar satellites, or on the main Lunar Island where another endgame lunar-themed boss fight already takes place, with already established boss "arena". 

Edited October 4, 2025 by Lovens

[lowercase skye]

9 hours ago, Lovens said:

Ok, here's another inconsistency in the lore. We know Pearl throws bottles in the ocean in hopes of reaching "her sweetie". Why does she continue throwing them at all (from the lore perspective) even after she is "over" Crab King?

Not an inconsistency. Once you give her the Pearl, she stops including her messages to the Crab King and instead only points to treasures. This is because, like she says at middle levels of friendship, she's glad that her bottles are at least reaching someone, that being the player. By the time you give her the Pearl, she's switched from trying to contact the Crab King with those bottles, to just pointing the survivors to treasures, like a little game.

4 hours ago, Lovens said:

But no matter how much lore is presented to "justify" Pearl's eviction, I still don't like how it ruined the gameplay when it was completely avoidable.

Then please, please stop trying to argue about the lore being inconsistent or bad, and just focus on the gameplay. Your gameplay criticisms here are so reasonable, but they're always tied to this argument about the lore and how it's cruel and nonsensical and full of holes.

[SilverSpoon]

2 hours ago, lowercase skye said:

Then please, please stop trying to argue about the lore being inconsistent or bad, and just focus on the gameplay. Your gameplay criticisms here are so reasonable, but they're always tied to this argument about the lore and how it's cruel and nonsensical and full of holes

That said, perhaps we can make cruel into not unreasonable, nonsensical into meaningful, and fill in the holes, then it’s worth discussing.

As a fundamental fix, letting the WARBOT arena be moved elsewhere would help, or else, we could make sure inocent players who build bases on Crab Island don’t get wiped later, give narrative meaning to Pearl being sent to Monkey Island (since Pearl and the Moonkey Queen are both victims of Wagstaff, they might become mutual sympathizers and understand), extend Pearl’s quest so she’s fully freed from her past, or it's my favorite idea, have it so that defeating a post-Rift Mutated Crab King temporarily frees him from Enlightenment, he reunites with Pearl, they settling the past and forgiving each other, and  Pearl knows that he can never release from Enlightenment, she accepts letting go of the past, a bittersweet epilogue.

Edited October 4, 2025 by SilverSpoon

[Lovens]

4 hours ago, lowercase skye said:

Not an inconsistency. Once you give her the Pearl, she stops including her messages to the Crab King and instead only points to treasures. This is because, like she says at middle levels of friendship, she's glad that her bottles are at least reaching someone, that being the player. By the time you give her the Pearl, she's switched from trying to contact the Crab King with those bottles, to just pointing the survivors to treasures, like a little game.

Oh but the lore has so many plot holes that I almost find it amusing to point them out and see what other stupid explanations people will come up with trying to explain those inconsistencies. Doesn't Pearl sending bottles at all make you ever question:
1) How does Pearl know the location of the treasure (from the lore point of view)? Who even sets up all the treasure in the world, is it Pearl? How is she so rich then? Why does she never take the treasure for herself instead then if she knows about it? Bet she'd love her some fishing gear and 10000 golden pickaxes. 
2) Why does she just randomly reveal that information to any random person (she doesn't know who will end up picking up her bottles)?
3) Where does she take so many bottles? Even if you don't trade her the empty ones back she won't stop sending new ones.
Finally, a message in a bottle itself as a concept is a sign of a person in distress. So even though she technically stops putting actual messages in them and only shows the location of treasure chests, the action of sending a message in a bottle itself looks like an attempt to reach to someone and a hidden "cry for help". Think "Blink twice if you need help" kind of thing.

Quote

Then please, please stop trying to argue about the lore being inconsistent or bad, and just focus on the gameplay. Your gameplay criticisms here are so reasonable, but they're always tied to this argument about the lore and how it's cruel and nonsensical and full of holes.

I would be glad to only argue from the gameplay point of view but I have said everything about it already many, many times. People still don't understand my gripe with it and still come and try to argue with me bringing up the "sacred lore" that supposedly should justify all my gameplay inconveniences and struggles. "Got your Pearl's island build messed up and your favorite landmark ruined? Well it was all because Wagstaff is evil/needed this island specifically/insert whatever else bs explanation here, and we needed a way to see it proven! And it was good for Pearl to move on, now she can get over her broken relationship!"

It's not Wagstaff and not Pearl who are playing this game and paying for the skins introduced each update, it's the players. Why should I care about some made-up vague stories in a made-up game if the stories ruin my enjoyment of the game? 

[Primalflower]

49 minutes ago, Lovens said:

1) How does Pearl know the location of the treasure (from the lore point of view)? Who even sets up all the treasure in the world, is it Pearl? How is she so rich then? Why does she never take the treasure for herself instead then if she knows about it? Bet she'd love her some fishing gear and 10000 golden pickaxes. 
2) Why does she just randomly reveal that information to any random person (she doesn't know who will end up picking up her bottles)?
3) Where does she take so many bottles? Even if you don't trade her the empty ones back she won't stop sending new ones.

this is cinema sins

Edited October 5, 2025 by Primalflower

[hyoton123]

Where does pearl get all these bottles anyway? Ding!

[mima_]

i wonder if X mark from bottle really from pearl at all though ?

here my thought .
1) pearl throw bottle to ocean when she still waiting for crab king and at this point we will be getting some bottle contain X and her letter.
2) when pearl got the cracked pearl back, we didnt get anymore of her letter... so i assume she gave up on him and already stop giving out letter that why we only get x map on every bottle ... 

in conclusion the bottle of treasure map was not from her at all.

[Lovens]

3 hours ago, mima_ said:

i wonder if X mark from bottle really from pearl at all though ?

here my thought .
1) pearl throw bottle to ocean when she still waiting for crab king and at this point we will be getting some bottle contain X and her letter.
2) when pearl got the cracked pearl back, we didnt get anymore of her letter... so i assume she gave up on him and already stop giving out letter that why we only get x map on every bottle ... 

in conclusion the bottle of treasure map was not from her at all.

She still does bottle throwing animation even after seeing cracked pearl though. And I saw her do that even after I tried the relocation kit on testing. That's probably one of the reasons why the relocation kit's shore placement is so strict - she needs to be near water to do bottle throwing and fishing. 

[Ridley]

4 hours ago, Lovens said:

She still does bottle throwing animation even after seeing cracked pearl though. And I saw her do that even after I tried the relocation kit on testing. That's probably one of the reasons why the relocation kit's shore placement is so strict - she needs to be near water to do bottle throwing and fishing. 

I do think the treasure map bottles come from Pearl, though it could be intentional. I think it is reasonably implied that Crab King had issues with being avaricious and the acquiring the lunar altar caused his disappearance. Pearl could be tossing out his old buried treasure maps.

[hyoton123]

12 hours ago, Ridley said:

Pearl could be tossing out his old buried treasure maps.

Oh, I like this idea. That’s some good revenge.

[Primalflower]

On 10/5/2025 at 6:13 PM, Lovens said:

She still does bottle throwing animation even after seeing cracked pearl though.

the sad messages are gone after showing her the cracked pearl, replaced with treasures only. shes throwing them specifically for you after the cracked pearl is given.

its a game between you and her now, rather than her trying  to reach out to him. because shes moved on (or is actively trying to).

Edited October 7, 2025 by Primalflower