Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Gengar84]

I gotcha. I dunno but it seems that the table is set for a huge win for Nintendo even if it angered fans to do it. They've gotten over it and in many cases didn't notice.

Yeah, I’ll always miss the full dex but my problems were more with the PR and the way they announced it than the fact that they had to remove it. I’m fine with a smaller dex is the games make big improvements in other areas but Sword and Shield seemed like a downgrade across the board. Here’s hoping Scarlet and Violet can continue Arceus’ momentum and pick things back up.

 

[chocolatejr9]

I can’t think of many that do it as often as GameFreak with such an attitude like they don’t care about the fans. I’m sure there are several others but not many among those I’m personally invested in. I started noticing their change of attitude with ORAS and their excuse for leaving out the Battle Frontier.

No offense, but aren't you a Blizzard fan? Because HOO BOY, do they make Game Freak look like a saint...

 

[Gengar84]

No offense, but aren't you a Blizzard fan? Because HOO BOY, do they make Game Freak look like a saint...

I’m a fan of Blizzard’s IP but not the current company itself. That’s a pretty important distinction. Obviously current Blizzard is far worse but they’re almost not comparable. I don’t think GameFreak is evil, just that they seem to have gotten lazy and figured out how to make the most money with the least effort. That’s very different than harassment and sexual abuse.

After all, I still buy GameFreak’s games and will continue to do so unless something goes horribly wrong. I just wish they’d be a little more honest and put in more effort. Other than Diablo III and the first StarCraft 2, I haven’t bought a Blizzard game in nearly 20 years.

 

[Quillion]

I think it’s more to do with the 3 year dev cycle the gens seem to be stuck with

Eh, if Ubisoft can churn out stuffed open world games every year, GF probably could with a good collaborator.

Ubi OW games are also stale and repetitive granted, but still.

 

[fogbadge]

I’m a fan of Blizzard’s IP but not the current company itself. That’s a pretty important distinction. Obviously current Blizzard is far worse but they’re almost not comparable. I don’t think GameFreak is evil, just that they seem to have gotten lazy and figured out how to make the most money with the least effort. That’s very different than harassment and sexual abuse.

well by all accounts their dev cycle is limited. Sword and shield is just it finally starting

Eh, if Ubisoft can churn out stuffed open world games every year, GF probably could with a good collaborator.

Ubi OW games are also stale and repetitive granted, but still.

ubisoft is a bigger company to be fair

 

[Gengar84]

well by all accounts their dev cycle is limited. Sword and shield is just it finally starting



ubisoft is a bigger company to be fair

That’s true, it’s not entirely on GameFreak. The Pokémon Company is a big part of the problem too. They need to greatly expand the team so they are able to handle the schedule without making so many sacrifices due to having to rush out the games. Pokémon is the most profitable IP in the world so they have more than enough money to do that. The problem is, why bother if everyone is going to buy the games anyway?

 

[Sucumbio]

Yeah, I’ll always miss the full deck but my problems were more with the PR and the way they announced it than the fact that they had to remove it. I’m fine with a smaller deck is the games make big improvements in other areas but Sword and Shield seemed like a downgrade across the board. Here’s hoping Scarlet and Violet can continue Arceus’ momentum and pick things back up.

I think it will.

I feel you. I have been displeased with many a PR moves over the years.

In fact it ties into my disdain for acquisitions. Oh how I wish RoboSport was on switch playing with 3 others from around the world.

The thing with how good a game it is, well it seems those who played Arceus first generally enjoy Sword and Shield... Fwiw. But I'm at this point more interested in how the new gen plays out.

 

[fogbadge]

That’s true, it’s not entirely on GameFreak. The Pokémon Company is a big part of the problem too. They need to greatly expand the team so they are able to handle the schedule without making so many sacrifices due to having to rush out the games.

exactly. And they should widen the dev time too. Part of me wonders if they’re heading for crunch culture

 

[chocolatejr9]

Wait, I just realized, aren't Directs usually after Pokemon news? Like, a week after or something?

 

[Perkilator]

Some small gameplay footage of Sonic Frontiers:

 

[Diddy Kong]

I do wish Pokken Tournament would continue one day

Pokken and Pokemon Go where actually quite innovative, even if not complete original of course. But it took Pokemon to a new direction, and I liked that.

Is Arceus Legends anything good? Reading too many divisive opinions about it, thought to maybe give it a go, but in case of doubt I almost never go for it

 

[Gengar84]

Pokken and Pokemon Go where actually quite innovative, even if not complete original of course. But it took Pokemon to a new direction, and I liked that.

Is Arceus Legends anything good? Reading too many divisive opinions about it, thought to maybe give it a go, but in case of doubt I almost never go for it

Arceus was really fun for the play through compared to most Pokémon games. It doesn’t have a ton of replay value for me personally afterwards though. I had a blast for about 60 hours then I was done, where I typically put around 500 in a standard Pokémon game. I think your enjoyment will depend on what you like most about Pokémon. The catching and exploration is much better but I personally find the battle system to be worse and they removed a large majority of moves and no Pokémon has abilities or can hold items.

 

[Perkilator]

Decided to revive an old creation thread.

 

[SPEN18]

I don't have an issue with dropping the National Dex. In fact, I think it is good for the series to no longer be tied down by what was clearly going to be an unsustainable feature. When you average over 100 new mons per gen and the move to 3D models was going to become inevitable, the writing was on the wall during gen 6 at the absolute latest, and arguably even as early as gens 3-4. If they had wanted National Dex to always be there, then they should have adopted a much more conservative approach to creating new mons.
To reiterate, from a design perspective the commitment to National Dex doesn't really make any sense. There's a ton of redundancy created by including every single iteration of every single archetype. And throughout the years we've always seen plenty of mons relegated to transfer-only status; making models for all those mons is just spending a ton of dev resources for what is essentially post-game bonus content that doesn't factor at all into the main part of the game. National Dex is at this point just a detriment to the overall product.
Besides, it isn't even that bad a case for those who want to see their favorites. With a rotating cast model (which even makes total sense in-universe due to each region having its own set of native mons), we could see almost all species appear like every other gen or so.

To connect the discussion back to the topic of Smash, there will probably always be a very small portion of the consumer base, largely comprised of dedicated fans, who will fervently oppose even minimal content removals, especially playable character removals, whether that be for PKMN or for Smash. The reality is that such considerations are largely irrelevant to good game design. In the cases of PKMN and Smash in particular, there are also "legacy" considerations to measure (for characters especially; and, yes, they should indeed be considered). However, the other reality is that many mons and PCs in Smash were never much more than circumstantial filler.

 

[ForsakenM]

I don't have an issue with dropping the National Dex. In fact, I think it is good for the series to no longer be tied down by what was clearly going to be an unsustainable feature. When you average over 100 new mons per gen and the move to 3D models was going to become inevitable, the writing was on the wall during gen 6 at the absolute latest, and arguably even as early as gens 3-4. If they had wanted National Dex to always be there, then they should have adopted a much more conservative approach to creating new mons.
To reiterate, from a design perspective the commitment to National Dex doesn't really make any sense. There's a ton of redundancy created by including every single iteration of every single archetype. And throughout the years we've always seen plenty of mons relegated to transfer-only status; making models for all those mons is just spending a ton of dev resources for what is essentially post-game bonus content that doesn't factor at all into the main part of the game. National Dex is at this point just a detriment to the overall product.
Besides, it isn't even that bad a case for those who want to see their favorites. With a rotating cast model (which even makes total sense in-universe due to each region having its own set of native mons), we could see almost all species appear like every other gen or so.

To connect the discussion back to the topic of Smash, the fact of the matter is that there will probably always be a very small portion of the consumer base, largely comprised of dedicated fans, who will fervently oppose even minimal content removals, especially playable character removals, whether that be for PKMN or for Smash. The reality is that such considerations are largely irrelevant to good game design. In the cases of PKMN and Smash in particular, there are also "legacy" considerations to measure (for characters especially; and, yes, they should indeed be considered). However, the other reality is that many mons and PCs in Smash were never much more than circumstantial filler.

'Filler' that has hundreds of people that love playing as them.

Also, Pokemon is entirely sustainable with all these Mons and 3D models. They just don't care about giving them actual time and a real AAA budget to outsource more help because PROFITS amirite guys? That, and to be honest, Game Freak is a slight bit incompetent without intelligent persons with drive to lead them. Iwata REALLY did them some solids before he passed, and now Ye Ol' Game Freak signs of lacking are starting to creep up again.

Don't forget that EVERY OTHER GEN REMAKE THUS FAR got the TRUE remake treatment, but Gen 4 which was possibly clamored for the most? Hand it to a team and have them make it so accurate to the original games that people regret buying it, but also still a mess at launch and with cut content from the originals as well. I'm glad I dodged the bullet of getting hooked on Gen 4, Gen 4 fans got done dirty.

 

[Gengar84]

I don't have an issue with dropping the National Dex. In fact, I think it is good for the series to no longer be tied down by what was clearly going to be an unsustainable feature. When you average over 100 new mons per gen and the move to 3D models was going to become inevitable, the writing was on the wall during gen 6 at the absolute latest, and arguably even as early as gens 3-4. If they had wanted National Dex to always be there, then they should have adopted a much more conservative approach to creating new mons.
To reiterate, from a design perspective the commitment to National Dex doesn't really make any sense. There's a ton of redundancy created by including every single iteration of every single archetype. And throughout the years we've always seen plenty of mons relegated to transfer-only status; making models for all those mons is just spending a ton of dev resources for what is essentially post-game bonus content that doesn't factor at all into the main part of the game. National Dex is at this point just a detriment to the overall product.
Besides, it isn't even that bad a case for those who want to see their favorites. With a rotating cast model (which even makes total sense in-universe due to each region having its own set of native mons), we could see almost all species appear like every other gen or so.

To connect the discussion back to the topic of Smash, there will probably always be a very small portion of the consumer base, largely comprised of dedicated fans, who will fervently oppose even minimal content removals, especially playable character removals, whether that be for PKMN or for Smash. The reality is that such considerations are largely irrelevant to good game design. In the cases of PKMN and Smash in particular, there are also "legacy" considerations to measure (for characters especially; and, yes, they should indeed be considered). However, the other reality is that many mons and PCs in Smash were never much more than circumstantial filler.

I think the optimal solution is to bring back Pokémon Stadium that just focuses on battles. You can still have mini games and challenge cups and that game can be where the full dex is usable where the main games focus more on story with a more limited dex. The new Stadium could have options for all past gimmicks and the ability to allow each or not. You can have a whole separate developer make these like they did for the past games and Battle Revolution so GameFreak can focus on the mainline games.

 

[TCT~Phantom]

What is the story behind Sword and Shield's disaster?

It's not that I don't believe you because I've read this a lot ... A lot. But it out sold gold and silver (pushing it to 3rd) which was the first Generation 2. Gen 1 has sold the most, still.

It took until Generation ... 8? From 2.... To come out with a game that beat all varieties of glasses tinted, fogged... Missing.... A system seller among those who've kept up and those who are like oh yeah Pokemon that mobile game {Go!} was cool .. let's try it! Yep this is cool...

Or

Wtf is this?

By being exposed to Pokemon on Switch it's clear they decided the RPG-Ness (ha) would be best suited adopting an art and gameplay style that would appeal to Switch owners (handheld leaning) first... POKEMON! fans second thus gambling once again on the Fate of a franchise (they called it obv) and this is especially true with Arceus which when if played first and by Switch owners (docked leaning) are like woah when did Zelda become Pokemon? (Or Pokemon become Zelda whatever lol). This calculus produces an end result of potentially outselling the first Generation especially if you want to get silly and consider Home's interoperability.

Anyway, just curious cause "disaster" seems like a harsh criticism.

Sword and Shield is an utter disaster in terms of design as a pokemon game.

Let's start with the elephant in the room, the cut of the National Dex. One of the greatest things about Pokemon is the wide variety of favorite pokemon you can see. Take any pokemon. Even one you might not like. It is someone's favorite pokemon. There are pokemon I detest like Spinda, the elemental monkeys in Gen 5, or Dedenne. Those still are people's favorite pokemon. One of the great things about the series is that no matter what, you can bring your old pokemon back and see them again. For example, Charizard is not in Gen 5's games, but you can bring that Charizard you had in Fire Red or Leaf Green forward. You have the ability even if they are not in the game's pokedex like in Gen 7 (where National Dex was cut in terms of its dex entries, not the pokemon). Now take that away. Your favorite pokemon might not appear again or you can't even bring them up with you. If you want to have them still not waiting on your 3DS, you need to pay 20 bucks a year to keep them hostage in Pokemon Home, until Game Freak dames to bring them to a new pokemon game. This is not limited to a niche pokemon, super popular ones like Greninja are locked away in Home. There really are not great arguments for Sword and Shield having the dex cut. The models are still the same upscaled models that they had since they went to 3D to future proof the series. The animations for walking and running were done during Sun and Moon. The official PR claim was that the cut had to be done to allow them to focus more on animation quality but... well we will get to that.

The story of Sword and Shield is awful, probably the worst in the series for when they attempted to tell a story. The only reason conflict happens is because the main villain had a single digit IQ and the patience of a toddler. Characters are well designed as always but they go through half arcs at best. The writing is dreadful. I know that Pokemon is not a series known for its story or its writing, but they have shown that not only do they want to do better in this regard but they have done well. Black and White is easily the best written pokemon game and I think is the perfect example of how story telling in pokemon is not a net negative. Black 2 White 2 and Sun and Moon (in spite of the latter's over abundance of cutscenes that did not advance the plot), also show that you can tell a good story in a pokemon game. Hell, Arceus gets a lot of flack for its story, when honestly I think its actually pretty good for a pokemon game. its no shakespeare, but its miles better than the tripe that Sword and Shield offered.

Region design is super important in Pokemon as well. Selling the aesthetic of each region and balancing level design is something that Pokemon has always struggled with. Every region in near universally loved pokemon games has its faults. Unova is linear, Hoenn has too much water, Johto has an awful level curve stemming from its openness, and Sinnoh in its original form relied super hard on HMs for exploration. In these cases though, I can either make counter arguments towards each of these or they are not crippling to my enjoyment. Galar though is the single worst region in the mainline series. The Wild Area is the one saving grace of it, but the issue is that by the time you have finished the 3rd gym, you already will be able to see 90% of it. There are a few areas left to explore once you get your bike, but almost the whole wild area is open to look at and explore. This wouldnt be an issue if the city and route design was not among the worst in the franchise. The areas are linear with almost nothing to do. Unova might be linear, but there was so much to do off the beaten path if one desired. Chargestone cave is a great example of this. Sure, it is a relatively linear dungeon, but there is a ton of optional stuff to explore there as well. Unova also had so much more to do in general on its routes and towns. The routes in Galar are forgettable and bland with almost nothing to do. There are a few interesting ideas for cities, but you spend almost no time in them and never do anything in them other than fight the gym leader. Other pokemon games handle this better to ensure that you have reason to revisit locations. Take Sinnoh for example. Veilstone has the department store, Solaceon has the daycare, Jubilife has the GTS/GWS, Canalave lets you have access to Cresselia and Darkrai, Snowpoint has Snowpoint Temple in the postgame, Hearthome has contests, Sandgem lets me check swarms, and Pastoria has the safari zone. There really is a lack of this in Sword and Shield. The vast amount of the postgame one you finish the terrible post game story amounts to just going to the final city for the Battle Tower and tournaments, and breeding pokemon either one of the two day cares.

Pokemon games have been introducing mechanics changes and gimmicks to spice up the gameplay of pokemon since Gen 2, but none have failed in the way Dynamax has. There is a reason even VGC and BSS, Game Freak's official formats, and Smogon, which runs the biggest fan ruleset for Pokemon, have distanced themselves from the mechanic. On paper, I see what they were trying to do. They wanted to do something like Megas and Z moves at the same time. They wanted the accessibility of Z moves with the power boost that Megas provided. The issue is that the mechanic is terribly designed balance wise. Doubling your pokemon's health and the boosts that Dynamax can provide makes the mechanic super snowbally, with the only real counter being your own pokemon dynamaxing. Gigantimax I will cede is cool due to the redesigns the pokemon get. Just seeing my Squirtle get 60 feet tall is not cool. The animation takes forever and seeing the same stupid animation of me throwing a big stupid ball and my pokemon becoming huge takes 30 seconds from my life. Unlike Megas or Z moves the animation takes far longer, yet somehow looks worse. Its a terribly designed mechanic that is rotten to the core.

You might expect Dynamax to make the game trivially easy, but outside of maybe the final boss nothing in the game poses a significant challenge. The Exp Share is now permanent and applies to all pokemon. Now, on paper this could be a good idea. If there was an option to turn this off and/or the level curve was adjusted to make sure I was not anywhere from 3-8 levels above the opposing trainer's pokemon, this could be a nice quality of life change. However, neither of these are the case. The games are a result are pitifully easy. I know difficulty has never been something the series has been known for. Most official pokemon games are on the easy side for the most part. The issue is the entire game here is beyond easy. Something like this would be so easy to fix too. Outside of my above solutions, you could add difficulty modes or something. Instead, Sword and Shield is pathetically easy. I did a hardcore nuzlocke of the games with 0 deaths until the champion, where I sacked things because it didnt matter anymore. Even with fan imposed rules to attempt to illicit a challenge, the games are a joke.

The post game of Sword and Shield is laughable as well. I alluded to this earlier, but you have a battle tower and breeding. Maybe champion rematches. There really isnt anything notable to do. You only have two legendaries to catch in the base game which you already caught by the end of the short post game story. This post game "story" amounts to following two awful characters around, participating in painfully boring dynamax battles, until finally you catch the box legendary. The entire time I did that story I was going through the motions. In the post game I just bred pokemon, made a battle tower team, and patiently waited for the DLC to drop so I could potentially get more enjoyment out of the game. You have pokedex completion, but to be honest you can get almost the whole pokedex done before you beat the game. Shiny hunting is also on the table, but that's it. The post game is barren compared to other games. Emerald, Platinum, and HGSS had the Battle Frontier. B2W2 had the Pokemon World Tournament. Hoenn and Sinnoh had pokemon contests. Sinnoh and Unova offer huge new portions of the region to explore. Johto offers a whole new region to explore. Sword and Shield offers nothing outside of the bare minimum of a modern pokemon game's postgame.

Now, you might hope that at least the presentation of these games were at least good with all these issues. Honestly, the games look awful. People dunked on Arceus for looking bad, but to be honest I had far more issues with these games. Tons of frame drops in the wild area. Terrible graphics and textures. The animations in battles looked terrible outside of a few pokemon's signature moves. Graphically, this is the worst pokemon game for its hardware. I know pokemon has never been known for graphics, but the other games at least felt like they were either taking advantage of the system's hardware or pushing it a bit at points. Sword and Shield looked dated when it came out and runs like a beta version of the game. Look up the cutscene with Zacian and Zamazenta in the post game and see how awful the animations are. They did not even include a turn around animation. When Pokemon Colosseum and XD have better looking battles than you and came out 15+ years before, its a problem. At least those games have more dynamic idle, hit, and fainting animations.

There are good things in SwSh. I like a good chunk of the new pokemon. Dragapult, Toxtricity, Corvinight, and Appleton are a few that I really like. I love a lot of the Galaran forms too. I love Galaran Zapdos, Galaran Moltres, Galaran Slowking, the Galaran Zigzagoon line, and Galaran Corsala. There are tracks in the game I do enjoy. Even if I think the Wild Area in execution is not ideal, I do see a lot of potential in the idea which hopefully Scarlet and Violet take the best parts of it (the amount of pokemon, the scope, the exploration, the fact the area feels alive with pokemon) and puts it into the rest of the game. But there is so much baggage in this game that just weighs it down completely for me. I like some of the social aspects like raids, but dynamax raids without friends are awful.

Now, some people might say the DLC fixes some of my complaints. You have the Dojo in the Isle of Armor, you have a ton of legendaries to catch in the Crown Tundra and Max Raid Battles. You have more pokemon being brought into the game. But a lot of the core issues I outlined are still there. While the post game is better with those additions, the game still has many elements that are rotten to the core. I would not say Sword and Shield with the DLC is the worst mainline pokemon game, but I can make a strong argument that vanilla Sword and Shield is. All of this for 60 dollars, 90 if you include the DLC. The game is so much more expensive than the past generations on the 3DS when the quality took a nosedive imo.

I want to emphasize that I do not hate modern pokemon. Its pretty common to see people hate on "current pokemon game" and highlight that "old generation" was much better. I think Sun and Moon and USUM get way too much hate. I think Arceus was great and a refreshing change of pace in spite of its faults. But Sword and Shield to me scream rushed. The nicest things I said about the game were it introduced cool new pokemon, which every pokemon game does. It had a few good songs, which every game has at least one or two true bangers. Outside of the social aspects with raiding, there really isnt much unique to Sword and Shield I can praise it on outside of minor QoL changes like the Ability Patch (which is in the DLC only). It really is a low point for the series design wise.

Sure, the games sold well. But lets be real for a second: any pokemon game that released on the Switch would have sold well in its position. Arceus and BDSP also had impressive sales. Being a mainline pokemon game on Nintendo's home system for the first time was always gonna sell well. Combine that with the switch success and the fact pokemon is as big as it is, its no surprise the games sold like crazy. But just because they sold well does not mean they are good. I know that the nostalgia circuit will eventually come to Sword and Shield. We already are seeing it slowly come to X and Y (games I have my own issues with). But with such a rotten foundation it will be hard to whitewash Sword and Shield. I doubt that it will ever be considered one of the all time great pokemon games.

I do not know what to expect from Scarlet and Violet. Right now I am cautiously optimistic after despising SwSH, having issues with BDSP, and liking Arceus a lot. But at the very least I can say that it would be hard for them to mess up as much as they did with Sword and Shield.

 

[Quillion]

'Filler' that has hundreds of people that love playing as them.

Also, Pokemon is entirely sustainable with all these Mons and 3D models. They just don't care about giving them actual time and a real AAA budget to outsource more help because PROFITS amirite guys? That, and to be honest, Game Freak is a slight bit incompetent without intelligent persons with drive to lead them. Iwata REALLY did them some solids before he passed, and now Ye Ol' Game Freak signs of lacking are starting to creep up again.

Don't forget that EVERY OTHER GEN REMAKE THUS FAR got the TRUE remake treatment, but Gen 4 which was possibly clamored for the most? Hand it to a team and have them make it so accurate to the original games that people regret buying it, but also still a mess at launch and with cut content from the originals as well. I'm glad I dodged the bullet of getting hooked on Gen 4, Gen 4 fans got done dirty.

I'd like to note again that Ubisoft is able to put out several fully loaded open world games a year. You may decide whether that's good or bad.

 

[JOJONumber691]

Oh boy Sword and Shield debating yay! I’m just going to say that Alola is underrated, and move on with my day lol.

 

[chocolatejr9]

'Filler' that has hundreds of people that love playing as them.

Also, Pokemon is entirely sustainable with all these Mons and 3D models. They just don't care about giving them actual time and a real AAA budget to outsource more help because PROFITS amirite guys? That, and to be honest, Game Freak is a slight bit incompetent without intelligent persons with drive to lead them. Iwata REALLY did them some solids before he passed, and now Ye Ol' Game Freak signs of lacking are starting to creep up again.

Don't forget that EVERY OTHER GEN REMAKE THUS FAR got the TRUE remake treatment, but Gen 4 which was possibly clamored for the most? Hand it to a team and have them make it so accurate to the original games that people regret buying it, but also still a mess at launch and with cut content from the originals as well. I'm glad I dodged the bullet of getting hooked on Gen 4, Gen 4 fans got done dirty.

Actually, wasn't there a rumor that the original pitch for the Gen 4 remakes was reworked into Legends Arceus because they thought it was too ambitious for a simple remake?

 

[Quillion]

Oh boy Sword and Shield debating yay! I’m just going to say that Alola is underrated, and move one with my day lol.

I think the only debating that's almost as bad is TP-SS era Zelda debating. At least the Star Wars prequels have earned ironic popularity.

 

[chocolatejr9]

I think the only debating that's almost as bad is TP-SS era Zelda debating. At least the Star Wars prequels have earned ironic popularity.

Due to a recent event on Twitter, I'd like to potentially suggest the "Mario and Peach shouldn't be a couple" debate, but that has nothing to do with the current discussion.

Yes, that was a debate that happened not too long ago.

 

[SPEN18]

'Filler' that has hundreds of people that love playing as them.

Also, Pokemon is entirely sustainable with all these Mons and 3D models. They just don't care about giving them actual time and a real AAA budget to outsource more help because PROFITS amirite guys? That, and to be honest, Game Freak is a slight bit incompetent without intelligent persons with drive to lead them. Iwata REALLY did them some solids before he passed, and now Ye Ol' Game Freak signs of lacking are starting to creep up again.

Don't forget that EVERY OTHER GEN REMAKE THUS FAR got the TRUE remake treatment, but Gen 4 which was possibly clamored for the most? Hand it to a team and have them make it so accurate to the original games that people regret buying it, but also still a mess at launch and with cut content from the originals as well. I'm glad I dodged the bullet of getting hooked on Gen 4, Gen 4 fans got done dirty.

Well, "hundreds" is not really enough to move the needle, but regardless of picking dirtily at your number choice, I don't think the "but people like them" argument is very strong. The vast majority of people are going to find something they like in the roster sizes we're talking about with PKMN and Smash. Almost nobody is going to avoid purchasing because a particular subset of PKMN or Smash PCs aren't in the game; and while you might please that small minority by bringing back some old filler content, you're probably going to please even more of the general public by spending those resources on something new.
New content being a driver for continued series success is a principal reason that the National Dex became an issue to begin with, anyway; adding new mons instead of exclusively recycling old ones was deemed a necessary component of selling the sequels (though I think it could have been done in much more manageable, sustainable volumes while still remaining a successful strategy).
Having a dedicated fanbase doesn't change the realities of quality design, resource consumption, or the plain fact that some mons and Smash characters are just there for some token variety ("filler," if you will).

No, PKMN is not sustainable; it has already proven not to be. For some of the reasons I stated before, it probably is better off not being sustained even if it could be.

And no, I don't think it's fair to just demand a AAA budget and such when that's no guarantee of a better-selling or even a better-designed game. PKMN games as they are don't really suffer from a content perspective, at least in a general audience sort of view.

The reality of a mega-franchise like PKMN is that the developers are going to feel obligated to capitalize as much as possible by churning out tons of new media every year. They have a tried-and-true formula for doing that, and while it has become stale for many, I think we're better off crediting some of the small steps in new directions that have recently been taken rather than expecting an immediate leap into a full-on unknown.

 

[Quillion]

Due to a recent event on Twitter, I'd like to potentially suggest the "Mario and Peach shouldn't be a couple" debate, but that has nothing to do with the current discussion.

Yes, that was a debate that happened not too long ago.

Eh, doesn't sound quite as widespread as SwSh or TP-SS era debating.

 

[chocolatejr9]

Eh, doesn't sound quite as widespread as SwSh or TP-SS era debating.

Yeah, you're probably right. Twitter has a weird tendancy to make things seem bigger thsn they are...

 

[Quillion]

Personally, I think both GF apologists and entitled Pokéfans are unrealistic and whiny. There's a middle ground that everyone needs to take here.

 

[Dukefire]

At least Pokemon X, Y and ORAS have super training. Allowing EV training easier access without continuous battling

 

[Gengar84]

Personally, I think both GF apologists and entitled Pokéfans are unrealistic and whiny. There's a middle ground that everyone needs to take here.

That’s usually my philosophy with almost everything in life.

 

[PeridotGX]

I actually would've cut a few returning stages to get more new ones like Bowser's Castle or even Melemele Island.

I don't know if this is an unpopular opinion, but I would totally do the same. 20-30 old stages and 40-60 new stages would have been perfectly acceptable in my opinion.

 

[fogbadge]

'Filler' that has hundreds of people that love playing as them.

Also, Pokemon is entirely sustainable with all these Mons and 3D models. They just don't care about giving them actual time and a real AAA budget to outsource more help because PROFITS amirite guys? That, and to be honest, Game Freak is a slight bit incompetent without intelligent persons with drive to lead them. Iwata REALLY did them some solids before he passed, and now Ye Ol' Game Freak signs of lacking are starting to creep up again.

Don't forget that EVERY OTHER GEN REMAKE THUS FAR got the TRUE remake treatment, but Gen 4 which was possibly clamored for the most? Hand it to a team and have them make it so accurate to the original games that people regret buying it, but also still a mess at launch and with cut content from the originals as well. I'm glad I dodged the bullet of getting hooked on Gen 4, Gen 4 fans got done dirty.

You have no way of knowing that they dont care. im telling you the tight dev time and the ever increasing number of pokemon and forms meant something had to give sooner or later and they chose old pokemon. its the same reason why smash ultimate has less new stages and returning modes due to the shorter dev time and bigger roster
dont forget that these remakes were handed to an external dev team

Oh boy Sword and Shield debating yay! I’m just going to say that Alola is underrated, and move on with my day lol.

sun and moon looses points for blighting us with kukui

 

[TCT~Phantom]

At least Pokemon X, Y and ORAS have super training. Allowing EV training easier access without continuous battling

One of the QoL changes sword and shield did have is that you can use Vitamins beyond the previous 100 ev cap. It makes it so you have to money grind to take advantage of it, but it does make it easier to raise good Pokémon imo. Additions like that, super training, hyper training, and the destiny knot breeding application are great. I just wish SwSh wasn’t bad.

Personally, I think both GF apologists and entitled Pokéfans are unrealistic and whiny. There's a middle ground that everyone needs to take here.

I don’t think anything in my criticism was that unrealistic. Most if not everything I mentioned was something they already did in a previous Pokémon game or multiple previous Pokémon games. There are a wide swath of problems in Sword and Shield, especially in its launch state. Obviously entitled fans exist like the people that sent Matsuda and other devs at game freak death threats, but people have it swing the other way so that any criticism of Sword and Shield makes you entitled for some reason.

 

[Sucumbio]

... the ever increasing number of pokemon and forms meant something had to give sooner or later...

This.

Is what I've heard fans of SwSH say ... When asked if they hate the smaller roster.

 

[DarthEnderX]

and then they all loved the game anyway

I did not.

One of the QoL changes sword and shield did have is that you can use Vitamins beyond the previous 100 ev cap. It makes it so you have to money grind to take advantage of it, but it does make it easier to raise good Pokémon imo. Additions like that, super training, hyper training, and the destiny knot breeding application are great. I just wish SwSh wasn’t bad.

Honestly, sending them on missions was the easier way to EV train them. Takes a few days, but requires the least effort. Still preferred Supter Training though.

But between that, bottle caps and mints, it's easier than ever to perfect a pokemon.

 

[Gengar84]

I did not.

I still had some base level of fun with it due to being a Pokémon game but it was definitely a disappointment in many ways.

I’m not really too stressed about it because, at the end of the day, it’s just a video game and there are many more important things. I just thought I’d share how I felt about them. That doesn’t mean the people that loved the games are wrong.

 

[Perkilator]

I don't know if this is an unpopular opinion, but I would totally do the same. 20-30 old stages and 40-60 new stages would have been perfectly acceptable in my opinion.

Okay maybe not that many new stages but other than that, I agree.

 

[DarthEnderX]

Since we talking Pokemon!

 

[Gengar84]

Okay maybe not that many new stages but other than that, I agree.

My problem is that many of the new stages were pretty boring layout wise. I miss the fun platform layouts from older games like Temple, Fourside, Saffron City, Hyrule Castle, and others. A lot of newer stages felt too much like Battlefield variants, which is especially pointless given the Battlefield and Omega forms of each.

Since we talking Pokemon!

I made one of those but I’m on my phone so I’ll share mine later (it’s a bit dated though).

 

[fogbadge]

Personally I thought sword and shield are the best switch Pokémon games

 

[Quillion]

BTW, I take back what I said about SwSh debating being the worst. IIRC, Mac vs PC is probably a worse debate.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Since we talking Pokemon!

Kinda basic maybe, but I like what I like.