Pokémon Presents - Pokémon Day 2025 - Pokemon ZA Info & Pokemon Champions Announced

I have no idea if we're allowed to discuss TCG trademarks so I'll put the deets in a spoiler tag

According to Pokebeach the trademark "Ninja Spinner" has been filed. This'll almost certainly be the first set after Legends Z-A given how we know that Inferno X, an expansion with Mega Charizard X as its mascot is releasing in Japan on September 26th.

Given that these and other products are releasing under the label of "Pokemon TCG Mega" the obvious implication is that this is soft confirmation of a currently unrevealed Mega Greninja
 
Also @Pikachu315111 I think you need to work on your rhymes :wo:

Just sing like Tony the Tiger and stretch the words where you need to, it's fine. :bloblul:

I have no idea if we're allowed to discuss TCG trademarks so I'll put the deets in a spoiler tag

According to Pokebeach the trademark "Ninja Spinner" has been filed. This'll almost certainly be the first set after Legends Z-A given how we know that Inferno X, an expansion with Mega Charizard X as its mascot is releasing in Japan on September 26th.

Given that these and other products are releasing under the label of "Pokemon TCG Mega" the obvious implication is that this is soft confirmation of a currently unrevealed Mega Greninja

 
Legends absolutely is their experimental series. My thing is, we can see how the experimental parts of it keep getting added to the main series.

I was frankly surprised when things like the crafting from items wasn’t brought forward to SV in any meaningful way, but they undoubtedly did bring forward all of the ride Pokemon experience almost verbatim, the only one which was a question mark was the true flying, which was added during the DLC.

Maybe Gen 10 will just be more of the same, but I just have this feeling about how the Legends series of games ties in the main series. I really do think there’s more than just a possibility of some changing up for the main series, even if it comes down to just a change in the presentation of the tun based system.

Champions, which a couple of you have alluded to, may yet turn out to be the “great equaliser” - as in, it becomes the VGC standard and everything else plugs into it - as HOME works for collecting.

Overall, feeling a lot happier and more confident about spending money on legends ZA later in the year.
While Legends is a bit more experimental, perhaps, I don't think it's experimental purely for the sake of testing new ideas for use in the "traditional" titles. For one, for a "Legends" series to have any meaning there needs to be something that sets it apart from the traditional series. That's why I found it not particularly surprising or disappointing that catching Pokemon without entering battle or crafting supplies didn't make it into SV, since those were major aspects of the PLA gameplay loop.

Several overworld aspects were present in games before PLA, like overworld Pokemon appearing in Let's GO and SwSh's "open world" areas. PLA feels like another step in GameFreak's evolution of those gameplay ideas, rather than a testing ground for gen 9. Similarly, PLA's ride Pokemon also seem like natural evolutions of SM's HM-replacing PokeRide and Let's GO letting you "ride" certain Pokemon during the following feature. So I don't think these are particularly strong examples of something being tested in PLA before being incorporated into SV.

Similarly, I think the battle system is another aspect that is meant to separate the Legends series from traditional, and the real-time battles of PZA may just be an evolution of the concept for the Legends series, not a test for replacing the traditional battle style in the traditional games.

It seems like a lot of people are looking at Champions being battle-focused and extrapolating that this could allow GF to switch up the battle styles in the traditional series, but I'm skeptical of that. To have Champions use a different battle system from the traditional series would mean there's little synergy between the two games and a weak pipeline from the main series into Champions. Future generations of Pokemon players growing up with a new battle system would find it jarring that Champions uses a different format. People already complain about the main games being singles-focused when VGC is doubles, and it seems unlikely that GF would purposely fracture the experience again in developing Champions. Even if the VGC circuit does move to Champions long term, I still currently expect that GF and TPC will want the traditional series to serve as the gateway, and that's best accomplished by keeping the battle formats the same, while letting the Legends series be the home of real-time battles.

As for my personal opinion, I hope that the traditional series games remains the traditional turn-based combat. I prefer the pacing of it compared to real-time combat, and I think it's perfectly fine for the core battle mechanic to be purely tactical rather than adding gratuitous jumping and dodging to the combat.
 
I think it's clear that Legends series is the "change" mainline, and paired versions are "bread-and-butter" mainline. I assume from devs perspective, they are, uh, 2D Mario line and 3D Mario line, more or less... One Pokemon game is what you've come to expect, and the other to keep a subset of fans happy. People requesting changes to BnB formula feel like they're somewhat missing a point.
All to stop people from complaining, a fruitless task.
 
I assume from devs perspective, they are, uh, 2D Mario line and 3D Mario line, more or less...
Finally, someone says it. I was wondering when this would be brought up. Speaking as a longtime Pokémon and Super Mario fan respectively (though the 2020s have been strangely inconsistent for me), I think there’s a lot of parallels to be found between these two I.Ps, so much so that I even thought of my own crossover project in my spare time but that’s beside the point.

I remember when the New Super Mario Bros. sub-series was actively ongoing, and to this day people have criticized those four/five/six games (depending on if you count New Super Luigi U and/or New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe as their own games) for all being too similar to one another and for having too many games released too close to one another. Gee, where have I heard that before? When it first occurred to me that “modern Pokémon”, whatever that means, might be having the same problem that those games did, possibly to an even greater extent, I quickly dismissed this as a double standard, and that says a lot coming from someone who’s gone on record saying Pokémon Sword is one of the worst games I’ve ever played. It just didn’t seem right for people to keep buying and supporting the Pokémon games when these same people tend to be the ones who also advocated against the New Super Mario Bros. games during the 2010s, specifically starting in 2012 when that sub-series got two new games in one year.

By comparison, the 3D Super Mario games have historically been much more varied and dynamic in their approach to world building, gameplay, and in the case of Yoshiaki Koizumi’s games (Super Mario Sunshine and the first Super Mario Galaxy), even the story, which isn’t an area Super Mario games are really known for otherwise. When 2022 and 2023 gave us Pokémon Scarlet & Violet and Super Mario Bros. Wonder relatively close to each other release date-wise, that’s when it hit me- consumers like variety, and Nintendo fans especially will flock en masse to get their hands on a newer style of game in situations where the past several recent releases have gotten stale and unappealing. But where Super Mario Bros. Wonder does still look and feel like New Super Mario Bros. in certain places, the transition between the Galar Pokémon games and the Paldea Pokémon games was much more drastic by comparison, and I would not be surprised to see future Pokémon games, specifically those on Nintendo Switch 2, try and develop and evolve the admittedly fun but very flawed first attempt at an open-world Pokémon game style that Pokémon Scarlet & Violet were going for.

It seems like a lot of people are looking at Champions being battle-focused and extrapolating that this could allow GF to switch up the battle styles in the traditional series, but I'm skeptical of that. To have Champions use a different battle system from the traditional series would mean there's little synergy between the two games and a weak pipeline from the main series into Champions. Future generations of Pokemon players growing up with a new battle system would find it jarring that Champions uses a different format. People already complain about the main games being singles-focused when VGC is doubles, and it seems unlikely that GF would purposely fracture the experience again in developing Champions. Even if the VGC circuit does move to Champions long term, I still currently expect that GF and TPC will want the traditional series to serve as the gateway, and that's best accomplished by keeping the battle formats the same, while letting the Legends series be the home of real-time battles.

As for my personal opinion, I hope that the traditional series games remains the traditional turn-based combat. I prefer the pacing of it compared to real-time combat, and I think it's perfectly fine for the core battle mechanic to be purely tactical rather than adding gratuitous jumping and dodging to the combat.
To be fair before I say what I’m about to say, I don’t actually have any evidence to back this up at the moment. That being said, I would be willing to bet that the size of the overall VGC player base has only gone up more and more in recent history, in part because of things like the “rise of eSports” and the massive sales numbers of the original Nintendo Switch. For this reason I don’t see the non-Legends core series Pokémon games getting rid of the current battle system anytime soon. Single Battle centric single player has made Game Freak a ton of money over the years, and The Indigo Disk, the VGC player base, and, heck, I’ll even through in the decision to bring back the GameCube games on Switch 2 all proves that there is absolutely still a profitable market for Double Battle gameplay as well.

Pokémon Champions, as much as I’m secretly nervous for what implications that game’s success could have going forward if or when it does break the bank, so to speak, I do believe to simply be a way to make multiplayer Pokémon battling more accessible as opposed to a direct replacement for anything we have currently. I already decided I probably won’t be getting the game myself in any form, but the game was advertised during its initial reveal as a sort of “spiritual successor” to games like Pokémon Stadium and Pokémon Battle Revolution. None of those games ever entirely replaced the handheld games they supported, but when I said I’m nervous about Pokémon Champions, I do think the decision to have the game released for mobile devices and (presumably) both generations of Nintendo Switch hardware could hold this game and possibly the core series back a significant amount as opposed to if Pokémon Champions, Pokémon Legends ZA, and the inevitable 2026 Gen 10 games were designed with the Nintendo Switch 2’s stronger hardware in mind. Game Freak in particular recently revealing they split off their resources to work on a new I.P.- that game unironically looks great by the way- is great for that new game but not for Pokémon also; it’s clear to me which Game Freak development team got the short end of the stick here.
 
Finally, someone says it. I was wondering when this would be brought up. Speaking as a longtime Pokémon and Super Mario fan respectively (though the 2020s have been strangely inconsistent for me), I think there’s a lot of parallels to be found between these two I.Ps, so much so that I even thought of my own crossover project in my spare time but that’s beside the point.

I remember when the New Super Mario Bros. sub-series was actively ongoing, and to this day people have criticized those four/five/six games (depending on if you count New Super Luigi U and/or New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe as their own games) for all being too similar to one another and for having too many games released too close to one another. Gee, where have I heard that before? When it first occurred to me that “modern Pokémon”, whatever that means, might be having the same problem that those games did, possibly to an even greater extent, I quickly dismissed this as a double standard, and that says a lot coming from someone who’s gone on record saying Pokémon Sword is one of the worst games I’ve ever played. It just didn’t seem right for people to keep buying and supporting the Pokémon games when these same people tend to be the ones who also advocated against the New Super Mario Bros. games during the 2010s, specifically starting in 2012 when that sub-series got two new games in one year.

By comparison, the 3D Super Mario games have historically been much more varied and dynamic in their approach to world building, gameplay, and in the case of Yoshiaki Koizumi’s games (Super Mario Sunshine and the first Super Mario Galaxy), even the story, which isn’t an area Super Mario games are really known for otherwise. When 2022 and 2023 gave us Pokémon Scarlet & Violet and Super Mario Bros. Wonder relatively close to each other release date-wise, that’s when it hit me- consumers like variety, and Nintendo fans especially will flock en masse to get their hands on a newer style of game in situations where the past several recent releases have gotten stale and unappealing. But where Super Mario Bros. Wonder does still look and feel like New Super Mario Bros. in certain places, the transition between the Galar Pokémon games and the Paldea Pokémon games was much more drastic by comparison, and I would not be surprised to see future Pokémon games, specifically those on Nintendo Switch 2, try and develop and evolve the admittedly fun but very flawed first attempt at an open-world Pokémon game style that Pokémon Scarlet & Violet were going for.
There is another thing you haven’t taken into account this much for the NSMB series and Wonder specifically though; reused assets. And while NSMB2 has the context of a new development team thus I give it a bit more leniency regarding reused assets, NSMBU is considered as even more guilty of reusing assets as it’s one of the early Wii U titles that is supposed to showcase what the Wii cannot do…

But when you take a closer look, outside of some modes that involve the Wii U tablet, it’s essentially just a rehash of NSMBWii, but in HD. The differences in new Power-Ups, Baby Yoshis and two new mid-bosses in Boom Boom and Boss Sumo Bro., as well as a whole new Bowser phase 2 fight, aren’t big enough to justify being one of the games the Wii U is supposed to showcase what the console can do that previous Nintendo games and other consoles at the time cannot.

And when NSMB2 and NSMBU releases within the same year with almost same boss rosters and world theming… Yup, that’s where the fatigue at that series kicks in. The four games of NSMB ended up being too similar to each others to the point you are better off sticking to one of them rather than having all the games from that series. Doesn’t help that all of them take place in the same ol’ Mushroom Kingdom, either. Part of why Wonder is a change of pace is, bosses aside, it managed to be distinct not just from assets and visuals, but also how it put emphasis on both old and new enemies and allowing each level to be distinct both visually and mechanically.

Pokémon, despite reusing assets for each game, only revisit a region through third version (before SwSh), a remake, or a Legends game, allowing each game to stand out from a standpoint of different characters, different availability of Pokémon, new species, new places to explore, so even the less-liked Pokémon games can stand on their own merits.

I do think the real issue about the repetition of the Pokémon games is not the gameplay, but rather how uncreative it can be when it comes to several major battles, as well as constantly reusing certain formulas such as “Ice as lategame”, Dragon-type Pseudo-Legendary since Gen 3, the single-stage PikaClone (Pawmi can at least evolve to make it more similar to Pikachu), and “dex fillers” that, while helpful for ecosystem lores, can end up harmful for choices if too many of them exists in a PokéDex.

If GF spice things up with some of those formulas, people will see the games less of the same and allows each of the game to feel more unique without the need to make major changes to the catch-and-battle gameplays. However, I would not consider Pokémon to be more samey than NSMB is even with the smaller formulaic things in mind.
 
Pokémon, despite reusing assets for each game, only revisit a region through third version (before SwSh), a remake, or a Legends game, allowing each game to stand out from a standpoint of different characters, different availability of Pokémon, new species, new places to explore, so even the less-liked Pokémon games can stand on their own merits.
I’m going to respond to your post one part at a time with what I want to say. I do want to make something clear, though- you make a lot of excellent points and I honestly don’t disagree with anything you said. I mainly just want to follow up on certain points.

Speaking of. Even when regions get revisited in one way or another, I do think there are certain, unspoken rules that should be followed. From a business perspective, what regions get revisited when is an often overlooked factor, but I think I speak for the masses when I say Let’s Go and BDSP we’re both pretty underwhelming as remakes. Strictly speaking, Kanto and then Sinnoh were the two next regions in line at that time to see remakes (specifically the GBA iteration of Kanto but remakes of a remake apparently aren’t allowed to exist I guess). At first I just chocked these up to what everyone else thought- Junichi Masuda was ruining these games, and both of them were rushed out slop in short time by Game Freak’s B Team and ILCA respectively. And while those statements may or may not be true (especially for Let’s Go, considering Masuda literally has directorial ownership of FireRed & LeafGreen!), what I’ve started to realize now that Legends exists is that this sub-series, much in the same way Super Mario Bros. Wonder gave new life to 2D Mario, represents a changing of the times during the “2016-Present Era” of this franchise where creativity and variety in game design and asset development should be encouraged in Pokémon. Legends Arceus in particular was not without its faults, but it felt like the first games since… gee, vanilla Sun & Moon that actually mixed up the formula and simultaneously brought us back to a place of familiarity without relying too much on reused assets or dated mechanics.

But when you take a closer look, outside of some modes that involve the Wii U tablet, it’s essentially just a rehash of NSMBWii, but in HD. The differences in new Power-Ups, Baby Yoshis and two new mid-bosses in Boom Boom and Boss Sumo Bro., as well as a whole new Bowser phase 2 fight, aren’t big enough to justify being one of the games the Wii U is supposed to showcase what the console can do that previous Nintendo games and other consoles at the time cannot.

And when NSMB2 and NSMBU releases within the same year with almost same boss rosters and world theming… Yup, that’s where the fatigue at that series kicks in. The four games of NSMB ended up being too similar to each others to the point you are better off sticking to one of them rather than having all the games from that series. Doesn’t help that all of them take place in the same ol’ Mushroom Kingdom, either. Part of why Wonder is a change of pace is, bosses aside, it managed to be distinct not just from assets and visuals, but also how it put emphasis on both old and new enemies and allowing each level to be distinct both visually and mechanically.
I might giving Nintendo too much credit here, but the issue of having two NSMB games released in the same year is at least partially compensated for by 2015’s Super Mario Maker, which maybe they considered the “true” new 2D Mario of the Wii U? To Mario Maker’s credit, that would follow the three-year-pattern we had seen up to that point. Unfortunately, all of that means nothing when 2019 gave us Super Mario Maker 2 and NSMBU Deluxe also in the same year as each other anyway. It’s still not as varied as 3D Mario ever tried to be, sure, but in tandem with what I said earlier, 2D Mario was given new life with the release of Wonder, and no matter what anyone thinks of 2D Mario compared to other prominent platformers that followed and are arguably even better, well… at least none of those felt that much like a copy-paste.

What sucks is that NSMB wasn’t the only series that made its way to Wii U that was like this. It’s by far the most egregious example I can think of, but almost all of the largest, most popular games for the Wii U had their own similar counterparts on the Wii and/or 3DS. I can’t be the only one who eventually thought of Mario Kart 8 as just “Mario Kart 7 two”, right? Or looked at Smash 4 as Brawl but worse? Or Tropical Freeze as DKC Returns but admittedly better? You guys get the picture.


I do think the real issue about the repetition of the Pokémon games is not the gameplay, but rather how uncreative it can be when it comes to several major battles, as well as constantly reusing certain formulas such as “Ice as lategame”, Dragon-type Pseudo-Legendary since Gen 3, the single-stage PikaClone (Pawmi can at least evolve to make it more similar to Pikachu), and “dex fillers” that, while helpful for ecosystem lores, can end up harmful for choices if too many of them exists in a PokéDex.

If GF spice things up with some of those formulas, people will see the games less of the same and allows each of the game to feel more unique without the need to make major changes to the catch-and-battle gameplays. However, I would not consider Pokémon to be more samey than NSMB is even with the smaller formulaic things in mind.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The different “eras” of Pokémon can roughly be organized by who directed each new generation. The problem I have with this, and the other reason Let’s Go and BDSP stick out like a sore thumb to me in 2025, is that each of these eras innovates off of each other but does not innovate within themselves. That might sound a bit confusing at first so let me explain. The “golden age of Pokémon remakes” I feel like most fans would agree to consist of FRLG, HGSS, and ORAS. All three of those remakes worked because they naturally complemented the base games of their respective generations. Those first two especially carried over the innovations in Pokémon following Gens 1 and 2 that became so synonymous with Gens 3 through 6. At the same time, however, the four-piece set of RS, DP, BW1, and XY- Unova does get a bit of a pass here since it was such a unique generation on its own- hardly innovated on each other in the same way those remakes did, instead relying on Emerald, Platinum, B2W2, and what probably would have been Z to do all of the heavy lifting for them.

Compare 2002-2016 to 2016-Present and the difference is night and day. Shigeru Ohmori’s directorial debut showed signs of success in ORAS, and all three of his generations so far look and feel way different than the base games of the previous era, and Legends taking the place of Masuda-style remakes has worked better so far than the 2018 or 2021 games, so much so that I almost wish we got a Legends Kanto game in 2018 instead. But again, even though Gens 7, 8, and 9 are so different than 3 through 6, that set of three still feels arguably too same-y in their base games and- would you believe it? Relies on the Ultra games and both DLC packages to do their heavy lifting for them.

In fact, across all three eras of the franchise so far, here’s what I would say were the best and most unique, innovative games from each set. Keep in mind that the Ultra games are similar to an Alola DLC of their own for the sake of this list (2017, 2020, 2023).

Gens 1-2: Base games
Gens 3-6: Remakes and better third versions
Gens 7-9: DLCs and Legends games

Edit to prevent double posting: Remember when I said Ohmori started directing games with ORAS? If you want an excellent example of a “passing of the torch” Pokémon game, you won’t get any better than this. For all intents and purposes, that’s what that game and its 2014 release date felt like, and that’s part of why I hold that game in such high regard compared to the others. It was quite literally a Masuda-era game and an Ohmori-era game combined into one for a singular $40 price tag and no additional DLC costs becaude the content that would have been DLC exclusive was included in the base game anyway because this game is goated. What else can you ask for?
 
Last edited:


Interestingly, this means we could see a release (or at least, an open beta) of Champions way sooner than expected.
I copy/pasted the text for people who don't want to check Twitter.

A couple weeks ago, someone made me aware of public posts (NOT a leak) by a Pokémon Champions staff member, which revealed a lot about the state of its development from the very beginning.Prior to January 2024, Champions' pre-production development was in a troubled state.

Around this time, a new Assistant Director was brought in (presumably GAME FREAK) who helped to "spearhead project recovery" past the alpha/beta stages.Given typical Pokémon pre-production length, this indicates Champions has been in development for at least 2~ years.

This AD oversaw development, led design, cutscenes etc.— Cinematic cutscenes weren't present in past Pokémon battle-sims— Stadium and PBR.In Summer 2025, they mentored the future lead director/design staff following a major re-organization, and departed from a design role.
 
Reading that outline would have me thinking that would be coming later than 2026, which was my rough idea of when it'd come out, honestly.
 
Reading that outline would have me thinking that would be coming later than 2026, which was my rough idea of when it'd come out, honestly.
From my understanding, the previous director has left the team after mentoring the new staff responsible for the game, which probably means the game is at a "finished" state and they're getting ready for future updates. Could be wrong tho!
 
From my understanding, the previous director has left the team after mentoring the new staff responsible for the game, which probably means the game is at a "finished" state and they're getting ready for future updates. Could be wrong tho!
The way I am reading this is as such:
-there were A Ton of problems
-They had to bring in someone new to actually recover the problems they were having approximately around Jan 2024
-They left like within the last month or two
-During which they had to mentor the replacement & new staff they hired on because
-There was a massive restructuring. In 2025. Within the last few months.

Game development is always rocky, this is not limited to GameFreak and related companies, and a year & a half is a long time to turn things around in game dev terms but also if you forced me to read this out and throw out a guess on when we'll be able to play the game either before or after an expected year (again, I was thinking 2026 due to no date given and launching closer to gen 10) it is difficult to read "we had years of problems requiring someone to specifically spear head project recovery" and "there was another recent restructuring within the last 3 months" as oh yeah this is basically about done we'll have it in our phones by the end of the year.
 
I'm just wondering what the cutscenes are gonna be for. As lew said neither Stadium game nor Battle Revolution had those and the pluralization makes it seem like it's more than just a cinematic intro or whatever
Yeah, I’m curious too — the fact they said cutscenes (plural) makes it sound like they’re more than just a flashy intro. Maybe they’re tied to the story or certain key battles?
 
Mario Kart World is not a story focused game but still has explicit (& inexplicable) cutscenes for unlocking the Special Cup and Mirror Mode so "cutscenes" can really mean anything large or small.

There could be a big story mode on one end orrrrr on the other end exactly two (2) cutscenes total: a fancy CG introduction and a "closing ceremony" they play when you beat the game (even PBR still had an end state)

Also guess it's possible since all we have to go off of is an off the cuff description of what someone helped with but I dunno if they would necessarily count gmaeplay stuff like Z-Moves or transformations as "cutscenes", otherwise then even PBR had that with its trainer introductions that are about as long and require as much coordination as something like the mega evolve pose, the camera spinning around on the tera crystal or what have you. And hell Z-Moves are pretty long, but there used to be some pretty involved animations for regular moves too.
 
https://xcancel.com/Pokemon_cojp/status/1945045929620349069?t=So8tA76-SilwhsbMhnNyrQ&s=19

Teaser visual for the upcoming Presents dropped. Have fun spending the next week either coping for a Pokemon rhythm game or Nothing Ever Happens posting
unironically wonder if this might be something related to Project Voltage

the crossover has been going on for years now and is pretty successful, I could see some random spin-off based on it. Plus i also feel likeit'd be a little weird to announce a new game now rather than Pokémon Day all the way back in february; unless they had a reason to have thios later announcement - being a crossover game would sort of make sense since maybe right now is just a better date on the miku side of things
 
I am just going to assume that it's entirely unrelated to any actual game announcements and is just them wanting to continue having quirky in-between segments this time featuring dj pikachu.

We've had Pokemon X Tekken (Pokken)
We've had Pokemon X Nobunaga's Ambition (Conqeust)
Next Pokemon crossover:

Pokemon X DJ Hero.
 
We've had Pokemon X Tekken (Pokken)
We've had Pokemon X Nobunaga's Ambition (Conqeust)
Next Pokemon crossover:

Pokemon X DJ Hero.
Don't forget they have an entire spin-off series that is Pokemon x Mysterious Dungeon(Which hilariously started as a Dragon Quest spin-off for the SNES before they had any wholly original titles like Shiren the Wanderer)
 
Back
Top