This garbage is why I raised the shiny rate to 10% in my hack. It doesn't really do anything other than self discovery
Which doesn't matter cuz my hack is pretty much just a joke hack of Emerald, so it's not like it'll be foreign fight wise
-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
Which doesn't matter cuz my hack is pretty much just a joke hack of Emerald, so it's not like it'll be foreign fight wise
I must admit that this latest event I only did it because of the sake of having the fossil mon pink Omanyte in a Love Ball. And my Switch Online ran out so I had to search for every den in the game until I got it, that was fun...at least I got the Hidden Ability AND female (11,9%).
Aside from that, I tend to ignore these kind of events if the Hidden Ability isn't worth it, like the shiny Clobbopus event. (GIVE THIS THING STORM THROW, MACH OR BULLET PUNCH FFS).
Dynamax is better for the doubles metagame than megas (even if its still not the best thing ever and most would just prefer a no gimmicks metagame, kinda excited for the no dynamax meta ngl LOL), but that's not really a big revelation.
The thing that makes me prefer dyna over megas is how easy it was to remove it when we realized it wasn't good for the generation. It's an universal mechanic (with exception of gmaxes which barely change anyways) and once we got over the "but its the gens mechanic :(((" we just snapped it away. We got to choose if we wanted to play with the new toy or not.
For megas you can't justify banning the mechanic because every mega is too different, so its just "analyse suspect ban unban keep in the tier what if its that other pokemon no its actually the mega ban unban" ad nauseum until we find some kind of decent metagame. Sure we ended up with some decent and good metagames in the end but man. Also megas ruined doubles that shit sucked.
Maybe this will be unpopular because I know people enjoy the mega gens but I don't like them LOL
Also we should have banned z moves but dats for another day
Z moves issue was once again, what's the point in giving it to a weaker mon when a stronger mon benefits MORE from it
Same with Megas and D/Gmax
The actual cool thing to do are stat buffs to a line that's more than 10 points, moveset tweaks, or an evo with an improved set of stats. Unfortunately for the last one, it's restricted to region evos, while the original mon is left behind :/
Not true, he did aim for the horn that one time. Then you have Counter Shield, Thunder Armor, and DODGE.
So what you're saying is. Ash is better than Gohan...
Here's one:
Dynamax should have been more powerful.
Specifically, they should have kept the secondary effects for status moves that Z-Moves had. Yes, that would have made DMax better. Yes, that was often the most broken Z-move sets. They still should have done it. It would have made the DMax mechanic more interesting if stall could do something other than Protect for the status move slots, and the meta as a whole would be less reliant on "Hit DMax Fight 3x and then win"
Dynamax should have been more powerful.
Specifically, they should have kept the secondary effects for status moves that Z-Moves had. Yes, that would have made DMax better. Yes, that was often the most broken Z-move sets. They still should have done it. It would have made the DMax mechanic more interesting if stall could do something other than Protect for the status move slots, and the meta as a whole would be less reliant on "Hit DMax Fight 3x and then win"
Or, instead of just having the Max Guard, have a few Max Status Moves. Some Ideas:
Max Offense: Raises user & allies Attack & Special Attack by +1 stage.
Max Defense: Raises user & allies Defense & Special Defense by +1 stage.
Max Speed: Raises user & allies Speed by +1 stage.
Max Disarm: Lowers opponents' Attack & Special Attack by 1 stage.
Max Siege: Lowers opponents' Defense & Special Defense by 1 stage.
Max Entangle: Lowers opponents' Speed by 1 stage.
This way, if you just wanted the stat changes, you just need a normal status move that raises/lowers those stats and get these as options. Also, if a Pokemon knows a healing move, I think a Max version of that would be a nice bonus such as:
Max Heal: Heals user & allies HP by 2/7 max HP & cures all status ailments.
* If you're wondering why 2/7, I was debating between 1/3 (which I felt was too much) and 1/4 (which I felt was too little) so I went with the inbetween (1/3.5, but to make it look neater I doubled it to 2/7).
Ash's Pokemon, Ash just standing there giving orders. Ash's best physical "technique" is ineffectively running into barriers.
Though to be (semi) serious, Ash's strength has always been his ability to think-on-the-fly & out-of-the-box... when the writers are at their best. Because we have moments of rather smart thinking you wish you could do in the game (like in the Gym battle against Valerie, having Hawlucha use X-Scissor on the Trick Room cause it's a Psychic-type move therefore can be broken apart by a move Psychic is weak against) and then there's moments where it feels like he just cheated (like in his Alola League match against Hau, Decidueye trapped Rowlet with a Spirit Shackle so it could hit with its Z-Move Sinister Arrow Raid... but Rowlet was wearing a cloak which was actually the thing trapped and just took it off; which should have been an automatic disqualification as the cloak is not part of Rowlet therefore is an illegal item).
Perhaps, but do not forget it's all Doubles-oriented, and Protect (specifically a Protect that completely blocks a Max Move) is really powerful.
Still, I do wish they had extra effects. Maybe "Protect + another effect". Or perhaps Protect for the whole party.
I think the issue is a mix of deciding how to categorize each status effect and then making an animation for all of them. Even if you divide all of them in groups (boosts, drops, uuh healing etc idk it's 8:30 am I'm blanking up). You could just keep the max move animation and add the extra effect of the original move, but I feel like that would halt a lot of progress in doubles that dynamax gives, and there's an unsaid need for these mechanics to bring faster paced games so that the current format works.
This probably doesn't make sense rip lol
This probably doesn't make sense rip lol
I don't see how these would work, considering that Max Moves already boost/debuff stats, so it'd be kinda worthless in comparison. Max Heal, maybe, although I can stall/defensive tactics become even more annoying to deal with.
Realism in Pokemon never entered the door and the series has been all the better for it.
First, here's an idea how each status move will be split up:
- Max Guard: Holding Hands, Heal Block, Teeter Dance, Crafty Shield, Happy Hour, Lucky Chant, Mat Block, Mist, Quick Guard, Safeguard, Wide Guard, Court Change, Electric Field, Haze, Magic Room, Rain Dance, Sunny Day, Trick Room, Electrify, Embargo, Mimic, Mirror Move, Sketch, Skill Swap, Switcheroo, Taunt, Topsy-Turvy, Transform, Trick, Ally Switch, Baneful Bunker, Baton Pass, Celebrate, Copycat, Curse, Destiny Bond, Detect, Endure, Follow Me, Imprison, King's Shield, Magic Coat, Magnet Rise, Metronome, Obstruct, Power Trick, Protect, Rage Powder, Recycle, Sleep Talk, Spiky Shield, Splash, Substitute, Teleport, Acupressure
- Max Offense: Helping Hand, Gear Up, Ion Deluge, Psychic Terrain, Rototiller, After You, Decorate, Foresight, Lock-On, Miracle Eye, Nature Power, Power Swap, Assist, Belly Drum, Bulk Up, Calm Mind, Clangorous Soul, Coil, Conversion, Dragon Dance, Focus Energy, Growth, Hone Claws, Howl, Laser Focus, Meditate, Nasty Plot, No Retreat, Sharpen, Swords Dance, Tail Glow, Work Up
- Max Defense: Aromatic Mist, Aurora Veil, Light Screen, Magnetic Flux, Reflect, Flower Shield, Magic Terrain, Mud Sport, Water Sport, Wonder Room, Conversion 2, Guard Swap, Psych Up, Reflect Type, Role Play, Acid Armor, Amnesia, Barrier, Camouflage, Charge, Cosmic Power, Cotton Guard, Defend Order, Defense Curl, Geomancy, Harden, Iron Defense, Stockpile, Stuff Cheeks, Withdraw
- Max Speed: Tailwind, Me First, Speed Swap, Agility, Autotomize, Double Team, Minimize, Quiver Dance, Rock Polish, Shell Smash, Shift Gear
- Max Disarm: Captivate, Growl, Venom Drench, Attract, Baby-Dolls Eyes, Charm, Confide, Confuse Ray, Disable, Eerie Impulse, Feather Dance, Flash, Flatter, Gastro Acid, Heart Swap, Kinesis, Memento, Noble Roar, Parting Shot, Play Nice, Powder, Power Split, Sand Attack, Smokescreen, Spite, Supersonic, Sweet Kiss, Tearful Look, Tickle, Torment, Will-O-Wisp, Grudge
- Max Siege: Dark Void, Leer, Poison Gas, Sweet Scent, Tail Whip, Spikes, Stealth Rock, Toxic Spikes, Gravity, Hail, Perish Song, Sandstorm, Defog, Entrainment, Fake Tears, Forest's Curse, Guard Split, Leech Seed, Magic Powder, Metal Sound, Mind Reader, Nightmare, Odor Sleuth, Pain Split, Poison Powder, Psycho Shift, Screech, Simple Beam, Soak, Spotlight, Swagger, Telekinesis, Toxic, Trick-or-Treat, Worry Seed, Snatch
- Max Entangle: Cotton Spore, String Shot, Sticky Web, Fairy Lock, Block, Encore, Glare, Grass Whistle, Hypnosis, Instruct, Lovely Kiss, Mean Look, Quash, Roar, Scary Face, Sing, Sleep Powder, Spider Web, Spore, Stun Spore, Tar Shot, Thunder Wave, Toxic Thread, Whirlwind, Yawn
- Max Heal: Aromatherapy, Heal Bell, Life Dew, Grassy Terrain, Teatime, Bestow, Floral Healing, Purify, Strength Sap, Heal Pulse, Aqua Ring, Heal Order, Healing Wish, Ingrain, Lunar Dance, Milk Drink, Moonlight, Morning Sun, Recover, Refresh, Rest, Roost, Shore Up, Slack Off, Soft-Boiled, Swallow, Synthesis, Wish
My basic thought is that most status moves lean to either blocking, increase or strengthen the user's offense/defense/Speed, decrease or weaken the opponent's offense/defense/Speed, or healing/curing. Therefore, 8 Max status moves which have those effects. Now, if the user wants a specific stat modification, they don't have to hope that the Type Max Move which does it is (1) a Type that they learn an offense move for and (2) is good enough that it's not a waste of a moveslot.
I want to address two things.
1. Ace Pokemon getting Megas. Yes, Megas also exist to promote merchandise, which is the reason why Charizard and Mewtwo got two, and Pokemon like Garchomp and Gengar got one. Remember, Pokemon is a merchandise driven franchise, so people who did not play Pokemon for long time will se their favorite Pokemon getting Megas and want to play the game. At least Megas were not soley Gen 1 unlike Alola Forms and Gigantamax.
2. The biggest issue I have is the subjective nature of how a Pokemon's stats correlate to its role. If that was the case, Articuno would be in the same tier as Zapdos, or Typhlosion as Charizard. People say Salamence should not get a Mega Evolution due to being a Psuedo-Legendary, but Goodra is also a Psuedo-Legendary and its in NU. Metagross is also another case of a Pokemon who people argue should not have gotten a Mega, but its in RU as of now. And that’s only looking a Smogon tiers. Dragonite gets significantly less usage than Goodra in VGC, does Dragonite deserve a Mega over Goodra in that case?
And that goes back to another topic I want to discuss: Difficulty. Before I go into this, I want to bring up other observations. I’ve been hanging on Fire Emblem Forums recently, and I have often noticed a huge series of complaints against Fire Emblem: Three Houses, with some people saying it’s the worst series; here are some of the complaints: “ The Monastery is a chore “, “ The Minigames are pointless “, “ Maps are too simple “, and the “ difficulty is too easy “. Don’t those complaints sound familiar? Anyway, I think it’s a shame that people feel that way about the monastery and minigames, because I really do believe that they really fit in the world of Three Houses very well and helps brings out it themes; in other words, Three Houses is a game that rewards you for taking the time to learn about your peers and participating in activities with them. People who just wanna go from battle to battle with little to no break are not going to enjoy the game because that’s not how it was supposed to be played.
But enough about that. I want to talk about the Map Design particular. Fire Emblem has a rough history especially in the west. The first five games were never localized in the west, and when they did start localizing them, they did not sell well. A big factor is how difficult the older games were. Not only did they feature huge maps with multiple objectives as well as being a huge time sink, Fire Emblem was famous for permadeath, or when Charcters die, they are permanently removed from the game. This made the games notoriously difficult, which is probably why when they started localizing the games in the west, they struggled to be super popular: The learning curve being too difficult really made it hard for newcomers to be invested. There wasn’t any option to turn off permadeath until New Mystery of the Emblem, which was the 11th game in the series. Radiant Dawn was widely criticized for being too difficult by western critics, and difficulty settings were mistranslated in English: Hard is Lunatic, Normal is Hard. Ever since Awakening, which saved the franchise form cancellation, the maps become a lot simpler in design with more simple objectives like “Defeat the Boss” instead of “Seize”. The developers noted the complaints and tried to appease both veteran players and casual players with Fates, with the Conquest Campaign being designed to be a challenge with complex map objectives and limited resources, while Birthright features simple maps and allowed grinding making it ideal for beginners. Despite that, they went back to simpler maps and objectives in Three Houses. Why? Simply put, most people or Casual players don’t like, or don’t have the patience to handle super complex maps the older titles. Fire Emblem was almost canceled, and they don’t want that to ever happen again. That’s why the newer games have been designed with a casual approach in mind, they want someone who started with Three Houses to stick until the end of the game- they do not want them to quit just because the game was too difficult.
Newcomers will likely have some difficulties with Three Houses. I know that for a fact because I am a veteran and gave a copy of Three Houses to my brother, and he had some pretty hard times in the game. Even I had found Three Houses difficult at some points, and I am a veteran player.
So what does this have to do with Pokémon? Well, all the logic I’ve used in the paragraphs above applies here. Just because a small minority of people find the game easy, doesn’t mean others will. For someone playing XY as a veteran might find it easy and find Megas overkill, but for a newcomer Megas might just be what makes the game passable after being too difficult. I’ve played XY several times, and in one particular run I actually struggled against Olympia because her Meowstic set up too many Calm Minds and I did not have a dark type. I actually lost, and yes, as a veteran player, I lost in XY. How tragic!
In conclusion, when looking at design choices like difficulty, it’s more important to consider casual or one time players, people who only play game once. Those are the people who vastly outnumber those who do Ironman runs as well as those who play the same games multiple times. While I can echo some people express disappointment that Pokémon games have become streamlined recently, I can understand why they do it from a business perspective and the fact that most hardcore players who do things like nuzlockes are in a minority and do not weigh much in comparison to the casual/newcomers.
While I do agree that some of the Megas like Houndoom, Altaria, and Banette could have ( and probably would be better off ) as cross-gens, I want to address two issues:
1. Ace Pokemon getting Megas. Yes, Megas also exist to promote merchandise, which is the reason why Charizard and Mewtwo got two, and Pokemon like Garchomp and Gengar got one. Remember, Pokemon is a merchandise driven franchise, so people who did not play Pokemon for long time will se their favorite Pokemon getting Megas and want to play the game. At least Megas were not soley Gen 1 unlike Alola Forms and Gigantamax.
2. The biggest issue I have is the subjective nature of how a Pokemon's stats correlate to its role. If that was the case, Articuno would be in the same tier as Zapdos, or Typhlosion as Charizard. People say Salamence should not get a Mega Evolution due to being a Psuedo-Legendary, but Goodra is also a Psuedo-Legendary and its in NU. Metagross is also another case of a Pokemon who people argue should not have gotten a Mega, but its in RU as of now. And that’s only looking a Smogon tiers. Dragonite gets significantly less usage than Goodra in VGC, does Dragonite deserve a Mega over Goodra in that case?
And that goes back to another topic I want to discuss: Difficulty. Before I go into this, I want to bring up other observations. I’ve been hanging on Fire Emblem Forums recently, and I have often noticed a huge series of complaints against Fire Emblem: Three Houses, with some people saying it’s the worst series; here are some of the complaints: “ The Monastery is a chore “, “ The Minigames are pointless “, “ Maps are too simple “, and the “ difficulty is too easy “. Don’t those complaints sound familiar? Anyway, I think it’s a shame that people feel that way about the monastery and minigames, because I really do believe that they really fit in the world of Three Houses very well and helps brings out it themes; in other words, Three Houses is a game that rewards you for taking the time to learn about your peers and participating in activities with them. People who just wanna go from battle to battle with little to no break are not going to enjoy the game because that’s not how it was supposed to be played.
But enough about that. I want to talk about the Map Design particular. Fire Emblem has a rough history especially in the west. The first five games were never localized in the west, and when they did start localizing them, they did not sell well. A big factor is how difficult the older games were. Not only did they feature huge maps with multiple objectives as well as being a huge time sink, Fire Emblem was famous for permadeath, or when Charcters die, they are permanently removed from the game. This made the games notoriously difficult, which is probably why when they started localizing the games in the west, they struggled to be super popular: The learning curve being too difficult really made it hard for newcomers to be invested. There wasn’t any option to turn off permadeath until New Mystery of the Emblem, which was the 11th game in the series. Radiant Dawn was widely criticized for being too difficult by western critics, and difficulty settings were mistranslated in English: Hard is Lunatic, Normal is Hard. Ever since Awakening, which saved the franchise form cancellation, the maps become a lot simpler in design with more simple objectives like “Defeat the Boss” instead of “Seize”. The developers noted the complaints and tried to appease both veteran players and casual players with Fates, with the Conquest Campaign being designed to be a challenge with complex map objectives and limited resources, while Birthright features simple maps and allowed grinding making it ideal for beginners. Despite that, they went back to simpler maps and objectives in Three Houses. Why? Simply put, most people or Casual players don’t like, or don’t have the patience to handle super complex maps the older titles. Fire Emblem was almost canceled, and they don’t want that to ever happen again. That’s why the newer games have been designed with a casual approach in mind, they want someone who started with Three Houses to stick until the end of the game- they do not want them to quit just because the game was too difficult.
Newcomers will likely have some difficulties with Three Houses. I know that for a fact because I am a veteran and gave a copy of Three Houses to my brother, and he had some pretty hard times in the game. Even I had found Three Houses difficult at some points, and I am a veteran player.
So what does this have to do with Pokémon? Well, all the logic I’ve used in the paragraphs above applies here. Just because a small minority of people find the game easy, doesn’t mean others will. For someone playing XY as a veteran might find it easy and find Megas overkill, but for a newcomer Megas might just be what makes the game passable after being too difficult. I’ve played XY several times, and in one particular run I actually struggled against Olympia because her Meowstic set up too many Calm Minds and I did not have a dark type. I actually lost, and yes, as a veteran player, I lost in XY. How tragic!
In conclusion, when looking at design choices like difficulty, it’s more important to consider casual or one time players, people who only play game once. Those are the people who vastly outnumber those who do Ironman runs as well as those who play the same games multiple times. While I can echo some people express disappointment that Pokémon games have become streamlined recently, I can understand why they do it from a business perspective and the fact that most hardcore players who do things like nuzlockes are in a minority and do not weigh much in comparison to the casual/newcomers.
You want proof that Game Freak doesn't give a shit about buffing underwhelming mons using Mega Evolution? They gave Mewtwo - who, btw, is a manmade Pokemon created over a thousand years after Mega Evolution was first discovered - two Mega Stones. Both of which also predate their potential recipient by at least a millennium. Just let that sink in.
On a more serious note: I guess while we're talking about Mega Evolution, I'll say this: Mega Evolution should stay in gens 6/7.
First off, I think keeping it there helps X/Y maintain what little reason there may be to replay them, and adding them to SwSh or anything released after - especially during the main adventure - would essentially render X/Y completely obsolete (if ORAS don't already, of course).
Secondly, don't get me started on what kind of nightmare online battling would be if things like Mega Mawile and Mega Salamence could both Mega and Dynamax simultaneously.
Third, I know enough about this franchise's fanbase to say with a modicum of confidence that there's just no way to bring Mega Evolution back in a way that satisfies enough of them. If GF just brings back the same Megas as before, they'll complain about the lack of new ones. If they do introduce new ones, they'll complain about how one certain Pokemon or another didn't get one. If such a mon does get one, they'll complain about how its design ruins it, or how it didn't get buffed enough, or whatever else. I can't see a winning formula for reintroducing Megas that doesn't piss off a sizeable chunk of the fanbase, so I think it's best to just avoid activating the shitstorm altogether.
Lastly, I don't think the most common argument I hear in favor of bringing it back - that being its ability to buff underwhelming mons - holds much weight, all things considered. There are other ways to do that without giving such a thing a Mega (e.g. the various toys Pelipper got in Gen 7). Plus, looking at the distribution of Megas we currently have, I don't find most of the recipients to be all that underwhelming in the first place (not being a top-tier threat in OU doesn't necessarily count as "underwhelming" to me), and frankly, I'd bet more money on Game Freak creating 3 more Mega Mewtwos than I would on them creating a single Mega Ledian or Chimecho.
Considering all of that, I think it's better for all parties involved to just leave Mega Evolution in the past. And before you ask, yes, I also think Z-Moves and Dynamax should stay in gens 7 and 8 respectively.
On a more serious note: I guess while we're talking about Mega Evolution, I'll say this: Mega Evolution should stay in gens 6/7.
First off, I think keeping it there helps X/Y maintain what little reason there may be to replay them, and adding them to SwSh or anything released after - especially during the main adventure - would essentially render X/Y completely obsolete (if ORAS don't already, of course).
Secondly, don't get me started on what kind of nightmare online battling would be if things like Mega Mawile and Mega Salamence could both Mega and Dynamax simultaneously.
Third, I know enough about this franchise's fanbase to say with a modicum of confidence that there's just no way to bring Mega Evolution back in a way that satisfies enough of them. If GF just brings back the same Megas as before, they'll complain about the lack of new ones. If they do introduce new ones, they'll complain about how one certain Pokemon or another didn't get one. If such a mon does get one, they'll complain about how its design ruins it, or how it didn't get buffed enough, or whatever else. I can't see a winning formula for reintroducing Megas that doesn't piss off a sizeable chunk of the fanbase, so I think it's best to just avoid activating the shitstorm altogether.
Lastly, I don't think the most common argument I hear in favor of bringing it back - that being its ability to buff underwhelming mons - holds much weight, all things considered. There are other ways to do that without giving such a thing a Mega (e.g. the various toys Pelipper got in Gen 7). Plus, looking at the distribution of Megas we currently have, I don't find most of the recipients to be all that underwhelming in the first place (not being a top-tier threat in OU doesn't necessarily count as "underwhelming" to me), and frankly, I'd bet more money on Game Freak creating 3 more Mega Mewtwos than I would on them creating a single Mega Ledian or Chimecho.
Considering all of that, I think it's better for all parties involved to just leave Mega Evolution in the past. And before you ask, yes, I also think Z-Moves and Dynamax should stay in gens 7 and 8 respectively.
The Mewtwo detail is an interesting plothole. I guess it's possible that Mewtwo's weird DNA allowed it to react with two existing mega stones that previously had no users? Or maybe the scientists that made it also made two artificial mega stones? I dunno if either of those make sense; I haven't played XY, so I'm not super familiar with the lore of mega evolution beyond "they were made by the ultimate weapon and/or some bigass meteor"
It's true that there are non-mega ways to buff a Pokemon. These buffs tend to be more future-proofed, so in that way they're preferable, but Smogon's also stuck with a shitload of things learning Close Combat and Nasty Plot unless it decides to ban move transfers, so in that way it's not preferable, even if that isn't actually a concern in the metas Game Freak actually cares about. However, I'd like to dispel the idea that megas helped already-strong Pokemon more than they helped weak Pokemon. I did the math a while back and only 37% of mega Pokemon were already good before they got the mega. Additionally, ~70% of megas for bad Pokemon were significantly better than their base form, while a mere 12% (only two fo them!) megas for already-good Pokemon were vast improvements.
Something that stuck out to me reading this is that it did not consider my largest issue with three houses. Specifically, that it is a step back in the ability to produce interesting and synergistic skill builds, which is where I got most of my time and enjoyment from the previous entries. To be honest, I haven't played 3H all the way through because I don't feel like the game respects my playstyle enough to make it enjoyable. If we're going to parallel that to pokemon, we're probably back to talking about the Natdex mess.
Also going to disagree with your main point. I don't owe the masses enough to feel like their preferences are more valid than my own, and I don't consider "does this make business sense" to be an indication of whether a game is good. So to me, this is completely irrelevant to whether I consider newer pokemon games or 3H to be well-designed.
Making video games more accessible is in and of itself an inherently good idea from a business point of view. If you can appeal to more audiences, that works even better for sales.
It seems to me that the prevailing concern here is not in regards to the idea of making the games more accessible, but rather the execution of it in practice. Yes, it seems the concern both in regards to newer Pokemon games and other franchises like with FE and Three Houses (well really, Awakening onwards) is that they focus on making the games more accessible to newcomers and casuals while not focusing on making the games more conducive to veteran players. Arguably, this is an execution problem, not one with the idea in and of itself. Older Fire Emblem games, for instance, had terrible accessibility to all but very hardcore Tactical RPG players and were difficult, until FE Awakening, Fates, 3H, and vice versa added a casual mode and other player friendly conveniences for newer players to get into the games more easily. That's not an inherently bad concept: what likely is the concern is how it's executed in practice making the games seemingly less fun for more experienced/hardcore players.
Arguably, older Pokemon games weren't actually difficult by any means. They were just more tedious and grind demanding because of poorly thought out level curves and lack of EXP All mechanic, combined with the shit/limited movepool options available to the player. The games from Gen 5 onwards aren't inherently less easy: in a vacuum the difficulty is actually pretty similar to old gens. It's just that the player now has more options at their disposal: infinite use TMs, everything has a better movepool, more ways to train and level your mons more quickly, Entralink Powers/O-Powers/Whatever, and vice versa. In other words, the player is more powerful. That's not necessarily a bad thing, since the AI in old gens wasn't that good and only made the older games seem more difficult because of bad game design, but they haven't powered up the AI accordingly to match the capable level of power players can reach in more recent games. A truly difficult Pokemon game would involve smart AI, strategic use of items, and well thought out movesets and teams. This is something you mainly see in multiplayer nowadays in the VGC and Battle Spot: given recent trends, it's clear they have focused more on that aspect of the games (Gen 6 frankly had some of the best multiplayer features ever) and back then mostly in the Battle Frontier or PWT. A simple way to include this would be to include difficulty modes that change how inherently difficult the game is, but I am unsure Game Freak cares about that unfortunately.
It seems to me that the prevailing concern here is not in regards to the idea of making the games more accessible, but rather the execution of it in practice. Yes, it seems the concern both in regards to newer Pokemon games and other franchises like with FE and Three Houses (well really, Awakening onwards) is that they focus on making the games more accessible to newcomers and casuals while not focusing on making the games more conducive to veteran players. Arguably, this is an execution problem, not one with the idea in and of itself. Older Fire Emblem games, for instance, had terrible accessibility to all but very hardcore Tactical RPG players and were difficult, until FE Awakening, Fates, 3H, and vice versa added a casual mode and other player friendly conveniences for newer players to get into the games more easily. That's not an inherently bad concept: what likely is the concern is how it's executed in practice making the games seemingly less fun for more experienced/hardcore players.
Arguably, older Pokemon games weren't actually difficult by any means. They were just more tedious and grind demanding because of poorly thought out level curves and lack of EXP All mechanic, combined with the shit/limited movepool options available to the player. The games from Gen 5 onwards aren't inherently less easy: in a vacuum the difficulty is actually pretty similar to old gens. It's just that the player now has more options at their disposal: infinite use TMs, everything has a better movepool, more ways to train and level your mons more quickly, Entralink Powers/O-Powers/Whatever, and vice versa. In other words, the player is more powerful. That's not necessarily a bad thing, since the AI in old gens wasn't that good and only made the older games seem more difficult because of bad game design, but they haven't powered up the AI accordingly to match the capable level of power players can reach in more recent games. A truly difficult Pokemon game would involve smart AI, strategic use of items, and well thought out movesets and teams. This is something you mainly see in multiplayer nowadays in the VGC and Battle Spot: given recent trends, it's clear they have focused more on that aspect of the games (Gen 6 frankly had some of the best multiplayer features ever) and back then mostly in the Battle Frontier or PWT. A simple way to include this would be to include difficulty modes that change how inherently difficult the game is, but I am unsure Game Freak cares about that unfortunately.
It's not much a problem of "caring" rather a problem of "is it worth it".
It boils down to same reason Battle Facilities were mainly cut or reduced to a very simplified version this generation.
Creating a harder mode requires development time, resources, and AI development, from a studio that's already struggling to meet release deadlines in first place.
What exactly is the gain to invest said resources when they aren't going to provide a sales benefit? The (atrociously large) majority of people who buy pokemon games buy them because they are Pokemon. They don't buy them for the challenge, they either buy them for the fun, for the creatures, or to play VGC in which case the easier the plot is the better.
In same fashion of battle facilities, what people who aren't already buying the game would buy it "if it was harder"?
The answer is: very few, if even.
I ask that to also people who didnt buy SwSh cause bored of how easy the game is, would you have bought Sword and Shield and its DLCs if it had a "challenge mode", expecially knowing that to implement it they would have to cut or rush a different feature on a game that's already suffering from rushed features? Be honest.
Thus, there's no reason to develop the feature.
That is, unfortunately, how business works.
I urge you all to keep in mind that the grasp you have on the games right now isn't exactly the grasp your 8 years old self had on the game.
What if previous games weren't exactly more difficult, but you perceived it as more difficult because, to put it plainly, you didn't really know what you were doing?
Like, what will give you the easier time in-game, a Charizard with Swords Dance and perfect coverage on the 3 remaining attacks, or a Charizard with 4 Fire moves "because it looks cool"?
What if previous games weren't exactly more difficult, but you perceived it as more difficult because, to put it plainly, you didn't really know what you were doing?
Like, what will give you the easier time in-game, a Charizard with Swords Dance and perfect coverage on the 3 remaining attacks, or a Charizard with 4 Fire moves "because it looks cool"?
And as a reminder: Gen V is the one with the lowest sales of all generations (well, technically it's Gen VIII but there's the DP remakes soon so...). Sure, we can excuse that to when it was released, and that BW has the lowest sales of any opening game pair of a generation. Even the heavily criticized USUM sold (barely) more than the acclaimed BW2 (in fact, only Platinum, Emerald, and Crystal sold less than BW2 - oh well, look at that, three of the bottom four have extensive battle facilities...).
I don't think it's a coincidence that there was a major shift in how to handle things in XY. The surprisingly (comparatively) low sales of Gen V, games that had a lot of ambition behind, have a lot to do with that, I think.
Excuse me sir, I have to urge you to get your facts and objective truths out of this discussion, how dare you imply that 14 year old me with my 3 dragonite, each one having different elements and 0 stabs, was not optimal?
When I was a kid playing the DS Pokémon games, Pokémon was extremely easy, because I would just roll everything with my absurdly overleveled starter. Now that I'm older, I make the games more challenging for myself by adding certain restrictions (no excessive grinding unless I'm trying to catch up with the level curve, no healing items in battle, set mode). With these restrictions, X is by far the easiest Pokémon game I've played so far, and it's not really a contest. I played on set mode, I never once used healing items in battle (I would sometimes cheat and use a few in the DS games to get over a hurdle), and I only ever did level grinding when I was training up new catches. Even with all of this, the game was a complete stomp after the second gym.
After B2/W2, there was a very clear effort by GF to make Pokémon even easier than it already is for people who don't play with restrictions, and all you need to do to see this is examine gen 6's experience mechanics. They buffed switch training by making all the Pokémon who participate in a battle get all of the experience, you get experience for catching Pokémon, and the EXP Share not only exists but is turned on by default. In addition to these new mechanics to streamline the process of gaining levels, important trainers often have less Pokémon than in previous gens, and worse Pokémon at that (some of them don't even have four moves!). The list of restrictions you need to make these games hard is much longer than it is for the games before the shift in design philosophy. It can be argued that this isn't a bad thing, and I don't much care either way because X was enjoyable enough for me to not regret spending time on it even though it was easy, but this isn't just people having a bad idea of how Pokémon's difficulty has changed over time because of childhood memories. The games got easier.
Last edited:
And this segues into another take I have and have been wanting to share for a while: I think people massively overhype how much XY deviated from the Gen 5 games and in general severely downplay the impact they had on the series going forward.
As much as it'll upset some people here to say, BW is the beginning of the modern era. Other than the only new Pokemon dex, which I doubt was ever intended to be anything beyond BW1's own little funky experiment, what else did they exactly roll back in the past 3 games? All the QoL stuff like perma-TMs and phasing out HMs has been kept around. Increased story focus has never waned either (XY was a major outlier in hindsight, and while there are very obvious issues with SWSH's writing they clearly did try at some level to make memorable characters and plots for them unlike the former 3d game). Even some more unsavory trends like excessive shiny-locking started here.
That's to say nothing of the idea that Nintendo or Game Freak internally deemed Gen 5 a relative failure, which is a bold-faced lie that only serves to propagate a bogus victim complex narrative that those heathen genwunners caused the world to reject the majesty of Black and White and that's why the franchise is now bad apparently. BW were actually the fastest-selling DS Pokemon games in multiple territories, and critically it was famously the first ever Pokemon game and only the 15th game ever to receive a perfect 40/40 score from Famitsu, Japan's biggest gaming publication. This is all for a game that came out in the twilight years of the DS, the 3DS just on the horizon for BW1 and already out by the time of BW2's launch.
X and Y weren't outliers. XY also had a heavy focus on story and characters, it just had messy execution and it showed.
At its core it was still focused on having a story to tell throughout the journey, whether it was memorable or likable or not is in the eyes of the beholder.