Unpopular opinions

[Magcargo]

The release schedule of new game => DLC next year works well enough imo. The main f up was Legends Arceus => Scarlet and Violet since there was less than a year between releases.

In general I think SV genuinely hurt the Pokemon brand to the average joe. It was used as a punching bag in IGN'S review of TotK, I see lots of normie gaming channels regularly trash on the game (with 18 hour videos of everything wrong w/ SV that I'm guessing say a whole lot of nothing) and it seems like more hardcore players have issues in how stuff like competitions have been handled due to various bugs. This may be the last straw on the Camerupt's back to force delays on the next release.

 

[Esserise]

Everyone here saying it would be better if Pokemon had a more spaced release schedule (I don’t necessarily disagree) but if they did there’s be an absolute onslaught of complaints, including from some people who argue for a longer release time.

Sure, you’re never going to please everyone. But I think a lot of the complaints they’d still get from people who want more frequent releases would be outmatched by the amount of people (and press) that would have better things to say about the games if the quality improved.

For example, I don’t typically see people saying that, say, Tears of the Kingdom took too long to come out. The extra year they spent on polish is generally praised as a good decision, and not many people are demanding that the next installment by ready for launch in 2025. People know it’s gonna take a while, but they also know, based on the strength of TOTK (and Breath of the Wild before it) as products, that the wait will likely be worth it. Granted, it may take some Pokémon fans a while to wean off of the near-annual releases and get accustomed to a new schedule, but I think it’d broadly work out in the end.

 

[Sonikku A]

I wonder how long it'll take for the franchise to be seen as a joke casually like Sonic...

 

[Rapti]

Ok, I don't know about the TCG but otherwise, where oh where does Pokemon hurt if new games are not released? or even have their sales increase?

definitely not in its merchandise; most of it is of first gen mons with a few select popular ones from other generations, latest generations have at most significant merchandise of the new starters first forms and that's only out of tradition, they sell ok but they're nothing special
I don't think anyone would notice if no new pokemon were released for the next three years, heck I don't think anyone would care if no new pokemon had merchandise of them released in the next five

the anime doesn't care about new games, ratings straight out increased when it stopped caring about introducing new pokemon and certainly never cared about following the games' story

same thing for the movies, even if they go back to releasing a new mythical each year, it's not as if the presence or absence of new pokemon will affect the popularity of the new mythical mon

so why does the Pokemon Company want to release a new game with new characters so often if:
a) new characters and pokemon have basically no impact on the rest of its products
b) constant new releases reduce the quality of the games and thus the customer confidence in the brand as a whole is reduced as well


like seriously, does the TCG need new mons that often? cause otherwise I don't see the incentive to keep the rushing of games and services for those games

 

[spookysocialist]

Ok, I don't know about the TCG but otherwise, where oh where does Pokemon hurt if new games are not released? or even have their sales increase?

definitely not in its merchandise; most of it is of first gen mons with a few select popular ones from other generations, latest generations have at most significant merchandise of the new starters first forms and that's only out of tradition, they sell ok but they're nothing special
I don't think anyone would notice if no new pokemon were released for the next three years, heck I don't think anyone would care if no new pokemon had merchandise of them released in the next five

the anime doesn't care about new games, ratings straight out increased when it stopped caring about introducing new pokemon and certainly never cared about following the games' story

same thing for the movies, even if they go back to releasing a new mythical each year, it's not as if the presence or absence of new pokemon will affect the popularity of the new mythical mon

so why does the Pokemon Company want to release a new game with new characters so often if:
a) new characters and pokemon have basically no impact on the rest of its products
b) constant new releases reduce the quality of the games and thus the customer confidence in the brand as a whole is reduced as well


like seriously, does the TCG need new mons that often? cause otherwise I don't see the incentive to keep the rushing of games and services for those games

Not sure if you're aware of this but releasing games makes money? "Why do they release games" because they can sell those games and make a profit? Your post implies they give the games away for free or something.
Also you bring up "customer confidence in the brand" but pokemon game sales have gone up recently. SV and SwSh massively outsold every gen except gen 1.

Oh, and as far as new characters for other media - you don't mention the big money makers for pokemon besides the main series, which are the mobile games. Go and Masters EX regularly bring in over 50 mil and 10mil a month respectively and their business model relies on a drip feed of new purchasable content

In terms of TPC looking into longer release cycles, we'll likely see additional studios get brought in to work on the games so that the yearly release can be kept up while still allowing for two or three year dev cycles. Maybe eventually reaching CoD style where multiple studios are permanently hired into the rotation. Nintendo has actually experimented with this recently - Fire Emblem 3 Houses and Fire Emblem Engage were actually developed at largely the same time by completely different teams at different companies. Engage had its release delayed due to the pandemic coming at the very end of it's development so it wasn't a perfect test but sales figures showed there was a market for games in the same franchise by different studios. And the fact that there's actually another unrevealed FE game that was either done or close to done at Engage's release means they might even have 3 studios working on the franchise.

 

[Worldie]

so why does the Pokemon Company want to release a new game with new characters so often if:
a) new characters and pokemon have basically no impact on the rest of its products
b) constant new releases reduce the quality of the games and thus the customer confidence in the brand as a whole is reduced as well

On top of what spookysocialist said, there's one specific reason.

The games are the "introduction" to the new generation.

The "Pokemon" franchise since its debut on the great stages always goes "Game releases introducing new mons / region / characters" -> Anime gets announced with new region and/or new protagonists -> New Pokemon and NPCs start showing up in the various mobile Pokemon games

With the merchandise (and the anime, obviously) already being "ready" probably months before the new games releases and basically having the stores on "put this on sale as soon as the game releases" which is likely what demands the strict release schedule.

It's a well oiled machine, and it's been functional to most degrees since forever. Changing it would require a new way to "introduce new generations", and honestly I can't think of one that'd make as much of a splash as the games do. Expecially as they are the one part of the franchise which has users of all ages and social status, whereas most adults do not interact with the anime or movies, and most kids are not interacting with the gacha mobile games and rely on their parents to acquire the dolls and whatnot, with the TCG being its own thing and generally only interacted with by competitive TCG players in first place.
It's also not even just used by Pokemon, other franchises that have been long going and have significant merchandise and/or other media related to them also "announce" the new entry via games first.

TLDR: Changing the "Pokemon machine" to not have the games as "launch platform" for a generation would require a massive restructuring which understandably TPCI doesn't want to do.

Also, an addendum:

Also you bring up "customer confidence in the brand" but pokemon game sales have gone up recently. SV and SwSh massively outsold every gen except gen 1.

While obviously true, I'd also add that Covid conveniently buffed the sales of SwSh due to the coincidence of the quarantine having people looking for ways to kill time while stuck at home. Hard to say if the Switch and Pokemon sales would be the same if the quarantines never happened obviously, but regardless fact is way more people than it would have happened normally got exposed to the game and franchise, most notably increasing the potential casual playerbase.
And the casual playerbase is the one that likes the games. While there is a very vocal minority that yells at "pokemon games stopped being good in gen 2 reeeee" on the internet, sales don't lie, and SwSh / SV were well received by the intended base. The main reason for which TPCI / Nintendo seem to aknowledge there is some issues with the release schedule is that people started to criticize that Nintendo, the company that's always been so proud of releasing fully functional games, is allowing Pokemon games to release in the state they are.
People used to say "There's Bethesda bad, and Nintendo bad. Bethesda bad are full of bugs and unplayable, Nintendo bad are stuff like Mario Sports which may not be a impressive game but it's still clean and functional". SV released in a pretty sorry state, I am not pretending it was a good release. Most of the problems got fixed since then, but while you could give some mileage to GF for SwSh as it was their first full 3d title, SV having the performance problems it had felt very unjustificable, expecially after Legend Arceus was running perfectly, and the Switch is host to games with much more demanding graphics like Xenoblade and Bayonetta, and much bigger openworlds like the two Zeldas, and those have no issues.
Nintendo cannot afford to be compared to the other companies, because the "perfection" of their releases is what they pride themselves on, so they have reasoning to not want to repeat the SV situation,
Obviously, it'll have to be seen if the gen 10 games will actually be performing, or will be another shitshow of performance problems. For what matters this could just be some PR to shut up people without actually doing anything, since as I said above, you can't just "delay" the pokemon machine.

 

[YubelVT]

Pokemon Rumble is the best spinoff franchise

 

[YubelVT]

I agree that Charizard gets too much hype; it was never good in battle

2015 RSE theory hit different

 

[pika pal]

Also, an addendum:

While obviously true, I'd also add that Covid conveniently buffed the sales of SwSh due to the coincidence of the quarantine having people looking for ways to kill time while stuck at home. Hard to say if the Switch and Pokemon sales would be the same if the quarantines never happened obviously, but regardless fact is way more people than it would have happened normally got exposed to the game and franchise, most notably increasing the potential casual playerbase.
And the casual playerbase is the one that likes the games. While there is a very vocal minority that yells at "pokemon games stopped being good in gen 2 reeeee" on the internet, sales don't lie, and SwSh / SV were well received by the intended base. The main reason for which TPCI / Nintendo seem to aknowledge there is some issues with the release schedule is that people started to criticize that Nintendo, the company that's always been so proud of releasing fully functional games, is allowing Pokemon games to release in the state they are.
People used to say "There's Bethesda bad, and Nintendo bad. Bethesda bad are full of bugs and unplayable, Nintendo bad are stuff like Mario Sports which may not be a impressive game but it's still clean and functional". SV released in a pretty sorry state, I am not pretending it was a good release. Most of the problems got fixed since then, but while you could give some mileage to GF for SwSh as it was their first full 3d title, SV having the performance problems it had felt very unjustificable, expecially after Legend Arceus was running perfectly, and the Switch is host to games with much more demanding graphics like Xenoblade and Bayonetta, and much bigger openworlds like the two Zeldas, and those have no issues.
Nintendo cannot afford to be compared to the other companies, because the "perfection" of their releases is what they pride themselves on, so they have reasoning to not want to repeat the SV situation,
Obviously, it'll have to be seen if the gen 10 games will actually be performing, or will be another shitshow of performance problems. For what matters this could just be some PR to shut up people without actually doing anything, since as I said above, you can't just "delay" the pokemon machine.

I think another layer to this is that Nintendo's hardware has historically been behind competing consoles of the same generation (whether it has an appreciable effect or is mostly market points varies by generation), so part of their brand became "look how impressive our games can be with less than others use!" That point is a legitimate appeal to some people, be it for allowing features and convenience (Switch's Portability frequently comes up) or simply a perception that their games have to be more solid to "make up" for the weaker tech on both presentation and performance.

Pokemon games looking so bad from a technical standpoint, with a game Nintendo's brand is heavily attached to vs a 3rd Party developer or port, is going to damage that image heavily. Despite TotK and Xenoblade demonstrating some impressive worlds and visuals for the technology, SV started a conversation (whether sincerely or as an excuse) that the console's aged hardware is holding back releases on it, which doesn't look good for people debating picking up a Switch or Publishers considering a Switch game/version. Compare this to so many other AAA Publishers and series, which generally have very buggy releases but continue to put up with it because they can stomach the bad press. In Nintendo's case (not Pokemon's maybe but one of its big 3 Entities), this press is not simply bad, but runs directly counter to an aspect their brand sells itself on, and the last thing they want is swiss-cheese coding in Pokemon to shake peoples' confidence in buying the next Mario or Zelda or Metroid Prime 4 in 2025.

 

[Ransei]

Calyrex-Shadow, Koraidon, Miraidon, and (Gen 8) Zacian-Crowned are all more broken than Mega Rayquaza ever was.

Same goes with various Dynamax Pokemon, such as Xerneas, Yveltal, and Necrozma Dusk Mane.


Did Mega Rayquaza create Anything Goes? Yes. People fail to acknowledge that this was just the beginning and the game has gotten significantly more powercrept since....

 

[ScraftyIsTheBest]

There's also the issue of the fact that the Switch is now a completely different beast from every portable platform that came before it. Previously, Nintendo would have a separate home console and a portable console per console generation that co-existed with one another. The Game Boy, DS, and 3DS were all coexisting alongside the N64, GameCube, Wii, and Wii U as a sister platform that was a dedicated portable console. Handhelds were cheaper, were weaker in power, and games on dedicated portable consoles were smaller in scope and were accepted as such. Games on them were also cheaper accordingly in line with their scope.

However, the Switch is a completely different beast. It is pulling double duty as both a portable and a home console at once. Nintendo is no longer making two separate platforms for two separate markets, like the DS and Wii or the 3DS and Wii U. The Switch is the one and only, and the successor that has been in rumors is setting up to be similar as well. However, when it comes to scope, price, and whatnot, the home console aspect of the Switch reigns supreme. Games are priced strictly at console level, 60 USD and presumably 70 for the successor, and console scale games are the expectation.

Game Freak has always historically been a portable-scale game oriented developer, and Pokemon games were pretty much smaller in scope and being strictly on handhelds, were appreciated as small scope quirky handheld games. Unfortunately, being on the Switch means the handheld aspect asked for Pokemon to jump ship to the Switch itself, but the fact that it's also a home console means the expectations for a Switch game are much higher now than they were for the Game Boy, DS, and 3DS. The first seven generations of Pokemon were never compared to the likes of Mario, Zelda, or Metroid games on the corresponding home consoles. They were just what they were. Now, they're being compared to the likes of Mario Odyssey, BOTW+TOTK, Xenoblade, and whatnot, all these experiences that show off what the Switch can really do.

And the prevailing issue here is that it showed with SwSh, PLA, and SV altogether, but Pokemon games on the Switch have been incredibly below par with what is expected of even a Switch title, even if Switch games aren't the pinnacle of power compared to a PlayStation or Xbox game. Sword and Shield was ridiculed for its graphics, but it was also comically underwhelming in scope for a Switch game, especially one that is at standard console game price. Legends: Arceus has been panned for looking mediocre. Scarlet and Violet is more like a console scale Pokemon game compared to SwSh, and actually feels like one, but the technical shortcomings are well documented.

Which is to say, what worked historically for Pokemon since the very beginning is clearly not working here. What was considered acceptable for a Game Boy/DS/3DS game is considered unacceptable for a Switch game. Sword and Shield and Scarlet and Violet both have different types of problems that show that they clearly had too little time for what they *wanted* to be to come into full fruition. The scope the Switch commands is much higher now, and none of the Switch games have been up to par in that regard.

For Gen 10 specifically though, they can absolutely afford to wait another year at the very least to 2026. That's Pokemon's 30th anniversary, which makes it just the right time from a capitalism standpoint to release a new generation as part of an anniversary celebration. It gives the flagship Gen 10 game more time to be refined, which it needs if they don't want another SwSh or SV. It would also be a few years after the Switch successor presumably releases which gives Game Freak more time to get used to its assets so they can release a proper debut game for it. Horizons the anime also started so late it's gonna need that extra year, especially after Journeys suffered production issues towards the end of 2022.

The main issue would be padding out the filler games between, which we'll see how that goes. Mid-generation games by the B team are often fillers between new gen games.

 

[Ironmage]

I think another layer to this is that Nintendo's hardware has historically been behind competing consoles of the same generation (whether it has an appreciable effect or is mostly market points varies by generation), so part of their brand became "look how impressive our games can be with less than others use!" That point is a legitimate appeal to some people, be it for allowing features and convenience (Switch's Portability frequently comes up) or simply a perception that their games have to be more solid to "make up" for the weaker tech on both presentation and performance.

Pokemon games looking so bad from a technical standpoint, with a game Nintendo's brand is heavily attached to vs a 3rd Party developer or port, is going to damage that image heavily. Despite TotK and Xenoblade demonstrating some impressive worlds and visuals for the technology, SV started a conversation (whether sincerely or as an excuse) that the console's aged hardware is holding back releases on it, which doesn't look good for people debating picking up a Switch or Publishers considering a Switch game/version. Compare this to so many other AAA Publishers and series, which generally have very buggy releases but continue to put up with it because they can stomach the bad press. In Nintendo's case (not Pokemon's maybe but one of its big 3 Entities), this press is not simply bad, but runs directly counter to an aspect their brand sells itself on, and the last thing they want is swiss-cheese coding in Pokemon to shake peoples' confidence in buying the next Mario or Zelda or Metroid Prime 4 in 2025.

I've definitely felt before that the endless drive for bigger and more realistic open worlds isn't leading to a better experience, and appreciated Nintendo for keeping on making games that sell themselves on the gameplay. I can't really say that now with how much Zelda and Pokemon have leaned into their respective open worlds. At some level, I feel like part of the blame is making something so easily comparable to the standard experience elsewhere.

 

[AztecCroc]

Calyrex-Shadow, Koraidon, Miraidon, and (Gen 8) Zacian-Crowned are all more broken than Mega Rayquaza ever was.

Same goes with various Dynamax Pokemon, such as Xerneas, Yveltal, and Necrozma Dusk Mane.


Did Mega Rayquaza create Anything Goes? Yes. People fail to acknowledge that this was just the beginning and the game has gotten significantly more powercrept since....

The Raidons really don't belong in that group.

 

[Ransei]

The Raidons really don't belong in that group.

Miraidon hits harder (hadron engine makes its SpA base 195, before even applying the Electric-type boosts), is faster (base 135), and is overall bulkier (due to higher SpD) than Mega Rayquaza, + has the ability to Terastallize into any type it wants, and is currently in National Dex AG with the general opinion among leadership to be more broken than Mega Rayquaza. Koraidon is said to be dangerously close, and even better than Miraidon in the regular Anything Goes Metagame, while following many of the same traits due to similar abilities and stat distributions.

 

[Worldie]

Calyrex-Shadow, Koraidon, Miraidon, and (Gen 8) Zacian-Crowned are all more broken than Mega Rayquaza ever was.

Same goes with various Dynamax Pokemon, such as Xerneas, Yveltal, and Necrozma Dusk Mane.


Did Mega Rayquaza create Anything Goes? Yes. People fail to acknowledge that this was just the beginning and the game has gotten significantly more powercrept since....

Miraidon hits harder (hadron engine makes its SpA base 195, before even applying the Electric-type boosts), is faster (base 135), and is overall bulkier (due to higher SpD) than Mega Rayquaza, + has the ability to Terastallize into any type it wants, and is currently in National Dex AG with the general opinion among leadership to be more broken than Mega Rayquaza. Koraidon is said to be dangerously close, and even better than Miraidon in the regular Anything Goes Metagame, while following many of the same traits due to similar abilities and stat distributions.

You see, here's the whole thing. Aside Gen 8 Zacian (which was very specifically made minmaxed anyway), all these mons have one thing in common with Mega Rayquaza: the ability to use the gen defining mechanic without needing to commit the item slot.

Mega Rayquaza basically shown that if you take a super mechanic and make it free to use, pokemon that are inherently already very good become potentially borked.

You can think of it in this way, if "Primal Kyogre" wasnt locked to Blue Orb, it'd be able to run Scarf or Specs or AV or anything like that. It'd have been banished to AG pretty quickly.

Mega Rayquaza was basically the first case of "elite becomes broken" due to being able to get all the benefit of a super mechanic without the downside. Which was then followed by how Dynamax and Terastal create the same scenario, where pokemon that are already insanely strong in their context become unmanageable due to raw power.

 

[pika pal]

The Raidons really don't belong in that group.

Miraidon and Koraidon are easily at the top of SV Ubers (nevermind the ND ban/consideration) even after they released all the Legendaries into the pool with Home. Miraidon just hits like a truck if Electric attacks can hit you, while having powered-up Draco Meteors to chunk the standard Ground types. Koraidon isn't quite as nuclear, but both of them share extremely high offenses with a "free" boost from their ability, one of the best speed tiers in the game much less in the usually slower Ubers meta, and demonstrate a versatility to run half-a-dozen sets each that all can put in work. They're skirting the line surprisingly close before you even consider Terastalization.

You see, here's the whole thing. Aside Gen 8 Zacian (which was very specifically made minmaxed anyway), all these mons have one thing in common with Mega Rayquaza: the ability to use the gen defining mechanic without needing to commit the item slot.

Mega Rayquaza basically shown that if you take a super mechanic and make it free to use, pokemon that are inherently already very good become potentially borked.

You can think of it in this way, if "Primal Kyogre" wasnt locked to Blue Orb, it'd be able to run Scarf or Specs or AV or anything like that. It'd have been banished to AG pretty quickly.

Mega Rayquaza was basically the first case of "elite becomes broken" due to being able to get all the benefit of a super mechanic without the downside. Which was then followed by how Dynamax and Terastal create the same scenario, where pokemon that are already insanely strong in their context become unmanageable due to raw power.

To be a bit fair, Mega Rayquaza was a more particular case because it has itemless access to a gimmick that was specifically designed around the item requirement, it outright broke a rule there. Most subsequent cases were abusers of already-generic mechanics, so they moreso underline the problems with Z-Moves or Dynamax inherently compared to Mega Rayquaza literally just being Rayquaza-but-more in terms of opportunity cost (since the next best stuff in the Primals didn't overlap with Megas for whatever reason). Occasionally I speculate if Mega Rayquaza would be AG broken if it had to hold the Meteorite as a stone, since as a primarily-offensive Pokemon that power boost was a factor in its obscenity, or if it would have been "tolerated" at a Suspect like Gen 8 Calyrex-Shadow.

 

[Worldie]

To be a bit fair, Mega Rayquaza was a more particular case because it has itemless access to a gimmick that was specifically designed around the item requirement, it outright broke a rule there. Most subsequent cases were abusers of already-generic mechanics, so they moreso underline the problems with Z-Moves or Dynamax inherently compared to Mega Rayquaza literally just being Rayquaza-but-more in terms of opportunity cost (since the next best stuff in the Primals didn't overlap with Megas for whatever reason). Occasionally I speculate if Mega Rayquaza would be AG broken if it had to hold the Meteorite as a stone, since as a primarily-offensive Pokemon that power boost was a factor in its obscenity, or if it would have been "tolerated" at a Suspect like Gen 8 Calyrex-Shadow.

My point was that Rayquaza breaking the "i need a item for the supermechanic" was basically a hint of what's to come (consequences-wise).

I was merely imagining a world where "Mega evolving" and "Z-moves" did not need a item slot. Pretty sure the AG banlist (as well as the Uber banlist) would have been much much bigger if Mega Garchomp was able to hold a scarf, or god forsake Mega Metagross/Mawile with a choice band, or if any given pokemon in gen 7 was able on a whim to throw a 140 BP nuke with no warning while also keeping their power boosting item or leftie.

 

[Sonikku A]

2015 RSE theory hit different

? Explain, please

 

[Pikachu315111]

Simple unpopular opinion from me....I'm good with the amount of Eeveelutions and hope they never bother bringing another to the game. I think if they hadn't created the Fairy Type that Gen 4 would have been the finish so unless they create another new type (feeling unlikely at this point) that they're never going to create another one.

With the current Types we have, I personally would like to see these 3 Types getting Eeveelutions and than call it: Normal, Dragon, & Ghost.

The reason is completely "fanon" (not sure if I'm using the right word) on my part: I imagine these 3 being a trio representing 3 different "end routes" for an Eevee uninfluenced by outside elemental or mystical forces:

• Normal: The closest Eevee would have to a natural evolution. No manipulation of its DNA with stones, time of day, or knowing a certain Move; it's just a fully mature form of Eevee. No different than 90% of all other Pokemon who's evolution line is essentially their life cycle from youth to adult.
• Dragon: This represents an Eevee who has reached the apex; becoming best of the best. Ascending from being normal to being extraordinary & fantastical. Dragon-type has been used to represent that idea before so I'm using it here; besides, gotta complete having all Types which were categorized as Special between Gen I-IV having an Eeveelution.
• Ghost: Though no matter how normal or great you are, in the end we all share the same fate: death. For some it comes after a long life, for some it comes tragically soon; death does not judge, it only is. In my head the Ghost-type Eevee isn't a malicious spirit nor a psychopomp, but rather just a grim reminder of the finality of things.

That said, I have also made an Eeveelution for every Type so I'm one to talk.

So, not posting this to start a fight, but when the Pokemon Company themselves are tacitly admitting that yeah maybe our last few releases have been rush-jobs, perhaps we could stop defending the yearly release model and admit that recent games haven't been anywhere near as polished as older ones?

My actual unpopular opinion is this: if there were a 3-year break between this year's release and the next main series game, I think we'd all be much the better for it.

All I'll say is about f***ing time.

there is no universe where TPC solves capitalism

They don't need to solve capitalism because they already won it. They're the de facto makers of one of, if not THE, most popular media franchise.

Can we FINALLY KILL the myth that GF "have to" keep pumping out games because otherwise they'll go broke, big meanie TPC/Nintendo is telling them to, or whatever dumb excuse people make up? Now that they themselves admitted they didn't need to do it, aka they were forcing themselves to do it, and now they're thinking about going back to having a few years before major releases?

I wonder how long it'll take for the franchise to be seen as a joke casually like Sonic...

Well Sonic is now riding high thanks to Frontiers so that analogy, at least at the moment, doesn't quite work.

TLDR: Changing the "Pokemon machine" to not have the games as "launch platform" for a generation would require a massive restructuring which understandably TPCI doesn't want to do.

... No, not really. Everything will now just be spaced out more. Inbetween major game releases they'll just have to do more filler merch with, btw, the Japanese store is FILLED TO BURSTING WITH. TPC don't need a constant stream of new games in order to make new merch, if anything having the major releases more spaced out means they'll have more time to plan, maybe even build up hype, instead of needing everything ready all at once.

I've definitely felt before that the endless drive for bigger and more realistic open worlds isn't leading to a better experience, and appreciated Nintendo for keeping on making games that sell themselves on the gameplay. I can't really say that now with how much Zelda and Pokemon have leaned into their respective open worlds. At some level, I feel like part of the blame is making something so easily comparable to the standard experience elsewhere.

I myself would be fine if they just made the routes their own unique micro "open worlds", each filled with their own interesting features and places to explore within it. And make Cities & Towns into explorable areas befitting of the city or town they're replicating. I don't need everything to be one large connected world, give me a series of playgrounds and explorative settlements.

 

[ant4456]

capitalism isn't about making money.

it is about making more money than the last quarter. forever. And ever.

 

[Sonikku A]

With the current Types we have, I personally would like to see these 3 Types getting Eeveelutions and than call it: Normal, Dragon, & Ghost.

Make RJ's Garfeon canon, please

Well Sonic is now riding high thanks to Frontiers so that analogy, at least at the moment, doesn't quite work.

Eh, don't worry, the Sonic fandom will cannibalize that victory. I should know...

But legit, Pokemon if they're not careful will be as ridiculed as Sonic was early 2000s. There are already a lot of fandom parallels, I don't want to see it leech out into common casual thought that furthers bias

TCPi/Nintendo actually aknowledging rushed releases hopefully will prevent that, but it won't mean much if sentiment is too sour to actually experiment. Even worse if they simply appease people that aren't actually buying the games. For now though, we'll see...

 

[ant4456]

My actual unpopular opinion is this: if there were a 3-year break between this year's release and the next main series game, I think we'd all be much the better for it.

this is literally the most popular pokemon take of all-time, no cap

 

[QuentinQuonce]

this is literally the most popular pokemon take of all-time, no cap

I'm not so certain. People have legit argued that yearly releases are good, actually, because the law of averages means a chance that we get a really good game every couple of years as opposed to a really good game once every 3 or 4 years

 

[YubelVT]

? Explain, please

 

[QuentinQuonce]

View attachment 543379

Thanks, this has enlightened me by precisely 0%