2015 RSE theory hit differentI agree that Charizard gets too much hype; it was never good in battle
2015 RSE theory hit differentI agree that Charizard gets too much hype; it was never good in battle
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.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'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 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.
The Raidons really don't belong in that group.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.The Raidons really don't belong in that group.
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....
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.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.
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.The Raidons really don't belong in that group.
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.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.
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).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.
? Explain, please2015 RSE theory hit different
With the current Types we have, I personally would like to see these 3 Types getting Eeveelutions and than call it: Normal, Dragon, & Ghost.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.
All I'll say is about f***ing time.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.
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.there is no universe where TPC solves capitalism
Well Sonic is now riding high thanks to Frontiers so that analogy, at least at the moment, doesn't quite work.I wonder how long it'll take for the franchise to be seen as a joke casually like Sonic...
... 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.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.
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.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.
With the current Types we have, I personally would like to see these 3 Types getting Eeveelutions and than call it: Normal, Dragon, & Ghost.
Eh, don't worry, the Sonic fandom will cannibalize that victory. I should know...Well Sonic is now riding high thanks to Frontiers so that analogy, at least at the moment, doesn't quite work.
this is literally the most popular pokemon take of all-time, no capMy 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.
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 yearsthis is literally the most popular pokemon take of all-time, no cap
? Explain, please
Thanks, this has enlightened me by precisely 0%
"it was OU once so you're wrong and i'm right" is what the person meant with his very informative 1liner+screenshot.Thanks, this has enlightened me by precisely 0%
Thanks, figured it was something along those lines. Just drives me nuts when people say shit like "ah, but are you aware of the Klempaderkinus Theory?" and then resolutely fail to actually explain what it actually means"it was OU once so you're wrong and i'm right" is what the person meant.
Though if you're interested in actual context of why it was actually good in gen 3 and only in gen 3, I got you covered
charizard was not considered good in 2015 idk what you're talking about"it was OU once so you're wrong and i'm right" is what the person meant with his very informative 1liner+screenshot.
Though if you're interested in actual context of why it was actually good in gen 3 and only in gen 3, I got you covered
Yes, but are you aware of the Klempaderkinus Theory?Thanks, figured it was something along those lines. Just drives me nuts when people say shit like "ah, but are you aware of the Klempaderkinus Theory?" and then resolutely fail to actually explain what it actually means
I'm not a woman and it's not 2018 but this was too perfect not to post in responseYes, but are you aware of the Klempaderkinus Theory?
Sir first you contest someone saying charizard was never good by showing a screenshot when Charizard was OU in gen 3, then you contest me linking a competitive history video saying that Charizard was legitimate in gen 3 OU saying it was not goodcharizard was not considered good in 2015 idk what you're talking about
charizard was UUBL in 2015. charizard still has the same analysis it had in 2015 (albeit with a disclaimer).Sir first you contest someone saying charizard was never good by showing a screenshot when Charizard was OU in gen 3, then you contest me linking a competitive history video saying that Charizard was legitimate in gen 3 OU saying it was not good
Are you ok? Need some help? Have you considered writing more than one liners as well while at it?