Unpopular opinions

yes I want the world to sometimes kick my ass and sometimes I want to feel powerful and like I can stroll on by without care

it colors the world instead of everything feeling the same the entire way through, which is boring

I do too, but I'd rather it be something purposely planned. Like, how I stumbled onto Alfornada didn't feel like a natural "oh, this place has higher levels, better come back to it later" but rather was a "oh, Levels suddenly spiked, this is meant to be a late game area". At the point I was in the game, Alfornada Gym should have been nearly impossible for me to beat, I should have stood no chance against Tulip or at the very least have to use every single Pokemon in my team. But, no, despite clearly being late game area, I was high Level enough where I was able to defeat Tulip by maintaining Type advantage. Which, yes, while fun, as I said lead to another problem: For pretty much the rest of the game I was unchallenged. The only other time I felt challenged was against Eri but that's because she was the last boss and I fought her early. And, like with Tulip, a battle I should have no business beating as easily as I did, I did so. Other Gym Leaders, Star Captains, and Titans from then on? No problem. Elite Four & two Champion battles? No problem.

There's a difference between planned difficulty highs & lows and ones which are caused by unintentional sequence breaking. Most if not all the bosses I should feel are a difficulty spike, they're meant to test to see if we're properly progressing. Between then, when battling the Route trainers and Wild Pokemon should we feel powerful, a cut above the rest who are capable of defeating the bosses. But the unintentional sequence breaking I did? It destroys that sense of balance. Now instead of a wavelength of ups and downs I have a giant spike early midpoint, a steep slope for the remainder of the midpoint and near end game, and a final small blip during the end game followed by a steady slope. Not really the kind of game experience I think they were planning.

It makes the feel erratic in an unnatural way.

Then people would complain its not open world and you’re being forced along a specific path.

Except you're not; a suggestion isn't the "next goal" you're forced to go to, it's just something which says this is the next planned location. But an open world game lets you completely ignore that and go wherever you want.

That said, since the Bosses are set Leveled, even with the suggestion thing not working as it's supposed to you're subtly being hinted where the next location is. Katy and Brassius are supposed to be the first Gym Leaders you battle, that's what their Levels say, but you can skip them and save them for your last two battles and completely wipe the floor with them.

"Then what's you're issue with battling Tulip early"? While I knew I'd entered into a late game area, due to Alfornada being on the south of Paldea, I thought at most it would be the 5th or 6th Gym. Mt. Glaseado and the two green areas above it very much felt like the end game locations for the main game bosses. I thought even if I defeat Tulip now the Levels will likely even out again upon getting to the base of the mountain. But not only do they not, on the mountain the Levels are equal to near Alfornada. Oh, and by the time I got to Mt. Glaseado, I had gone through the area where Eri's Squad is which I believe is the highest Level in the game. Here I thought the toughest Star Captain would be the one after Mt. Glaseado as it takes the most effort to get to, but no, it's the one that's relatively close to Atticus's Squad. Not to mention I find it odd that, not only is a Gym Leader not the strongest boss in the main game, but there's two Team Star Captains above them. It feels very anti-climatic no matter what way you do it.

You can see what happened with say, Final Fantasy 16 or Starfield. They're fine games on their own, I think both easily earn a 8/10, but everyone, fan or critic, expected lord knows what kind of masterpiece, and honestly it didn't help that the advertising pretended they would be the next best thing.

Advertising definitely didn't help. FF16's commercials made you think it was a kaiju slugfest with Kingdom's vying for power while causing massive destruction upon a defenseless populous. The actual game was a social commentary on caste systems, valuable resource management, and of course a sprinkle of climate change with the kaiju's battles mitigated to fancy boss battles with a lot of reaction commands that don't really use any of the skills and equipment you've gotten. Starfield was a Bethesda game, 'nuff said.

And just "being a good game" doesn't fly on modern internet.

Honestly most fans and critics like FF16, that wasn't the issue. The issue was Square Enix expecting it to suddenly sell a billion copies even though no other FF game or any of their JRPGs selling that good. It's a thing you see over and over again with companies like Square Enix, Capcom, Activision Blizzard, EA, etc.; they expect even the most niche of games to sell to every single person on the planet twice over to "break even". And all so a few dozen shareholders can grab more and more money, expecting infinite growth no matter the cost (and then when it all goes kablooey said shareholders jump off with their golden parachutes with their ill gains leaving everyone else to deal with the mess of what happens next).
 
Honestly most fans and critics like FF16, that wasn't the issue. The issue was Square Enix expecting it to suddenly sell a billion copies even though no other FF game or any of their JRPGs selling that good. It's a thing you see over and over again with companies like Square Enix, Capcom, Activision Blizzard, EA, etc.; they expect even the most niche of games to sell to every single person on the planet twice over to "break even". And all so a few dozen shareholders can grab more and more money, expecting infinite growth no matter the cost (and then when it all goes kablooey said shareholders jump off with their golden parachutes with their ill gains leaving everyone else to deal with the mess of what happens next).

A lot of this comes down to the red-text with how money is funneled around with productions. I'm not sure as to how 1:1 this is with video games, but in the film community it's fairly common knowledge that a movie has to make about 2.5x its production budget to be considered profitable, because a sizeable amount of the earnings goes to the theaters (about 50% domestically, 60% internationally, and 75% for China). That's a big part of why this year for film has largely been a parade of high-profile flops and under-performances, because even if these movies make money, it's often not close to enough to justify the amount invested into them. (Indiana Jones 5 for example had a budget of $300 million)
 
Not to mention I find it odd that, not only is a Gym Leader not the strongest boss in the main game, but there's two Team Star Captains above them. It feels very anti-climatic no matter what way you do it.

Nah I don’t find it odd at all, in fact, I welcome it. Obviously all the Gym Leaders are canonically always as strong as they are in the rematches - based on Katy’s dialogue they use weaker teams for the Gym Challenge. Nemona is basically an avatar of the player on multiple playthroughs - building up a new and going through the region again despite already being champion - constantly looking for a new challenge. It makes a lot of sense to me that some of the other students, e.g the Team Star bosses, would have surpassed the Gym Leaders “weakened” Gym teams.
 
Nemona is basically an avatar of the player on multiple playthroughs - building up a new and going through the region again despite already being champion - constantly looking for a new challenge. It makes a lot of sense to me that some of the other students, e.g the Team Star bosses, would have surpassed the Gym Leaders.
Considering Nemona is a psychopath, she does indeed perfectly represent the average Nuzlocker player :wo:
 
Considering Nemona is a psychopath, she does indeed perfectly represent the average Nuzlocker player :wo:
She is? I always thought Penny was the controversial one due to hacking your phone and not getting punished for it ( She gets punished for stealing League Points, and you can also argue that she wasn’t actually punished at all ). And that's not going into the ethics of the Paradox Pokemon, and the fact that the school tried to hide the professor's death due to their project they sponsored had a tragedy of killing someone.
 
Idk how unpopular this is, but looking back at a lot of FRLG's sprites it's really dawned on me how much I prefer RSE's art style.

Many years back, I was with several friends and we started trading a bunch of stuff between games for what I think was the first time for a lot of us. While our focus was on "cool" Pokemon like Gengar and Tyranitar eventually we got the idea to start sending common species like Pidgey and Nidoran over to the Hoenn games where they don't normally appear and I remember us all being surprised and commenting upon how wildly different the sprites looked, and often for the better. It's really apparant how wooden and stiff FRLG's sprites are in comparison to those of RSE, which generally tend to make the Pokemon look more expressive, animalistic, and dynamic. It's slightly ironic because the same is true of DPP/HGSS, but that's another post.

Some examples that jump out at me:


1694081770290.png
:rs/bulbasaur:
1694081777965.png
:rs/caterpie:
1694081789858.png
:rs/pidgey:
1694081794309.png
:rs/rattata:
1694081815992.png
:rs/nidoran-f:
1694082111923.png
:rs/haunter:
1694082180999.png
:rs/marowak:
1694082084866.png
:rs/eevee:

It's not just something that affects Pokemon exclusive to FRLG - it's the same for a lot of the Pokemon that are in the Hoenn Dex like Sandshrew, Grimer, and Machop:

1694082435420.png
:rs/sandshrew:
1694082341726.png
:rs/grimer:
1694082316685.png
:rs/machop:
1694082327095.png
:rs/alakazam:
1694083546169.png
:rs/machamp:


Amusingly I lean more to liking FRLG's art style in general when it comes to the overworld and human characters: it's quite noticeable when trading between Kanto and Hoenn games because the art style for the opposing games looks so different.

RSE Brendan and May vs FRLG Brendan and May
1694082740889.png
1694082893976.png
1694082756358.png
1694082874494.png


RSE Red and Leaf vs FRLG Red and Leaf
1694082986373.png
1694082779443.png
1694083238730.png
1694083257017.png


Brendan and May definitely look better in Kanto.
 
She is? I always thought Penny was the controversial one due to hacking your phone and not getting punished for it ( She gets punished for stealing League Points, and you can also argue that she wasn’t actually punished at all ). And that's not going into the ethics of the Paradox Pokemon, and the fact that the school tried to hide the professor's death due to their project they sponsored had a tragedy of killing someone.
Wait I'm gonna need a refresher on where the school cover up thing comes from. Most I knew of the school is that they knew the Professor was studying stuff in the Crater and developing stuff around the Terastal Phenomena, but nothing in relation to their death or what the Paradoxes actually were. I wasn't aware the school sponsored it to an extent that they had responsibility for deaths it caused (and there's the argument to be made that it was the Professor's Hubris rather than negligence by other parties).

The post-game talk gave me the impression less of you finding out something they covered up (compared to the Team Star situation) and more "you're telling me THAT'S what was down there? Okay we need to keep this a secret for peoples' sake right now," which isn't an unreasonable approach since Area Zero was already highly restricted when it was just assumed to be a dangerous Pokemon habitat. Ethics around the Paradox Pokemon aren't really addressed because they're neither being exploited (in terms of bringing more in or doing something with the existing ones) nor eliminated while staying in the crater. They feel very much like a "let the sleeping bears lie" situation, and your Raidon already had waves captured Paradoxes as people just assuming you have a weird/rare Mon that resembles one they already know. In limited numbers they're not even strictly dangerous because no major issues are suggested to arise from the Quaking Earth Titan (whether full grown or down to normal) just kind of hanging around in Asado Desert with the other Donphan
 
I recently finished Gates to Infinity and it got me thinking...do ppl want next an Explorers of Sky remake or an original new game? In my case I prefer the latter, while EoS could benefit from the new elements added in Gates and Super (except Mysteriosity, keep it dead) I also wouldn't be unsatisfied with just a port of it.

If we get a new game however, I would also appreciate it if the story stays away from some of the formulaic plot beats. For example, not every MD game must be about a human with amnesia isekai adventure, this world is already pretty rich with the concept of Pokemon living like humans. The special episodes of Sky did a very good job at it.
 
Wait I'm gonna need a refresher on where the school cover up thing comes from. Most I knew of the school is that they knew the Professor was studying stuff in the Crater and developing stuff around the Terastal Phenomena, but nothing in relation to their death or what the Paradoxes actually were. I wasn't aware the school sponsored it to an extent that they had responsibility for deaths it caused (and there's the argument to be made that it was the Professor's Hubris rather than negligence by other parties).

The post-game talk gave me the impression less of you finding out something they covered up (compared to the Team Star situation) and more "you're telling me THAT'S what was down there? Okay we need to keep this a secret for peoples' sake right now," which isn't an unreasonable approach since Area Zero was already highly restricted when it was just assumed to be a dangerous Pokemon habitat. Ethics around the Paradox Pokemon aren't really addressed because they're neither being exploited (in terms of bringing more in or doing something with the existing ones) nor eliminated while staying in the crater. They feel very much like a "let the sleeping bears lie" situation, and your Raidon already had waves captured Paradoxes as people just assuming you have a weird/rare Mon that resembles one they already know. In limited numbers they're not even strictly dangerous because no major issues are suggested to arise from the Quaking Earth Titan (whether full grown or down to normal) just kind of hanging around in Asado Desert with the other Donphan

Yeah, none of the school’s current staff knew anything. They were all hired only a year and a half before the game started.

Sada/Turo presumably died shortly before the game begins (their cause of death was protecting the original Raidon from the more aggressive one, which caused the original Raidon to flee Area Zero, which we see in the opening cutscene). From what we’re told, the AI duplicate then chose to impersonate the original professor and contacted Clavell for help, but Clavell himself doesn’t learn about the original professor’s death until after everyone reports back to his office in the postgame. No one was “covering up” any death.

As for the school’s part in funding the research, it’s a little unclear. The expedition lead by Heath was explicitly funded by the Academy, but that was over 200 years ago. The Area Zero journals written by Sada/Turo mention “corporate backers,” but nothing about the Academy. However, the Academy does benefit from Sada/Turo’s research by virtue of having Tera Orbs to distribute. But I don’t recall if it’s stated that they receive these as a direct benefit in exchange for funding the professor’s research, or if the unnamed “corporate backers” (perhaps meant to be the Pokémon League?) were able to mass-produce Tera Orbs based on Sada/Turo’s prototype, and the Academy simply purchased or received a share of them due to their ties to the League. I would guess the latter, though, due to the mass exodus of school faculty after the Team Star incident, because that surely would have disrupted the funding pipeline and been mentioned by Sada/Turo somewhere?
 
I recently finished Gates to Infinity and it got me thinking...do ppl want next an Explorers of Sky remake or an original new game? In my case I prefer the latter, while EoS could benefit from the new elements added in Gates and Super (except Mysteriosity, keep it dead) I also wouldn't be unsatisfied with just a port of it.

If we get a new game however, I would also appreciate it if the story stays away from some of the formulaic plot beats. For example, not every MD game must be about a human with amnesia isekai adventure, this world is already pretty rich with the concept of Pokemon living like humans. The special episodes of Sky did a very good job at it.
I think the main thing they need to figure out if they write that trope out is how to integrate the tutorial and explanation of the World to the player. Isekai themes, as tired as they are, generally come with that learning built in for the protagonist and thus the audience (not even limited to Pokemon, FFX does this with Tidus being new to Spira, for example). When the problems for the world are on a Global scale, it'd be a hard sell for any Pokemon, even a young one, to not have some frame of reference already.
 
I think the main thing they need to figure out if they write that trope out is how to integrate the tutorial and explanation of the World to the player. Isekai themes, as tired as they are, generally come with that learning built in for the protagonist and thus the audience (not even limited to Pokemon, FFX does this with Tidus being new to Spira, for example). When the problems for the world are on a Global scale, it'd be a hard sell for any Pokemon, even a young one, to not have some frame of reference already.
So the player character in the next PMD should be a UB or Paradox, got it.
 
also I'm sick of people who say "wow how am I supposed to know what level this area is shpposed to be"

IT'S A FUCKING DONUT.
I too enjoy eating donuts in erratic zigzag patterns. :psysly:

Let's be real, a JRPG like Pokémon isn't exactly the most conducive to open-world gameplay. Well, maybe they are, but Game Freak certainly isn't the company for the job. A simple route split got Johto in shambles.

And of course, RBY Kanto was mentioned, and how open it was. Indeed, you could do a lot with that. A lot of mons benefitted from it when it came to availability. Do y'all know what was the problem with it?

There was no freaking point besides that because there was no kind of level scaling.

For example, skipping Lt. Surge was all but trivial. His badge only locked Fly. You could very well leave him as the 7th Gym. For what? Just to roflstomp him out of spite? There was no benefit to the player besides trivializing difficulty, which the improved mon availability already helps with.

Lo and behold, many decades later, what do we see? Game Freak making the exact same mistake.

If one does not figure out the obscure progression of Paldea and acts accordingly, all that they'll get for their efforts is a game where you simply run from point A to point B to one-shot a boss and move on to the next one with even less of a challenge than usual because they're beyond over-leveled.

Now, there are several ways of doing scaling difficulty. Matching levels is NOT what I'm proposing here.

Let's take SwSh's Klara as an example.

There are two entries in the game data for her initial battle. One after the Darkest Day, which I'm sure you'll be familiar with as she has a Lv. 58 Venipede and a Lv. 60 Slowpoke. Said Venipede ONLY has Poison Tail as an attack. It is as pathetic as it sounds.

What you may not be aware of is that this exact same team is her pre-Darkest Day team, but at levels 10 and 12 respectively. Now it all makes sense. That is adequate considering that you can battle her as early as you can access the Wild Area.

So, why in blazes is her Post-DD team the exact same with inflated levels? I couldn't possibly tell. But what it shows is that matching levels are pointless. A Lv. 58 Venipede is NOT handling anything that's on a similar level but fully evolved. It simply lacks the base stats to do so. (And moves, but that's another issue entirely.)

Therefore...

Or, something I forgot to suggest in my post: Level-scaling.

"What? You expect them to make 18 different teams/movepools for each boss?"
70203a39d4ef81e0cc4ec5b725300921.png

If GF is going to make a truly open world game with the mechanics of the core Pokemon games, they should have to put in the work needed for such a system to work. They're a long-standing, fully staffed, reputable game developer connected to Nintendo who make one of the most popular games in the world, so popular they own part of a company dedicated to selling merch of that series which makes millions if not billions of dollars each year; YES, I am expecting them to put in the work that I could do in a couple of hours! Heck, they don't even need to make 18 different teams/movesets, they just need to make like 4 or 5 and then have the Levels & Stats adjust. I'm tempted to do it myself, maybe later when I have the time...
You're a beautiful, articulate person who deserves a natural shiny on your next run.

Seriously, there's no point in doing things halfway. Either commit to the open-world design and do what it needs to be done for it to work, or don't. Linear games are still good.


Also, this is off-topic, but the Zelda slander I've seen in the last couple pages is disgusting. :tymp:

TotK probably deserves it tho.
 
Literally every bad open world game I've played has level scaling. And almost all of the ones I've played that are good have no level scaling.

Fuck. Level scaling.
Level scaling is sadly a bait.

It sounds good on paper: the world progresses with you, so you always have a challenge.

And that's the catch: since the world progresses with you, there's no sense of progression. The feeling of going through a lower level area and murdering (or ignoring) enemies that arent a challenge anymore is pretty important in RPG to give the player the sensation that "they're getting stronger".
I think it was Oblivion where people memed how rats are the deadliest enemies of the game, due to them leveling with you as well so you having to eventually deal with insanely high lvl rats that somehow manage to be as strong as bandits or undeads.

It's also very hard to even balance this "scaling", due to the fact that the player (expecially in RPGs where you don't just have combat stats) may be leveling non-combat related resources, meaning they may be getting overwhelmed and get stuck, or other way around, focusing everything in their combat and facerolling the enemies whose balance assumed a even split of combat and social stats.

My favourite type of "working" level scaling is partial + story related one.
For example, in Dragon Quest XI, the overworld enemies change depending on which act you're on. However, they are not related to the player level per se, just to the point of the story, progressively getting harder but still staying at the level they are at the start of a given act.
So in the same area you'd have (invented names/levels) lvl 3 Wolves, then at start of act 2 you'd find level 20 Dire Wolves, and in act 3 you'd find level 40 Undead Werewolves.
This does make sense as the story progresses, and you keep the feeling of the progressive danger on the world, but at same time, you do keep the feeling of progression, as this is both 1) limited to overworld enemies, 2) makes sense plotwise, and 3) still static, the Undead Werewolves will stay level 40 no matter if you're lvl 40 or 100.

Honestly level scaling and open worlds are some of the modern fotm/plagues I wish games would stop trying to force into them.
They're both not necessary and very hard to execute properly, as well as requiring significantly more development effort and QA which as we know, publishers aren't exactly keen on giving to the developers nowadays.
 
Level scaling is sadly a bait.

It sounds good on paper: the world progresses with you, so you always have a challenge.

And that's the catch: since the world progresses with you, there's no sense of progression. The feeling of going through a lower level area and murdering (or ignoring) enemies that arent a challenge anymore is pretty important in RPG to give the player the sensation that "they're getting stronger".
I think it was Oblivion where people memed how rats are the deadliest enemies of the game, due to them leveling with you as well so you having to eventually deal with insanely high lvl rats that somehow manage to be as strong as bandits or undeads.

It's also very hard to even balance this "scaling", due to the fact that the player (expecially in RPGs where you don't just have combat stats) may be leveling non-combat related resources, meaning they may be getting overwhelmed and get stuck, or other way around, focusing everything in their combat and facerolling the enemies whose balance assumed a even split of combat and social stats.

My favourite type of "working" level scaling is partial + story related one.
For example, in Dragon Quest XI, the overworld enemies change depending on which act you're on. However, they are not related to the player level per se, just to the point of the story, progressively getting harder but still staying at the level they are at the start of a given act.
So in the same area you'd have (invented names/levels) lvl 3 Wolves, then at start of act 2 you'd find level 20 Dire Wolves, and in act 3 you'd find level 40 Undead Werewolves.
This does make sense as the story progresses, and you keep the feeling of the progressive danger on the world, but at same time, you do keep the feeling of progression, as this is both 1) limited to overworld enemies, 2) makes sense plotwise, and 3) still static, the Undead Werewolves will stay level 40 no matter if you're lvl 40 or 100.

Honestly level scaling and open worlds are some of the modern fotm/plagues I wish games would stop trying to force into them.
They're both not necessary and very hard to execute properly, as well as requiring significantly more development effort and QA which as we know, publishers aren't exactly keen on giving to the developers nowadays.
Well said.

Imo, the best idea for SV in particular would be to treat all of their 18 main "bosses" as caps.

So instead of having to follow an order like "Kate -> Titan Klawf -> Brassius", I'd rather have the game be "Lv. 15 -> Lv. 16 -> Lv. 17" (the same levels as the aforementioned Leaders and Titan) and I get to pick who I'm stomping first.


But I have an unpopular opinion of my own to spice things further.


Game Freak does not have the time and brains to fully realize an open-world game and I'd rather have a tight, polished experience instead.

Between SV's level blunders, Dexit forcing those enormously bloated regional dexes that make teambuilding a chore, and TotK being an enormous disappointment, I'm growing tired of those grandiose games with no depth.

The dex bloat is one of the worst things to come out of Dexit in my opinion. It pairs up well with another sickening mechanic that the Switch Era has brought. Forced Exp. All.

I just can't be bothered rotating 18-mon deep squads. It makes the whole game lose its identity to me.
 
SV is literally a well made open world game. I did not think it was a flawed game in its content. It just has no polish because it needed another year to be made.
 
Literally every bad open world game I've played has level scaling. And almost all of the ones I've played that are good have no level scaling.

Fuck. Level scaling.

So there is no bad faith "hurr durr causation", I'm saying I directly dislike it as a mechanic and it actively hinders my experience.
Just feel like stirring the pot by mentioning that BotW and TotK do level scale. Most enemy encounters will have at least one of their mobs change colour/difficulty based on progress, with standard weapon drops scaling off the same measurement.
 
Just feel like stirring the pot by mentioning that BotW and TotK do level scale. Most enemy encounters will have at least one of their mobs change colour/difficulty based on progress, with standard weapon drops scaling off the same measurement.
yeah I always hated it there, I've talked about this before
 
SV is literally a well made open world game.
And I'm sure you'd have no problem backing this up with some arguments. Or maybe you did and I missed it.

Could you elaborate on this? I tend to agree that regional dexes have gotten too big over time, but I don't see the connection with Dexit specifically. Imo the worst offender is XY and that came out a decade ago.
Of course!

You see, XY did have similar issues, but for slightly different reasons. The goofs tried to cram 3 regional dexes in one game. XY tried to do a lot and time ran out before they could really nail things.

Now, I'm pinning the bloated dexes on Dexit for a single reason. Only the mons that get into a region get to be usable.

That means they're not doing 250ish-sized dexes because if they go for a small dex, it'll be even worse. So every game needs to have 400-500 mons on it now and that's not working well for the cohesiveness of the regions. It also makes team building a pain because you have a lot of options packed together. And it also drowns out the newer mons because they're naturally making less of them.

It's all a mire of bad decisions poisoning the franchise.
 
Now, I'm pinning the bloated dexes on Dexit for a single reason. Only the mons that get into a region get to be usable.

That means they're not doing 250ish-sized dexes because if they go for a small dex, it'll be even worse. So every game needs to have 400-500 mons on it now and that's not working well for the cohesiveness of the regions. It also makes team building a pain because you have a lot of options packed together. And it also drowns out the newer mons because they're naturally making less of them.

It's all a mire of bad decisions poisoning the franchise.
I think this is assuming a causal relationship rather than GF simply deciding to make bigger regional dexes to the game's detriment (in your and I imagine many's opinion). The fact that home-only Transfer mons exist in post-Dexit games before we get to the DLC means they have a viable way to allow Mons to be useable without them having to appear as part of the Regional Dex (indeed I don't think the various Starters and Legendaries have Paldean Dex entries), they simply don't choose to go this route and instead try to put everything into the game as an encounter of some form.
 
I think this is assuming a causal relationship rather than GF simply deciding to make bigger regional dexes to the game's detriment (in your and I imagine many's opinion). The fact that home-only Transfer mons exist in post-Dexit games before we get to the DLC means they have a viable way to allow Mons to be useable without them having to appear as part of the Regional Dex (indeed I don't think the various Starters and Legendaries have Paldean Dex entries), they simply don't choose to go this route and instead try to put everything into the game as an encounter of some form.
Yeah, you could say my gripe is that they cram 400ish mons on a single regional dex instead of making them Home available.
 
Back
Top