Id say thats true for video essays in general or atleast the ones ive been listening to.
-
Smogon Premier League is here and the team collection is now available. Support your team!
-
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.
Little things you like about Pokémon
- Thread starter Kurona
- Start date
Oh my god someone made a video essay about the one-way ledge after Mt. Moon that basically traps you in Cerulean. It's a weird element of Kanto's game design that no one ever talks about.
its weird because while i dont think the ledge video is wrong (it was a clear intentional design choice and for most likely the exact reasons they mentioned) but i think its overexaggerating the ledges importance. it is a really good point of no return for the setting and atmosphere, but gameplay wise it doesnt affect the game that much: the new patch of grass that you get not only is Better for grinding but it brings back some good staples in case you missed them (ratatta and spearow) and offers two new pretty decent pokemon in ekans/sandshrew, mons that are completely useable to beat the rivals and get access to the other patches of grass that bring back pokemon you might have missed anyway (the bugs) and new pokemon tailor made to beat the shit outta misty.
so i think its function is more so symbolic than anything. i also never felt the "oh how am i going to get back" issue because even as a new player you can pretty easily assume that youre going to come back from the little area thats blocked off with a tree or from the water below. or hell theyll just give you a tool or quest to put you back there. i feel like a hater because some of this sound like "uuh the curtains are just blue lol"
so i think its function is more so symbolic than anything. i also never felt the "oh how am i going to get back" issue because even as a new player you can pretty easily assume that youre going to come back from the little area thats blocked off with a tree or from the water below. or hell theyll just give you a tool or quest to put you back there. i feel like a hater because some of this sound like "uuh the curtains are just blue lol"
To be fair your critique is less "curtains are just blue" and more "the curtains are blue for a reason but you're kind of elevating them/for a different reason"
Droomish is great. Been subbed to her for a while. I like her videos because she and I clearly share much of the same appreciation for the same kinds of details and embellishments and the lives of people within in a game world, but it’s stands out to me because while I can tell she clearly has a preference for the older games, she expresses that love without devolving into the same old miserable Gen 5 wank that I seem to keep getting burned by whenever I look for good Pokémon analysis.
Very much like with the architecture video, which put me off at first with its nostalgia-baiting title, but I figured, eh, what the hell, I know that’s just how the YouTube game is played, I’ll give it a chance. And it was a great video that wasn’t about the old games being nebulously “better,” instead just being specifically about what makes Unova’s world design so good (and it is, and I’ve been saying that since 2011)… until they had to bring it crashing down with the predictably maudlin “i hOpE GaMe fReAK cAn rEMeMbEr tHeY uSed tO iNsPiRe pEoPle” tripe obnoxiously set to An Unwavering Heart, which is everything that utterly sucks about modern Pokémon discourse distilled into a minute.
I did enjoy the ledge and trade evolution videos, shorter though they were. Haven’t got the time right now to crack into the other ones, but I will. To your larger point at least, I do agree that if you’re looking for Pokémon analysis in general, there’s a much richer frontier than there used to be.
Last edited:
The Ledge is fine from a map design perspective. "The player is in Cerulean City, we want them to either fight the rival or fight Misty. We do not want them to retreat back to Pewter looking for another option." Maybe it's overly-cautious from a game design perspective, but it makes sense to me. Metroidvanias have a lot of issues with "where do you go next", and Kanto is almost a Metroidvania as much as it is an RPG.
The thing I don't like is cutting the player off from mon selection. Geodude and Paras are both mons that the player might want during the Misty/Surge stretch, and not have access to if they didn't catch them. It's not game-ruining or anything, but it's an odd choice. Why wasn't the ledge just past the Fossil guy, inside the cave?
The thing I don't like is cutting the player off from mon selection. Geodude and Paras are both mons that the player might want during the Misty/Surge stretch, and not have access to if they didn't catch them. It's not game-ruining or anything, but it's an odd choice. Why wasn't the ledge just past the Fossil guy, inside the cave?
While I do agree with everything here, I’ve also speculated for quite some time that the Oddish and Bellsprout families were meant to fill this role in addition to rounding out Kanto’s Pokédex up to a nicer looking 150 (plus Mew). The fact there is tall grass that is still accessible on Route 4 with these Pokémon available as well as both their evolution levels and their intentionally Bulbasaur-esque typing seems to indicate they were specifically placed here to give an Grass-Type alternative to Bulbasaur for this stretch of the game for players who did not select it.
Their inclusion in Let’s Go supports this idea- since you can’t start with Bulbasaur or Squirtle, you pretty much have to have access to a Grass-Type before Brock to even access the battle in the first place. The idea of the Kanto starters being a sort of “difficulty slider” is well documented and I think a lot less people would have chosen Bulbasaur as the game’s Easy Mode starter had Oddish and Bellsprout always been available before Brock as opposed to just in Let’s Go. This specific way they did it, all three Grass/Poison lines can still fulfill their designated roles and help with Misty and Surge without indirectly penalizing Bulbasaur selectors for the Brock fight, whereas Squirtle players would have been given an indirect team building advantage instead. I really hope all of this made sense.
Arguably superior options are available past the ledge. For Misty you can go north and grab Oddish or Bellsprout, while Yellow adds the ability to obtain Bulbasaur. Lt. Surge, meanwhile, has Diglett Cave sitting in his backyard. Diglett/Dugtrio last you the entire game in Gen 1 thanks to the high crit rate and 100 BP Dig against all the Poisons you fight.
Last edited:
the thing about Paras is that in Gen 1 it has no grass moves by level up and in Gen 3 it only has one in the 40s, so it wouldn't even be useful. you are forced to teach it bullet seed in FRLG to even be able to use its grass typing.
I always liked Paras and Parasect but Game Freak clearly doesn't.
While Game Freak doesn't strictly balance around Singles (let alone 6v6 Singles compared to Battle Spot), I appreciate that they do throw us some bones with items and moves that specifically interact with hazards, like Heavy-Duty Boots in SWSH and another Rapid Spin in Mortal Spin in SV.
I also really like how they've chosen to balance hazard removal to never be entirely free.
I just think all this interplay is neat, especially because Game Freak probably stumbled into the hazard metagame's balance by accident.
I also really like how they've chosen to balance hazard removal to never be entirely free.
- Rapid Spin and Mortal Spin only remove hazards from your side but are both blocked by type immunities.
- Defog has the best distribution and can only be blocked by a specific ability on one Pokémon, but also removes hazards you've placed down and can be punished by Defiant.
- Court Change can take all your opponent's work placing hazards and flipping the script in one turn, but requires a specific game state (presumably no hazards on the opponent's field and some on yours) to function optimally. It's also only on a single Pokémon and thus has more specific team-building implications than the other options.
I just think all this interplay is neat, especially because Game Freak probably stumbled into the hazard metagame's balance by accident.
Last edited:
I have the suspect they've been trying (unsuccessfully) to actually get hazards to be relevant in VGC for a couple gens at this point.
Both gen 8 and 9 saw a massive distribution of hazards to pokemon that didn't have them before, as well as multiple moves (and abilities) introduced that set hazards while doing something else.
They do recognize that "wasting a turn to set Stealth Rock" is something hardly worth it in a fast paced meta like VGC, I can only recall a singular time in the entirety of gen 9 where this was actually a thing (on a single team that reached top 2 at a major, on a Ting-Lu).
I do wonder however, if they can even actually succeed. Hazards becoming relevant in VGC would have massive ramifications in how it's played considering Intimidate/Fake-Out shuffling are a big part of... pretty much every meta since a few years (cough cough Incineroar cough)... but is it even possible to make a hazard-setting move(or ability) strong enough to make it being considered by VGC players that doesn't break singles apart?
It’s not too likely hazard see use in VGC unless they hyper-buff hazards to make the metagame even faster, and even then it’ll end up making Heavy-Duty Boots mandatory if the hazards end up being very powerful in VGC and didn’t do anything to stop Intimidate / Fake-Out shuffing.
As in, doubling Stealth Rock’s damage output, making Spikes also decreasing Defense by one stage per stack, Sticky Web also decreasing Evasion, Toxic Spikes activating on a Pokémon that used Rapid Spin / Tidy Up and ignoring Heavy-Duty Boots before being removed… that would be horrific in Smogon Singles.
But even with Stealth Rock’s controversial reputation in mind, I appreciated how decently balanced the hazards and removal tools are overall. With one exception of a hazard I mentioned, none of them are too ubiquitous for any metagame to the point that it singlehandedly dictate a Pokémon’s effectiveness just by how they interact with that hazard.
I'm honestly surprised hazards aren't more of a thing in doubles. Even without considering Focus Sash and Incineroar, getting chip damage on whatever Pokemon your opponent has in the back seems quite powerful. I've seen stuff like a single turn of poison chip from an Amoongus Sludge Bomb be the difference in landing a KO or not, and hazards are getting that damage on things that are otherwise undamagable because they're hidden in their Pokeballs.
If only they put that much effort into balancing the hazards themselves.
Probably not gonna be the case for a good long will I feel. Singles vs doubles are two very different metas and have their own strengths and weaknesses for archetypes and moves.
Easiest way they could do it is to make a Mon that’s doubles focused with Toxic debris or an equivalent. Or give Glimmora Follow me, that works to
Easiest way they could do it is to make a Mon that’s doubles focused with Toxic debris or an equivalent. Or give Glimmora Follow me, that works to
Glimmora already sees a lot of use in VGC to my understanding. But that seems to be more due to a combination of traits that include Toxic Debris instead of that being the main selling point. (STAB Meteor Beam go brrrr.) In fact, Mortal Spin sees play on some sets because it's a spread move that poisons more consistently than relying on Toxic Debris procs.
That's correct, but I wouldn't call it "a lot". It sees some use, but it's not that common and only really in the lower power formats (tends to disappear as soon as the expanded dex happens)
The Toxic Debris is a bonus (incidentally, it's also the least relevant Hazard, Amoongus being as common as it is means they're often cleaned without even trying, and if the opponent has an Amoongus of their own you'd often actually gladly take the poison so you can disregard the threat of Spore.
If they were to make an ability that sets Spikes or Stealth Rock, I'd think there'd actually be serious consideration to include that mon for the ability primarly rather than the ability being an afterthought.
But then again, it's pokemon, and usually Pokemon are the sum of their parts... a insane ability doesn't do anything if they put it on a Pokemon whose stats are abysmal, there was a reason noone used Pincurchin in any serious context (rip my Iron paradoxes :\ )
Last edited:
i think the only way to make hazards viable in a way that doesnt fuck up singles is something pokemon will most likely never do: having moves do pretty different things in doubles compared to singles.
we do have a few mechanics that differ, but theyre either not noticeable for the casual player (the damage spread reduction) or the move is tailored For Doubles so it just has no use in singles (helping hand). there are some exceptions and combo moves like the pledges but theyre pretty niche. i just dont think theyd ever complicate pokemon further than this
we do have a few mechanics that differ, but theyre either not noticeable for the casual player (the damage spread reduction) or the move is tailored For Doubles so it just has no use in singles (helping hand). there are some exceptions and combo moves like the pledges but theyre pretty niche. i just dont think theyd ever complicate pokemon further than this
Yeh that's what I was pointing out.
If a Pokemon is powerful enough (between the setter move and combination of other factors) to actually justify using it in 4v4 to set hazards specifically, chances are it's going to break all other game modes because that means you're getting to set hazards for free in modes where those field conditions are already insanely strong as is.
I’ve started work on a fun side project I had in mind for Pokémon’s 30th anniversary for a while now, and looking back at all 30 years of the franchise, it’s made me appreciate the franchise’s storied history more than I had prior. What I find especially fascinating is how Pokémon and Nintendo’s financial systems- more specifically, their fiscal business year system- puts a new perspective on some of the generations and when they were current, as well as what came out around what time.
With only one (plus Blue/Green) original pair of games in Gen 1, and with those games being released in 1996, you would think, for the sake of this project, that Gen 1 is considered a three-year generation, right? Well, not quite. Pokémon’s fiscal year cycles over from March into April, meaning some games like the originals, FireRed & LeafGreen, and Legends: Arceus have an argument to be made that they belong in the previous year. The yearly cycles of things such as VGC and the older movies, among others, supports this idea- in fact, the seasons of the anime and the releases of Mythical Pokémon line up so well that I have to think this was intentional from the very beginning. The idea that all of their yearly cycles line up together, I mean.
Gen 1 (Japan): 1996-99
Gen 2: 2000-02
Gen 3: 2003-06
Gen 4: 2007-10
Gen 5: 2011-13
Gen 6: 2014-16
Gen 7: 2017-19
Gen 8: 2020-22
Gen 9: 2023-26
There’s even a second “trend”, of sorts, that has been followed. Even the generations that are the second on a particular system follow this if you count “definitive version” handhelds as their own thing. I should note that ever since Gen 3, these have also matched up perfectly with Pokémon’s limited edition hardware. Do not be surprised for this reason if we get a 30th Anniversary Pokémon themed Nintendo Switch 2 bundle.
Gen 1: Game Boy
Gen 2: Game Boy Color
Gen 3: Game Boy Advance
Gen 4: Nintendo DS
Gen 5: Nintendo DSi
Gen 6: Nintendo 3DS
Gen 7: New Nintendo 3DS
Gen 8: Nintendo Switch (+ Lite)
Gen 9: Nintendo Switch OLED
Gen 10 most likely: Nintendo Switch 2
With only one (plus Blue/Green) original pair of games in Gen 1, and with those games being released in 1996, you would think, for the sake of this project, that Gen 1 is considered a three-year generation, right? Well, not quite. Pokémon’s fiscal year cycles over from March into April, meaning some games like the originals, FireRed & LeafGreen, and Legends: Arceus have an argument to be made that they belong in the previous year. The yearly cycles of things such as VGC and the older movies, among others, supports this idea- in fact, the seasons of the anime and the releases of Mythical Pokémon line up so well that I have to think this was intentional from the very beginning. The idea that all of their yearly cycles line up together, I mean.
Gen 1 (Japan): 1996-99
Gen 2: 2000-02
Gen 3: 2003-06
Gen 4: 2007-10
Gen 5: 2011-13
Gen 6: 2014-16
Gen 7: 2017-19
Gen 8: 2020-22
Gen 9: 2023-26
There’s even a second “trend”, of sorts, that has been followed. Even the generations that are the second on a particular system follow this if you count “definitive version” handhelds as their own thing. I should note that ever since Gen 3, these have also matched up perfectly with Pokémon’s limited edition hardware. Do not be surprised for this reason if we get a 30th Anniversary Pokémon themed Nintendo Switch 2 bundle.
Gen 1: Game Boy
Gen 2: Game Boy Color
Gen 3: Game Boy Advance
Gen 4: Nintendo DS
Gen 5: Nintendo DSi
Gen 6: Nintendo 3DS
Gen 7: New Nintendo 3DS
Gen 8: Nintendo Switch (+ Lite)
Gen 9: Nintendo Switch OLED
Gen 10 most likely: Nintendo Switch 2
Genuinely I have no idea what you are trying to point out here
All I was really getting at was that I like Pokémon’s yearly release system a good bit. Helps keep things organized in my opinion. Nothing too serious. Plus, and I will admit Pokémon fans can rely too much on this sometimes, I get a strange, unironic enjoyment out of pattern recognition. I apologize for the confusion.