Ultra Necrozma (along with Alola in general) exemplifies the near-impossibility of creating a boss battle in a Pokémon game that’s satisfyingly difficult to players with a broad range of skill levels without forcing them to do stuff like spam Revives.
As with other battles that are generally considered hard, like Whitney, the classic response to someone saying it’s tough is “no it’s not you noob, just use [highly specific Pokémon or cheese strategy]!” even though that goes directly against how you’re taught to play the game, i.e. by building up a team of Pokémon you like that can handle a variety of threats by virtue of their typing or movesets or the extra grinding you did. Plus, the process of clearing routes teaches you that offense is the most effective and efficient strategy, so most casual players prioritise direct attacks over status moves.
Even as someone who liked totem battles, it was clear that there was a kind of ludonarrative dissonance between how the game expected you to proceed through the plot (winning everything on your first go to prove your specialness and avert the Ultra Wormhole crisis) and how it expected you to play the game (by scouting out tough battles with a loss or two and then developing a strategy to overcome them).
Going back to Whitney, whenever anyone anywhere suggests that her gym battle is tough, someone will say “just get the trade Machop” or “just use Geodude or Onix” but like, maybe I don’t want to use any of those Pokémon?also none of them are sure bets without a ton of healing items, especially if your Pokémon are male or she uses Milk Drink at the right times or gets some Stomp flinches
Similarly, the Ultra Necrozma battle is said to be easily winnable... if you bring a team of Innards Out Pyukumuku or exploit Disguise or successfully pull off Destiny Bond or use Perish Song or whatever. These are all strategies that are either inefficient or useless in almost any other battle, though, and again: I shouldn’t be forced to use one of a small subset of Pokémon when the main selling point of these games is the infinite variety of ways you can build a team.
I remember doing a mono-Dark run of Ultra Moon where the MVP was my Baby-Doll Eyes Umbreon, a Pokémon that was practically useless in most regular trainer battles (and honestly kinda frustrating to raise) but could neuter 2/3 of the scariest fights in the game simply by using a bunch of debuff moves.
The first time I battled Ultra Necrozma, I won, but only because I had a Magnezone that could tank an attack and use Thunder Wave, giving the rest of my team a few key chances to chip away at it. That doesn’t make me a more skilful player than the person whose well-crafted team happened to fold to an overlevelled Pokémon with decently varied coverage and obscenely high stats.
To clarify: I actually like that they went for such a crazy-strong boss battle. It was a cool sequence and I’d like to see a change in design ethos that makes this kind of challenge less of a sucker punch to the player. It’s just a little annoying how difficulty in Pokémon is discussed and implemented, because it feel like there’s more that could be done.
As with other battles that are generally considered hard, like Whitney, the classic response to someone saying it’s tough is “no it’s not you noob, just use [highly specific Pokémon or cheese strategy]!” even though that goes directly against how you’re taught to play the game, i.e. by building up a team of Pokémon you like that can handle a variety of threats by virtue of their typing or movesets or the extra grinding you did. Plus, the process of clearing routes teaches you that offense is the most effective and efficient strategy, so most casual players prioritise direct attacks over status moves.
Even as someone who liked totem battles, it was clear that there was a kind of ludonarrative dissonance between how the game expected you to proceed through the plot (winning everything on your first go to prove your specialness and avert the Ultra Wormhole crisis) and how it expected you to play the game (by scouting out tough battles with a loss or two and then developing a strategy to overcome them).
Going back to Whitney, whenever anyone anywhere suggests that her gym battle is tough, someone will say “just get the trade Machop” or “just use Geodude or Onix” but like, maybe I don’t want to use any of those Pokémon?
Similarly, the Ultra Necrozma battle is said to be easily winnable... if you bring a team of Innards Out Pyukumuku or exploit Disguise or successfully pull off Destiny Bond or use Perish Song or whatever. These are all strategies that are either inefficient or useless in almost any other battle, though, and again: I shouldn’t be forced to use one of a small subset of Pokémon when the main selling point of these games is the infinite variety of ways you can build a team.
I remember doing a mono-Dark run of Ultra Moon where the MVP was my Baby-Doll Eyes Umbreon, a Pokémon that was practically useless in most regular trainer battles (and honestly kinda frustrating to raise) but could neuter 2/3 of the scariest fights in the game simply by using a bunch of debuff moves.
The first time I battled Ultra Necrozma, I won, but only because I had a Magnezone that could tank an attack and use Thunder Wave, giving the rest of my team a few key chances to chip away at it. That doesn’t make me a more skilful player than the person whose well-crafted team happened to fold to an overlevelled Pokémon with decently varied coverage and obscenely high stats.
To clarify: I actually like that they went for such a crazy-strong boss battle. It was a cool sequence and I’d like to see a change in design ethos that makes this kind of challenge less of a sucker punch to the player. It’s just a little annoying how difficulty in Pokémon is discussed and implemented, because it feel like there’s more that could be done.
Last edited:
#5: 4.6% (Dusclops's moveset is extremely set in stone)
#39: 41.0%
#84: 15.5%
#86: 26.7%
#117: 11.3%
#118: 14.1%
#138: 12.0%