Unpopular opinions

[WinterArcanine]

double posting but its for a different topic

people always talk about doubles, and implementing doubles in the main campaign of pokemon. Now, personally I enjoy singles battles too and i would prefer a more hybrid type of game, but lets ignore that and talk about just doubles

So my preference for this is very much only doubles in main fights (rivals, gyms etc) > doubles for all fights. I think the main problem with doubles is that for any fight that isnt important, it gets reaaaaally annoying to constantly do double fights with the common fodder trainers. theyre fun once or twice but i think the "doubles is faster" stuff stops being true the lower the quality of a trainer is. when the answer is just to spam a move, youd rather have a simple click move > action than click move > choose target > click move > choose target loop.

but the best part of doubles is that i think monotype gyms really benefits from being a doubles battle. for single monotype to not get destroyed by a counter, you need to be able to stack on immunities/resistances/find ways to counter. Fine on paper, that's just teambuilding! but we have to remember most gyms will not be high leveled or 6 mons, and not all types have ways to do that without being extremely overwhelming for its placement. its very easy to fall into romhacky "counters everything" teams, or to just not do enough and end up being bodied either way.

If you have a doubles team though, you force the player to either teambuild with multiple counters (already more interesting than using a single mon tbh) or for the other pokemon of the team to pick up the slack and be there to help the counter. meanwhile you can create a foe with pokemon that are actually supports and defensive without being blown exploded by the players starter or something. it also makes very small counters to types the team is weak to much more effective: you can have a water/ground type that protects the other water types from electric types, while another pokemon uses flying moves to chip grass types (doesnt have to be stab). its beatable, but engaging

Would it be a hot take for me to say like 80% of the non-boss trainers just shouldn't even be around in the games? (and replaced with higher quality and tougher battles, though not boss level obviously)

One of the worst things about the pokemon games is just how long it takes to play through them while also hardly doing anything, and the tons of trainer battles that are super easy to go through is one of the most egregious things causing that. SV replacing this cycle of going through routes catching some stuff, battling like 20 trainers with two underleveled raticates and five magikarps and whatever the fuck else, getting to the city and talking to like 20 people, and so on, with exploring a larger region and having two other stories with their own boss battles replacing that cycle, is probably the biggest thing that made me enjoy the game so much more than most other pokemon games.

Seriously, so many of the battles being mind-numbingly boring and easy is awful. Switching to doubles and less quantity but far higher quality would be awesome.

 

[Bakugames]

Would it be a hot take for me to say like 80% of the non-boss trainers just shouldn't even be around in the games? (and replaced with higher quality and tougher battles, though not boss level obviously)

One of the worst things about the pokemon games is just how long it takes to play through them while also hardly doing anything, and the tons of trainer battles that are super easy to go through is one of the most egregious things causing that. SV replacing this cycle of going through routes catching some stuff, battling like 20 trainers with two underleveled raticates and five magikarps and whatever the fuck else, getting to the city and talking to like 20 people, and so on, with exploring a larger region and having two other stories with their own boss battles replacing that cycle, is probably the biggest thing that made me enjoy the game so much more than most other pokemon games.

Seriously, so many of the battles being mind-numbingly boring and easy is awful. Switching to doubles and less quantity but far higher quality would be awesome.

I think i agree, we dont need infestations of worthless trainers, we can have things like route/area minibosses that are just little challenges to get you ready to move on to the next area. most games have a few trainers that stand out for being a bit more challenging, and i think you can make a pokemon game with just them

 

[Samtendo09]

Would it be a hot take for me to say like 80% of the non-boss trainers just shouldn't even be around in the games? (and replaced with higher quality and tougher battles, though not boss level obviously)

One of the worst things about the pokemon games is just how long it takes to play through them while also hardly doing anything, and the tons of trainer battles that are super easy to go through is one of the most egregious things causing that. SV replacing this cycle of going through routes catching some stuff, battling like 20 trainers with two underleveled raticates and five magikarps and whatever the fuck else, getting to the city and talking to like 20 people, and so on, with exploring a larger region and having two other stories with their own boss battles replacing that cycle, is probably the biggest thing that made me enjoy the game so much more than most other pokemon games.

Seriously, so many of the battles being mind-numbingly boring and easy is awful. Switching to doubles and less quantity but far higher quality would be awesome.

I think i agree, we dont need infestations of worthless trainers, we can have things like route/area minibosses that are just little challenges to get you ready to move on to the next area. most games have a few trainers that stand out for being a bit more challenging, and i think you can make a pokemon game with just them

That is for sure a hot take I can agree with. It doesn’t help that some Gym Leaders - even back in the good old days! - were barely better than generic trainers, or worse, outclassed by some random trainers right before they are fought.

I’d like to add Team Grunts prior to SV at that. So little variety for what is supposed to be a threatening criminal group, to the point they are more repetitive than other generic trainers. Having a few less Grunts with at least slightly more variety may help them feel individualized underneath their samey look, or going a similar route of what SV did with Team Star would help cut to the chase.

 

[Basedwell]

double posting but its for a different topic

people always talk about doubles, and implementing doubles in the main campaign of pokemon. Now, personally I enjoy singles battles too and i would prefer a more hybrid type of game, but lets ignore that and talk about just doubles

So my preference for this is very much only doubles in main fights (rivals, gyms etc) > doubles for all fights. I think the main problem with doubles is that for any fight that isnt important, it gets reaaaaally annoying to constantly do double fights with the common fodder trainers. theyre fun once or twice but i think the "doubles is faster" stuff stops being true the lower the quality of a trainer is. when the answer is just to spam a move, youd rather have a simple click move > action than click move > choose target > click move > choose target loop.

but the best part of doubles is that i think monotype gyms really benefits from being a doubles battle. for single monotype to not get destroyed by a counter, you need to be able to stack on immunities/resistances/find ways to counter. Fine on paper, that's just teambuilding! but we have to remember most gyms will not be high leveled or 6 mons, and not all types have ways to do that without being extremely overwhelming for its placement. its very easy to fall into romhacky "counters everything" teams, or to just not do enough and end up being bodied either way.

If you have a doubles team though, you force the player to either teambuild with multiple counters (already more interesting than using a single mon tbh) or for the other pokemon of the team to pick up the slack and be there to help the counter. meanwhile you can create a foe with pokemon that are actually supports and defensive without being blown exploded by the players starter or something. it also makes very small counters to types the team is weak to much more effective: you can have a water/ground type that protects the other water types from electric types, while another pokemon uses flying moves to chip grass types (doesnt have to be stab). its beatable, but engaging

Great post.

Would it be a hot take for me to say like 80% of the non-boss trainers just shouldn't even be around in the games? (and replaced with higher quality and tougher battles, though not boss level obviously)

One of the worst things about the pokemon games is just how long it takes to play through them while also hardly doing anything, and the tons of trainer battles that are super easy to go through is one of the most egregious things causing that. SV replacing this cycle of going through routes catching some stuff, battling like 20 trainers with two underleveled raticates and five magikarps and whatever the fuck else, getting to the city and talking to like 20 people, and so on, with exploring a larger region and having two other stories with their own boss battles replacing that cycle, is probably the biggest thing that made me enjoy the game so much more than most other pokemon games.

Seriously, so many of the battles being mind-numbingly boring and easy is awful. Switching to doubles and less quantity but far higher quality would be awesome.

i personally disagree, I like grinding against other trainers because I enjoy seeing my Pokemon get stronger, and many low stakes fights help me learn its strengths and weaknesses, as well as appreciating the subtleties of its strengths. It helps me develop personal relationships with my Pokemon.

That said, with xp share and longer battle animations, that is no longer feasible, and I feel like S/V and L:A did a great job introducing alternative ways to make games without grinding, which I felt worked to their benefit.

One thing they need to get better about is showing newer players strategy, bc Scarlet was my 2nd Pokemon game and also one I learned the least from, I kinda just overwhelmed everything without thinking, and when I did struggle in the endgame fights, it was harder for me to identify flaws in my team and strategy. And I’m a pretty smart adult.

I also think that most Pokemon basically feel the same to play as in-game these days, and that my team choices matter less, but I don’t see a fix for that one.

 

[Hugin]

Would it be a hot take for me to say like 80% of the non-boss trainers just shouldn't even be around in the games? (and replaced with higher quality and tougher battles, though not boss level obviously)

One of the worst things about the pokemon games is just how long it takes to play through them while also hardly doing anything, and the tons of trainer battles that are super easy to go through is one of the most egregious things causing that. SV replacing this cycle of going through routes catching some stuff, battling like 20 trainers with two underleveled raticates and five magikarps and whatever the fuck else, getting to the city and talking to like 20 people, and so on, with exploring a larger region and having two other stories with their own boss battles replacing that cycle, is probably the biggest thing that made me enjoy the game so much more than most other pokemon games.

Seriously, so many of the battles being mind-numbingly boring and easy is awful. Switching to doubles and less quantity but far higher quality would be awesome.

It makes sense with the original design philosophy of the games(which has since gone out the window and is why the franchise is somewhat flailing with regards to difficulty since ~gen 5).

Specifically, the early games were very big on gauntlets as the source of difficulty. You enter a dungeon(cave, office bldg, forest, etc) filled with enemies. Every X steps you are attacked by a wild mon. Progressing to the end requires fighting Y trainers. There's powerful/valuable items hidden about, but collecting them will require more steps and fighting more trainers. HM moves that kind of suck are required for navigation and limit your useable PP. Healing items or Repels can preserve your mons, but that's money that could go into TM purchases etc. This culminates in the E4, a series of 5 max-difficulty battles with no healing and no escape options.

Now, this didn't work well. The economy has always been broken, making healing items too accessible. Exploring and getting into more fights actively strengthens your mons, making future dungeons easier. Trainers don't reset, so "Explore everything you can, Escape Rope out of the cave, Center, and re-enter" is a great way of making progress. And frankly, dying because you went in with a Water and a Grass with a combined 40 PP of STAB and your 50th Geodude just landed 2 Magnitude 10s in a row isn't a great feeling.

So at some point, GF shifted the design. Healing is common. Wild mons are easier to avoid. The player is just given repels. Trainers mostly wait for you to attack them. And that would be fine, if they'd added additional difficulty elsewhere. But they're still designing bosses like the player has fought their way through an army of ninja to reach them and the fight needs to be winnable with 3 mons fainted.

The solution is obvious, just make the boss fights difficult on their own, but I think GF is scared of that turning off players. They flirt with this(gens 7 and 8), but they kept the barrage of weak battles around and didn't make things significantly difficult. Still, I do think there's progress being made, so maybe...?

 

[Volt-Ikazuchi]

double posting but its for a different topic

people always talk about doubles, and implementing doubles in the main campaign of pokemon. Now, personally I enjoy singles battles too and i would prefer a more hybrid type of game, but lets ignore that and talk about just doubles

So my preference for this is very much only doubles in main fights (rivals, gyms etc) > doubles for all fights. I think the main problem with doubles is that for any fight that isnt important, it gets reaaaaally annoying to constantly do double fights with the common fodder trainers. theyre fun once or twice but i think the "doubles is faster" stuff stops being true the lower the quality of a trainer is. when the answer is just to spam a move, youd rather have a simple click move > action than click move > choose target > click move > choose target loop.

but the best part of doubles is that i think monotype gyms really benefits from being a doubles battle. for single monotype to not get destroyed by a counter, you need to be able to stack on immunities/resistances/find ways to counter. Fine on paper, that's just teambuilding! but we have to remember most gyms will not be high leveled or 6 mons, and not all types have ways to do that without being extremely overwhelming for its placement. its very easy to fall into romhacky "counters everything" teams, or to just not do enough and end up being bodied either way.

If you have a doubles team though, you force the player to either teambuild with multiple counters (already more interesting than using a single mon tbh) or for the other pokemon of the team to pick up the slack and be there to help the counter. meanwhile you can create a foe with pokemon that are actually supports and defensive without being blown exploded by the players starter or something. it also makes very small counters to types the team is weak to much more effective: you can have a water/ground type that protects the other water types from electric types, while another pokemon uses flying moves to chip grass types (doesnt have to be stab). its beatable, but engaging

Btw, Emerald had this solved in uhhhh, 2004?

I suppose it'd be a bit harder nowadays though, but it is what it is.

They really gotta encourage Doubles as the main way of playing if they want to push VGC that hard though. I fell out of Doubles back in the day because the Frontier Brains didn't show up on Doubles, how stupid is that?

 

[pokemon4eva]

I always found Emerald Frontier more fun when playing Doubles, then I stopped doing so when I noticed I never found Noland that way. Getting to use stuff like EQ + flying/levitator is sooooo satisfying.

Speaking of which, the Tower has a Multi Battle mode in which you get to pick your battle partner for double, could be another player or a NPC. Not a fan of the former bc you might as well be playing by yourself, but the latter is interesting. My favorite is what the Battle Tree did and letting you select the trainers you defeat as your partner, but this started in Emerald and I assume bc they don't want to draw a backsprite for all trainers that it looks like this. It's so cursed....

 

[Bakugames]

Btw, Emerald had this solved in uhhhh, 2004?

I suppose it'd be a bit harder nowadays though, but it is what it is.

They really gotta encourage Doubles as the main way of playing if they want to push VGC that hard though. I fell out of Doubles back in the day because the Frontier Brains didn't show up on Doubles, how stupid is that?

not really? people want a full game of doubles, and emerald showed they could make one (1) good doubles gym, but not an entire game.

if you mean in team comp I think thats fair, though they still need to solve the early game doubles gym. you dont want it to feel like an easy chore beatdown, because then its slower singles, but the lower levels of anything means one good pokemon being supported by another can make it more of an headache than its supposed to be. its probably why the double gyms we have are all pretty much the last ones.

i think alola also solved this partially, but its easier to build a boss with a goon to support it than a team

 

[Celever]

not really? people want a full game of doubles, and emerald showed they could make one (1) good doubles gym, but not an entire game.

if you mean in team comp I think thats fair, though they still need to solve the early game doubles gym. you dont want it to feel like an easy chore beatdown, because then its slower singles, but the lower levels of anything means one good pokemon being supported by another can make it more of an headache than its supposed to be. its probably why the double gyms we have are all pretty much the last ones.

i think alola also solved this partially, but its easier to build a boss with a goon to support it than a team

Honestly I don’t really think I see the hardship of designing good early game double battles. Mons already has weak doubles tech that they can use as inspiration for battles and accustom the player to the battle style. Disarming Voice is a really weak spread move for instance, introduces the concept of spread moves to the player well, that type of thing. They just made Dragon Cheer which is weak dubs tech too. Late game that can be Howl and there’s clear mechanical power scaling happening there. Give the champion Decorate Alcremie lol.

There’s nothing particularly wrong with double battles that are kinda just 2 single battles except you can double target if you want to either. Most of XD’s early game is that and it plays well; you don’t really get support moves until later on on any of the available mons either on your or the opponent’s teams.

Double battles are kind of inherently faster than single battles too. Each individual turn may take longer but that’s because each turn is compressing two turns into one while taking less time than playing out 2 turns in a single battle does. So stomp battles should be taking less time on average not more. Especially if you’re stomping via actual doubles strategy such as Howl or Helping Hand or whatever and netting KOs in one turn that in singles would take 2.

 

[Hugin]

I've said before, Doubles needs to be a whole game. If the player has to swap between Singles and Doubles, whichever one is less common will feel like an imposition, and the default will be "spam strong attacks" rather than anything that exploits the doubles-specific options.

If it were up to me, though, the game would swap between Doubles where you use 2 mons and multibattles where you are partnered with someone else(generally a Rival* or otherwise significant trainer). This would give the player an example of the more complicated strats available in Doubles while also letting the designers create puzzle battles to force the player to learn.

The other key is figuring out how to reduce the number of minor battles in favor of major ones. I don't think it's a coincidence that Orre doesn't have any wild mons. Doubles is complicated and they probably knew people wouldn't want to waste time getting spammed by 2 Zubats.

* 2 rivals, Hunter and Taylor. Hunter spams offensive moves at every opportunity, Taylor uses supportive stuff like Wide Guard and Coaching without ever using attacks. When partnered with the Player, you have to compensate for their weaknesses. When they team up against you, watch out.

 

[Bakugames]

i think encounters can be single battle even in doubles. they dont need to be mechanicalmy interesting as being an introduction to new pokemon and a grinding spot is their main job

 

[Genuine_Angus_B33F]

A full doubles game is a concept I am very interested in personally, but I think that the modern game's standards are potentially ill-equipped to do so without making a few unorthodox choices and breaking some established conventions.

Points about generic double battles being pretty boring when they are constant and monotonous is true, in my opinion; the Orre duology's biggest strength is that even the most generic fights often come in-built with an objective that can not be solved by simply swinging for the fences with the same one-two punch combo over and over again. The process of whittling down and catching Shadow Pokemon leverages the concentration of focus onto a smaller number of more complicated battles by utilizing a tighter margin for error and a window for success that doesn't extent infinitely upward with player power. Meanwhile, the severely limited roster pushes players to make use of more situational and haphazard synergies, and the purification system around it all pushes players to taste test all kinds of different combinations rather than simply settling on a single power couple to take on the world.

Removing the dynamics around Shadow Pokemon from the game takes away all this design scaffolding that pushes the strengths of doubles to the forefront, and you can see that if you see what a playthrough of these games looks like if you choose to simply ignore the vast majority of Shadow Pokemon - you get a lot of easy, tedious fights. With that in mind, I think people who are skeptical of just taking an indev vanilla main series game and flipping a switch to turn every fight from singles to doubles are probably right.

With that all said, I think that it is a big tricky to find what the keystone here is. I wouldn't hate an Orre game remake or blatant spiritual successor, but it'd be sort of narrow to say Shadow Pokemon are the only way to make doubles work. There's a lot of things one could point to, but to me, it's a lot about being extremely strict on limiting powerful, linear strategies that beat a large majority of possible opponents but suffer into specific counters. Stuff like instant Weather or Terrain abilities, redirection + setup sweeper duos, trick room setup duos, and even just strong and reliable spread move combos can all easily erode a lot of the potential of a doubles game by being a solution to too great a portion of the game.

...and of course, that's slightly awkward considering those aforementioned strategies make up a pretty solid amount of what people think of when considering VGC in general. Sort of similar to how porting competitive singles staple moves and items like hazards and utility attack overload into a singles game does not constitute good singles ingame design, I don't know how much the "Doubles game as a pipeline into VGC" thing would actually work without just making something more like a series of Battle CDs / direct VGC tutorial, which I don't think is something people are thinking of with a "Doubles Game."

I have more thoughts but am limited by time.

 

[Bakugames]

Double battles are kind of inherently faster than single battles too. Each individual turn may take longer but that’s because each turn is compressing two turns into one while taking less time than playing out 2 turns in a single battle does. So stomp battles should be taking less time on average not more. Especially if you’re stomping via actual doubles strategy such as Howl or Helping Hand or whatever and netting KOs in one turn that in singles would take 2.

see the issue imo is that while this is true, just because a doubles battle goes faster doesnt mean it feels faster for a player. a lot of the feeling comes from the effort of adjusting 4 inputs instead of one, which feels more sluggish than a single move click, even if that means you knock things faster. and it sounds exaggerating that itd matter that much but i think it does have an effect, as whenever i ask why someone doesnt like double battles the answer is more commonly that theyre annoying and slow

 

[Volt-Ikazuchi]

not really? people want a full game of doubles, and emerald showed they could make one (1) good doubles gym, but not an entire game.

No, no. I was talking about how most battles in Emerald could be doubles if you wanted, but they could also be turned into singles if you broke up the duos.

And that gym was a top 3 gym in the whole franchise lol, put some respect on Tate and Liza's names

With that in mind, I think people who are skeptical of just taking an indev vanilla main series game and flipping a switch to turn every fight from singles to doubles are probably right.

I dunno about that. Iirc, some editors can be used to force doubles for any trainer. Maybe I'll do that in SwSh when I'm done with Stadium 2/Crystal.

 

[Basedwell]

I love how Tate and Liza in Emerald are immune to Earthquake, and have a lot of tools to combat Surf spam, and those are the only 2 real spread moves in the game. Emerald may not have the toughest gyms but definitely has the best designed.

 

[Genuine_Angus_B33F]

I dunno about that. Iirc, some editors can be used to force doubles for any trainer. Maybe I'll do that in SwSh when I'm done with Stadium 2/Crystal.

This is far from a matter of whether or not you can do something. I'm well acquainted with what's possible in this regard - did you know doing so in specifically Black and White is actually a gigantic pain in the ass?

I'm more considering the details of executing that idea. There are a fair few ways to play these very basic switch-flip type hypotheticals, but I'm not super interested in the result of doing so alone.

 

[Volt-Ikazuchi]

This is far from a matter of whether or not you can do something. I'm well acquainted with what's possible in this regard - did you know doing so in specifically Black and White is actually a gigantic pain in the ass?

I'm more considering the details of executing that idea. There are a fair few ways to play these very basic switch-flip type hypotheticals, but I'm not super interested in the result of doing so alone.

In that case, I'd take a closer look at the Orre games' rematches, Mt. Battle, Emerald, and Platinum, to a lesser extent.

These are the closest that you'd get to constant, regular double battles without the Shadow mon dynamic.

The thing about developing an entire game around it would also run into a situation like this, where you can just barrel through common trainers. Personally, I don't think that's entirely a problem. People need matches to put theories to the test and practice. It also lulls the player into a sense of safety and confidence so the harder challenges have an amplified impact.

The simple switch flip is but the first step. It gives a framework to work with.

 

[QuentinQuonce]

Yeah Emerald is absolutely chock-full of double battles. Obviously the majority are singles but literally every area has at least one, and in most cases two or three or four, opponents who can be fought as a pair. Not just routes but even locations like the Trick House, Mt Pyre, and every single gym... and ofc all the Gym Leader rematches are fought as double battles too, they're a lot of fun. It's kind of the standard for how other games should be imo.

 

[Basedwell]

I don’t see the point in nitpicking or trying to rationalize every single decision Pokemon makes… like you wanna know why Mega Rayquaza doesn’t need any item? Because they wanted it to be more powerful and broken in competitive, and it’s cool.

You wanna know why regional forms exist some places but not others? They wanna capitalize on nostalgia without replacing the original.

Also in Emerald, Platinum, and B2W2 they were clearly building towards something as those games had a ton of double battles, and even triple battles in the B2W2. But then there was that direction change post-gen 5

 

[Samtendo09]

I don’t see the point in nitpicking or trying to rationalize every single decision Pokemon makes… like you wanna know why Mega Rayquaza doesn’t need any item? Because they wanted it to be more powerful and broken in competitive, and it’s cool.

You wanna know why regional forms exist some places but not others? They wanna capitalize on nostalgia without replacing the original.

Also in Emerald, Platinum, and B2W2 they were clearly building towards something as those games had a ton of double battles, and even triple battles in the B2W2. But then there was that direction change post-gen 5

I feel like you contradicted yourself as you did rationalize Mega Rayquaza specifically, since you could say the same thing to the Primal Forms and the Mega Mewtwo forms, and Mega Rayquaza managed to be beyond broken even in VGC.

People nitpick or rationalize the big things, like how viable a Pokémon is in-game or competitive, for a reason. When it goes as far as people constantly nitpick the smallest things that don’t really harm the fun, or rationalize the big negatives that is either detrimental or contrived, then that’s where the issue arises.

 

[Basedwell]

I feel like you contradicted yourself as you did rationalize Mega Rayquaza specifically, since you could say the same thing to the Primal Forms and the Mega Mewtwo forms, and Mega Rayquaza managed to be beyond broken even in VGC.

People nitpick or rationalize the big things, like how viable a Pokémon is in-game or competitive, for a reason. When it goes as far as people constantly nitpick the smallest things that don’t really harm the fun, or rationalize the big negatives that is either detrimental or contrived, then that’s where the issue arises.

I mean like an in-game/canon rationalization, I should have clarified. I meant it in the context that I’d be fine with new Mega and Regional forms in Z:A even if it didn’t make “canon” sense. There’s other contexts, that’s just the currently relevant one.

 

[Sonikku A]

I feel officially VGC needs 6 tiers available all the time

-Restricted (2 Legendaries at max)
-Modified Restricted (above + no DLC mons)
-Modified RegH (no Legendaries/Paradoxes)
-Local dex Retricted (no transfering from other games)
-Local Dex Modified Restricted
-Local Dex Modified RegH

Part of the issue later gens is how powercreep pressured the same teams to revolve around restricted mons, but I feel variety still could have em. So just make a separate tier to play in. It'd allow weaker mons to shine in the "RegH" tier

It'd also force GF to be way more aware of what mon is dominating VGC for lower tiers, then potentially balance

Or GF can simply ignore that and make the problem worse to encourage DLC

 

[Hiddenfreezer]

So I tried the Battle Frontier in Emerald for the first time last year.
One of the worst game modes I have ever played. Pokemon Stadium 25+ years ago was better if I would compare it.

 

[Bakugames]

i think the popular opinion is that hms are bad and annoying but i have a specific opinion that is hms were completely fine in gen 1. as a matter of fact, that was the only game they fundamentally worked

 

[Ironmage]

Having generational gimmicks tied to held items helps to mitigate poor item balance (by forcing powerful mons off the standard for their role) and should have continued being the case post-3ds.