-
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.
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
I'm pretty sure "Ultra Breath of the Wild" was referring to the Switch 2 port, not Tears.
The point of the open world is to get any Pokemon you want at any time. Get ANYTHING you want at anytime.
When teambuilding in prior Pokemon games, you needed to reach specific checkpoints in order to get what you wanted. Want to use Scyther for Gardenia in DPP? Too bad, you gotta wait until you get to route 210 before you get it. This is mostly fine, but it limits how much you can truly customize your Pokemon in a given playthrough.
With SV (and SS to some extent), you basically have the entire kitchen sink out of the box. All the games TMs, evolution items, and Pokemon are available before the first gym, barring a handful of exceptions. The games also make it much simpler to acquire these resources without making it "free" - TMs for example require a moderate amount of effort to make- so its not entirely free, but there is still a bit of progression being made on that front whenever you get Pokemon materials. Moves being relearnable from anytime is also a nice QoL that makes customizing around certain situations even more fun. Getting good items for a general team is also easier now.
I'd say the open world format in the latest games is a massive improvement to the franchise for those reasons - building your dream team is much easier out of the gate, with far fewer restrictions than there were in the past. And while I wouldn't say this "requires" you to interact more with the mechanics, it does make it easier to interact with them. I think SV's systems between the crafting, materials, and multiple different characters with differing movesets lends itself well to the open world grind loop too, since certain builds will always require some sort of progression which you have a few means of attaining.
I guess it could be, but that would only be the case if you for some reason want to buy the Switch 2 version as a separate, discrete new item rather than just purchasing the $10 digital upgrade path or getting it bundled with an NSO subscription. And if it’s your first time buying either game, then you’re essentially just paying the same price that you would have before ($60 for BOTW, $70 for TOTK) + $10 for the upgrade path.
The only people shelling out $70 for TOTK on Switch 1 and then another $80 for TOTK on Switch 2 are like… physical edition collectors, and in that case, avid Pokémon collectors don’t really have any high ground to stand on given that they’ve (sorry, we’ve) been buying different versions of the same game 2-4 times for 30 years now.
(Disclaimer: I don’t know how these nuances differ with other currencies.)
Last edited:
I'm an SV-truther, but I'm going to be a #hater for a quick sec.
Someone else already said it but I want to echo it, SV's open-world just felt so pointless.
I understand teambuilding being something that becomes very flexible with it, but then again, because there's no scaling (my absolute biggest issue with SV's open world) you end up with a team of incredibly mismatched levelled Pokémon - and there's no penalty for attempting to go for stronger Pokémon either, at least SWSH didn't let you capture the static encounters until you had enough badges. Wasting the dead obedience mechanic and not applying it to levelled Pokémon was a missed opportunity.
I'm also kinda against the complete easiness of in-game team building, I'm all for making it easier post-game and for competitive, but there was something exciting about finally reaching a destination where a certain Pokémon was available in previous games. I'm not someone who trades, so I would always put in the effort myself. SV took that away and made it too easy. Working with what's available in the current area(s) is part of the charm of Pokémon, especially in the early game. Where's the fun in cheesing a strong capture and just steamrolling bosses?
But going back to the pointless element, because there's no scaling you still pretty much have to complete the bosses in a set order. The illusion of free will
and super off-topic but on-topic of what's being discussed, I don't think Zelda is the franchise for Pokémon fans to go up against lol, whilst I personally don't have a lot of.. interest in Zelda there is a definite difference between each game released that shows a significant evolution in the way the game is played/how it performs etc etc.
Mario on the other hand..
Someone else already said it but I want to echo it, SV's open-world just felt so pointless.
I understand teambuilding being something that becomes very flexible with it, but then again, because there's no scaling (my absolute biggest issue with SV's open world) you end up with a team of incredibly mismatched levelled Pokémon - and there's no penalty for attempting to go for stronger Pokémon either, at least SWSH didn't let you capture the static encounters until you had enough badges. Wasting the dead obedience mechanic and not applying it to levelled Pokémon was a missed opportunity.
I'm also kinda against the complete easiness of in-game team building, I'm all for making it easier post-game and for competitive, but there was something exciting about finally reaching a destination where a certain Pokémon was available in previous games. I'm not someone who trades, so I would always put in the effort myself. SV took that away and made it too easy. Working with what's available in the current area(s) is part of the charm of Pokémon, especially in the early game. Where's the fun in cheesing a strong capture and just steamrolling bosses?
But going back to the pointless element, because there's no scaling you still pretty much have to complete the bosses in a set order. The illusion of free will
and super off-topic but on-topic of what's being discussed, I don't think Zelda is the franchise for Pokémon fans to go up against lol, whilst I personally don't have a lot of.. interest in Zelda there is a definite difference between each game released that shows a significant evolution in the way the game is played/how it performs etc etc.
Mario on the other hand..
Obedience in SV still applies to all Pokemon caught above your current badge's level, so no, you can't use "nearly anything" before the first gym.
I suppose you could probably breed the overleveled captures to get around this, but that's also been true of overleveled trades for past games.
Last edited:
My hot take: Physical collectors deserve itI guess it could be, but that would only be the case if you for some reason want to by the Switch 2 version as a separate, discrete new item rather than just purchasing the $10 digital upgrade path or getting it bundled with an NSO subscription. And if it’s your first time buying either game, then you’re essentially just paying the same price that you would have before ($60 for BOTW, $70 for TOTK) + $10 for the upgrade path.
The only people shelling out $70 for TOTK on Switch 1 and then another $80 for TOTK on Switch 2 are like… physical edition collectors, and in that case, avid Pokémon collectors don’t really have any high ground to stand on given that they’ve (sorry, we’ve) been buying different versions of the same game 2-4 times for 30 years now.
(Disclaimer: I don’t know how these nuances differ with other currencies.)
"Well if the upgrade is on the cart then I gotta buy the entire game again!!! What if the servers shut down in 10 years and I don't have the upgrade!!!"
yknow what im gonna bitch about phys vs digital discourse rn
-you can still download wii, 3ds and wii u shop games if you bought them
-since the 8th generation, console stores are not the same. cont.:
-all 3 console manufacturers are now using digital and physical libraries as a lock in between console gens and are therefore incentivized to keep everything available ("if I have GTA6 on PS5, then if I get a Xbox Series XYZ then I will have to buy it again" -> "well I'll just get a PS6 ig so I can keep my games on the new system + get upgrades for them")
-ubisoft is getting sued and that's basically 1 of like 3 examples people have of this happening
-the second nintendo says "fuck you you dont own this digital game" they will get sued into oblivion. no, courts will not be amused by a TOS wording choice
-physical media also breaks down
-the impermanence of life is unfortunate but very real
-emulation is true preservation. NES systems will all be unusable within the next 100-200 years, but extremely accurate NES emulators can be spread within 3 seconds
Nah I was referring to Tears
Which would be perfectly fine and was what I expected, but the levels didn't get the memo!
What's the point of sneaking alllllll the way up to Glaseado to get a Frigibax before Gym 1 if the lowest level you can get it is 34? And that's assuming you can catch one without getting swept outright.
Lowkey, the Legend of Zelda fandom has quietly gotta be one of the most neurotic fandoms out there. The way you see people on online spaces rant and rave about the state of the series would make you think Aonuma personally shot their dog or something (this isn't really directed at yall btw, I'm just tired of the discourse I see in other places). Yes, BOTW and TOTK were massively successful commercially and critically. Yes, they will have lasting influences on the series and likely will influence the development of the next game. No, the next game is not going to be a carbon copy of BOTW, and yes, the next game in the series will likely find many ways to innovate and improve upon things people didn't like from earlier games. I think the pessimism in general is unwarranted, even if I also acknowledge that its the byproduct of a series that isn't continually updating like a run-of-the-mill live service.
But more to the point, I feel like people unnecessarily hate on devs for shaking up the core formula of a long-running game series. Like yeah sometimes those risks can make shit games, but also those risks can also make amazing games you never knew you asked for. For example, take Mario. If you grew up playing 64 and Sunshine, you probably fell in love with the breadth and the depth of the movement mechanics, the ability to explore the world fully, the ability to freely mess around in the hub world etc. And then Mario Galaxy comes out and it completely dumpsters all those things you loved. All that movement you grew to love about the core 3D mario formula? 100% Gone and replaced with extremely floaty, meandering jumps and the complete removal of the dive? The large interconnected worlds? Gone for the most part and replaced with a bunch of silly gimmick levels that forcibly include motion controls for some reason as well as much more narrow corridor style levels. The Fludd Nozzles and Cap powers? No longer are powers a way to extend your moveset, they are just set pieces for a singular star or two. And ofc Mario Galaxy is successful cuz its on the Wii which blew up so they make Mario Galaxy 2. And hey, all those design elements you hated about the OG galaxy? Well they are even more gone now, and the games doubled down on literally every aspect that differentiated Galaxy from Sunshine and 64. Then 3D World comes out, and hey, yet again no more free roaming worlds that you grew up loving yet again. I bring all this up because I think Mario Galaxy jumps the shark way harder in terms shaking up the core formula than BOTW or TOTK could even dream of. I think if you went back in time and described all the changes to the movement mechanics (you know the core of a platformer) to a 64/Sunshine diehard, they would almost certainly hate it. In fact, I think if Mario Galaxy came out today in a post Odyssey world with widespread social media, it would probably get excoriated for all the reasons I pointed out and people would say that 3D Mario fell off or something.
And I bring all this up, not because I think the Galaxies or 3D World suck, but because I think they are great. And they are so good that some people have even gone full circle and hate Mario Odyssey for changing the formula that 3D world has gone with. Isn't that crazy? And part of why they are so good is because they are so different. There are things Galaxy does, that no other Mario game can or does do, and because of that, some people would consider it the best style of Mario out there. You might say that Mario is allowed to deviate in a way that Zelda isn't, but its not like Zelda doesn't make big changes to its core design. The aesthetics of each game wildly changes from the grittier and depressing world of MM to the much lighter aesthetic of WW or even when they changed the grim-grey-muddy look of TP with the Skyward Sword and the goat Groose.
Honestly, I think part of the hate is unfortunately driven by the way Internet Discourse on social media is structured because its way easier to reflexively hate on something than it is to appreciate Devs for trying something different for their series. (See the reflexive hate on the idea of Open-World Mario Kart). (Ironic because this is the unpopular opinions thread I know). And although I don't want to imply that everyone is a sheep, I do think internet discourse does a lot to shape how we view games as a whole. We're social creatures at the end of the day, and we care deeply about other people's opinions even if sometimes we shouldn't.
That is all to say, sometimes changing things up doesn't work, but sometimes it does, and I think its a little silly to doom about game devs trying to deviate from their core formulas. Sure sometimes they might come up with something disappointing (like in the Zelda fan's POV BOTW or TOTK), but sometimes they can absolutely cook and give you a Mario Galaxy. Maybe they would have succeeded if they made a Sunshine 2, but IMO, I'm glad they took the risk because I really like Galaxy and a lot of other people do too.
But more to the point, I feel like people unnecessarily hate on devs for shaking up the core formula of a long-running game series. Like yeah sometimes those risks can make shit games, but also those risks can also make amazing games you never knew you asked for. For example, take Mario. If you grew up playing 64 and Sunshine, you probably fell in love with the breadth and the depth of the movement mechanics, the ability to explore the world fully, the ability to freely mess around in the hub world etc. And then Mario Galaxy comes out and it completely dumpsters all those things you loved. All that movement you grew to love about the core 3D mario formula? 100% Gone and replaced with extremely floaty, meandering jumps and the complete removal of the dive? The large interconnected worlds? Gone for the most part and replaced with a bunch of silly gimmick levels that forcibly include motion controls for some reason as well as much more narrow corridor style levels. The Fludd Nozzles and Cap powers? No longer are powers a way to extend your moveset, they are just set pieces for a singular star or two. And ofc Mario Galaxy is successful cuz its on the Wii which blew up so they make Mario Galaxy 2. And hey, all those design elements you hated about the OG galaxy? Well they are even more gone now, and the games doubled down on literally every aspect that differentiated Galaxy from Sunshine and 64. Then 3D World comes out, and hey, yet again no more free roaming worlds that you grew up loving yet again. I bring all this up because I think Mario Galaxy jumps the shark way harder in terms shaking up the core formula than BOTW or TOTK could even dream of. I think if you went back in time and described all the changes to the movement mechanics (you know the core of a platformer) to a 64/Sunshine diehard, they would almost certainly hate it. In fact, I think if Mario Galaxy came out today in a post Odyssey world with widespread social media, it would probably get excoriated for all the reasons I pointed out and people would say that 3D Mario fell off or something.
And I bring all this up, not because I think the Galaxies or 3D World suck, but because I think they are great. And they are so good that some people have even gone full circle and hate Mario Odyssey for changing the formula that 3D world has gone with. Isn't that crazy? And part of why they are so good is because they are so different. There are things Galaxy does, that no other Mario game can or does do, and because of that, some people would consider it the best style of Mario out there. You might say that Mario is allowed to deviate in a way that Zelda isn't, but its not like Zelda doesn't make big changes to its core design. The aesthetics of each game wildly changes from the grittier and depressing world of MM to the much lighter aesthetic of WW or even when they changed the grim-grey-muddy look of TP with the Skyward Sword and the goat Groose.
Honestly, I think part of the hate is unfortunately driven by the way Internet Discourse on social media is structured because its way easier to reflexively hate on something than it is to appreciate Devs for trying something different for their series. (See the reflexive hate on the idea of Open-World Mario Kart). (Ironic because this is the unpopular opinions thread I know). And although I don't want to imply that everyone is a sheep, I do think internet discourse does a lot to shape how we view games as a whole. We're social creatures at the end of the day, and we care deeply about other people's opinions even if sometimes we shouldn't.
That is all to say, sometimes changing things up doesn't work, but sometimes it does, and I think its a little silly to doom about game devs trying to deviate from their core formulas. Sure sometimes they might come up with something disappointing (like in the Zelda fan's POV BOTW or TOTK), but sometimes they can absolutely cook and give you a Mario Galaxy. Maybe they would have succeeded if they made a Sunshine 2, but IMO, I'm glad they took the risk because I really like Galaxy and a lot of other people do too.
Alright rant over. I really don't understand the hate for Open World Pokemon unless you are just burnt out on Open World games in general which I guess could be fair. Like all the pitfalls people say Open Worlds fall into are just not things that are an issue for the core Pokemon experience. Many open worlds incentivize exploration by offering out pointless sidequests, but a Pokemon Open World incentivizes exploration by putting all the rare and cool monsters in the boonies, something that objectively can't be pointless since its the whole appeal of the series. Open World interfering with the pacing of a story? Well Pokemon stories aren't amazing anyway, and even then, SV is still one of the most competent ones if not probably the best. And then there are the things that Open Worlds can showcase that aren't possible at all in a traditional linear Pokemon game. For example, I think the ecology of Pokemon is really cool, but it is basically impossible to showcase in a linear game. In an open world, they would have way more room to expand and explore the ecosystems and ecology of Pokemon. And then there is exploration which is done way better too. Yeah, you can do some exploring in traditional Pokemon games, but nothing hits harder than seeing a cool place and just bee-lining to it to check it out or just like stumbling onto a really cool set-piece out of nowhere.
Moreover, I really don't think Pokemon as a whole benefits from linearity in a way that a traditional RPG might. The whole core appeal of Pokemon and Pokemon world to me is about exploration, customization, and chill gameplay and those are all things an open world can do way better IMO. Also that Pokemon prop hunt thing they released was hilarious, and I don't think it would work nearly as well if movement around the world was restricted.
To be clear, I'm not really talking about SV here cuz those two games are genuinely unfinished and suck in many fun and distinct ways. But I don't think thats the fault of the Open World medium, I think its Gamefreak being ass. I think if there is any game that genuinely merits and really wants an Open World, its a monster-collecting series like Pokemon.
Last edited:
As somebody whose favoruite gen 9 mons are under no illusion of being available early, levels aren't the only issue with trying to get nonlinear scaling working. Evolutions, or lack thereof, can seriously mess up the power curve as well. This hasn't been something the linear games have done perfectly, as the multi-game prominence of the Speedrunner's Hawlucha shows, but it gets amplified by an attempt to have as much as possible as early as possible. Either the first few setpieces let the player casually show up with some single-stage or item evolution mon and stomp their LC-grade opponents or the NPCs use those tricks as well and the player's own starter is a disappointment. I love the customization aspect of Pokemon, but it only really works under the assumption that everything is fully evolved. That aspect doesn't need an open-world main story, it needs a battle frontier.
Okay possibly a popular unpopular opinion
But
We really need gen 10 to have a battle frontier that is not just linking to Pokémon champions
Some of us are not so sociable in the world
But
We really need gen 10 to have a battle frontier that is not just linking to Pokémon champions
Some of us are not so sociable in the world
Oh yeah, here's a controversial take. The Battle Frontier was mainly a bunch of gimmicks, and most of them were just garbage. The garbage runs from hoping your mon picks the right moves and not just screws you with RNG, to getting half your team put to sleep because you picked the wrong door, to getting half your team put to sleep because SPIN THE WHEEL!!!!! Maybe half of them are decent, as long as you don't get stuck against the opponent who has double team and Bright Powder on all their mons, but that's just something that happens in all the Battle Towers regardless.
I always enjoyed that tbh! Games were meant to be hard in the good old days…!
My guess is Pokemon Champions has/is a battle frontier and they just update that regularly going forward. Which I'm fine with as long as it's a good one and they have a reasonable way to get mons and make transfers easy.
Okay question for everyone. When someone says "I want the Battle Frontier back", do you think they mean(or do you mean) they want the specific 7 Battle Facilities from Emerald, or do you take it as "I want a postgame battle facility with a variety of formats including changes from base mechanics in some of them"? Because I've been assuming the latter(people upset with Battle Tree being boring), but maybe there's a bunch of fans who really want Battle Pike specifically to come back?
I actually would prefer stadiums/coliseums like in the Gamecube games to come back tbh, with a greater range of teams and pokes and rules to play around with. I really enjoyed Pyrite Stadium and the Under tbh.
I think they literally just want the name "Battle Frontier"
Game Freak could give Gen 10 every battle facility that's ever existed plus brand new ones, call it "Battle City", and people would still be saying they want the Battle Frontier to return.
Pokemon is the franchise where, literally no matter what preventative steps you take, you're going to eventually be done in by that 95% accurate move finally failing you at the worst possible time.
Every flavor of bullshit in the Battle Frontier is a different vector toward teaching the player to come to terms with the things in life that he or she cannot control, and they all have their place.
Having the Frontier in ORAS would benefit inmensely because getting and training a Battle Ready Pokemon is still nowhere near as painful nor intricate (compared to breeding at least, I still don't get how RNG manip works lol) as in Emerald. But even if you don't agree if keeping postgame content ppl liked on the remake of said game is worth it, I dunno, copypasting XY's Battle Maison and just slapping it in the Hoenn game is not a good look. And I'm not even going to bring up the whole "Frontier project has started" fiasco lol.
I literally know people irl that have never touched Emerald and only like the *concept* of the Frontier and threw a tantrum about how ORAS was the worst thing ever for not having it, arguing that even HGSS did (even trough it was a copypaste of Platinum). One of them still argues ORAS is worse than BDSP because of it.
That being said, I don't think Game Freak handled it well either. The excuse they gave was genuinely stupid and the game kind of rubs it in your face with it being "under construction" which obviously never led anywhere. Then SM keeps alluding with Anabelle that there is a world with the Frontier in Hoenn...
Personally, I had hype for it...when Emerald was my first ever third version. Playing trough it was painful as a child, and boring as an adult oncd I needed to get the Ribbon Master done. The novelty in most of them quickly wears off excluding Factory, and you always get screwed in all of them by luck anyways. I prefer BW2's postgame by a mile, trough still respect the Frontier for what they are and still think Battle Factories should always been a thing (looking at you SV, how could LA have one but not you when your second DLC is literally about battling)
That being said, I don't think Game Freak handled it well either. The excuse they gave was genuinely stupid and the game kind of rubs it in your face with it being "under construction" which obviously never led anywhere. Then SM keeps alluding with Anabelle that there is a world with the Frontier in Hoenn...
Personally, I had hype for it...when Emerald was my first ever third version. Playing trough it was painful as a child, and boring as an adult oncd I needed to get the Ribbon Master done. The novelty in most of them quickly wears off excluding Factory, and you always get screwed in all of them by luck anyways. I prefer BW2's postgame by a mile, trough still respect the Frontier for what they are and still think Battle Factories should always been a thing (looking at you SV, how could LA have one but not you when your second DLC is literally about battling)
The wild thing is that in Japanese, the Battle Chatelaines' dialogue uses a dialect from Kyushu, Hoenn's IRL inspiration. Couple that with the utter lack of any unused Battle Frontier materials in the Teraleak (say, unused concept art for Frontier Brain redesigns) and it truly does seem like porting the Chateau over to ORAS was the plan from the start.
Just makes that one infamous interview untold leagues more baffling. It wasn't a sloppy bit of improv because they couldn't admit they ran out of time, so what the heck...?
For real tho, I get that everyone hates the Palace and that's perfectly fair. Look at the broader picture tho.
Battle Tower - Absolute CLASSIC. BDSP had a great one with the Gym Leaders showing up, and SwSh's was bashed for being worse than the standard. Hasn't really been missing in most 3D games, so it hardly counts.
Battle Factory - Another classic, great gateway for the rest, and just a ton of fun with crazy variance to keep anyone on their toes.
Battle Dome - Underrated gem, I really wish it was closer to VGC/Stadium settings instead of Take 3, Pick 2 in Singles and whatever in Doubles, I'm going off memory here. Apparently, it was one of the easiest, but I'd guess it's because you had so much information. Fair enough, I guess. Still really fun and it was interesting to see the other brackets. My personal favorite tied with the Factory.
Battle Pyramid - Very unique facility, great idea, and I'd really wish to see it back in an expanded, more interesting format.
Battle Pike - Also underrated, but it was great. I'm still mad they had wild Milotic, but I couldn't catch one.
Battle Arena - An interesting facility because it requires a different team composition, but it only really shines at higher streaks. Early streaks kind of break the gimmick because you can easily 2~3HKO a Jigglypuff lmao.
Battle Palace - I think everyone agrees this place is a hellhole, designed by the same people that made DP's Great Marsh. Probably programmed by Masuda himself. Fuck this place with a rusty rake.
Gen 4's Frontier was aggressively mid, but the Castle was really fun, the Hall was boring, but not that bad, and the Arcade might as well be russian roulette, but your opponent gets the first 4 shots.
And it says a lot I remember all of these without checking Bulbapedia for how they work. (I barely remember the Hall tho, I only remember it's 1v1 and there were ranks based on types)
I really, honestly just think they'll say anything in interviews to get them through the next 5 minutes