Talking Point: When Did 'Good Enough' Become Good Enough For Pokémon?

Ever since XY honestly.
And while I have adored every game before and after things should definitely change.

Pokemon has been awful and lazy since DS era. Gold/Silver peaked.

Why bother trying when you can get daddy Nintendo to just sue your competition?

Since 2018... 7 years of mediocrity.

@Moonvalley2006 you can’t say they didn’t give it their all for BW/B2W2, Platinum and HGSS

As a passive observer who's only completed game is Sun, I do think Pokémon is in need of a proper shake up to keep things fresh in this era, in the vein of say, Mario Wonder or Bananza. Find new ways to experiment with mechanics instead of just doing more of the same.

It's not resency bias. It's a set of retro glasses.

Gen 1 was a terrible gen by modern standards. Even for Pokémon. Games were buggy, had a weird thing with Ghost / Psychic, too easy, good (bad) AI, badge boost glitch.

Gen 2 had weird Gym levels in the middle of the game.

To me Pokémon have always been medium quality at best up until X & Y. Which added 3D to Pokémon, real character custimisation, and was basically my favorite game up until Legends Arceus. Which to me, is still the best Pokémon game.

Pokémon Legends Z-A is a good number 2. Just becuase I liked the catching mechanic in Legends Arceus more. The battles in Z-A are near perfect, the story is good, the graphics (except some flat buildings) are great, music is top notch.

@N00BiSH That's basically the Legends-subseries. Those games break with tradional gameplay, and for me those changes make them the best.

For me, the Pokémon series has never just been "good enough", I genuinely love all the mainline games that I've played, especially during the Switch generation. Heck, Violet has been my favorite video game of all time since 2023. It may not have the best visuals of all time, but man, it is just so freaking fun to play.

I'm honestly disappointed that the "new Gen every three years" thing is ending. Ever since I really got into Pokémon during the early days of Gen 7, back when I first watched the Indigo League anime and played my mom's copy of Blue on the Game Boy Color. Ever since then, I've always looked forward to the new Gen every three years. Yes, I understand that incorporating better visuals and maker bigger games and all that jazz means longer development time, and based on leaks, Game Freak is definitely going to start making bigger Pokémon games going forward. I'll just miss having a new Gen every three years 😢.

Also, even though Pokémon is my favorite franchise, I do think that there is room for other Pokémon-like games to exist as well. Including Palworld: ever since the Palworld lawsuit began, I've had the belief that it is just dumb and shouldn't have happened in the first place.

Z-A is really, really good fun. I beat it today and I still want to keep playing, even though Dragon Quest 1+2 comes out tomorrow. I will definitely keep playing Pokémon, if the next game is as fun as Z-A.

I think Pokemon has been in undeniable decline since Gen 6, honestly. With a few standout points of a few games (Megas in Gen 6, Nemona in Gen 9, Legends Arceus), the series is certainly going budget on a big name with the intention of maximizing profit. They focus more on simplistic so there's easy transition to other games, like Pokemon Go. Not to mention the toxic community around the TCG (with the scalpers) and the competitive environment and its handling.

And it's really easy to hate The Pokemon Company right now, between the C&Ds, the way they treated Palworld, the mechanic patenting, and their handling of the shiny Koraidon/Miraidon distributions... Pokemon feels less and less like something worth getting invested and involved in.

I still like hunting and tracking Pokemon, but games feel more like "oh, this again" and less "OH MY GOSH, LOOK AT THIS!" And that's just sad.

Since day 1? I was there when Gen 1 launched and my feeling along with everyone else I knew was that the game was notably janky (like Final Fantasy 1 levels of jank) and the addictive nature and charm made it worth the while. We can and I'm sure will argue which generation was better than the other but they've been selling split content and jank in varying degrees from the start and it's all been good enough to be the vessel for the gameplay hooks.

I don't think that the answer to this question is as black-and-white (hah) as people would have you think - a lot of people online will assert that [insert the generation with their first Pokémon game here] is "teh BEST" generation, and everything after that is mediocre trash. Putting my own personal biases aside (personally not a fan of B/W), I think Gen 6 is where they started aiming for "good enough", although it didn't really become obvious until Sw/Sh. I feel that most games from X/Y onward hope that their central grab (first 3D entry, first console entry, real-time battle mechanics, open world, etc.) is enough to get you to ignore how underdeveloped they might be in other areas (plot, visuals, locales, animations, difficulty, settings, etc).

By the way, I'm glad to see that NL users know what's up with Legends Arceus. That's the only Switch entry that I've been able to wholeheartedly recommend to people!

complaining about Pokémon has been a content genre since Sword and Shield. Good to see Nintendolife get in on the grift.

X&Y is in my opinion where things started going from great to just good.

ScarVi weren't even "good enough", those were hot trash and by far the worst games I've ever played in my life - not exaggerating. They're going to keep bleeding fans until it's absolutely necessary for them to change, and I may be middle-aged by then, which makes me sad.

@GetontheStiix So you see no room for improvement in the series? Which part about GameFreak makes you want us to shut up about them, their net worth or how sentimental you are about your childhood?

The difference is the games used to be janky and charming now they're janky without that charm. I think since X and Y switching to 3D made the series so clinical and soulless.

I still think that putting Legends Z-A in dead last is absolutely insane.
And this article makes me feel that there will be a follow up where the NL staff says exactly what they want from the franchise. What counts as "more ambition", if going open world in S/V and the revamped battle system in Legends Z-A aren't enough?

@ParsnipHero Please explain what exactly do you mean by "souless" without sounding like you're pulling a buzzword out of nowhere.

Pokémon in 2025 should be the same sort of scale as totk and botw. Make a huge open world with interesting places to visit. Make the graphics look better than the 2005 looking versions they churn out now.

I feel like there's a lot of generalization going on here. Different games excel at different aspects and some games are better than others. I think both Legends titles are great so I feel weird saying the whole Switch generation was mediocre. The only thing that was subpar across the board was graphics, which is nowhere near as important as gameplay quality (at least for me).

Look I don't know sh* about Pokémon, it's the one nintendo licence I really don't care about. But from my outside point of view, the ones I see being quoted as the best non-remakes ones, are gold silver, black white 2, sun moon, X Y and Arceus. So I'd say overall there are some fairly recent games though it should be noticed that the last games are considered pretty bad and that the fact that the fanbase seem to place remakes as the best in the series maybe says something about the company being unable to get it right on their first try?

The jump from 3ds to Switch was way too big way too fast for Gamefreak. And they haven’t scaled up at all to compensate. Going from a system that’s between the N64 and GameCube in terms of power to a full HD console is just too big of a jump. From Red and Green all the way to Sun and Moon, mainline pokemon games pushed their handheld consoles to the limits of what they’re capable of. But on the Switch they don’t. Instead they feel like 3ds games on a system capable of much more.

XY. It was so brain dead easy, I think I had less than 10 Pokémon faint in my entire first playthrough.

Sun & Moon were a step in the right direction, but then Sword and Shield came along

Probably an unpopular opinion but I'll say it anyway 😂

Pokemon has never been that good. Whether it's graphically, story, world-building, game mechanics. It has always been done better elsewhere. Pokemon just got lucky and went the 90s equivalent of viral.

But like going viral, it was also just a fad of its time, and the people who were caught up on the fad have stuck with it for nostalgia. In my personal experience, Pokemon has been one of those things, where you had to play it from a young age as the modern games are so complex that there's a high barrier for entry.

Pokemon has long peaked, and is only still as successful today as it is because long-time players like us continue buying, supporting and playing the series that are familiar to us.

@Ultimapunch
That's a perfect point. Sword and Shield is also arguably where the fanbase started getting outwardly frustrated, and it's pretty easy to tie back to the botched console shift.

I think it lost the magic after DS generation.

Its all about profit Nintendo knows it will sell very well even if the budget is low. And on top of that they know there will be tons of people defending their practice.

Whats not to like?

Seriously tho, I am seeing a lit of people posting how great the game is, some even say its the best pokemon ever. So in all fairness, maybe it is!? Maybe pokemon players simply arent demanding and the game could be even worse and still well received.

In the end we could argue pokemon fans got exactly what they deserve and were hoping for and are more than glad to pay for it.

@kevinm360 In my experience things that go viral don't stay viral for long unless they do something right. There's more to it than just being lucky. They found a very strong concept that appeals to both young and old people. It's just a bummer that they don't put more time and effort into their games these days. The quality has certainly gone down after the main series transitioned to proper 3D.

Pokemon is the most profitable media franchise in the world. They can afford to put more care into delivering a better product.

But the reason they don't is because the games aren't where the real money. It's the merchandise. The games exist as a marketing vehicle to sell merch, and they have to rush them out on schedule so that the merch can sell with it.

To be fair, the whole industry has become complacent? The whole attitude of “we can patch it later” and “people will buy it anyways.”

Feels kinda like it in the switch generation main games. DS/3DS era games weren't amazing but they had their own style and were trying some new things. Once we got to the Wii area, we started really getting shoveled some crappy games. The switch made it more apparent though as the quality and performance of games was just so far behind all other Nintendo games.

The video games exist to keep the merch train rolling, no need to spend more creating masterpieces if they sell like they already are.

The Pokemon company was very hesitant with Nintendo during the Wii U/3DS era, and they delayed their partnership for plans for the Switch. This crunched and messed up development timelines. It really feels like Pokemon's been phoning it in for the entire Switch generation.

One interesting idea I saw suggested recently that one of the big problems with Pokemon is that it both wants to and doesn't want to be AAA.

Like it wants to have that big modern Pokemon adventure with more openness and innovation, while also living up to what has always worked via nostalgia. But it doesn't want the AAA developer size and cost per game or the time needed to live up to...honestly in some ways, even AA JRPG competitors like the last Tales game or DQ11 or the recent Atelier games. It's also just weird in a way where they can't directly follow up games' successes and failures because they're all in development at once because otherwise they can't do their borderline yearly releases.

Personally, I'd be more interested in modern Pokemon if they partially, if not entirely abandoned even attempting to make modern AAA games. I would prefer Pokemon to go back to 40 dollar games and look towards HD-2D for how to modernize sprite based graphics, because this 3D HD video game thing is not working for them as is. If you were to ask me which games look more appealing, the worst looking HD-2D game looks much better than the best looking Switch Pokemon RPG, and its not even close. (and tbh, forget HD, I'd say the DS Pokemon games still look better)

My vote goes for X&Y.
A bunch of the C-gear features from BW were dropped (including literal video chat), and felt like a first major step down for me.
Don't get me wrong I still really enjoyed X/Y/ORAS because the mega gimmick was just so good.

@ShadLink I remember revisiting Pokemon Red and Blue back when it was released on Virtual Console. They did not hold up very well. Don’t get me wrong, they aren’t bad games, but they’re not masterpieces that still hold up today in the way say, Super Mario Bros does.

😅This article sounds more like "I have Pokemon burnout" than anything.

X&Y. They’ve clearly always been ambitious and remain so but once they made the jump into full 3D things went south. It was obviously easier for them to make mostly sprite based games quickly while maintaining a high level of quality but they haven’t been able to match that moving to more powerful hardware.

There really should have been a big shift in how things get made as they moved to Switch- more outsourcing of projects (especially remakes) so GF can focus on less games should have been the priority. Even when they did that with ILCA and BDSP though it seems they gave them a small budget and not a lot of time to do it so does it even matter? Especially when GF were still spread thin across several projects in house. Ultimately they clearly just don’t care because the games are wildly successful regardless of quality, but that’s just weirdly at odds with how they ambitious they still are with the series.

It was starting to lose its shine on X and Y, but they still had some interesting aspects. But Sword and Shield was when things became much more noticeable.

I think Pokémon’s primary appeal is to a more casual audience who do not look for the things that the more engaged gamer audience of this website do. The games are still fun.

For an analogy, Pokemon are blockbuster movies. Tons of people enjoy them. But ask a hardcore cinephile what they think of the latest superhero flick and they’ll rip it apart and point out all the flaws. But those flaws don’t matter to the average person who just wants to have fun and enjoy something. That’s what Pokemon is and that’s why it continues to sell better than other games that are “technically” better, just like a Marvel movie has a better box office than the latest Oscar winner.

I have played 3 mainline Pokémon games. The reason that I never played a fourth game was because while I liked the gameplay, the games felt all too similar. This franchise needs a big change for me to return.

@OmnitronVariant this. The arrogance on display for "not being satisfied" with a children's game is wild.

And I don't even really like Pokemon.

I liked Pokemon Legends Arceus. I didn't even want to waste my money on Pokemon Legends ZA after seeing what it looked like from others who bought it.

I'm not convinced Pokemon has ever been a super polished or a graphical juggernaut on any system. They've always been a bit simplistic throughout the generations. I think their development process just never really caught up to modern standards. It takes a whole lot more effort to make a good looking and fun game in an HD, 3D world compared to a top-down 2D game (just look at how development timelines have ballooned in the past decade for most other game series).

Gen 1 was fairly on par with other Gameboy RPGs, but when you get to Gen 3 on the Gameboy Advance, it's clear they wanted to keep the same simplistic formula with minor enhancements when you compare RSE against other GBA RPG juggernauts (like say, Golden Sun). Gen 4 is basically Gen 3 but with some 3D buildings. Gen 5 really shook things up visually as much as possible within the confines of still basically being the same core, grid-based game.

Even going into Gen 6 where everything is fully 3D, the core formula is hardly touched - you have the same basic grid layouts, same towns connected by routes - it still doesn't feel totally removed from the Gameboy games.

When you have a core formula like that (towns are arranged in grids, routes connect towns, random encounters with Pokemon in tall grass on these routes), I imagine it's easier to iterate and slowly improve graphics and mechanics. I think with the switch generation, they kinda upended that core formula and now things are just a bit of a mess. There's a struggle between trying new things and staying true to the core identity, and I think the balance is really off there. I think they need someone like Monolith Soft to handle the world and help with the graphics, but their dev teams are just pretty out of touch at this point.

Like what do you do? Do they try to make a Pokemon XY-esque game and revert back to the core mechanics, abandoning free roam for a more grid based gameplay with a limited camera angle? Maybe that would be for the best if they're not gonna significant change their development process to facilitate a true 3D open world type game.

Yeah no, XY was the beginning of all of this (I would also argue BW, but not for reasons relevant to this discussion and at least BW2 was an ambitious followup, XY is the true origin of Pokemon's current problems). You could definitely see the cracks start to emerge then, content was starting to get cut, map designs were starting to get simplified, and corners felt like they were getting cut. The Switch generation only accelerated this.

What the issue is I think is that handhelds have dramatically increased in power and Pokemon has not scaled up its ambitions to match it. As recently as 2012 they were still making 2D sprite based games that would feel more at home on the SNES than the Wii and then on the 3DS they went 3D and then on the Switch they developed on console for the first time which was capable of large, open environments. Both leaps in technology that are notorious for causing headaches with developers needing to put more time, money, and manpower into the game to maximize what the hardware is capable of. TPC has largely avoided this and keeps trying to develop a 2025 Switch/Switch 2 game like a 1996 GB game and of course that's just not going to work. They need to get over themselves and put the effort and resources in. I'm not entirely sure which part of TPC is responsible (it's definitely not Nintendo because they do not operate like this. My guess is Creatures because they're far less involved in games than the other two and far more involved in merchandise, so they'd be more likely to want quick, cheap games pushed out the door to sell more merch junk, but it's hard to say), but whoever it is they need to get with the times. If not, I think Nintendo needs to rethink this arrangement because it's hurting the brand.

Pokémon is just.. really weird to me now. It really is "eh, good enough" now, and it deserves so much better. That's why I complained so much about it, I love Pokémon but they're really not showing the series the love it so deserves.

A lot of people still buy these games and enjoy them. And that's their right, and I'm happy they all enjoy the games. But at the same time it's heartbreaking, because it shows that these games still sell regardless, and that they don't need the love they deserve poured in. Everyone settles for good enough. Purely because it's Pokémon.

I really don't want to tell other people what they should or shouldn't buy. But I really do wish people would vote no with their wallets more on this series. I want to see it shine, thrive, be the absolute best it can be. Not a series that is known for sloppy models, textures and animations because it's all good enough anyway. And let's not forget about the complete lack of voice acting in key cutscenes.

Yes, the lack of polish is a big issue to me, not the fact that the series doesn't try new things. If that was the biggest issue, with Pokémon being treated like a triple A series but still playing pretty much exactly the same as generation 1 (just refined), I would still be buying every single entry. But instead, I haven't really played many of the new games.

For me the decline started with X and Y, the moment it went 3D. Those were still decent games though. Sun and Moon tried something new, but something about it still felt off to me. I also got the Ultra games, but those were the first I never even finished because something bothered me. I still can't even figure out what it was in those. I do recall not really caring much for the island challenge though, and just wanting gyms back.

I got Let's Go and that was decent, but kanto nostalgia probably plays a part there. Plus it was the first HD entry. I had an okay time. But something still felt off. Then came Sword and Shield, the first Pokémon games I canceled my pre order from. The stagnation from the last several entries, and the controversy around these new games, ended up having me vote with my wallet and just nope out. The only Pokémon game I've played since then was Legends: Arceus, which was a decent (but still somewhat flawed) game, that I got solely because they experimented with it.

All the other Switch entries though.. they just don't do it for me. Even with Arceus though I wish they gave it more time in the oven to make it really shine, just like all the other Switch entries needed. But it's always just...... good enough these days with this series. And who can blame them, with these sales numbers.

The fact that they keep asking for premium prices really bothers me as well. Two games for full price. Expensive DLC that you need to buy power version and is not a shared purchase between the two games. Expensive HOME system which really should come free with NSO+EP, not be an additional fee on top of that. Not to mention all the gacha bullhockey they have on the mobile and some Switch spin off titles. Pokémon has never felt more like a cash cow, and this poor cow has been run dry. Give it some grass for Pete's sake.

.... it's really whatever at this point though. I don't want to be that guy anymore who shouts at people to quit having fun. If people enjoy these games, by all means, go nuts. I'll continue standing by the sidelines hoping that the series some day gets the love it really deserves again, one way or another.

(Had to cut my comment on two, thanks NintendoLife comment size limit.)

They’re making HD console games under the same restrictions and guidelines of a cheaper handheld experience. While Pokemon has always been a huge money maker, they were never the most demanding games, but this was fine back then because they still looked great for the hardware. But once they jumped from 3DS to Switch these issues really start to show, especially when you’re being compared to far more demanding games like BOTW or Xenoblade, and especially when you’re demanding premium prices for them.

Also the games have gotten considerably easier, which really don’t think is a bad thing honestly, these games are made for kids. And before anyone gets offended by that, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. Sometimes people just want easy games. And really, and I gotta be careful with how I say this, but the series hasn’t really grown with the audience, especially compared to Digimon, and I think that’s fine. I think some people really need to accept that they might have grown out of the franchise

The reason why modern Pokémon games have bad quality is that they make a lot of money, even if they are zero-effort and low-quality games developed with not enough time or budget. Plus, many die-hard Pokémon fans have become corporate chills and support the current state of Pokémon games, and avoid any constructive criticism to improve the game. They are just giving their money to support a bad product, which makes The Pokémon Company happy.

Game Freak never had the size and manpower to handle multiple projects and annual releases. With a low budget and strict scheduling, Game Freak could only produce bad games annually with low production values and low quality in terms of gameplay, story, open world design, voice acting, etc.

Game Freak has expanded its workforce from 150 to 200 developers and partnered with ILCA to form the Pokémon Works collaboration. ILCA, with its 400 developers, combined with Game Freak's 200, brings a total of 600 developers who could theoretically manage multiple projects and annual releases. Reportedly, ILCA will handle remakes while also assisting Game Freak, which will focus on mainline games and the spin-off Legends series.

It's all about a bigger budget and better scheduling, allowing developers more time and resources to create a truly high-quality Pokémon game. This could mean stylized and refined graphics, a more detailed open-world design, fully voice-acted NPCs, and gameplay driven by a compelling story. A higher budget doesn’t necessarily mean realistic graphics, but rather a polished and immersive Pokémon world.

I would like to see a new adventure based on the first four generations with an open world that combines all four regions of Kanto, Johto, Hoenn, and Sinnoh. Imagine having back iconic characters for an exciting adventure. Characters like Red, Blue, Green, Professor Oak, Brock, Misty, Ethan, Kris, Lyra, Silver, May, Wally, Brendan, Dawn, Cynthia, and more could come together in a massive open world spanning all four regions. Imagine these classic characters embarking on a fresh journey in such an expansive setting!

Gen 4 used to be my least favourite gen, (Pokemon seemed tired and formulaic by that point and I needed a break before returning to and beating it years later, after Gen 5). That lasted until Sun and Moon, (X & Y I could forgive somewhat, although it was far too easy, especially coming from the difficulty of Gen 5). To be fair, Sun and Moon did try and shake things up a bit, I just didn't jive with it or the story. Ultra Sun and Moon were definitely better.

Then the Switch Pokemon games started, Pokemon on a home console was an exciting prospect. Let's go Pikachu and Eevee were fine, but not as good as the originals. Sword and Shield were disappointing, Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl were the worst remakes up to this point. Arceus was promising and a good game, but it looked and still looks awful for a game released in 2022. Scarlet and Violet were not very good at all, they ran terribly, the gyms and challenges were the worst in the series, (imo), and the elite four was a joke. The whole setting was so lazy with the shop fronts, lack of themed elite four rooms etc. But there were glimpses of promise with the final area and story, if only they had the budget and time to refine it.

I've played every mainline Pokemon game to the end credits, I haven't played Z-A yet as I'd rather get it on a Switch 2 which I don't have yet, but I don't see it topping any of the pre 3DS games or even Arceus for that matter. But I've come this far, I'll buy it and play it, I'm part of the problem lol.

As someone who never grew up with Pokemon and whose only experience was that garbage 3DS F2P Rumble game, every new thing I hear about it makes me glad I made the decision to just completely write it out of my collecting habits (especially with those obscene prices).

This is some top tier engagement bait. Well done!

They’ve got a brilliant business going, so for Pokemon Company — ”Good Enough” is fantastic.

Personally, I don’t think it’s good enough. With the production values on display they should be about 30 EUR titles, not asking for the same money as much higher quality experiences. And ”but it’s for kids” is a bad argument. Kids deserve nice things too — and the cost is still the same.

Now if people want to pay fine dining prices for McDonalds, let them.

People at this point really need to get it though their heads that the games are just a small cog in a huge machine.

Once the games started being far less of a money maker than the TCG or the plush or anything else, down the ladder of importance they went.

As a Pokémon Blue Starter, (Bulbasaur btw), I don't agree. I LOVE (!!!) ZA. Dreaded Arceus actually. But I also dreaded Diamond and Pearl (yes, the original ones). I guess it's what you think about Pokémon as a franchise and how you translated the pixels into your fantasy. For me, ZA is exactly the animé and how I translated the pixels from blue into HD. It has sidemissions, little storylines of Pokémon and their trainers, an overarching storyline, I LOVE it! Same with Scarlett, played it for many hours and gotten multiple Pokémon to level 100.
If you want my 2 cents, it's the sheer amount of AMAZING RPG's on Switch. When Blue came around, on a handheld, there were like... one, there was Pokémon. On the hybrid system, which also has all the console games the amount of great games is astounding! So for the handheld gamers, the pickings were way slimmer back then. But now, you have SO MUCH (which is great). But then Pokémon becomes a taste, instead of "what's the game to play of you want this type of game". Some like the taste, some don't. But when all you have to eat is brusselsprouts or rocks, you're like WOW BRUSSELSPROUTS, but when you have an exquise dinner buffet you're like ewwww, Brusselsprouts...
I hope I articulated that al comprehensively and please don't throw rocks at me now.

Definitely X&Y. It was a first party game but didn't fully support stereoscopic 3D, and when it did, the framerate was pretty bad. The game was also really lacking polish in the UI department compared to the top tier UI designs from B/W and the sequels.

I really don't think ZA is a bad game at all. I think the general sentiment toward Pokemon has soured from SwSh and SV, as well as the DP remakes (that didn't live up to what we historically expected from a Pokemon remake), and that negative opinion of Pokemon has bled onto ZA. It's actually a super fun game with great side quests and an interesting locale to explore. The gameplay is probably the most fun I've had with Pokemon in over a decade, easily.

The ire at ZA is incredibly misdirected, but it's hard to blame people who have been disappointed over and over with the switch games so far.

I am an older gamer, love Nintendo games, but never took a shine to Pokémon.

If they want to catch me, they should go back to the beginning. Pocket Monsters: In the Beginning…(Genesis ref.)

Take me to the time when catching and discovering pocket monsters was new. Show me the original traps and monster balls used to catch these charming and sometimes dangerous creatures.

For me, a big world where they just roam around waiting to be caught and trained is just not interesting. The sense of discovery, studying, capturing, and ultimately training these creatures is just not compelling for me.

I love turtles, but I wonder if they would still be fascinating if they wandered around by the thousands…

I was the first person at school to have Pokemon because I was a Nintendo kid. I got blue and got 150, then got yellow. Then I got the second gen and was bored with it and never finished it.

I don't know about the other games, but I just feel like Pokemon didn't ever want to be a game for anyone above the age of 15. Not saying adults can't enjoy it, but it's just not a game that ever grew up

I didn't grow up by Pokemon games so when I tried to buy Pokemon X for the first time, it was from my curiosity to look at the kids playing Pokemon on 3DS.
Eventually I have collected quite a lot of Pokemon games including the spinoffs like Pokepark, Pokemon Mystery Dungeon, etc but I never felt I'm really crazy with that franchise.
The franchise is fine to me but I don't feel really engaged with Pokemon franchise.
It doesn't really have WOW factor to me.
The gameplay structure looked way primitive than the other modern JRPG games, the storyline didn't feel naturally occurred. I personally prefer Yokai Watch 3 than any Pokemon games for the engaging gameplay even after postgame.

Honestly, I don't know. My favorite era of Pokémon is the DS/Wii era, between both the main series & spinoff games.

However, from the 3DS era and beyond, it has being a mixed bag.

I am one of the few people who enjoyed X, and I loved AlphaSapphire too.

However, Gen 7...is my least favorite generation of all, I wasn't a fan of a lot of the new Gen VII mons, and I never completed the games. There are aspects I do like about it, but this is when I started to feel negative about Pokémon.

In regards to the Switch era, I did enjoy both Let's Go Eevee, Pokémon Sword & Shield. However, Violet is when I started to have doubts about Pokémon, a lot of it possibly being due to me being a different type of Pokémon fan than others.

I love my linearity in Pokémon, and while I didn't mind the open zone format of Sword. I wasn't as much of a fan of the open world of Violet, to the point it took me a long time to get back to the game.

Part of it being that I've being spoiled by Grand Theft Auto as outside of that franchise, I can't get into open world games at all, even Breath of the Wild & Tears of the Kingdom. There are exceptions of course, I love Marvel's Spider-Man.

I did enjoy Legends Arceus and have restarted the game to play it again, as it is a great game. However, as for Legends Z-A, I just don't have the urge to play it, and I don't know why.

I am one of the few people who don't care about graphics or how places look, and I don't mind it only being set in Lumiose City. However, I'm not a massive fan of the battle system in the game, espicially with the cooldown feature. And the lack of grinding options doesn't help either as I can't battle trainers as if I lose, then I'll lose money, and I want that money to buy items.

The lack of variety in the Pokédex doesn't help either. I just feel so mixed on Legends Z-A that I just don't know how to feel about it. Its not bad, I am intrigued by the story, but I just don't know if I want to play it.

Its honestly why I feel like when Gen X comes around, I'm gonna wait and purchase it after it releases, so I know it is a game I want to purchase.

I'm a 27 year old adult who has to consider a lot of factors. I'm not that kid who loved Pokémon so much in the DS/Wii generation anymore.

Pretty sure the only Pokémon purchase I'll make next year is Pokéopia.

I'd say the ball got rolling starting with X and Y but really ramped up with Sword and Shield onward. Basically, they moved onto hardware far more powerful and complex than the Game Boy and DS, which came with a whole slew of new difficulties in being able to properly develop for. And as the franchise continued to grow, so did the need to release games yearly across main series and spin-offs while maintaining cadence with things like the anime, movies, TCG, IRL events, and so on. But developing a Switch game is a hell of lot more complicated than a Game Boy game so it's like they're so pressed for time, and money apparently, that they need to cut corners to meet deadlines.

For me, the GBA is the perfect incarnation of Pokémon. Super polished and refined, sharp and attractive pixel visuals, very brisk and snappy gameplay performance, mechanically sound, and modernization of the classic formula. Those games feel great to play and look at it.

Here’s the thing… Pokémon means Pocket Monster. They made a big deal about that with the pocket size GameBoy, GBA, DS, 3DS, etc, how you can game on the go, and so it was a perfect pair. You have these pocket monsters to fight, anywhere, anytime, enjoying a full RPG that fits in your pocket. This could never be as treasured on a giant console/TV with all this fancy stuff added to fluff up the game as it was in the simple olden days of whipping out your pocket system and playing Pokémon. So yes, now it’s partly nostalgia that is behind the love for the older games, but also when you look at what they really are, they just have so much strategy as well as imagination which is kind of lost now. I don’t mind the graphical updates, it’s actually kind of cool. But I like the original game format to remain. Give me a HeartGold/SoulSilver with updated graphics and the same exact gameplay as the DS one and I’ll be delighted. But it MUST come with a PokeWalker too, like the original. An actual device not some dumb smartphone app.

I take umbrage with Palworld being pointed to as some sort of beacon of innovation in the space, but that aside...

IMO it probably started with "we're not doing an end game because kids want to get back to their phones" (paraphrasing) and the way legendaries were implemented not in the world itself (a la HG/SS) but via Hoopla hoops. But those are pretty minor compared to what happened on the jump to the Switch.

Sword/Shield literally guideposts you past anything you might want to look at (big explosion in the distance? just leave it to Leon! Powerplant building in the distance! Don't worry about it!). Add Dexit to that, and a largely ugly wild area (Neat idea! Poor execution), and you get a game that really didn't match the level of quality I expected. (Not to mention it was like 30-40 hours with Pokedex completion...)
Pokemon Legends Arceus is not an exception, with a dreadful battle system and even worse story. The catching and research stuff was fun, but the world still looks BAD. "Good enough" insofar as they're ultimately fun to play. But the writing doesn't even aspire to "good enough."

Scarlet/Violet and Pokemon Legends: Z-A suffer from the same problems of writing and presentation.

I don't agree that Pokemon should balloon its budget. I think it needs to design for its budget. I think it needs to design its story beats around the fact that they won't have voice-acting. I think it needs to design its worlds around the technical or artistic limitations of their team/engine/hardware. Design around the time permitted. Or, dare I say it, permit more time (but I suppose that would be an increase in budget).

@N00BiSH Nah, that's not the issue. Pokemon's experimented with new mechanics quite frequently throughout its history. Sun/Moon in fact was one of the more experimental entries in the franchise, it had Trials instead of Gym and replaced HMs with Ride Pokemon. There's been other entries like that as well. BW2, rather than being essentially a director's cut re-release with a handful of new content like the likes of Yellow, Crystal, Emerald, and Platinum, was a full-fledged sequel that had a different story and tons of new areas and new content. Legends Arceus did a prequel set in the ancient past with more survival and crafting elements. Scarlet/Violet went open world. And now we have Z-A experimenting with real time battling. There's been multiple games' worth of experiments to the point where Switch Pokemon games feel like a COMPLETELY different experience to the original RBY. Lack of experimentation and original mechanics isn't the issue.

Pokemon's actual issue is a lack of ambition and resources. The recent games always feel like they're cutting corners in some way and Game Freak/TPC doesn't seem to want to devote the amount of time, money, and/or manpower needed to make the kind of AAA experience a full priced Switch/Switch 2 game deserves.

Series went on the decline after X&Y, and the quality got laughable bad and showed off Gamefreak's incompetence when pokemon transferred to console.

But things aren't going to change probably because the sell like hotcakes regardless of quality and the fans eat it up.
If this were any other IP it would be ripped to shreds.

People saying ZA is worse than games like Gold and Silver have never played Gold and Silver. Terrible regional dex, absolutely no memorable characters other than maybe Silver, no story outside of the 30 minutes of grinding level 13 Team Rocket grunts, and the most grindy Pokemon games to date (the remakes are not excused for this either).

I grew up in the days of playing Pokemon Blue under my desk at school and pulling out the link cable at recess to trade with people - and as someone who's played every mainline game since - Pokemon has never been "amazing". I would say Black and White and Black 2 and White 2 are what I'd consider the "best" Pokemon games, and I think that's the level we need to judge them on. Pokemon will never be Breath of the Wild or Mario Odyssey or Xenoblade Chronicles. If you keep expecting that you're setting yourself up for disappointment. People complain the graphics aren't up to par with Zelda. Well duh. The fanbase wants all Pokemon walking around in the overworld constantly regenerating so that it's "immersive" and will not at all take up massive amount of processing power that will cause the game to need to scale back on assets and/or make the game lag to function properly. Why do you think Breath of the Wild has the Blood Moon? Because the map can't handle consistently regenerating models every 30 seconds. And that game had what, 15 unique enemy models? And you guys want 1000 uniquely animated models walking around and constantly regenerating once you knock them out/leave the area? Sure Breath of the Wild is a beauty to explore - but there's barely anything on screen with you at the same time ever.

Breath of the Wild is my favourite game of all time and this is not a knock at that game, but if they had enemies constantly taking up processing power in the background the game would not have run remotely as well as it did and sacrifices would have had to have been made.

Honestly i give kudos to Game Freak for even trying to appease to the open world fans' demands even though they probably know it's not for the best of the franchise. I'd love it if we went back to Unova with a remake similiar to BDSP (ASTERISK HERE that it's actually made in house and has the HGSS/ORAS treatment instead) and keeps the encounters out of the overworld.

Long unexpected post later but short form is - Pokemon has never been this amazing, graphical, story driven juggernaut of a masterpiece that fans seem to think it used to be. Take the nostalgia goggles off. I love it to death, but I would never consider more than 3 or 4 mainline games as above and beyond expectations.

@BrazillianCara What would "more ambition" look like?

1. More side content, with similar quantities and types of side content to what we had in games like Platinum, HGSS, and BW2. They had entire side modes like Contests, the Pokeathlon, Pokestar Studios that disappeared in the 3DS games. There were also multiple battle facilities with unique styles of battling whereas nowadays we're lucky to even get a generic Battle Tower-esque facility. The games feel much emptier and more repetitive with that kind of content stripped away.
2. Greater interaction with the world and Pokemon. Make the world feel more alive than just a generic stretch of land with Pokemon wandering around doing almost nothing in it. Let us use our Pokemon to interact with the environment more instead of scripted interactions, a Pokemon game with a physics engine similar to BotW/TotK would be really fun and ambitious.
3. Greater graphical/technical polish. No trees with low-res textures that feel like something out of a GC game. No glitches that break the game or make it feel like a Sonic 06-esque mess.

@nukatha People actually liked the C-Gear? I found it a massive step down from the Poketch in DPPt. There was basically nothing to do with it unless you had a friend to play with, whereas the Poketch had multiple QoL apps that were dropped completely in BW and never really returned aside from remakes.

@charliecarrot Admittedly I haven't played Z-A, I'm going to buy it used when used copies start popping up because I don't believe this experience is worth a full $60/$70. However there is one main issue inherent to Z-A itself that's worthy of criticism and that's being restricted to Lumiose City. Lumiose City simply doesn't seem comparable in size, scope, or variety to full sized regions in other games and considering that we're paying the same amount of money, it makes Z-A look like a chintzy cash grab for a glorified beta test for real time battling. Like yes, I am very interested in real time battling mechanics, but I would want to use said mechanics in a full-fledged, AAA Pokemon adventure, not a singular city that's closer in size to $30 DLC areas than $60/$70 full regions. That's not an issue of criticisms of other games bleeding into other games, I don't have this criticism of other games because Game Freak has never done this before. It's a symptom of a larger problem of the games not being ambitious enough to justify being the $60-70 AAA console game the Switch Pokemon games are making themselves out to be.

Pokemon is like Marmite. One of those little taster pots of Marmite, spread over 1000 pieces of toast.

Some people simply don’t like it; never have, never will. Many more people do like it, but most of them agree it’s being spread too thin.

@somnambulance Ehh, I was around for Gen 4 and there wasn't nearly as much criticism for that game as other generations. There was some criticism about the overabundance of cross-gen evos and the lack of Fire types in DP, but it wasn't as toxic as it's been recently.

Additionally, I have not seen much complaints about Gen 7 shaking things up too much. I saw praise for that in fact (more for Ride Pokemon than Trials really, Ride Pokemon addressed the long held complaint towards needing HMs in your party, Trials didn't really move the needle much in terms of what people were getting sick of with gyms). The criticisms towards Gen 7 were more around the games focusing too much on story and not enough on map design, what people were irritated with was the entire game was basically a long guided tour where you proceed down a linear path and get stopped every few steps for the NPCs to yap at you, which is not really "shaking up the formula" and more a specific design philosophy that people hated (and it wasn't even a new one as BW and XY had similar issues, just to a lesser degree).

@TheBigK

For me, the GBA is the perfect incarnation of Pokémon. Super polished and refined, sharp and attractive pixel visuals, very brisk and snappy gameplay performance, mechanically sound, and modernization of the classic formula. Those games feel great to play and look at it.

I agree with all of this! Really well put. Although I’d argue they managed to keep this going into the first half of the DS era as well. DPPt and HGSS both hold up really well in my eyes.

I know BW/B2W2 are now among the most well regarded games in the series* but for me it’s where things started to feel a little ‘mooshy’. I think it’s partly the introduction of 3D-lite into the environments, which always felt like a compromise on the original DS, but it just seemed to lack the crispness the previous games.

_{*There seems to be a point where the fanbase pivoted from venerating HGSS to deciding it was trash and that BW was what a really good Pokemon game looked like.}

Gotta buy em all!
Just like you were programed to.

"Good enough" are what the older generations were. In the grand scheme of JRPGs, Pokémon's popularity vastly outpaced its actual quality. But at least you can reasonably call those older games quality, they're decent.
Scarlet and Violet were genuinely awful, and Z-A doesn't look much better. For whatever reason- be it some combination of FOMO, an access media bias, console warriors, and just a sharp increase of total people playing video games in general - standards for established franchises are on the floor.
You get what you keep paying for

Why bother polishing a product if the fans have mentally conditioned themselves to always buy it anyway, regardless of quality?

This kind of article feels like low-hanging fruit. Should the games be better? Yes. Are they still some of the absolute MOST FUN games (for me) on the entire market?? HELL. YES!

I always thought selling two games that were practically the same while targeting kids to catch em all was sleazy. I always thought blind card packs were sleazy. To the sycophants, those are *actual "grifts."
I used to hear people say that the two game BS was so people could trade, and then I ran a Game Crazy for seven years. It wasn't in a great part of town, and the Pokémon "kids" would almost always get both, either on the same trip or weeks apart.
It's a sleazy, grifting series that can't even manage to keep up with the standards of the PS2.
Since thats my avatar next to this, its my opinion. I dont care what you have to say about it.

Im not a fan of Pokemon, even thou I did have buy all the recent games cuz my son's a massive fan, having said that, I think its laughable how little care put all companies involved (Creature, TPC and Nintendo) It's their biggest IP, I mean, put a little more effort, Come On!!

@Moonvalley2006 Splitting attacks to use Physical or Special stats instead of Type in the DS era was one of the single best things to balance the game.
Many a Pokemon had some pretty garbage movesets before that.

And Gold/Silver didn't even want to make evolution stones easily available. Like, you had to trade and evolve in Gen 1 (possibly requiring deleting moves, and how late in the game was the Move Deleter?) or I hear get really lucky with Mystery Trade. What were they thinking?
And some Pokemon Types not well represented by Pokemon or Moves.
Maybe I'm only judging because I didn't have Gen 2 nostalgia (I only played Gen 1 and it was okay, didn't play again until Gen 4, but later went back to play the earlier games).

@OpheliaDynamight Please stop with this "it's ok to put no effort in it because it is for children".
This is a silly attitude. Not only that, it is fundamentally flawed.

1/Pokémon is not just for children.
2/Children can tell when something is low quality, you are just insulting them by pretending otherwise.

Kids don’t care about graphics or performance, and adults buy them anyway.

Sun and moon was the beginning of the end for Pokémon in my opinion. Ever since that garbage game, I have not been genuinely excited for any of Pokémon's new releases.

Company just needs to focus on spin offs good enough to be a new potential mainline.

I can say for sure I’ve only been disappointed really in two Pokémon mainline games:

1) X&Y

2) SwSh

They aren’t terrible games and both do somethings well. But overall, I’m left feeling underwhelmed by both for a variety of reasons.

I have yet to buy or play ZA. So I don’t really know where it’ll fall.

I did go back and played Crystal not too long ago. For the longest time, Gen 2 was my favorite. But it was a chore and a half playing through that game. Not at all how I remembered.

@Gatorclops

People saying ZA is worse than games like Gold and Silver have never played Gold and Silver. Terrible regional dex, absolutely no memorable characters other than maybe Silver, no story outside of the 30 minutes of grinding level 13 Team Rocket grunts, and the most grindy Pokemon games to date (the remakes are not excused for this either).

To be fair, these are criticisms I often hear levelled at Breath of the Wild as well. And the lack of enemy variety could, at a stretch, be compared to ‘terrible regional dex’ (admittedly quite a stretch).

And yet, it remains one of your (and one of my) favourite games of all time.

I didn’t (and still don’t) feel BoTW really needed more memorable characters, or a more thickly applied story. I liked the experience of exploring ‘the wild’, largely alone, uncovering its nooks and crannies, even if doing so had no bearing on story progression. It’s a game that delights in the space between things as much as in the things themselves. It’s sequel filled that space with a great deal more things, but I didn’t find myself having a great deal more fun as a result.

If I’m immersed in a game’s world and engaged by its core mechanics, that’s generally enough for me to be having a good time. Personally I got that with GSC (being a lot younger probably helped). Maybe if I were the same age I’d get that with Z-A too.

This article was an interesting meta-read. I had to think for a minute, and yes, despite the fact that this game is literally half the series ago now, Black 2 and White 2 were the last Pokémon games I would give a letter grade of A. There have been several games since that had some memorable aspects to them, but ultimately, no entry has excelled as a video game since the 2D era. However, I'm thankful that they managed to keep me as a fan all the way up to the present because one thing I can praise Game Freak for is that they make sure each individual entry doesn't feel identical to its predecessor, for better or worse. To me, despite appreciating Sun and Moon, Sword and Shield were the epitome of safe, and yet immediately afterwards, we got Legends: Arceus, Scarlet and Violet, and Legends: Z-A, with the dream game Champions coming soon and with leaks suggesting even higher ambition in the future if you can believe it. It very much looks as though the developers consistently want to make the best game they can, but the top people for one reason or another have been imposing limitations on them and only recently have they been gradually opening up to the idea that distinct games with more development time and more substance do in fact sell better.

For me personally the last game I enjoyed was x and y. I didn't really like sun and moon and everything after has been much worse than those.

I've always said — and I still do say — that people don't give the spinoff games enough credit. These are not made by Game Freak, and they often have visual production values that blow away the GF main line games. HAL Laboratories's Pokemon Stadium games are the obvious ones, but there are also Mystery Dungeon, Conquest, Pokken, Snap, et. al.

The problem is that many of these spinoffs (with the exception of Go) don't rake in nearly as much money as the main games. (Conquest, in particular, was regarded as a flop until Koei-Tecmo's own financial statements said that it met expectations.) The accountants at TPC know this, so they can safely dismiss the "I wish Pokemon looked better" crowd as just Internet noise.

@darkswabber its so funny the article starts with that little nah it isn't X and Y but for real, it was X and Y that was the beginning of the end. Mediocre games

@Coalescence Yeah Gen 1 was some real jank. Gen 2 is really the beginning of Pokemon's potential. It did have some issues (mainly related to just how little trainers you get for exp and money building after you beat the Elite 4 and then do the Kanto run) but it was a gigantic improvement on Gen 1.

Pokemon is going to be a hit no matter how good or bad it is.

I’ve played 3 or 4 Pokémon games and I couldn’t tell you the difference between any of them.

Sword/Shield was the last "great" pokemon game.
They were dipping, but Sword showed a ray of hope. Too bad it was snuffed out by Scarlet/Violet.

This comment field shows exactly why GF is doing the right thing: There’s no consensus here about which games are good or bad. Because they’re making varied games that might not always appeal to the same people. And they can afford to do that because they’re not doing «AAA» development.

You cracked the code peeps.

It's the same every new generation. The people who loved whatever they grew up with, hate the new stuff. I've personally seen it ever since gen 3(gen 2 seem to get some slack for being the immediate sequels, and not yet "being a part of the pattern). "It's repetetive," "the new designs are horrible," "it's RPGs for kids" have been repeated for every generation since.
To me, the only right out bad games were Sword and Shield. It had no imagination whatsoever, story did not make sense at all and trying to make kaiju Pokemon was just a bad mechanic. And saying that Arceus tried something new, but not ZA is straight up dumb.

pokemon has ALWAYS sucked. im saying this as a pokemon fan whos bought every mainline game around release since... xy... yeah, not exactly a lifelong fan but i think ive been around long enough to say it. selling two of the exact same game with minor elements changed was a novel idea to encourage trading that devolved into a shameless cash-grab, especially when we ended up with FOUR games in a single generation (bw2 at least had proper differences, ultra sun/moon was inexcusable especially when the 3ds supported dlc).

so the recent dookie theyve been putting out hits that much harder. game freak just clearly do not have the resources to make modern pokemon games alone, imo they should be in charge of planning while having access to nintendo devs, as well as UNLIMITED budgets because god knows tpc can afford it. and most importantly, let these games take time. pad things out with side games like pokopia and licensed stuff like the shiren the wanderer crossover but dont force these mainline games out unfinished.

these games just cant be low-budget indie games made by amateurs anymore, the days of low-powered handhelds died with the 3ds and its not unreasonable to expect more. people get really defensive and angry on behalf of this billion-dollar franchise that wants so badly to implode, all because some of us actually want to play an outright good pokemon game. we should all be sick of pokemon games that we have to defend liking, "look, i know it looks genuinely terrible and runs awfully BUT--" we deserve better!! and frankly game freak deserves the opportunity to make a pokemon game they can actually be proud of

@Waluigi451 I bought my first Pokémon game (Yellow) back when I was playing Baldur's Gate 2. Right after it's release in 2000. (Europe) I really disliked the slow battles in Pokémon at first. Baldur's Gate even back then was a full action RPG. No slow turn based battles. And even though it looked awesome on the GBC I had back then, it felt slow and tedious.

I know that I never completed that Pokémon Yellow game. And I rather soon switched to Pokémon Gold (and later Crystal). By then I have accepted that Pokémon was a slow game and had a lot of fun with it.

Legends Z-A and Legends Arceus, for me at least, made me think back of those good old Action RPGs which - to this day - is still my favorite genre. (Though I don't really mind the turn based fights in Baldur's Gate 3) And yes, I know battles in PLA are still turn based, but they are A LOT faster.

And honestly with this site, espeically the reviewers, I have the issue that they think Pokémon New Snap is awesome because of it's graphics. But that game is basically an on-rails shooter with an unlocked camera. There are no battles, no catching and a limited amount of Pokémon. It's a game I lost interest in within a couple of hours of me first playing it. It's a pretty picture, but a terrible game. A game I would rank a 4/10 at best.

@Kroko children don't tend to care if a game is a rock solid FPS or if the textures on a building aren't varied or super realistic.

Just because a game is bought by adults as well as children doesn't mean it's not for children. The intended audience is still children. For some reason, a lot of adults seem to think Pokemon has to grow up because they grew up. That wasn't a promise Pokemon ever made.

And at the end of the day, it sold like 5 million copies out of the gate, which is a pretty big indicator all the whining and moaning by some adults is out of touch. Unless of course you think you're that much smarter or better than 5 million+ people.

Love all the 2D games and XY, Omega, but after that it’s been downhill to the point I bought but haven’t played the SwSh DLC.

What I’d love is a new 2D game. It’s been done for Mario and Zelda already.

@ShadLink I bought my first PC to play Baldurs Gate. Good times! I always set my Baldurs Gate game to pause constantly so I’ve got some control over what’s going on. I might start a new game and take all the breaks off just to see if I can survive it.

I think the core formula has proven to be incredibly effective. But yeah, I stopped viewing the games as "great" a long time ago. For some reason, Scarlet/Violet really clicked with me (warts and all), but before those, I´d say the last mainline game I was genuinely delighted by was Pokèmon Platinum on the DS. Black/White might have been good, but I kinda had to force myself to get through them, and the Sun/Moon games lost me completely after only a few hours.

Legends: Arceus did something interesting, but I didn´t vibe with the game overall, and Z-A might be good or not - but I´ll never know because "good enough" is not an acceptable level of quality to gamble on when Nintendo wants roughly $100 for it in my local currency.

Around X and Y. That's when content started largely going missing, no post game, no third game, etc. Sun and Moon hit a new low with the Ultra games. Sword and Shield was a step up from those, but was marred by a poor story, poor post-game, TPC double dipping wallets for DLC, and so-so graphics. Scarlet and Violet were a new low in performance and graphics, performing even worse than Legends Arceus, and a step back in mechanics compared to LA.

Idk if someone mentioned it yet, but even though the leak is unverified, I feel the need to put that 21.8 million USD or so bones into perspective:

That's over 3.3 billion yen.

And if we convert that to seconds of time. That's 3 times the time a lot of us on this site have been alive (96 years or so). That's not a small budget by any means.

Count me in for the "Pokémon has always been good enough" crowd. I was there in Gen and I remember it as a coding mess, softlocking (there's a reason why I stopped using Softboiled in the field) and glitching out of nowhere during normal gameplay (never forget that Lass that started the battle normally and ended it as a Machoke back sprite).

Now, despite the fact of how the rights of Pokémon are split, I'm convinced The Pokémon Company has the final say.

There's a reason TPC is usually listed in the copyright (as simply Pokémon) before Nintendo, Creatures and Game Freak and may actually hold some of the rights to the series if the composition copyrights in Smash Bros. starting with Ruby/Sapphire music is anything to go by. Those songs state: Composition Copyright Pokémon. / Nintendo / Creatures Inc. / GAME FREAK inc.

TL;DR TPC's decisions most likely overrule Nintendo's starting with Gen III, but before that the mainline series was already a coding mess.

From Ruby and Sapphire on the series has been incredibly stale... collect more pokemon, defeat bad guys, yada yada yada

Sword and Shield started to mix things up with wild areas.

Arceus gave us completely new mechanics for the game and changed up the turn based combat a bit while giving us bigger wild areas to explore freely.

SV gave us our first true open world experience but lacked the charm, progress and polish that Arceus gave us earlier that year which felt like a very lackluster entry.

ZA doubled down on everything in Arceus and has given us the most whimsical entry to date trumping all other Pokemon mainline games but still a little behind presentation wise to New Pokemon Snap and voice acting/charm wise to Detective Pikachu Returns.

ZA is undoubtedly my favorite entry in the series since Gold and Silver. I haven't had this much fun in a Pokemon game in a long long time. As long as the next mainline game takes everything the Legends games have now established and continue to double down on them while implementing other mechanics getting us closer to living the Anime (voice acting, presentation/graphics polish, real time evolutions and trading), we should be eating very well going forward.

@OmnitronVariant No, there's other examples outside of Pokemon of consumers making less than reasonable purchasing decisions. The NSMB games all sold 10+ million copies (except for U because the Wii U sold so poorly) despite being lazy rehashes. Same with CoD games. And then there's the gacha market which makes millions despite being far less bang for far more buck. Unfortunately there does seem to be a segment of the gaming industry, and a fairly significant one at that, that just mindlessly buys based on brand recognition and flashy marketing and doesn't pay attention in the slightest into how good the game actually is.

@Bolt_Strike Or maybe they simply enjoy that? Look, I don’t enjoy gacha games at all and I can’t fathom why anyone would buy COD every iteration, but also, I enjoy games other people feel the same about.

What makes me question the entire premise of buying based on brand alone is because if people don’t enjoy a game, they’re unlikely to buy the next one. If they still do and that one also isn’t enjoyable, many people stop there. I know I do.

I know it’s not satisfying to have to acknowledge that maybe people genuinely enjoy Pokémon games you don’t, but it’s going to be more likely than you want to admit.

People genuinely enjoy playing CoD. People genuinely enjoy wasting money on gacha games because they have different values and preferences. I can’t see eye to eye with them, but I’m not going to dehumanise them either.

Pokémon ZA is one of the most fun games I’ve played this year when there’s been so many disappointments to me — MKW and Bananza were definitely not for me. And Arceus and Violet were both tremendous fun, whereas Sword was not. But there’s people in these very comments that say Sword was their recent favourite. Maybe we just have different tastes.

@OmnitronVariant I doubt they're simply enjoying it. I think they just don't know they can do better and simply take whatever's front of mind.

There's also been theories proposed that parents are buying these as gifts and the children aren't specifically asking for it. I can definitely see this for the likes of Pokemon and Mario. Parents that aren't into gaming probably don't know what a good or bad game is like and aren't going to be inclined to do the research into whether or not the kid will like it. I suspect this is at least a factor if not the entire truth.

@Bolt_Strike Weird the parents aren’t buying millions of Star Wars games then. Or Hello Kitty. Or SpongeBob. Hmmmm.

@OpheliaDynamight been saying this for years.

Good Enough? Cue Cindy Lauper

As an avid breeder and NatDex collector, Sun/Moon and their Ultra-sequels were the peak of great Pokemon gaming for me, starting from the Game Boy games.

Then I played Shield, which destroyed the game for me. They lost me as a customer then.

They really need to get their act together with the series, though I doubt they ever will.

People who constantly whine about the old games being superior in every way are blinded by nostalgia. I've never played Pokemon back in the day, my platforms of choice were Amiga/PC/Sega. I only played the original Pokemon games many, many years after the fact and they were so boring I never even finished any of them. No rose-tinted goggles to elevate them to a godlike status for me. The DS era was better, the 3DS era I loved (still play Ultra Sun and X occasionally), the Switch has been great. Yeah, S/V was a trainwreck performance-wise but the gameplay loop was fun. Arceus is still the best Pokemon game ever for me. I really want to love Z-A but the city just looks boring and I constantly get lost in it because there are no landmarks to make areas memorable. The combat also really needed a dedicated dodge button for your Pokemon.

Bottom line: you play Pokemon because it's a comfort thing. You get exactly what you expect and nothing more - running around and catching monsters. If you want something intense, original, with unpredictable story, why are you playing Pokemon?

I actually like the recent games. Say what you will, but I think that the switch era of games are fine. BDSP maybe a little unfair with the champion having near perfect IVs, but outside of that the games are just fine to me. In fact, I would prefer them over the original games, and I say that as someone whose first game was Yellow. Yes the older games has nostalgia, but there's so many improvements to the newer games from ease of access to TMs not being limited, to the stories being interesting (Though perhaps admittedly that story aspect was better in gens 4, 5, and 7), and while I don't agree with some changes, I think it's tried to do enough to keep the series new and fresh despite having to stay in its genre.

I don't care for trying ZA, but that's because I don't like the Legends series. If I wanted to play an action RPG I'd go play a modern FF game. I don't. So I'll stick with classic style Pokemon and retro FF games.

@Bolt_Strike
I had friends to play with.

It's not incorrect to say Pokémon has always been more miss than hit if we're looking at it through an objective lens. I remember the mid-2000s and most reviews of Pokémon games back then were never strong. Fans loved them but a lot of reviewers who didn't said they weren't good games, which is likely the reason why the likes of Gale of Darkness and Colosseum are sitting at 60/70 on Metacritic respectively. Even Gen 3 was showing problems despite being pure nostalgia for many. I'd say the same about Stadium as well.

Basically you're looking at G+S (including remakes), B+W/2, and maybe Arceus as the ones that people thought were exceptional outside of your core demographic of Pokemon fans. Go too in terms of pure popularity but that's a different kettle of fish.

Nope, I'm as Pokéngaged as I've ever been. I love every main series game and generation, as well as the Mystery Dungeons, Pokemon Conquest, and TCG for GBC. I've liked the different gimmicks in different gens too, but I really fell for the Tera Raids and Tera types in Scarlet and Violet the most. I can't get enough of it. The only problem is not enough Poke Boxes. I'm starting to have to let go of monsters due to lack of space... I also like that they have become more accessible in terms of getting PP Up, mints, mirror herb, changing nickname, and relearning deleted moves. And with SV's open world there is so much to explore and find. I hope the main series battle and catching mechanics stay exactly as they are in future games. I don't care for either in the Arceus game.

Pokemon hasn't felt the same since the move to 3D

To be far. There are a lot of Nintendo games who should not be priced $60, let alone $40 or $30.

IMO its undeniable that Gamefreak have struggled with Pokemon since it went 3D. The DS era was absolute peak, you can feel how much love and effort went into those games.

The first 3D(S) games X&Y were okay, I enjoyed them at the time, but they just didn't stick with me like the previous ones did. Ever since then it's been clear that Gamefreak don't know how to make a 3D game effectively, and are also never given the time needed to figure it out. All of the newer games feel like they needed an extra year or two in development, and are missing the love and polish of the DS era.

I initially skipped Gen IV (save for Heart Gold) and Gen V, coming back from Gen VI before going back to the others. XY did so much right for me. I loved the massive dex, the inclusion of old and new, the then fresh 3D models, Friend Safari’s for shiny hunting (albeit tracking friend codes was a bit of a pain). OR/AS might have lost a bit but felt like a great remake and included enough to feel big with the island flying stuff.

But for me, Sun snd Moon somehow felt more boring. I didnt enjoy the Z-Crystal gimmick and that gen made me pause mid playthrough as i found it hard to keep interest. It fell flat for me.

And then from Gen 8 onwards i feel like theres an identity crisis. I think suddenly its a lot harder to cater to expectations on wanting free roaming, but what worked traditionally (less is more routes in handheld) also just felt like an issue.

On the other hand I loved Lets Go (save for lack of wild battles) and Legends Arceus especially. ZA has some great ideas but the wild zones arent enough. I honestly dont know what i want from a Pokemon game anymore. At the very least, for all the crap Arceus gets, i felt it ran well enough. Scarlett Violet prior to Switch 2 on the other hand felt utterly broken. I suppose at the very very least, i want better optimised games. That was a bug thing lost from 3ds.the switch games feel increasingly rough. Even BDSP has constant hitbox issues that prevent me appreciating it.

The DS era was so good it set a very high bar, however ZA is such a fun game and proof that GF are still trying new things. Im not really onboard the negative narrative set out by NL and other fans on pokemon recently. I actually tried to cancel my preorder after reading the ZA review here but was too late...so glad now as i definitely prefer the game to Arceus!