Pokémon Let's Go Pikachu And Eevee Demo Reveals How Shiny Pokémon Will Be Found

Is it 2019 yet?

To think the time spent on this could have gone into a new Pokemon Snap.

Another dumbing-down of mechanics in Pokemon. " Why should I have to spend so much time finding a particular kind of Pokemon??? I should just be handed it instead"

@LordGeovanni I think you meant "Why should I have to reset my game up 300+ times to find a Shiny???"

@Yosheel Did you ever get that Celebi? Or are you still resetting?

@LordGeovanni
Grinding yes, stupidous working no. So Ill take it

Haters g unnahate, hate, hate, hate.

I see it more as streamlining instead of dumbing down. Battling and catching wild Pokémon is the worst part of the game and anything to strip it back is welcome in my books.

Whilst the 2019 game is almost certainly going to be better, I feel like this game is going to at least be good, if not great. I can't wait.

@SpaceboyScreams If adding a sparkle around something is what's been holding up Pokemon Snap 2 for 19 years, that's one impressive sparkle.

Speaking of a demo. Yes please a demo before release would be lovely lol.

@HobbitGamer I obviously meant the game as a whole haha

I'm just here waiting until 2020 for Let's Go, Dunsparce!

@SpaceboyScreams Its more like snap 2 than you give it credit for. For a start when you capture the pokemon your trying to get a good shot of them to capture them, heck its like a open world snap 2 with online battles lol.

@Kiz3000 @SteveF @HobbitGamer so I guess the direct assault on my games is just me being upset and spiteful or hateful? People are being babied by these actions and you are all just lapping it up. Where is the challenge in video games anymore? Now I need to not only be hand held and told how to beat the boss but I'm also required to give the exact thing that would make the boss ridiculously easy. You want to have something incredibly rare? Here let's put a giant target on them and make them visible in the Overworld so that all you have to do is hide in the corner for 30 minutes. If this game was any more hand-holding you wouldn't even have the opportunity to choose your character name.

@LordGeovanni I can tell you’re very upset about this. I suggest maybe this game isn’t for you if it upsets you so. After all, games are meant to be an enjoyable experience. If you find that part of your enjoyment is something more challenging, there are many other games available, as well as another Pokémon entry next year.

Hyperbole about difficulty doesn’t detract from the truth that a more accessible game allows more people with various skill levels to enjoy something together. I’ve been playing games since 1987, but I’m looking forward to playing this with other friends that casually play games. And I’m sick of random battles and level grinding.

@Kiz3000
"Battling and catching wild Pokémon is the worst part of the game."

So... what should we do in Pokemon games ?
Dancing with Pokemons ?

@LordGeovanni There are challenging videogames. This game is not trying to be one of them and it doesn't need to be.

It's as if they are trying to make the series accessible for the younger audience or people new to the crowd. Not everyone has the time or patience to learn what types are super effective against others. Some people just enjoy the Pokémon and want to see their favourites battle.

Do the Pokémon on the routes change in real time? As in if you stood there for a minute or two the Pokémon disappear and new ones appear? I would imagine the Pokémon spawn when you enter the route. Therefore shiny farming will require people to enter, exit, and re enter routes. Still an element of grin but a much better one than running away from a fight every 20 seconds

@Tsurii I’m okay with that for this entry. It wasn’t present in some other entries, either. I understand what you’re saying, and there’s another game coming next year. I also understand what folks like @Kiz3000 are saying, and they’re not wrong. As the amount of Pokémon has increased, some of it has begun to feel tedious to some players. And it’s not like the new mechanic puts all 150 in one field for you to walk up to and choose. There’s still the exploration and hunt, but I think it allows a smoother flow through a story. I’m probably going to pass on the 2019 entry because I just can’t get into the core experience anymore, it’s lost its luster to me. But I can dive into Let’s Go and still have fun.

I can’t wait for this title!

Haven’t played Pokémon properly since the GBA days. Life took over, and I didn’t have the time for go looking for all the extra Pokémon with each generation.

Love the dip-in-dip-out nature too. Now I can can go back and get my team back together again during work breaks!

@Anti-Matter @Tsurii

Catch wild Pokémon and train them up against other trainers and gym leaders. I have never needed to grind wild mons in any of the games and find it a chore to keep running away in caves and the like. I prefer the way the anime does it and not the games. I do love turn based RPGs but I am not fond of the encounter rates in Pokémon.

@HobbitGamer
I do appreciate your input, but I already know this game is not for me. Now I'm just expressing my distaste for people happily celebrating the death of RPGs that I love. There are ways to make proper RPGs that do not hand hold you the whole way. A majority of RPGs have a Time balancing issue, but the way to fix that it's not to destroy every foundation of RPGs. It is the balance the amount of work needed to be done within a period of time. This is not making RPGs better, this is making Pokemon worse.

The worst part of these games is everyone endlessly complaining about them. So don't buy it. I bet you the cost of the game bundled with the controller that the game is still gonna sell well, regardless of all the internet trolls whining.

We know we're getting a main series "core" RPG next year, so if you're that upset about Let's Go... Just don't play it. If we weren't getting that core game next year, I could understand. If Let's Go were the "new main series" I'd be upset too. But it's not. As a place holder, and a spin-off it allows Game Freak to get used to, and experiment with the Switch, without risking the mainline series. Which seems like a lovely idea to me.

I also happen to like that this game ties in with Pokemon Go. A big part of what has always made Pokemon a great series for me is the interconnection among the series' titles. Let's Go will give that to Pokemon Go, and by extension, if my suspicions are correct, ultimately connect Go via Let's Go, to the main series through Pokemon Bank, when Bank hopefully makes the leap to Switch.

It’s a gap bridging title that’ll bring new fans and new Switch owners to titles that will come, such as the previously announced 2019 title. I’m all for that. I’m sure that if you need to satisfy your Pokemon craving this year one could do a lot worse.

@LordGeovanni This isn't the death of RPGs. That's the most overblown thing I've read online this year... at least unrelated to politics.

Let's Go isn't replacing the main series. It's a placeholder and spin off to allow Game Freak to learn how to develop on the Switch.

@Kiz3000 they make an item to help you with that. It's called Repel. I never use it myself but I heard that there's even multiple varieties now. There's probably even some hold items that let you guarantee escape from Battle or even encounter fewer Pokemon to begin with.

The options are already in the game so why should we have to change the whole mechanic when I enjoy the mechanic the way it is?

@Heavyarms55 you seem to have missed any of my numerous comments about RPGs being dumb down. If it comes down to it I could go into this discussion again but you can probably search my name on this site and find my views already. RPGs in general are being dumb down. Whenever people are so happy that they're jumping in Jubilee for these changes I'm going to get pissed. We should stop encouraging people to be lazy and actually encourage them to be playing the games as they were originally designed.

@LordGeovanni Feel free to get angry about things that aren't happening. You'd hardly be alone in that bad habit. You don't have to reply and explain your position, I imagine it'd actually annoy you even more than me. Save yourself the trouble and try to relax.

It's astonishing people get so upset over... Pokémon lol. This will be my kid's first Pokémon game and they're super excited for them. I'm excited to watch them enjoy themselves. Guess I'm part of the problem

November can't come soon enough!

Well, I can't wait for Let's Go...and I am betting the 2019 Pokemon game will be mind blowing.

@Heavyarms55 thank you for blatantly insulting me. I'm currently at work and don't have too much time to text so please forgive me if I make this short but hopefully you can understand it.

RPGs are too easy they're too short and they are demeaning. This is exactly because people don't want to dedicate time to playing games. They want to dedicate time to getting through the game as fast as possible just to say that they did it.

RPGs currently suffer from three practices in game design. The first is saving your game wherever you want, encouraging save scumming. There is absolutely no penalty in gaming now. Did you faint Zapdos? Just reset. Did you fail to beat Giovanni? Just reset. You saved right before the battle. Who cares about penalties like half your money being erased? You never need to pay for your mistakes.
Second is the unlimited inventory. You never need to plan out your trip because no matter what you probably have a frozen cure berry somewhere in your pockets that you didn't even realize you picked up an hour in the game. Now you never need to worry about being frozen, even in a critical battle.
Third, visible encounters allow you to escape having to do any battles anyway. Who cares if you can't save in the dungeon when you get through the dungeon without battling anyway? You should be able to trounce through a Vermin-infested, poisonous swamp without ever having any conflict, right?

And the best part is you're going to have to try and justify all this and you're still going to ignore the fact that these are problems in game design that are occurring because people are too damn lazy to play a game the way it was designed.

@LordGeovanni Yeah... wow. Okay then man. You go ahead and think that if you want. There ain't a snowball's chance in hell you're gonna convince me things like the ability to save before a boss battle are a bad thing.

Good day to you, angry sir.

Why is everyone so butthurt over this game being an easier way to introduce new players to the pokemon gaming world? It should have been a 3ds game when GO released on mobile 2 years ago. They said what it was from the start and it's not a main pokemon game. It looks fun, enjoy!

@Heavyarms55
So you just dismiss my entire point because you find one minor flaw in your opinion? Saving before a boss battle is good. Avoiding the penalties for losing a battle is bad. If you can't actually discuss the points being brought up maybe you should be involved in discussion regarding it. Because I don't have time to sit here and fight fallacies.

@bones I agree, I am waiting for a demo before I order it. I have played pokemon forever, but I am not sold on this game yet.

@SpaceboyScreams Game Freak did not develop Pokémon Snap. Go bother HAL Laboratory and let Game Freak do their own dang thing.

@LordGeovanni As an old school RPG player, I agree that RPG games have been streamlined to keep people playing. For whatever reason, the human race doesn't seem to have the attention span it used to. haha. I downloaded FF7 on ps4, and was floored to find built in cheat codes to allow you unlimited gold, max level, fight skips etc. I couldn't even play it knowing that I could just cheat at the press of a button. That isn't fun for me, but I always have the psone og version!

I like how hard shiny pokemon are to catch. That's what makes them special. But this isn't a mainline pokegame. This is basically a glorified cellphone app, so let them have their fun! Just be thankful this isn't mainline.

@LordGeovanni This is an entry level pokemon game. This means they can get people to buy a pokemon game without dumbing down the core experience. Because that is the alternative if they want to broaden their player base.

Kind of disappointing that shiny Pokémon show up with those star particles on the overworld. I imagine they’ll still be as rare as they normally are, but not knowing which Pokémon will be shiny before an encounter would’ve been half the fun of looking for them. It would’ve encouraged me to check every Pokémon I see.

I keep wondering who this game is for, and I keep coming back to 30-something year old lapsed adult players.

It's not for the hardcore Pokemon crowd, as should be painfully obvious.

It's not really even for the children. Children don't mind repetitive tasks like battling wild pokemon. Children also have the most amount of free time and patience (yes, patience, when a kid is really into something, they throw a lot of time and energy at it) to learn new game systems and trial and error their way through things. Core pokemon was always for children, and has never had trouble capturing and entertaining that audience despite the perceived "difficulty" of getting into the games.

You know who doesn't have time or patience to learn type matchups? Or deal with random battles? Or the other various things they've changed in Let's Go to make it more accessible? Adults. Adults are the ones that don't have that time or patience.

It's not even really for the Pokemon Go market. That's a completely different market in a lot of ways. Go players largely don't own a Switch, and probably aren't going to shell out $360+ to play Let's Go when they can continue playing Go on their smartphone for free. But there is a crossover sub-market in the greater Go player base: a lot of Go players of a particular age are lapsed players who probably haven't played core pokemon for a few gens at least, maybe not since original R/B/Y. That's why the Go connectivity features are there, because that crossover audience is the target audience.

That's why these games are in Kanto, not Alola. They're a nostalgia grab at lapsed players, and the co-op mode is intended as a parent-child mode. Grab the lapsed player by the nostalgia, make them remember how great pokemon was in their childhood, and allow them to share it with their child.

Let's Go has a lot of potential to grow the overall Pokemon fan base, but they're not really being built for children. They're being built for adults.

@itslukec thank you for your comments and agreements. Glad that there are others that carry my sentiments.

@Therad But the problem is, do you know what else is an entry level Pokemon? Red and blue. Without Overworld visible encounters. Without unlimited inventory. And some how many children were able to play that without too much difficulty. In fact I was one of them.

I'm not saying there are not ways to improve Red and Blue, or the concept overall, but instead of addressing those problems, these games are just making everything easier instead.

@LordGeovanni I’m not gonna argue your opinion about whether gaming (and RPG’s) are too easy these days. But I do want to point out your gripes (seemingly with Pokémon in post #29) have been staples of the series for years and you don’t have to play the game that way if you don’t want to.

Wow, whole lot of people spewing BS about RPGs in here huh?

Pokemon: Let's Go is a Dumbed Down RPG because they removed random battles, the single most loathed mechanic of JRPGS since the NES?

Pokemon go is now Easy because you don't have to fight Random Battles? Which pokemon game was Hard because of Random Battles? Literally all this is changing is that you don't have to spend a bunch of in-game currency on Repel.

You still have to go out and hunt for pokemon to catch

You still only have a very small chance of catching a shiny

You still have to battle all of the trainers en-route to your next destination

You still have to battle Legendary Pokemon

You still have to battle Gym Leaders.

God forbid you don't have to stop every 5 seconds to one shot random obnoxious pokemon or walk in circles for 7 hours to level up a new pokemon.

@UmbreonsPapa but that is where you're wrong. Unlimited inventory in Pokemon has only been around since about 4 gen. (Although it was increasing in different amounts during second and third gen). Visible encounters are only becoming part of the series now. My main focus is not that these are individually massive flaws, but rather poorly utilized they become flaws. And with multiple flaws a bigger flaw occurs, making the games drastically easier than they should be.

Regardless of such, thank you very much for pointing out which comment you wanted to reply to. That was a massive help in determining how to respond.

I find it hilarious that this game needed to be made in the first place, Pokemon itself is not that hard to play and If I wanted a hardcore RPG experience I would look elsewhere because Pokemon isnt a hardcore RPG and should never be a hardcore experience, if you think Pokemon needs to be hardcore then I would suggest seeing a psychiatrist.

But if parents and children can enjoy this together I will not argue its existence and hope 2019 will come faster.

@LordGeovanni
Why so serious ? 🙃
We play Pokemons for fun, Not for arguing each other.
Games should be fun and EASY to play.
Wanna HARDCORE ? Play something else.

@Anti-Matter Dance Dance Revolution: Pokémon Mix

I can’t wait for these games! I’m thinking of getting Eevee first, then getting Pikachu when I finish that one.

@Anti-Matter my conflict with this is that they're making the game easier and then people are on able to handle more difficult games. Then they complain those games are too hard and demand that they be easier to o. This is why games like Dark Souls were even made specifically to be difficult. My major concern is having more RPGs dumb down and made ridiculously easy when I want a game I will get into and participate and enjoy for 40 plus hours. I can't do that if I end up one shotting everything because I'm overleveled when all I was doing was walking from point A to point B to go take on the next boss. I want games I have to plan for the bosses in. I want games that I have to monitor my spending habits. I want games that I have to worry about what equipment absorbs or reflects damage. But those Concepts tend to be too hard for kids nowadays so they're going away from gaming.

If people would actually try to play the game that's there and not try to make it easier all the time perhaps they would enjoy gaming a lot more.

All right. For those still talking with me, I need to move over to the other half of my job so I can't respond any further right now. I'll come back later and see if anybody wants to message still.

@LordGeovanni
"My major concern is having more RPGs dumb down and made ridiculously easy when I want a game I will get into and participate and enjoy for 40 plus hours."

Yo, i had played one of easy RPG games, Fantasy Life 3DS and i like it. I could Finish the Storyline Just only Relying on the Tasks given on the screen. Why do you want RPG become So DAMN Hard as Final Fantasy IV (I still haven't finished FF IV NDS due to Hard gameplay that i felt) ?
If the games can be Easy, then why not ?
Not everyone can engage in Hard games.

@Anti-Matter well said different strokes for different folks and all that.

Not every RPG needs to be face to the wall Hard if people want that kind of experience they should really look elsewhere than Pokemon or have a difficulty setting.

@SpaceboyScreams GameFreak doesn't do any of the spinoffs. They're usually done by Intelligent Systems or Genius Sonority (or in the case of Snap, Hal Laboratory).

Hal has probably been busy with Kirby and maybe Smash (if they're helping out again).

@HobbitGamer it's playing hard to get.

@LordGeovanni red/blue is not entry level anymore. Old games were hard because arcades needed to be hard to earn money. But even if it was entry level for you, the next entry had a player base drop of 30%. And after pokemon go, the most casual experience as of yet, pokemon sun/moon gained 50% more players over the previous entry.

I don't get all the whining from the so-called hardcore gamers. We are living in the golden age of gaming, we have super easy games as well as super hard games. Why whine over the ones that are easy? Buy another game.

And it is even worse when it comes to this game. Next year there will be a new core game. You can safely skip this entry since it is a spin off.

@LordGeovanni are you complaining in an article about shiny Pokémon being visible in the field that this is making the game TOO EASY? I don’t think that word means what you think it means. Shiny hunting isn’t about difficulty, it’s about burning time. It never was hard, just time consuming. For all we know, the spawn rate for shinies could be just as low here or even lower, this just cuts the time a small bit, which is good. There are changes to this game that are fair points for you to complain about - I’ll disagree because you can always skip this entry plus not a single entry in the series was EVER hard (nuzlocke safe difficulty, you’re always free to self-impose challenges), but they’re still fair points for you to argue. This particular change doesn’t affect difficulty though, just time consumption.

@Tyranexx
Random Encounter was so Unreal.
Modern RPG now displaying enemies on the map. They are visible and you can avoid them if you want.

@NoxAeturnus Agree this game is not for the kids or Go players is for the Genwunners, Pokémon is not a game that needs to be easier only Genwunners think that Pokémon is hard and way too complex to them but in reality anyone who has truly play a recent game knows that Pokémon is a game that can be play as a casual or hardcore if you so desire

I'm fine with this shiny change, and with seeing pokemon in the overworld. Though I wish they'd take advantage of the hardware and go nuts with slight pattern or color variations, for a lot of pokemon.

My only gripe is still, and forever will be, the inability to battle wild Pokemon. But I can get past that, if there's enough meat in other areas to make up for it and the lack of difficulty. I say this as a Genwunner who likes first gen best. I have my doubts regarding this game's value.

I'm just a little worried that it'll be the barebones story we had in Yellow, and nothing else. It was fine back then, but it's a bit below what I'm expecting for a 60 dollar console Pokemon game. None of these demos delve deeply enough to tell one way or the other. :/

Why wouldn't they show the shiny coloring in the overworld? It's a simple palette swap. If my partner is Shiny, I want to see that when they follow my trainer.

Maybe I'll finally catch a shiny of my very own. Other than the red gyarados that everyone could catch I have not once in the 20 years I've been playing pokemon encountered a shiny. Granted I am not a shiny hunter but it still would have been nice.

So the same as its always been, cool

@Anti-Matter Random encounters are still loved by some. Octopath Traveler is doing very well, and it is random encounter city. It is a style of game. Just because you don't like them, don't think you speak for everyone. I love FF4, and it is special to me because when I defeated a boss, it wasn't easy. It took strategy, and planning.

That said, I also enjoy games like Fantasy Life. There is room for all skill levels in video games, but I don't think I died once in all of Fantasy Life. Some people enjoy a challenge.

@LordGeovanni Just throwing my own two cents in the ring, it's far easier to make an easy game harder for yourself than it is to make a hard game easier.

Whilst I enjoy the challenge of Classic Hardmode FE games, sometimes it gets annoying enough that I really just want to put in a Casual mode, like the newer entries have done, and better enjoy the journey. You can emulate Classic mode in Casual, but you can't emulate Casual mode in Classic.

With the hundreds of items now in Pokémon, and the widespread online game, an inventory limitation feels cheap. Part of the charm of online is being able to come up with some unorthodox strategies using lesser-used items, and it would just feel wrong for the bag to be limited in such a way. However, if you so chose, you could self-impose an inventory limitation, which would up the difficulty mildly. The point is now you are being given the option to, rather than having no say in the matter.

The save anywhere mentality is more of an intelligent design for modern handhelds. You could quite easily whip out your GB/GBA/DS/3DS and play through a small amount of a game on a bus, being able to keep your progress when you get off. Not everyone has long chunks of time to spend battling all the way from one savepoint to another over a short break, and if they're frequent enough to allow for that, then what's the point in it not being save anywhere anyway? If you want to save everywhere, then go right ahead, but if you only want to save in "safe spaces" in games, then you are equally at liberty to do that.

In terms of overworld encounters, I honestly don't think it's a bad thing for players to be able to skip out on encounters. It allows for low-level runs, which test ingenuity, without the tedium of running from every fight. The random encounter system also has it's merits, allowing the player to see more of a game's bestiary, but can lead to issues when actively searching for a specific monster for a quest, and being besieged by low level bats. It's personal preference, really.

Speaking more on topic;

I personally love a challenge to videogames, but Pokémon isn't really where I go to get that. I'll self-impose a few rules (like set, not switch), but I haven't lost an in-game battle since Gardenia back in Gen IV. Even then, I think I've only seen about 3 'blackout' messages throughout every Gen. Pokémon has never been a hard game, so them streamlining some aspects is going to do very little. I'd assume shinies are still going to be as rare as before, and all that's really changed is people reloading areas to look for the shiny glimmer rather than jumping in and out of patches of grass. It's not exactly going to change much. Heck, the new go mechanics might actually make mid/lategame catching more enjoyable, as, let's face it, once you have access to quick and dusk balls, all you need to do to catch something is quick ball it, see if it catches, false swipe it, and spam dusk balls until it clicks. It's a nice change of pace, and I'm interested to see where they go with it.

it's too bad that I won't be picking this game up this year, but honestly, Idk how I'd have time to play it as well as Red Dead 2, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Spider-man and Smash Bros Ultimate, plus my backlog of games. 2019 will be better and I'll hopefully have a Pokémon game that I can love again since the DS days.

I think the shinies will still be rare. But now you don’t have to go to a battle screen to know if you have found a shiny. It’s not like making the game easier, it’s just like taking an unnecessary loading screen away.
Everyone hating this can go play pokemon red where you have to play halfway trough just to even get a bicycle, just to have to scroll trough the menus to even equip it.
Some things in video games are there for just to make the experience better. If those conviniencies are annoying, one can always go back playing old rpg:s without even saving.

That said, I like battling wild Pokemon and would like to see that feature even in these let’s go-games. But getting rid of random encounters and seeing my opponent is a huge plus for me.

@LordGeovanni Look man, if you really want, I can go into my point of view in great detail. The one point I mentioned was just an example. But I was in the wrong for insulting you and I don't want to be the cause of a protracted argument. You are entitled to your opinion no matter how much I disagree with it. I apologize for my insult. Let's just leave it at that.

Alright. I finally got done with work. Let me see...

@Anti-Matter #49
Do I want RPGs to "become So DAMN Hard as Final Fantasy IV"? No. But I also think RPGs should still be consistently difficult. You cannot tell me that the Pokemon Games maintain the same level of difficulty. Red/Blue were fairly difficult but so was Silver/Gold. In comparison, X/Y and Sun/Moon are jokes. Without doubt, the leaders of evil teams and the Gym Leaders should always carry more than 4 Pokemon. I would hesitate to say that first or second gym should, but either give me a roadblock like Whitney's Miltank or give me a 4+ pokemon battle. This is the difficulty decline I am talking about. Maintain the same level of difficulty. Not Dark Souls, but not "Baby's First RPG either".

@Coffee_Drinker #50
Like I said above, I am not asking for Dark Souls level of difficulty. But I am asking for a difficulty that actually makes me think more than "Mash A". If I don't need to consider how to tackle a Gym Leader, then I am not engaged in the game. And that is not the intention of developers. Unfortunately, GameFreak has said that they dislike multiple difficulties because it apparently encourages bullying. ... And they are actually a little vocal about Nuzlocks not being in the spirit of Pokemon. So basically they are saying that the harder versions people make for themselves are against GameFreak's wishes. That is a mentality I am against and why I am so vocal in messages like this.

@Therad #53
First of all, if the First Games in the series are not "entry level" then the Dev MASSIVELY failed their franchise. And you really can't say Red/Blue are not Entry Level when Yellow was based off them and these games are based off Yellow. Now, in addition you mention a 30% drop from the "Entry Level" Red/Blue to the next Entry Level. I am guessing that is Silver/Gold? Well... according to http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon , That would be accurate for your data, but that is ALSO a level that has NEVER been returned to from the "Casual" crowd since the games got easier. This leaves me to think that maybe the drop is cause due to the difficulty lowering. (Or it could be the fad dropping, but I would disagree.)
You also mention the Golden Age of Gaming. Well I would also disagree here. We are stagnant in gaming. This is because technology hasn't progressed faster than the games. This is why console generation 7 lasted forever. This is why gen 8 is lasting forever too. It isn't worth making new systems yet. And because of that, AAA costs are going through the roof. And how do you reduce costs or increase sales? Make the game available to the lowest common denominator. Basically, Babyfy it until anyone can play. And now gamers like me are getting fed up with lackluster games trying to take $40 or $60 and then ADD DLC on top. And STILL not be as plentiful in content as games from 10+ years ago.
You also mention that I could skip this game. I already planned that. My point is when I stay silent then people like GameFreak think that it isn't a bad decision. If the idea is bad... It is BAD. I want GameFreak hearing this.

@ShadJV Let us discuss Shiny Odds. Case that is what you are insisting is not difficulty related. And the goal is to get a shiny X. In Generation 2 the shiny odds was 1-in-8192. In Gen 4, the games introduced Chaining and Masuda Method to decrease the odds. In Gen 5, GameFreak introduced the Shiny Charm lowering the shiny rate By TWO THIRDS for most shiny methods.
This has now decreased to a staggering 13/4096. Effectively it was 1.2 of 10,000 encounters (gen 2) and is now 31.7 shinies (Gen 7). And THIS game is flat out allowing you to pick and choose the pokemon, while NOT having to fight, AND it flat out tells you it is shiny on top of that. IN ADDITION to the reduced shiny odds probably. If this isn't a reduction in difficulty, I think I need to see what measure you use for difficulty.

@Tyranexx #57
I will not say that Random Encounters are not used as padding. It is honestly quite often they are used for that as well. As I said above about my three "flaws"of current RPGs, it isn't so much they are flaws, but rather they may be utilized poorly and therefore cause conflict by making things too easy. I FULLY disagree that Random Encounters should happen often. But I also feel that Visible Encounters do the player an injustice. Allowing people to skip battles also makes bosses seem unfair when that player gets curb-stomped. And if the Devs lower the difficulty of the boss because of this, then the difficulty of the game gets lowered because of the Visible Encounters. And so that is my point. Balancing the amount of Visible Encounters is quite difficult. But there have also been some games that did Random Encounters right. Bravely Default actually allowed you to modify the encounter rate. My personal opinion is that Devs should add an option in the Setting Menu to switch between Visible and Random Encounters. Random Encounters are a minor algorithm for implementation, if you want Visible Encounters you use a ton more space for that. And having both would cater to both fans of either without major strain. Effectively, I understand why others like Visible, but I want options.

@itslukec #63
That is my point too. I SUCK at Platformers. But I am good enough for Mario. It doesn't mean I want to demand that Megaman games get easier. I just need to get better. But I would also hate it if Mario Platformers got easier cause then I wouldn't have a platformer that I enjoy to play any more.

@TheXReturns #64
I never actually thought I would have to sound like a PC Master Race but... Git Gud.
And for adding my own difficulty to games, Why? Why should I HAVE to make my games harder? They were difficult enough when I played the SAME SERIES 20 years ago. And, yeah, I got really good at Pokemon over the years, but I can compare the difficulty between the games in the present year and EASILY say that X/Y or Sun/Moon are FAR easier than Silver/Gold. So again, I ask Why? Why should I HAVE to increase the difficulty for my games to get any enjoyment from them? Effectively, if I have to raise the difficulty myself I am saying that the Devs failed at making the game. And that IS what I am saying here. GameFreak could add difficulty to the game. They are avoiding it and ACTIVELY making the game even easier. That is why I am so upset.

@Lizuka #67
I agree completely.

@Heavyarms55 #68
I fully accept any apologies you give. I honestly don't even think they are necessary. You had an opinion and I debated it. It doesn't make your opinion wrong. If anything it merely is "slightly flawed" in my view. Regardless I would be interested in hearing your opinion fully. I am most certainly not fully expecting my "demands" to change anything, but I would always love exploring new ways that game devs could expand options and allow gamers to play the way they want. Such as the toggle option I mentioned before for Random or Visible Encounters.

@LordGeovanni Because god forbid a game actually respect the time of the player.

@HyliasHero
God forgive a player actually respect the time and efforts of a developer and not just speed through the game as fast as possible. Or actually take the time to encounter enemies that you might not see on the straight path between two points. Your point here is a fallacy. You're not contributing. You're merely trying to discredit me without purpose.

@Tyranexx
Oh yeah. That was actually the reason why I brought up Bravely Default. It is possible for games to make Visible Encounters and do it well. Just like Random Encounters. But my complaint is often Visible Encounters do not contain the balance needed to keep the game without being significantly easier than it should be.

With save scumming, I do feel that Games should never kick you out and require you to restart from your save. I prefer the Dragon Quest version which kicks you back to the last time you were in with half your gold. Pokemon follows this method and that's what I agree with. But the lack of penalty by save scumming is what I feel is a flaw. Perhaps if you could only save at the beginning of a dungeon or perhaps also halfway through the dungeon it would contain some difficulty but also encourage you to take that penalty but keep everything else you obtained.

@LordGeovanni you still fail to understand what difficulty means. Shiny hunting is time consuming, not difficult. It’s not strategizing, it’s not reacting, it’s not anything that could be categorized as a “challenge”. You can’t get better at it, you just go with the highest odd method for your game and just mindlessly do it until you are lucky enough to find one. I know exactly how shiny hunting works, I HAVE shinies and it is simply an utter time sink. You can’t make that easier, you can make it less time consuming. It is complete nonsense to call something something like that “difficult”. Anyone can do it. There’s no getting better at it, you simply look up how to efficiently do it (as it’s never explained in game and without going through the code you can’t really tell what is the efficient way to do it) and then you do it. By making the process less time consuming like this (which is an assumption we’re making, as we don’t know if the odds have raised, lowered, or stayed the same) they are not taking any difficulty from the game, they are reducing how much time the process takes, which is good because once again, it’s mindless. Good game design is not rewarding a player simply for pouring more hours into simple activities, it’s rewarding the players for challenging activities. Shiny hunting is none of those things.

There are valid ways this game dumbs down the franchise and makes it easier, such as requiring the player to catch a Pokémon strong against Brock. But this simply is not a case of being less difficult, time spent doesn’t necessarily equal difficulty and... well I don’t know how else to explain it to you, man. If you think shiny hunting is difficult, clearly we play on different levels. Not that Pokémon itself has ever been that difficult unless you, once again, use self imposed rules like nuzlockes. But even with how easy the series is, shiny hunting is entirely mindless.

@ShadJV
Either shiny hunting is rewarding and therefore should have a difficulty assigned to it or it has no reward for you and therefore means absolutely nothing to you. If you want to shiny why shouldn't you have to put effort into it? If shinies mean so little that it is not important to you, then maybe there should be a 50% shiny odds. Who cares? They're general enough everybody should have one.

Or, perhaps, maybe, finding a shiny is rewarding. And I would rather hunt for the shiny then just find a secluded corner to sit and watch my screen for half an hour just waiting for a shiny to spawn. This is so badly panhandling to lowest common denominator that it is flat-out condescending. Either everybody deserves shinies or they deserve to have a level of effort required. For you to dismiss the effort as merely time-wasting but value the reward is to directly spit in the face of everybody that wants to get those Rewards.

@LordGeovanni it’s like you didn’t even read everything I wrote. My point is you keep complaining that they’re taking away DIFFICULTY. And there was no difficulty here to take away. Suddenly you’re changing your argument? Then we have nothing to talk about here because either you don’t know what you’re arguing or you intentionally change it to avoid being wrong.

@ShadJV I'm claiming that there's difficulty because there is reward. If you can't even understand that I don't know where you're coming from.

@LordGeovanni that is completely irrelevant for difficulty. Difficult or easy tasks could be rewarded.

Look up the definition of difficult. “Needing much effort or skill to accomplish, deal with, or understand.” Reward is irrelevant, a difficult task could have no reward and an easy task could have a reward. The difficulty of getting a shiny doesn’t change here, it still has no difficulty. It just potentially takes less time. There’s still reward so your weird definition of difficulty (that is not supported anywhere) still holds true that it is difficult.

@ShadJV
Huh. I would expect requiring patience, time, resources, knowledge and skill, effort, research and luck would easily transgress into something being difficult.
After all the patience required to perform the action required to get the shinies, the time spent, the resources in games such as specific Pokemon with abilities to attract certain types or using items such as potions to heal or repels to push away Pokemon of certain levels to focus your hunt for the right Pokemon, the knowledge and skill of knowing how to combat potential problems like Roar or Teleport, and of course what moves you yourself will use to capture said Pokemon, the physical effort of maintaining awareness of the actions occurring, (i.e. not falling asleep mid hunt or running away because you didn't pay attention or hear the sparkle), the research put into learning new ways to hunt shinies including new Pokemon skills, abilities, items, and techniques, and of course good old-fashioned luck that has no way to train.
Are those not exactly fitting into the definition you just gave regarding difficulty? Do I have to tear apart more misguided and insulting comments from you? Rewards have value because they are scarce. A common reward has less value than a rare reward. The effort required to obtain a rare shiny Pokemon is proportional to the value of that shiny. Otherwise if the shinies have no value there's no reason to have a difficulty to get them. Aka make them as common as the regular Pokemon.
Should some part of this not be apparent to you, I honestly don't know how to explain further.

@LordGeovanni I appreciate that. I am quite happy we were able to fall back from what felt like a nasty brewing argument. Comments like this are poorly suited to having a rational conversation. If you have a discord you don't mind sharing, I'd be happy to chat there sometime.

The thing that surprises me is not people complaining that this more accessible game is coming out, its that a Core Pokemon RPG is also in the works and they are STILL COMPLAINING!

Also I think Dark Souls should have an Easy Mode.

@Heavyarms55
I am sad to say that I do not have my own Discord. For the most part I almost routinely merely debate in comments like such. Rarely do I actually get angered myself but I do selectively choose my words to entice different emotions.

This game is lame 😂

@HobbitGamer
Yes this. I've found shinies in only
4 games, including Pokemon Go and most of the time I get stuck with the really subtle ones.

Crystal-Ratata
Black 2-Magnamite
X-Fletchling and Durant
Go-Mareep

And never once have I been able to breed for shinies so I'll take it being a tad easier.

Besides Pokemon isn't exactly some incredibly difficult game anyway.

@Tempestryke you would probably split from laughter on some of our comments in the article about Pokémon that came after this.

@HobbitGamer

??

@LordGeovanni I figured my point made itself, but clearly it went over your head. Not everyone has the time to devote hundreds of hours to a game, whether it be because of school, work, kids, etc.

I also fail to see how enjoying a game in shorter bursts is somehow "disrespectful" to the developers. Whether you play a game for 5 hours or 500 shouldn't matter as long as you enjoy that time. And I don't know about you, but grinding isn't exactly what I consider a good time.

@HyliasHero
Again I have the same issue with your response. You are effectively saying that I am incapable of understanding your point. That is insulting to my intelligence you see. Why should a developer be happy people are going through a game as fast as possible and missing multiple aspects of content? Why should they be encouraging people to skip out on over half the game? That is their hard work you decide you don't feel you want to have to deal with. If that is not insulting to developers then I never want any of your quality work on any of my projects.

You also mentioned that not everyone has hundreds of hours to play a game. That's true, I can believe that. Perhaps they shouldn't buy an RPG. RPGs are traditionally the longest games you could possibly buy. Would you start a project that you can't finish? Same thing like starting a game that you can't finish. If you don't finish it it's not the developer's fault, and as a fellow fan, it's not my fault you can't finish it. It would solely be up to the player to finish that game. If they are incapable because their life is so busy, they should reconsider buying the game.

@LordGeovanni I never said you are incapable of seeing the point. I said that the point went over your head. If I didn't think your were capable of it then I wouldn't bother commenting. As for the developer thing. I would think they would be satisfied as long as someone enjoyed their game regardless of how long they spent doing it. By your logic speedrunners are "disrespecting" the developers of the games they play. That's also not counting games that reward you for playing through them quickly.

And your point about "missing half the game" comes back to what I was saying about respecting player's times. It shouldn't be necessary to devote hundreds of hours to get the full experience out of a game. Going back to Pokemon specifically I don't see how improving quality of life for catching shinies (which are still super rare) makes you miss "half the game".

Playing a game in bursts over the course of a long time is perfectly plausible for people with busy schedules. The issue comes in when those games require more than the 70-80 hours most RPGs are in order to get the full experience. Grinding is not fun and just wastes time. Anything to reduce the amount of time grinding is a good thing in my book.

@HyliasHero
First off I would fully expect developers to be upset if people are speeding through the game and skipping out on half of the content. Just consider the music director making five or six songs that they have great pride in and have the fans just not even see it because they are too lazy to go for far off legendaries or encounter certain types of battles. For your insinuation that speedrunners insult Developers, well I would expect speedrunners to play most of the game first. Only the significant minority wants to push through the game and get it over with and just move on something else. But that doesn't mean that Minority isn't insulting the developers by doing such.

You bring up again that you're talking about just getting shinies. I'm talking about the whole game. You want to talk about just shinies? That would effectively be post-game content. Why should things that people want hours worth of time invested in be handed out like candy on October 31st? You seem to misunderstand the level of laziness being placed in players hands here. In current Pokemon games you are required to encounter one at a time the Pokemon to find a shiny. With this over world view of the Pokemon you effectively cut out 100% of any non-specific Pokemon encounters. Hunting or Clefairy? Never encounter a Geodude, a Sandshrew, a Paris, or a Zubat. You can just find some mediocre corner to huddle in and wait for the Clefairy to generate in front of you. You wanted to be a shiny Clefairy? You just huddle in the corner for even longer. That isn't grinding, that's sitting around and waiting for a handout.

Having a shiny was once something of great pride for Pokemon players. That meant that you invested tons of hours into hunting down one specific species and grinding out the ridiculously low chance of finding a shiny. Now shinies are effectively worthless and that's not even because of things like this. The Pokemon games have been hacked and exploited and they are a joke online. And instead of prioritizing the removal of all of these cheaters gamefreak is reducing the difficulty of getting all of these things. And that is where I have the biggest problem.

@LordGeovanni I think I'm done breaking my personal rule of not arguing with people online. It never goes anywhere because both sides are too stubborn to ever change their opinions and it just keeps going in circles as a result. I hope you have a nice day.