
When you're trying to please a fanbase that's been around for over 20 years, any major change to the status quo will always divide opinion. Pokémon is a series that’s kept under heavy scrutiny by its loyal community, with each minute detail studied under a Silph Scope with no place for mistakes to hide.
Despite this, I doubt Pokémon Sword and Shield’s producer, Junichi Masuda, quite understood how people would react after appearing on Nintendo’s Treehouse livestream and in a subsequent Famitsu interview, where he detailed some specifics of his future game. Masuda explained only the Pokémon that appeared in the new Galar region could be transferred in from older titles through Pokemon Home. His justification was a little vague, stating not only would it have been extremely difficult to recreate the 1000+ Pokémon (including their various forms) for the Switch but the number of Pokémon in the National Pokedex would be detrimental to a balanced battle system.
Without going into great detail about what was said by Masuda and subsequently game director Akira Omori, it’s clear that the Pokémon community are fairly divided on this news - after all, Pokémon’s motto is Gotta catch ‘em all! and not Gotta catch a few! On a surface level, some are understandably very upset that their favourites may not make the cut, but looking deeper there seems to be a larger problem with how the most loyal of fans are taking Masuda’s words - they don’t trust him.
When you consider just how little official word has been said about the reduced roster and Pokémon Home, it pales in comparison to what has been said online by those enraged by Masuda and Omori’s comments. Misinformation in the form of hastily composed infographics has been used as a kind of smear campaign against the makers and Game Freak as if to paint them as enemies of their own brand and fanbase. It’s a sad thing to witness and one that completely detracts from all the recent positives following on from Pokémon GO’s release.

Whether or not Masuda and Omori are honest in their reasoning behind the cull, it’s important to take a look at the situation from both sides before grabbing our pitchforks and rallying behind a hashtag.
Firstly, you can’t deny that when it comes to Masuda’s first point, balance, there’s a lot of problems with the National Pokedex. Masuda stated that Sword and Shield wasn’t the first time they considered a cull - that goes back to Sun and Moon. When you consider the sheer number of Pokémon, each with different types, base IV stats, and different move-sets, the combinations are astronomical and understandably some Pokémon get forgotten about. Masuda clearly believes the time was right when moving to an entirely new platform for a chance to refresh the Pokedex.
Whilst the majority of Pokémon are eligible in competitive battles, some are far too overpowered to be playable. Even when removing banned Pokémon from the equation it’s clear that some tournament-legal ‘mons are more gifted than others.
Just take a look at the 2018 World Championship’s top eight players. Out of the 700+ Pokémon that were available to choose from, every one of the quarter-finalists had one or two of either: Incineroar, Snorlax, or Landorus - with one of them, semi-finalist Nils Dunlop, having all three. There’s a reason games like Overwatch, Smash Bros., or even League of Legends with 144 Champions have succeeded competitively - there is a manageable level of balancing. You don’t necessarily see the same characters being played time-in-time-out at tournaments and when one character or strategy appears more powerful than another, adjustments and tweaks are made to keep each and every character relevant.

This is admittedly an entirely self-made problem. With every new generation, new Pokémon were added at the behest of the fans. It was just a matter of time, as Masuda says before the roster became unmanageable.
When it comes to the Trading Card Game, there are routine rotations as to what is and isn't playable at sanctioned events - as cards are released, the meta evolves. Not every Pokémon in the National Pokedex has a tournament-legal card, so this cull may be part of a plan to unify these two competitive scenes. If there’s less confusion as to what Pokémon are or aren’t playable, then players may be more inclined to get involved from a grassroots level, with a more level playfield featuring all available Pokémon. Remember, there will be plenty of newcomers alongside the returning players.
Whilst it may appear to some that many of the game’s assets are straight copies from older games, gameplay videos have shown new idle and battle animations with higher quality Pokémon models than previously seen. I’m not a game designer, but it would be fair to assume that these designs would have taken up a fair chunk of development time, especially as it appears that these models and animations have been made from scratch. The animations themselves have been subject to some direct criticisms by those cherry-picking specific animations (with graphical glitches aside) in an aim to disprove this. Take Wingull for example, its Pokedex entry states that: “It has trouble flapping in flight. Instead, it soars on updrafts,” so naturally you wouldn’t expect it to flap in its idle animations. For years, the same animation of Wingull swaying from side to side has been recreated but when it comes to Sword and Shield this suddenly becomes indicative of lazy development.
It would have been extremely safe for Game Freak’s team of 143 to put all their resources into remodelling each and every Pokémon into Sword and Shield, happily plodding along with the same balancing issues, a few notable additions, and a generic plotline. Given more time and manpower, I believe 1000+ Pokémon may have been possible. Yet, when you look at the series entries that have performed the best, it’s those that have embraced innovation that have continued to perform well. Sun and Moon were the first games to really break from the mould of ‘catch, train, battle, gym, repeat’ and have gone on to be some of the more critically acclaimed titles in the whole series. Already, Sword and Shield look to take things one step further with open-space Wild Areas and local and online Max Raid Battles, with no doubt more features to be announced in the near future.

Whether or not Game Freak’s justification for the upgrades being too much work is truthful or not, no matter how much time there is to set aside, this wouldn’t have changed the balancing issues mentioned earlier. In this instance, you can’t have the best of both worlds.
Those most vocal about this culling should be picking their battles better. When trying to address minor gripes with false information and wild assumptions, it takes focus from the larger more pressing issues.
One of the more glaring negatives is regarding Pokémon Home and Pokémon Bank. Pokémon Bank is a premium service that allows players to store 3000 Pokémon online for use in games spanning generations six and seven. It’s unclear whether Pokémon Home - the new overarching storage service linking up Pokémon Bank, Let’s Go Pikachu and Eevee, Pokémon GO, and Sword and Shield - would require an additional subscription fee. If many of the Pokémon available in Pokémon Bank are incompatible with Sword and Shield, then there will need to be a pretty decent initial incentive for players to perform such a transfer considering they won’t be able to get them back to Pokémon Bank or their original games; leaving them in Pokepurgatory with no real use. As it stands, no such incentive exists other than a vague comment by Masuda on the topic to suggest some gameplay elements for Home may be incorporated in the future.
Many players would have spent hundreds and in some cases, thousands of hours training and breeding Pokémon over the course of more than a decade, to have them seemingly become defunct. Whilst you could argue there’s a false sense of entitlement from fans for these Pokémon to continue being usable in Sword and Shield as well as future games, Pokémon Bank is a paid-for service that encourages the cross-title support for 99% of all Pokémon. For these fans to be told that Pokémon Bank would be compatible with Home but only to a certain degree, is like being told that you can only keep half of your childhood toys when your family moves home. Patrons of Pokémon Bank shouldn’t be expected to pay for a subscription-model service that only offers limited support for the next game in the series, a bit like paying for a Netflix that doesn’t add titles to its catalogue.

When communicating such a prominent predicament, it’s important to be as clear and transparent as possible but if anything Masuda’s comments muddy the water and are part of the reason why some people choose not to believe the balancing or graphical rationales. I believe that the news broken by Masuda and Omori was done so both prematurely and without any proper planning. Nintendo and The Pokémon Company are often fairly tight-lipped when it comes to articulating features of a game; limiting such announcements to formal press releases and Directs. These comments are clear evidence that, even supposing the best of intentions, miscommunication can be a PR disaster. No matter how many Pokémon are to be culled from Sword and Shield, The Pokémon Company owe it to their fans to address, at the very least, the objective issue surrounding Pokémon Bank’s subscription model and its compatibility with Pokémon Home.
Assumptions have been made from both sides of the argument. Heck, I’ve made some here. Without concrete evidence to back anything up each side will continue to speculate and draw their own conclusions as to how the saga will end. For now, here are the facts: Pokémon Sword and Shield will be released Worldwide on November 15th, both games will feature new and returning Pokémon, and eager fans will buy both games at launch.
It’s been an embarrassing few days for the community, but now it’s time to fight for the answers that really matter and embrace this series’ evolution from an entirely different perspective; one of optimism and opportunity, not anger and frustration.

Are you disappointed that the entire Pokédex won't be returning for Sword & Shield? Do you agree that it's time to embrace and explore fresh opportunities? Feel free to share your thoughts below.
Comments 350
This hottake ain't it chief...
I don't even need to read this article to know that this will benefit absolutely no one whatsoever.
I used to think this was a reputable news site. Guess I was wrong.
I can't believe Nintendo Life could defend GF's incompetency this much. You apologists are the reason this kind of horrible decisions are seen as an okay thing to do.
>Don't read article
>U WRONG FAM
It's stupid. If you can't include all 800+ Pokemon, don't keep churning out new games and new Pokemon for a quick and easy profit.
This is a problem of their making. As the article says, the slogan of the series is 'Gotta catch 'em all'. If you can't actually catch them all, it kind of makes them look pathetic, especially after their much vaunted Pokemon Bank, Pokemon Home (or 'Pokemon House Arrest' as it may now be renamed), and goodness knows what else.
Time should have gone on a national pokedex rather than the gimmicky nonsense of Dynamax.
As for balancing no entry in the series has achieved this.
I read this article, most of these points can be resolved by seperating into National and Regional playlists.
This image here shows why culling Pokemon isn’t a benefit to anyone.
Well, at least i can use Sawk and Lucario for my Pokemon team. 😁
Everybody hating in the comments, you try making a game in the scale of the Pokémon community where they expect a new Pokémon game for the switch now. Now, I'm not saying it was the best option but they can't keep delaying it to add all the 1000+ Pokémon as people would get mad. Personally, I would be fine if they didn't add Dynamax and delayed it but would the community be fine with it? I don't know, I'm not a game developer but this is my reasoning for it.
I play Pokemon games solely by myself without trading or fighting with others. So unbalance has never been a problem for me.
He had to put crying Sobble in the article. Now you’ve ruined my day...(Crying Sobble is actually really sad)
Finally! I've waited for NintendoLife to openly defend this awful decision. You still have a chance to redeem yourselves by making a soapbox article presenting the opposite view, don't waste that chance.
Disappointed in with no national dex, terrible reused animations, poor pop in draw distance, disconnected low res scenery are among other things that really show that Gamefreak are being incompetent to a larger audience that's finally taken notice.
They don't care since it will sell anyway and there are a line of people who are ready to defend any poor decision they make.
Okay, I respect your opinion, and this is a well written article. However, I would like to offer some counterpoints:
>"For years, the same animation of Wingull swaying from side to side has been recreated but when it comes to Sword and Shield this suddenly becomes indicative of lazy development."
It is now being called lazy because it has been the same for years.
>"it’s those that have embraced innovation that have continued to perform well"
>"Sun and Moon were the first games to really break from the mould of ‘catch, train, battle, gym, repeat’"
Except, they didn't really innovate. The formula was still the same, they just renamed the gym battles.
Also, they are literally just using the 3DS Models for the old Pokemon. They were built to last into the HD generation. That's why people were able to find HD models in the 3DS games. They only have to create the new ones. As for the animations; the 3DS Pokemon games have always had pretty bad battle animations for the most part. Some are nice, yes, but most are just blegh.
GameFreak is sitting on the most lucrative franchise OF ALL TIME. NOTHING MAKES MORE MONEY THAN POKEMON! They HAVE the ressources they need to make a true, next generation Pokemon game. But they don't care. Because they don't need to. Because kids will buy it anyway. GameFreak does not deserve the franchise anymore. Let someone else handle it Monolith, Retro, idc. Just not GameFreak.
Sincerely,
a fan since generation one.
@Kuchenjaeger Oh, and as for the whole "balance" argument:
Just split it in two, like mentioned in the article. Done. Problem solved.
People are complaining without reading the article? This is the kind of narrow-mindedness that will never help Pokémon to become a better game. I disagree with the 'purge', but I think that the writer made some good points and it should be interesting to see them in action.
@Xelha True, but do you think Game Freak thinks this?
If balance is the issue, why not just limit competitive play to use pokemon naturally obtainable in the game, but still make it possible to transfer other pokemon and use them in non-competitive. Not everyone cares about the competitive scene, some just want to have battles against friends using their favourite Pokémon, in which situations it's sometimes fun having a slightly overpowered Pokémon.
And besides, they're clearly reusing the same Pokémon models that they've been using since 6th gen, can't imagine it'd be that hard to just continue reusing them
This guy also done a better Wingull animation.
https://old.reddit.com/r/pokemon/comments/c28top/i_fixed_the_wingull_animation_from_scratch_hope/
This was inevitable. There will be at least 1000 Pokémon going forward. There 100% had to be a time they simply couldn't fit all of them in one game.
@Franklin
I asked this several times, never got an answer: Did Gamefreak ever stated, that "Gotta catch 'em all" does mean, catch every Pokemon from every Pokemon game in every Pokemon game for all eternity?
@memoryman3 Thank you for sharing that.
“Why no National Dex?” It’s not the end of the world. GameFreak can update their game. Since this is coming from 3DS to Switch(Let’s Go did almost nothing) they can take full advantage over the Switch. And plus, did Splatoon 1 have ranked battles day one? No. Did they add it? Yes. So they can add this after they finish the main game. You can only fit so much stuff into a cartridge.
So many angry children in these comments, I’d be surprised if any of you are even older than pokemon games. Lol
There have been far too many pokemon for a long time now. I have actually lost interest over the years due to that. I have been saying they should cut it down to a manageable number. glad they are finally taking the steps to do so.
@MrBlacky
What odd criteria.
Imagine if Sonic started walking at a glacial pace. Granted the makers never said that he would always go fast, but it would look rather stupid.
@TheHumbleFellow before passing judgment please read the article first.
@konbinilife I agree. If they keep adding new pokemon then I fear what the games would look like in the next 10 years and beyond.
i mean it is ok not to allow them to appear in rhe game but why not even allowing transfer. if equilibrium is the problem they can just ban some from turnament.
finally why do they release games so quickly if they took twice the time to develop them how good would they be ...
Personally, I'm not bothered about there not being all the Pokémon in the game, but I'm glad this is helping people to finally realise how lazy Game Freak is. The animations have been terrible for years now, and Let's Go is just unacceptable on effectively a home console that can run Breath of the Wild, and from a franchise which is one of the most profitable brands in all of media.
I think they should have continued until 1000 Pokemon, made a definitive 3D experience, and just ended it.
We accept that book series and movie series end, but for some reason not with games.
I'm more surprised about how completely patronizing the tone of this opinion piece was! It's not rare to see pieces that condescend to their readership, but to climb nearly to the top of that rhetorical sore...nicely done, James!
@Franklin
And Sonic is running fast in every game and also, if you buy a Pokemon game, the goal is to catch every Pokemon in that game (Gotta catch 'em all).
I'm honestly super curious about the balance, there are pkmn that didn't get any changes since red and blue (and I fear that's the case to all pkmn actually) and some are even so weak that are unusuable in the game's story, let alone the competitive field XD
If they really worked hard to change things I'm personally all in to accept the limited pokedex (even if I'm biased by not having transfered any mon in the last gen), but the changes needs to be there.
If I'll catch a Pokemon (new or old) just to find out that no matter how much I like it, I can't use it for a lack of stats, moves, ability or even all of the above then I'll definitly join the outcry~
@MrBlacky
So by your criteria the slogan should be:
'Gotta catch 'em all in this particular entry'
rather than
'catch every Pokemon from every Pokemon game in every Pokemon game for all eternity'
Because from what you've said, it needs to be spelled out precisely in order for us to actually take it seriously.
Wait, why wouldn’t Pokemon Home be compatible with every pokemon from pokemon bank?
It’ll be compatible with every pokemon from pokemon go.
That’s literally just about every pokemon from gens 1-4 (save a couple like Rotom).
5’s coming to Go soon, and it’s too soon to drop 6-7.
They might not all be in sword and shield, but I see no reason that extends to pokemon home.
Though I guess your Go pokemon would obviously be in a separate category.
I'm all for a cull. 1000+ pokemon is just way too many. Out with the old and in with new I say.
Too many pokemon just makes the game too compex. Gamefreak are on the right track in my opinion.
How does this benefit everyone? I never have, and never will, care about Competitive Pokemon. I don't care about the TGC so neither of these "positives" are positives to me. Sure, there are some new animations but they are hardly good enough to justify culling a significant proportion of the Pokedex.
Wingull doesn't flap its wings often but, in game, it literally doesn't have a turning animation. It's flying not levitating so it can't just turn 180 degrees without any body movement.
The game looks fine graphically, not spectacular by any means. Some textures aren't great but you find that in most games. The graphics of the game are nothing to write home about.
The Pokemon I care about are the ones I've have since Emerald, Diamond, Heart Gold, etc. as well as the shiny collection I've amassed since XY. Sure, I'll make a new team for the main story and I will grow fond for the members but, in the Post Game, I want to mix and match from my new ones and old ones.
If you guys want a good reason why Game Freak made this decision, then here's a post by game developer who has possible explanation why
https://askagamedev.tumblr.com/post/185566109937/what-do-you-think-was-the-most-likely-reason-that/amp?__twitter_impression=true
What will GF's excuse be in the next set of games when the missing Pokemon are added and the current batch is missing? They have to realize that in the future they will have all the models 'updated' will they just come out with they don't want to add them.
I know this article isn't Nintendo Life's opinion but the article must be made just to course uproar, it's well known most of the Pokemon community don't agree with GF's choice.
I understand how it may help things such as to cause changes to the competitive scene, but that doesn't mean I agree with it.
Yes, I will buy the games and I am sure I will enjoy them but I don't want to complete the living dex in pokemon home, I want to have them in the actual game.
No, just no.
And yes, I read the entire article.
Pokémon generates incredible amounts of money. Plus the models of old Pokémon look pretty much the same here as the HD versions of 3DS models (which can be seen with proper emulation).
Giving us far less options is just bad. You can't excuse it. Maybe if it was a studio with smaller revenue and/or if they really had to recreate the models and animations from scratch. But no.
Does every fighting game include every fighter from every previous game? Aside from Smash Ultimate, no. And what made that game so special is because it’s so unprecedented. Did Monster Hunter World have every monster ever created in the entire series? It had a couple dozen, out of HUNDREDS. Even Generations Ultimate, a game which really didn’t push graphical boundaries, only had a portion of all monsters to date.
And that’s only a matter of a few hundred monsters.
We’re nearing a THOUSAND Pokémon. There comes a point where it just isn’t feasible, without sacrificing significant development time that could’ve made the game better. If people can’t understand that then they’re not worth having a discussion with, because they only see through the shortsighted lens of their own demands, no matter how unreasonable.
Besides which, having that many Pokémon in a game is just ridiculous. It’s hard enough keeping track of elements and weaknesses with a hundred Pokémon. But a thousand? Holy crap. Pokémon fanbase, ladies and gentlemen. Constant controversy over everything. Let’s Go, now Sword and Shield. It’s always something. These people are never happy.
If they add them in post launch, awesome. But I’m not expecting it. Nor do I have a problem with a game that offers half a thousand Pokémon instead of a thousand.
@Nomad
You know what ? From Hundreds of Pokemons, only some of them i used them oftenly or i like.
I don't really care with weird ugly looking Pokemons in the past generations since i didn't really want to catch them all.
Screw competitive Pokemon. If it means they have to do more work with banning Pokémon during competitions, so the average player is happy they have access to everyone then I’m all for it.
I’m sure the comments will be filled with apologists. I wouldn’t expect anything less from fanboys.
@LetsGoSwitch then hire more people and cull out the gimmicks that no one cares about.
I'll be upfront now. I don't normally pre-order games. But I have pre-ordered Pokémon games and did pre-order Pokémon Sword once it's release date was confirmed. After some serious thought, I did cancel it and have decided, for really the first time in since playing this series to wait for a new Gen to be released and see how the games shake out
I guess on an intellectual level, I understand the points being made. I can see why 1000+ Pokémon (including various forms) can seem daunting to those who casually play the series and unfair to those who play competitively. But I guess thinking about this selfishly, what about those of us who just like catching and collecting Pokémon and don't necessarily care for the competitive scene?
And yes, maybe we should wait and see if an update or two adds the rest of the Pokédex later. The capability is certainly there. But what if it never happens and your favorite Pokémon are just stuck languishing in Pokémon Bank or Home for two years or more? I can already envision this not being a pleasant scenario. Especially if a year or two after Sword and Shield, GF decides to release an Ultra version /third game or a pair of remakes that possibly only uses the other half of Pokémon not included in Sword and Shield. As someone who has eventually purchased every mainline title in the series, something like this would rub me the wrong way.
I guess ultimately, I think the lack of clarity and transparency (which the article does point out) is the bigger issue. This should have been a bit information included in the Pokémon press conference along with the reveal of Home and made pretty clear
@JaxonH
'Gotta fight 'em all' and 'Gotta hunt 'em all' were really misleading slogans.
@Xelha Yeah I have to admit most companies these days just want a profit. That's why I like Nintendo (except with the Wii U)
@Franklin
Pretty sure “catch em all” refers to all the Pokémon in the game. In fact that seems obvious. The goal...of the game... is to catch... all the Pokémon... in the game.
And if not, then the slogan needs to get flushed down the toilet because it’s outdated. You aren’t going to catch them all, every single one ever created ,when there’s 10,000 Pokémon or 50,000 Pokémon. A line has to be drawn somewhere. I’m surprised they made it as far as they did before drawing that line to be perfectly honest
@TheHumbleFellow if you'd read the article though you would have seen them taking Masuda to task for the communication and PR nightmare Game Freak unleashed in that announcement and GF's own utter lack of planning and foresight on how to manage the whole situation when, as the article state, Masuda's own informations about Home are so vague they only further served to muddy the waters so to speak.
Admittedly my hype for Pokemon SwSh lessened when I heard that not all Pokemon will be in this game. If they put some more time into the game they could keep all of them. But I do see that there is a point where there are just too many to manage. I am still looking forward to this game as it will still have around 400-500 Pokemon at least (people have roughly calculated) and has some cool new stuff they are trying, like the wild area. As someone who has dabbled in the competitive scene I can see the point on balancing. I only hope they actually work at making it more balanced. My fear is that they didn't actually work on balancing like they said and it will just be Landorus-T equivalents in every second online battle Hopefully they actually fulfil their excuses for not including a national dex with some good animations, story, characters, world, new pokemon designs and balanced competitive gameplay. Cuz I gotta say, the Galar region, new Pokemon and characters we've seen so far actually do look well done.
@JaxonH
That's obviously not true from very early on. Mew wasn't in the game (Red and Blue) itself.
It's quite clearly a definitive statement.
@UmbreonsPapa i'm more neutral about the "loss" of pokemons as I've only returned to the series after almost a decade but the lack of communication and the vagueness of what we DID get iitt's definitely something I can understand how infuriating it might be for veterans.
For some reason I was more hyped for Let's Go.
Is absol going to be in this game?
I'm actually quite glad iv used pretty much the same party for the last 15 years be nice chance to mix it up
Something is off here. This article looks to be written by a regular user and his account was created about a week before the Sw&Sh reveal in Feb. I suspect PR firm shenanigans. NL this is not ok. Take this garbage article down.
@Nomad i agree its too many! Except i say out with the new, keep the old. Thats only because i started playing with the first 150. I agree with other complaints though. Mainly that the pokemon company has ridiculous amounts of money but wont invest the time and resources to really make an immersive game with excellent models and animation etc.
I didn't know Pravda wrote Nintendo articles.
@memoryman3 The first point of your pic is already wrong. They are not the same model at all. You can't make a SD model turn into a HD model just by upscaling it. The edge of the polygons will show during animations. No studio can create thousands of different monsters models just for one game.
Like the cull is going to even come close to touching any Pokémon that are used in the meta/were used in recent tournaments. And it's not like Gamefreak/TPC has to think about balancing nearly 1,000 critters (e.g. obviously a same-leveled Goldeen without Horn Drill isn't going to beat a Darkrai in any form of 'nature' or in a game battle).
But let's get real here:
With everyone arguing about which designs are good and bad, having a cull is the real and only benefit from this.
Casual players are looking at an enticing game between Open Wilds/camera and more interactivity with other players.
Veteran players see some pain points here and there but there's a chance that the competitive scene may go from Melee-cringe to Ultimate's balance. Maybe. For all of these other cuts, I would certainly hope that Gamefreak/TPC is pouring a ton of work and energy into making more Pokémon viable so that we don't see boring, redundant tournament teams.
Is that worth the nearly doubling of the retail price? Depends upon the labor of modeling the world and debugging the 'Mons models. Absent that data that we'll never get, the trade-offs downward aren't exactly inspiring confidence in the price point.
@Kuchenjaeger Gamefreak owns just as much of Pokemon as Nintendo does. They are the ones who invented it, so I don't think anyone else will make the games.
Edit: also its 2019. Why are there 2 copies of each game still coming out?
I am still disappointed with there being no national dex. I have seen people saying they are fine with it but I can see these people when the game(s) gets released only to find out that many of their favourite pokemon not get added and then begin to complain.
That is the reason I don't like this choice. If Game Freak said "There won't be a national dex at launch as we want people to play with the new and returning pokemon for this region for a while" then I would be ok with it and release all pokemon later on (like around February) through home.
But if they don't get added at all then I say this is going to be my last pokemon game (I already had it paid off and if I didn't do this before this news then I so would have waited to see if more get added) as future pokemon games are going to have this pick and mix way of choosing them.
Also casuals not caring about this may not be entirely true. What if someone caught their first shiny back in gen 3 have have transferred them through each generation when they reach post game and use them only to find out that said pokemon didn't make a cut. That will put a massive black stain on a game that they enjoy.
I have a crobat that is shiny which I caught in Heart gold but to me that crobat is very special to me as back in gold my first shiny was a goldbat and then in heart gold my first shiny I caught early in the game was a zubat so she is extremely special to me as she been through all my post games from gen 4 - 7. If the zubat line doesn't get added (I know they will be) it would break my heart and I see my experience reflected onto many others who may have even gotten theirs in gen 3.
My opinion is pretty much the same as it was in previous articles... This decision could be a big problem for Pokemon. As I said before, Gen 3 did this and it created plenty of outrage until FRLG and Emerald came out. The only way Gamefreak can make this work is if they include any missing Pokemon in future installments as they did with Gen 3.
Of course I've known this was coming for a long time. You keep adding 100+ Pokemon per game and eventually you'll run out of room to keep adding more. From a development POV, it makes sense. It reduces the time they need to spend on each Pokemon. Pokemon Revolution was already showing signs of this with many older gen Pokemon having really lazy animations.
I think it's less that people want to "catch 'em all" and more like people are scared their favorite Pokemon won't be included, which is reasonable concern. If they only cut Pokemon like Dunsparce and such I don't think there'd be nearly as much backlash, but we know this is not likely to be the case. How many Pokemon are culled will really make or break the game. My biggest concern is that this is going to be a Gen 3 situation where they cut out almost every older Pokemon and focus on the newer ones. I mean, what's the point of all the fancy graphics and new animations if your favorite Pokemon aren't even there? That's the point, you want to see your favorites in glorious 3D. That concept was enough to fuel an entire line of games on N64 and GC. If even one favorite is cut, that fan may not buy the game.
As for me, I may still buy the game. I'm not entirely new to this situation, considering most Monster Rancher games are also missing monsters. If the wild area is significant enough, I'll probably still get it.
it's a real crappy situation and I'm sad to see it happen. This would be a real good chance for some of the defunct monster raising games like Jade Cocoon, Dragon Quest Monsters, and Monster Rancher to rise up.
Stop excusing Gamefreak simply being lazy. If they're culling numbers to improve animations, they have absolutely nothing to back that notion up because they're still recycling everything from previous games.
@Greator You'll see the piece is actually fairly balanced. In an ideal world, I'd have all the 'mons, have it perfectly balanced and Home would be free!
Because obviously fans who just play the games know more about the development of a game than the actual developers.
This is just another example of a perceived entitlement from fans (see also: game of thrones) and it’s getting old, fast.
There is a lot about the game we just do not know yet. Maybe there are 200+ Pokemon in the Pokédex? Maybe they went to great lengths to add some actual character and personality to the Pokemon instead of the lifeless character models from PLG which were just ripped straight Pokemon Go?
It is also called ‘gotta catch ‘em all’ not ‘gotta unbalance ‘em all’. Not having 1000 creatures in a region to catch is actually very realistic.
I understand their reason for dismantling the National Pokédex but I hope someday they'd make another game in which all Pokémon can be in it because that's what's the greatest thing about it.
@TuxDC Haha, great work detective! I'm not a full-time employee of NL.
People want from Game Freak, an only handheld game developer, their first hd Pokémon mainline game with their first open world, with 1000 Pokémon with each animations for in Amie, overworld, battles for every unique move.
Yeah that doesn't sound wrong at all...
To me, the overworld looks great. I love the artstyle. There is nothing wrong with the animations, although there are some bad apples. I've seen no pop-in that's worse than Oddysey or Breath of the Wild.
I completely don't like it that not all Pokémon are in, although a bit understanding.
But I myself don't play to get all mons, I play for the experience and meeting old and new Pokémon on the way.
So I'll be buying.
@JaxonH I'm glad we see eye-to-eye!
I am wonder how many people actually complete the National pokedex anyway. I’m willing to bet it is less than we think.
Ever since that Treehouse, there hasn’t been one day when I didn’t think about, however brief, being unable to transfer any Pokémon I wanted into Sword and Shield, Pokemon’s first proper console game. As an OG Blue and Red player, that news was (and still is) extremely disappointing. My hype level went from an 11 to about a 2.
I hope that Game Freak not only notices but actually considers this massive backlash. I, too, hope they learn from it and make the necessary changes to make it right.
The fans, from casual to veteran players, got them to where they are. So, to me, GF’s decisions from here onwards are going to be telling of how much they respect the community that made them into a multi-billion-dollar brand.
A bit to soon to tell right? I mean ... the game is still in development.
@Franklin The gotta catch em all slogan has been completely irrelevant over the past couple decades of pokemon games. Instead of having fun actually catching the pokemon, players are forced to trade over their pokemon which is a slow and boring process. The new slogan should be gotta "sit around while i wait for my pokemon the transfer" em all. If anything GF should put all the pokemon in the wild area so you can actually catch them.
Bleh, last time I'm opening this website. Good riddance.
@Xelha your not looking at the big picture think of it as a chance to start over they are doing what they did before with gen 1&2 were you couldnt bring them over to gen 3
I have never played Pokemon games to catch them all, and to be honest I haven't enjoyed a Pokemon game since SoulSilver. This one looks like a return to forn though, so for the casual fan like me, this news doesn't bug me at all. I play them for the adventure. Collecting Pokemon doesn't keep me around for very long.
@Anti-Matter But the thing is, not everyone will like the same Pokémon as you. You may like the cute or pretty ones, but I prefer the ugly and weird-looking ones. And that’s okay.
But you know what’s great? That we are given the option to play with any and all Pokémon, however cute or ugly or strange, should we have PokeTransfer and/or PokeBank.
The point is, we have less options in the pool now. Less diversity. And that’s a negative from the consumer point of view.
While it would be great to have them all in there I don’t mind this decision. I love Pokemon and keep up to date on them all the time but I’d be lying if I said there wasn’t a good bunch that I haven’t completely forgotten about.
@TheHumbleFellow Thanks for reading? I guess not.
1) This will not benefit "everyone". There are definitely going to be people whose favorite(s) are dropped from the game's existence. And who's making the decisions on what to cut and under which criteria?
2) This will do nothing to "add variety" to the competitive scene. The game's nature as a turn-based, limited-move, dog fight means there will always be the optimal monsters with the optimal movesets. Or are you suggesting that GameFreak mess with stats, movesets, and other "balance" factors adter the game's release?
3) The realest reason for cutting out pokemon is to cut out needed development time and work. How much is unknown, and how long we'd have to wait for a game with all the things is similar.
4) What hasn't been mentioned, and I think is a missed opportunity if they don't do, is that there needs to be some form of gatekeeping around pokemon that end up in the game from this raid thing. If you can catch pokemon from the raids, then their announcements, reveals, and incentive to get them can be pretty motivating to engage with the mechanic if there is no other way to get them. But if you can transfer everything, why would I care about raiding to catch a sneasel when I've already transferred four of them and can breed as many as I want?
@JaxonH
The Pokemon fanbase would be happy if Game Freak lived up to expectations, which aren't that demanding. We want a game that is up there with the top Nintendo franchises in quality, animations, gameplay and innovation. You say adding all 1000 Pokemon would use up a lot of development time. The problem with this is that we aren't seeing how that development time has been put to use in Sword and Shield. Granted, the game isn't put yet, but the models are the same as those in Sun and Moon, animations are the same or barely upgraded, the new gimmick is Pokemon getting big and the open area doesn't seem as interesting as, say, Xenoblade Chronicles 2. These points only make it seem like GF isn't cutting Pokemon to increase quality or because they don't have time, but because they can't bother to actually introduce all mons. And when we're talking about the biggest franchise in the world, this is unacceptable.
I wouldn't say that there really is a "benefit" necessarily aside from hopefully helping Gamefreak put more focus on other things.
But from my perspective the lack of national Pokedex is completely irrelevant to how I play Pokemon, I haven't transferred Pokemon between gens since like Gen 3 to 4.
@Franz Very well-said. Anyone with a taste in consumerism can see it is a smart point to allow the transfer of Pokemon whose designs may have been the reason a particular generation of players joined in a certain generation. Look at the recent surveys for "What are you most looking forward to in SwSh?" 60% if not more of people will undoubtedly say the new Pokemon.
I personally think those that say "It is unreasonable" do have a point, I'm not against debating that issue. However, anyone that says they are unwilling to discuss these things with "entitled players" have little to no perception on the love Pokemon's fanbase has for their cherished Pokemon and are numb to market desires in an overly vocal society. Just read the comments if you need to dip into the consumer's mind, even if some responses may be a bit dramatic.
Nothing against the article and its defenders, but I am unsure how the opposing viewpoint of "All Pokemon are here" would be a fail in any way outside of possible balance (which has been proven time and time again that Gamefreak doesn't pay much attention to, look at any Tournament Pokemon % of usage). I love my Alolan Raticate and Dragalge, but I as well as a large portion of the community know that it is unrealistic to pull those Pokemon in tournament play. We want them for the adventure. A "rebalance" probably won't let my Raticate take down a Blastoise or a Mewtwo.
I would like to have a game where the devs don't have to bust their butts and lose hours of sleep bringing all Pokemon over. However, this game is pivotal for Pokemon's future. I would love to see a good argument for how people will respond when it's confirmed people will no longer see Alolan Raichu, MegaCharizard and legendaries from Gen 4. It's really the games after Sword and Shield that may be hit the hardest by people who want all the Pokemon but experience this upcoming adventure without 4 of their favorite lines of Pokemon to share it with.
As someone that does like good points, I have to admit we should definitely wait for facts. For all we know only a few lines of Pokemon won't make it and all others will, who knows?
@Franz
I prefer Water / Ice / Blue color Pokemons.
Sawk and Lucario are my best looking Fighting Pokemons for me.
We don't know yet how many Pokemons will be in Sword / Shield.
I keep my eyes on upcoming information from GameFreaks.
They had the chance to reboot this franchise with the Switch game. But no, let's keep adding more new Pokemon but don't let the trainers play with their old Pokemon because reasons.
I'm not even mad at the graphics (that could've been better), but they decided to hide all their questionable decisions behind that lame excuse, and the graphics are not so far from the 3DS games. Yeah, they're more pretty, but don't tell me GameFreak/TPC don't have the money to really make their games shine.
Personally, I'm really disappointed with the direction this games are taking so I don't think I'll play them for the time being. There will be better options in the future to satisfy my monster collecting needs, like Yo-kai Watch (I hope) and SMTV. And if everything goes wrong, then I still can play the older Pokemon games.
I think the people trashing this article are kinda missing the point. I feel the people complaining about the National Dex just have no idea about the realities of modern game development or how franchises work in general. Sure all the models are already high resolution but then there is the matter of programming every single one of those models on top of the fact that Sword and Shield probably uses a whole new engine and code base. This was mainly why you could not transfer Pokemon from Gen II to Gen III mainly due to differences in maximum IV Values.
Removing stuff such as Mega Evolutions and Z Moves does in fact serve to benefit newcomers because it means new players do not have to worry about being overwhelmed by all these extra mechanics. Also balance was of course a factor as well
I don't get why people keep screaming they should just delay the game when the reality is they can't afford a delay because Sword and Shield is no doubt expected to coincide with so many other things including the new TGC line, movies, toylines and merchandise , and of course the new anime season. This is on top of the fact that Nintendo no doubt is riding heavily on this game for the 2019 Holiday season. If the game is delayed not only will the shareholders be upset but also it will leave a gaping hole in the Switches holiday lineup.
When you consider how many Pokemon there are at this point its plainly obvious why they largely dropped the gotta catch em all tagline long ago.
If you really think Game Freak is just swimming in money from the sales of Pokemon itself then your sadly mistaken as the majority of profits from the sales of the games don't go to Game Freak they go to Nintendo and the Pokemon Company
Man the amount of whining here is INSANE " WahWah I didn't read the article but it's wrong!!111" "Bad journalism cuz it ain't parroting my opinion!"
At least read the damn article and comment on it with some arguments.
@ArthasIV https://wolfgabe.tumblr.com/post/185686100691/okay-i-get-it-people-are-upset-about-the-national I actually explained many of the things mentioned in this article here
The game looks like hot garbage. I've never been so disappointed to be a Pokemon fan.
>One of the biggest, best selling IP's on the market
>Finally making a debut on a home console
"It would be too hard to make 1000+ mons"
Yeah...no...sorry. For the money this titanic franchise has pulled in, this statement is just utterly ridiculous.
It would be a bit like a Marvel movie going "Yeah, no special effects this time. They take so long to make and they're super pricey".
If you create a franchise entirely centered around an ever growing pool of critters, be prepared to do the legwork for it OR do a hard reboot.
Tell everyone: "This has no old mons, this has nothing to do with anything before it, we're starting over fresh".
This mishmash was bound to raise some eyebrows.
Are we still seriously whining about the Pokédex cut?
For the love of god people this isn’t the last Pokémon game on the switch. You asked for open world gen 8 for 2019, and here it is. Have you ever made a game before? A switch game? An open world switch game? Stop whining about the Pokédex cut!!!
How cutting down Nintendolife's staff will benefit everyone
So much toxicity in these comments. Look, if you aren’t happy with the changes that the developers made regarding the national dex, then don’t buy it, don’t support it. It’s as simple as that. It’s embarrassing to see that people are this mad over a change like this. Do any of know how much time it takes to develop a game like this, especially with a deadline that they have? If the devs don’t want to kill themselves just to fit in every Pokémon in the game, then I’m ok with that (Japanese literally work themselves to death, it’s a real thing) This article makes perfectly great points as to why a full national dex would be a mess. And if you can’t see that then I don’t know what to tell you. I fully support their decision and it makes complete sense.
@RainbowGazelle I'm in the same boat. I don't mind the fact that not all of them are available. Let's be honest, that wouldn't be possible at some point anyway considering how many there are.
However, this would've been the right time to improve other aspects of the game. Notably the lazy animations, lack of interaction between Pokemon, and with their environment, etc. We're seeing none of that. And that's quite disappointing IMO. Especially considering that these games make a ton of money anyway, without being innovative at all. It's easily one of the most profitable IPs out there. If there's one company that can afford the extra time and money spend polishing the games, it's the companies behind the Pokemon franchise.
Sakurai works his butt off to make a switch game with only 80 characters in it, and here we are complaining that our open world, brand new, finally the Pokémon game everyone wanted on the switch, doesn’t have 1000 Pokémon in it. Did you miss the part about the wild area? And how this is a brand new region with about 200 new Pokémon? Again I say, have you ever made a video game?
@drewber2635 yes exactly. Fans would also probably be mad if the game were delayed, or if they hadn’t announced it at all because it ‘wasn’t’ ready yet.
@Einherjar "If you create a franchise entirely centered around an ever growing pool of critters, be prepared to do the legwork for it OR do a hard reboot." - This right here is the most crucial issue, as far as I am concerned. Pokemon has grown so big thanks to introducing a hefty number of new creatures every few years and bringing them back for every game. You cannot get rid of your franchise's most defining aspect, and not offer a big enough feature to compensate, without people getting upset about it. The way this was communicated to the public (and attempted to be excused) just made a bad situation worse.
If anything, this decision highlights the problem with Pokemon being an annual game release franchise. 1 game that's supported for multiple years with expansions would be better.
I wouldn’t mind if the main games took the TCG approach - meaning that no games has all 800+ Pokémon, but instead they shifted the available Pokémon from game to game to incentivize players to try out new Pokémon combinations in their teams instead of sticking to their old true and tried, while developing the continuation of the Stadium series - they could take far longer with that one, make all the balance adjustments they want and leave that title as the core battling game (obviously compatible with Pokémon Home).
@Tirza You like me? Thanks!
I'll give the guy credit .....he tried ...not an easy opinion to defend.
Balance was definitely not a factor in this decision. Pokemon has never put time or effort into balance. And even if they did have a sudden change of heart, there's SO much that can be done - giving Pokemon more moves, stat buffs, etc. to make more Pokemon relevant. Removing Pokemon is the last possible thing you would think of for this. There's also so many Pokemon that are SO CLOSE to being useful in their own unique way but are crippled by weird things like not having the right moves or not the right stat distribution. Or you could just have a tier system like Smogon so tons more Pokemon would be viable.
"Whilst the majority of Pokémon are eligible in competitive battles, some are far too overpowered to be playable. Even when removing banned Pokémon from the equation it’s clear that some tournament-legal ‘mons are more gifted than others."
If only it was possible to make some sort of Tier system based on usage instead of banning X amount of Legendaries & Mythics. HMMMMM...
@Preposterous Ayup, exactly my point. And i think the fact that this decision happened to the main series first ever entry on a home console added further insult to injury.
They should have had the Pokeballs to call it a hard reboot, throw all old mons out and start with a fresh batch of ~100 critters on consoles.
Not entirely controversy proof, but at least the excuses wouldn't have been so ridiculous.
@WoolooSweater That wasn't the case with Animal Crossing. That game got praise for its delay because they were upfront about it and said staff would need the time.
They also mentioned a little while before the games were known as SWSH that it "might" be ready for 2019, but "might" be 2020. Make no mistake, this is the result of Nintendo pushing for a rushed holiday release.
As someone not deeply invested in Pokemon at all (though I was there right at the beginning ^^) this has been a rather enlightening to be honest. I mean, folks are keen to pay lip service to all kinds of things (crunch is bad, innovation matters, it's not a numbers game, quality offer quantity and so on and so forth), but when it comes right down to it ... things - at least for particular subset of people - turn out very, very differently.
I for one am curious to see where they are going with this game. Haven't been interested in Pokemon game in over a decade (although I gave X&Y a shot for a bit), and while I can't say this has m stoked, I will at least bother with reading a review or two once it drops. I like the idea of that open-wild area and the raids at the very least. It seems to tread some new('ish) ground, which makes sense given it's move to "home" console, and that is something. Maybe it'll even have a story and character worth caring about for once? I doubt it, but knows ... anyways, point being, all of this strikes me as much more relevant than whether this game features 100 or 1000 Pokemon, beloved classics or not. A mediocre game will never be truly uplifed by making it bigger ... while good game will only rarely be degraded by being smaller ...
But yeah, it sure is good to see people bearing their souls on what actually matters to them nowadays with this type of release, sad as it is imho.
Still don't care. Still gonna play it.
I would have been fine with the cut, but I was already spectacle of the game's quality since it was first announced. From a presentation standpoint, this is only a LITTLE better than playing Sun/Moon in HD on an emulator and a couple of patches.
I was already making fun of the animation and textures before the dex cut was even a thing.
The 'open world' situation is also taken out of proportion. The Wild Area is a neat idea, but from a progression, standpoint looks more like a glorified Hyrule Field in pre-BOTW Zela. Semi-open world at best.
Just throwing this in for comparison, but Yokai Watch 4 just released in Japan, it launched with only 109 monsters (compared to the 600+ in Yokai Watch 3) Some people did take issue with that, but the overall responses of the game are still between mix-to-positive. Why? Because the game greatly improves on the visuals and animation compared to the 3DS games, and also has an entirely new Action Battle System built from the ground up. What's more, Level-5 confirmed that they'll bring back Yokai in future updates.
Do we even know how many Pokémon are being removed? What if it’s just some legendaries and the mythicals? Like 50 Pokémon?
Yes I know it’s not gonna be 50.
But the point is we don’t know who’s being cut. And whoever’s being cut will appear in the next remake/gen, if at the expense of others being cut. GF wouldn’t do any of this if they didn’t know what they were doing. It’s not being delayed for a reason. Probably because after it’s released fans are gonna be clamoring for gen 9 or gen 4 remakes, and will want it in 2020. Guaranteed.
@LuckyErika Maximizing profits by minimizing investments is the goal of literally every company lol. Our socio-economic structure incentives this, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that that’s a factor. It’s not Gamefreaks fault that that’s how our economy works. And those kind of decisions are made by the bigwigs. They are the ones that put those laws down as to how much money and labor can be used. The bottom line is profit unfortunately. But there are more factors that go into this. I think one of the biggest ones is time, or lack of I should say. They are on a very strict schedule and while it would be great if they took more time to make a more fleshed out game, it won’t happen because time is money.
I personally don't like the idea of Dynamax, the wilds don't look that appealing to me either, and the UK inspired map doesn't look very big. Which concerns me for my interest in these games.
I can deal with non full dex as I'll just keep the living dex on bank and just get national in this and keep them separate.
Currently also no incentive to get Home due to this.
I wanted to avoid all spoilers and content of this game before the release as I went into Sun and Moon knowing every detail and it made me like it less.
I almost feel now I need to ingest all pre-release content of this game to make me actually want it. Currently I'm really not excited for it at all and if it was released next week I wouldn't be buying it.
@WoolooSweater If it's only a few Pokemon being cut, there would have been no reason to cut anything to begin with.
@Ralek85 No one is advocating for a crunch. That's a very warped perspective on the situation.
If they had to delay the game or were clear about a post-game update, people would be fine with it. And this is to take into consideration that a development team of a franchise worth more the MCU should have the budget to outsource this sort of thing.
I just wish people would stop overreacting over the littlest things
@Aaronnnnn Yeah it's like personally I don't think this is a big deal at all, in fact I honestly couldn't care less. I was never planning on transferring Pokemon nor do I use the transfer service, so this won't effect me at all. I have a feeling that most people are in the same position as me, this seems to be one of those issues that is only an issue for a small group of people.
I don’t think the money matter to GF, it’s about appealing to the fans with a more than 20 year old franchise frequently. A lot of people were pushing for this game back in 2017. If they hadn’t done USUM and Let’s go, then the Pokédex maybe wouldn’t have to have been cut. But people wanted games in 2017 and 2018, with Lets go needing the whole GF teams attention, shortening the dev time for gen 8. And with this trend of games every year, the fans expected a game in 2019. Which is what we have.
I'm not particularly bummed by the cut as I'm more of a casual Pokemon fan who doesnt intend to transfer any Pokemon.
But no, removing options and choice isn't a good thing.
Life for some of us can be rough. Did anybody expect it would be served for you on a silver platter so easily? It may be an imperfect product, but Ill still buy it for the experience and to fill the void in time. Also, a lot of people seem to overlook one thing... If SwSh don’t satisfy in the end, then have you really forgotten about the one thing people been hyping for that could satisfy better... the Sinnoh remake?
@memoryman3 yep, Bye nintendolife
I don't super care either way but the change does make me actually want to try to 100% the game pokedex again, which I haven't done since Silver. So possibly I will play it longer because of this.
@N1ntendodo I mean, in having more Pokemon ingame?
I’m devastated.
Well, not really, I’ve never played a Pokemon game.
@JaxonH "We’re nearing a THOUSAND Pokémon. There comes a point where it just isn’t feasible, without sacrificing significant development time that could’ve made the game better."
Exactly! I completely agree...
However, the problem is about perception. To us (based on E3 footage), it looks like Game Freak have barely used the time to make the game significantly better. It has a limited open-world aspect yes, but the animations of both Pokémon and NPCs seem to still be horribly limited, copied and pasted from 3DS, and give the impression that no effort was put into them whatsoever.
Masuda saying that they're using the extra time for better animation quality is perfectly reasonable, however it looks to be a lie so far. That's the main problem, I believe.
@LuckyErika You realize that early trailers as well as E3 demos are often are based off older/in progress builds right?
Yet they probably had all the time in to put in more gen 1 pokemon because we havent had enough of that. ¯(ツ)/¯
I worked hard to build the Pokemon companions I've made over the years. I know a lot of my favorites aren't "popular" Pokémon, but I love them all the same. And now there's the chance that some of them, like Bisharp, Cryogonal, Hitmonchan, Tentacruel, the fossils, Octillary, Ampharos, the other regional birds, Shiftry, Manectric, Floatzel, Lopunny, my shiny Drapion, Zebstrika, Eelektross, Florges, my ever-angry Toucannon, Salazzle, Araquanid, my Alolan 'Mon, and so many legends could be left behind and unable to explore a new world with me? I've gotta say, guys, that's pretty heartbreaking of a concept.
@LuckyErika I hear you, but riddle me this (again though, I'm more or less an outsider looking in here), how is this news? I mean - TO ME - Pokemon games looked like one gigantic low-res asset recycling undertaking for years on end now ... hell, to me it looks like even with this move to Switch plenty of previous assests will still be recycled without these saving showing up ... anywhere else.
I do not expect RayTracing or even SSR in a Switch Pokemon game, so I don't mind the way the handle water reflections, but the game just looks cheap. Not entirely without charm, and huge step up over the visual misery that the series was stuck in now for 30 years, but nothing compelling really, not from a technical standpoint and not from a artistic standpoint.
Again though, I honestly wonder how this is news that could inspire such outrage? Did I miss something? What gives? Also, they are evolving the gameplay loop a fair bit from what I can tell ... shouldn't that still count for more?
@Seacliff Well, I don't know about "no one". There are other big franchises who are or have recently become notrious for causing folks who churned them out physical or mental harm due to significant crunch, some of them also HUGE billion-dollar franchises (looking at you Take-Two..). More importantly though, the industry (and I dare say the whole of our industrialized world) most decidely does not operate on the notion of save-here-spend-there. The fact that they could afford to do all kinds of things, has zero bearing on the probabilty of such a thing happening. They are out to maximise profit like everyone else (and argueably they are doing an aweinspiring job at it to be frank).
IF someone is going to take the brunt of the burden, I think we all know that between worker and the bottom line ... workers loose out .. virtually always =( Still, beyond that, don't you feel there are dimensions of this particular game, that ought to matter alot more than the sheer quantity of Pokemon?
I don't want to compare apples to oranges, but I am among the first to cry foul (or "who cares!?" for that matter) if a dev comes out marketing his newest game as XYZ-times bigger than the last one ... who cares how big it is? Obviously were are not talking geography here, but I feel like instead of virtual acres, we are talking virtual creatures, but still ... given the particular focus of Pokemin vis-a-vis your run of the mill open-world game, I can see some parallels here. In other words, significant ressources are expended upon a dimension of the game that just ultimately does not impact the quality of it's gameplay - not at all or not in a proportionate measure to the ressources wasted.
That was my though at least, seeing this whole affair unfold on Treehouse ^^
@JayJ Thank you
@Ralek85 It's not so much about the quantity as much as that the fanbase recognizes that each Pokemon has its fans.
Millions of people only play Pokemon JUST for the Pokemon. They want to go on an adventure with their preferred team of Pokemon. If it was for deep battle mechanics I'm pretty sure everyone would have jump ship to SMT or Digimon over a decade ago.
@graysoncharles That is usually the kind of people you see trying to speak for everyone on the internet.
@Yorumi There's a possibility that porting the models over to the Switch is harder than using them on the 3DS, but that's all the more reason to make sure SwSh has all the Pokemon.
If they get it done now, either through a post-game update or otherwise... then they don't need to do it again. At least for the rest of the Switch's lifespan.
Why the sudden concern with balance? Pokemon has NEVER been balanced, going back to Gen 1. This seems like a flimsy excuse.
I love how many people are abandoning an entire website because ONE staffer wrote an opinion piece that opposes their personal opinion.
I don't see the issue here. Pokemon games have always had a limit to which pokemon will appear in the region, and you'd only unlock the National Dex when you were completely finished with the game.
This time, they're just making Pokemon Home the National Dex. Why is that something to get mad about?
@LN3000 The problem is that pokemon not in the region can't be put into the game at all through home or other means.
Big no.
You're actually stupid if you think there'll be decent balancing or animation changes because of this lazy garbage.
@Lockjaw2814 You know they won't keep their word anyway. They'll be back in the comments section on the next article.
@SilentHunter382 Ok? Then play the game with the 500 other pokemon that are there. Again, the games have always limited to a certain degree, which pokemon were able to come in.
This certainly is a controversial claim that will draw clicks and comments and ad revenue. Good interneting.
I can't say I agree: this is either neutral or bad depending on how you play the games. If you're someone who has caught and transfered Pokemon from previous games and has sentimental value attached to that, then you reasonably have come to expect that you can transfer Pokemon to new games because Nintendo has consistently provided that feature up to the present. If you enjoy catching them all, this is only a negative.
If you don't enjoy catching them all (and I don't), then this is neutral. I personally don't care that every Pokemon is in the game. I always make a new team every playthrough. If there are enough Pokemon to do that and the world is more interesting than the 3DS overworlds, I'll likely get the game and enjoy it anyway. I know Pokemon isn't actually a series with an interesting story or innovative features or particularly thoughtful level design, but it is an enjoyable and relaxing 20-30 hours. But not having the full Pokedex doesn't become a plus just because I won't catch em all.
@TheLightSpirit Nobody's taking those pokemon away from you though. You'll still have them wherever you've been training them, AND you'll be able to have them in Pokemon Home along with the new pokemon Sword/Shield.
What benefit is there for you to be able to bring the pokemon you've spent "months/years" into Pokemon Sword/Shield after you've already beaten the game, when all the same functionality is inevitably going to be in Pokemon Home?
@TheLightSpirit It's a videogame. It's not that important.
Aipom best be in this. I'll be quite furious if my boi got snapped.
@LN3000 "Again, the games have always limited to a certain degree, which pokemon were able to come in."
The thing that with other games not having the pokemon in them can still be added to the games through importing from older games or the pokemon bank but this time is not the case.
If someone pokemon they had from gen 3 and imported that pokemon into the new gens to use them for online play on the current games at the time. Now this time that pokemon may not be in the SwSh so they can't added into the game as that pokemon doesn't exist in the game at all.
First, I'm admit I'm not a Pokemon fan, but in a general sense, I do agree with this article. Sure, the people who are mad about THEIR favorite Pokemon not returning will probably be the loudest, but I think there's probably a lot of people who think like me. And that is; the best way for a franchise to get stale is to make the top priority of a new game to be a fan pandering "greatest hits collection" first, and new content secondary. That's how Pokemon has always been, and it's also why I didn't buy the last version of Smash and Tekken. I don't want to play with the same characters over and over.
@LetsGoSwitch I doubt in this comment section there is someone that makes 1/100 of the money that Pokemon makes. Saying "well, make you the animations!" it's the stupidest counterargument I've ever seen. Unless you are talking to another company that makes a similar amount of money than TPCi or GameFreak it just doesn't make sense at all...
@SilentHunter382 yes, but there will be more Pokémon on the switch and most likely more of the cut Pokémon will be featured
I almost envy the people who are upset over the number a Pokémon game has. They must have the easiest lives with no other problems whatsoever. Some people worry about medical bills or if they’ll have enough food for their families eat, but here we’re worried about a video game. #firstworldproblems
@TheFox The issue here is that they made PAID services like Pokemon Bank or Pokemon Home made specifically to bring back old Pokemon to newer games. It would be like if Smash said "if every fan paid 10 dollars a year we will bring back every fighter for future entries" and then 6 years later say "LOL no".
We also have the issue that people don't see any advantage of taking those Pokemon out. Those "higher quality animations" or "better balance" justifications is something people don't see.
@Trickbaby14 Yes, people should discuss problems like that in a WEBSITE ABOUT VIDEOGAMES. What a way to dismiss critism...
If game freak hadn’t announced Pokémon HOME, not as many people would be mad.
@WoolooSweater But there will never be another game with all the Pokemon in it. So.. tell me why Pokemon Home exists, please. I swear, that is something NOONE was able to answer me. The most people said is "well... they will say more in the future" but the entire point of Home is to bring back old Pokemons, right? Why would you do that if you can only transfer them into a game where you can obtain that Pokemon already?
@glaemay the models were HD from start and downscaled to SD.
@graysoncharles Fortnite and PUBG are from a game perspective bad games, yet so many people play them.
That Pokemon games will sell well doesn't mean they are good, some games sale anyhow no matter if they are bad and GF knows that.
Yesterday I saw the toxicity about Pokemon in the ANIMAL CROSSING story. I come to Nintendo Life today, see this title, and know the comment section would be sewer filled with industrial waste. I guess I truly am a casual Pokemon fan: the criticisms are fair, but I'm nowhere near THIS level of comment-section butt hurt.
@jowe_gw there’s a difference between criticism and whining. Save your criticism for something important.
@R_Champ In my case it's the complete opposite. FINALLY GameFreak is being critized for it's bad planning and (yes, I'm going to say it) laziness. They have the most profitable franchise in the world and they can't be botherd to make a game on the same graphical level than other 1P Switch games. And now they don't have the excuse of "this game is for casuals so we are allowed to be lazy!".
@Franz I'm sure Gen 1 will be nearly 100% intact, because it always gets more attention. It's everybody else's favorite generations I'm worried about.
I'd be way more okay with this if they were announcing a focus on newer Pokémon, actually - that makes sense. But I'm guessing they'll just pretend those never happened.
@Trickbaby14 Then what are you doing here? Complaining that other people complain about trivial things is just as trivial. And I never said that was wrong. You went to a VIDEOGAME WEBSITE asking people to not complain about videogames. Tell me the logic of that.
The excuse of there being too many Pokémon models makes me feel sympathetic on one hand, but on the other...
I'm still looking forward to the games and whatever the franchise may hold in store, but it's pretty pathetic that both Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee and Sword/Shield contain less content than the 3DS games.
@jowe_gw Doesn't that mean, though, that you are now complaining about complaining about complaining?
The evolution of The Pokémon community:
2017: “USUM my foot, we want Pokémon Switch and Gen 8!”
2018: “A Kanto remake with no wild battles and Pokémon GO? We want Gen 8!”
2019: “Gen 8 but it doesn’t include gens 1-7?! How about you take your time GF!”
Gamefreak in 2020: “Shut up you little bratty aholes and enjoy the darn game!”
@WoolooSweater "Don't ask questions, just consume products and get excited for next products".
I understand why they can't include them all, and I understand it, but I'm definitely going to miss cherry picking my team. Especially since I mainly play mono and it's slimmer pickings when you only build your team with one Pokemon type.
@Xelha,
Of course there is a benefit,and how big does the amount of Pokemon have to get too until they have to do this?,we need to just look at the bigger picture..and those new cartoon like Pokemon look awesome too.
@jowe_gw "Then what are you doing here? Complaining that other people complain about trivial things is just as trivial."
You kinda did actually. Also, calm down, I just thought it was funny. It's not like I removed fake monsters from your favorite game or anything.
@johnvboy The thing is people don't see the advantages of this. Clearly it's not graphics or animations. So... what?
(also, what's the point of Pokemon Home?)
@jowe_gw Pay attention to your own posts. I was never the one telling people not to complain. I responded to your comment you directed at TrickyBaby14
@Lockjaw2814 oh, okay.
But that doesn't change my point. Sure, I was complaining about complaining. But he went into a videogame website complaining that people are critizing videogames.
Fans would be waiting till 2025 for The Pokémon Company to design a meaningful new area with 700+ Pokémon galivanting in it! Anyhoot, going forward, I bet they are all transferable from one game to the next. The way folk are carrying on, it's like they think the sky has fallen in and this is the final Pokémon game lol. What's the rush. The area looks great, and I am sure they have put loads of stuff to explore.
But, honest question as I have never used the Pokémon bank myself, isn't this just something they can enable when they feel like enough people have levelled up and enjoyed the game? I mean, what would be stopping someone just putting their best Pokémon in to the game and face rolling it. That would be pretty gutting for a game designer to see.
Seriously, only the people who play with a full team of legendaries will be hugely affected
I think Sw/Sh will likely be decent overall, a couple of the new features are great. But Pokemon will never be the "best it can be" as long as Game Freak are the developers and release a new main game every year. This falls on fans too, who demand and buy them constantly. I mean, there was only one year in the past decade that they did not release a new mainline Pokemon game (I consider remakes of old gens as mainline games, and outside of the behemoth of GO, I exclude spinoffs like Mystery Dungeon and Quest.)
2010: HeartGold/SoulSilver
2011: Black/White
2012: Black 2/White 2
2013: X/Y
2014: Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire
2015: (None)
2016: Sun/Moon + GO
2017: Ultra Sun/Ultra Moon
2018: Let's Go Pikachu/Let's Go Eevee
2019: Sword/Shield
If Game Freak/The Pokemon Company actually took their time and had say 3-4 years to create a mainline Switch Pokemon game, I think it would be BOTW tier. But GF/TPC are seemingly too cheap and proud to hire or ask for more development help (they did for GO, but mobile is a separate beast). Nintendo got Monolith Soft to help with Zelda, enlisted Retro to revive Metroid Prime 4, why can't GF/TPC do the same if it's "too difficult" to have new HD models/animations for all Pokemon? This isn't a tiny new indie developer creating their own little 2D platformer IP. GF has been around for 25+ years, and Pokemon is the highest grossing media franchise in the world in revenue. Not Marvel, not Star Wars, not classic Disney IPs....but Pokemon. [https://screenrant.com/pokemon-highest-grossing-media-franchise/].
This goes back to my point that GF/TPC are too cheap and proud in certain aspects. Same franchise that was too proud/cheap for cloud saves, the whole Mario Maker/Yoshi Woolly World costume thing, and one save file per game as a core tenet of the whole series. Sorry for the long post, just my two cents.
@GrailUK It looks great for an early GameCube game, true.
@jowe_gw I don’t know, it kind of hurts your credibility considering you were so hopped up on internet rage you started (metaphorically) yelling at the wrong person.
Wow, you have no clue about competitive battling, each generation the allowed pokemon are rule limited to the new DeX, this is something that's been done the last 2 generations, doing the same again would have left the exact same pokemon allowed in gen 8 competitive as we're getting anyway whilst still having all pokemon data in the game, it would have had the exact same 'balance' there was no need what so ever to cut pokemon for this.
@Alber-san
I think there are some legitimate criticisms about the game and I’m not knocking people for those legitimate criticisms.
But complaining they couldn’t fit all thousand Pokémon into the game is not one of them.
I also think people have a tendency to focus on the tree and miss the forest (literally and metaphorically). When you look at the game as a whole it’s gorgeous, and a massive step forward from what I played on the 3DS. And even a noticeable improvement over Let’s Go.
If people want to nitpick a tree and say it doesn’t look good, fine. But I’m not bothered by such things because I see the whole picture. And as a whole it’s a really pretty game.
@TheLightSpirit 1) You sure you’re talking to the right person, because not once have I ever said anything about sales equaling quality. I’ve also never said anything in anyway actually defending the game.
2) You seriously going to talk about not taking someone seriously after they say someone is whining and then actually talk about people whining?
@RainbowGazelle
And if people want to complain about that I take no issue with it. My comment was specifically regarding the unreasonable demand that no matter how many Pokémon amass over the years, they have to include every single one under threat of mob rages.
Personally though I take no issue with animations as I thought the animations look fine, be they changed or not. Looking at the game as a whole, it looks great to me.
They took out pokemon because apparently they're working on "upgrading" the graphics. Yet the "open world" area looks like it came straight out of an N64 game. It's completely pathetic that a franchise that sell millions looks far worse than countless other jrpgs with way smaller budgets yet we're supposed to believe they're upgrading them?
I didn't know you could transfur Pokemon between games until now. I always thought 'gotta catch them all' was about the Pokemon in that specific game. If people are really that upset then they shouldn't buy the game. It's really the only way this will change.
@jowe_gw Which ones are you comparing it mate?
Personally, I think that it will help balance the game overall. And I kind of have a feeling that they will introduce more and more (if not all) into Pokemon Sword and Shield slowly to make sure the balance is maintained. Yes, it would probably take awhile but I think this is the best format from things getting out of control.
@JaxonH I’ll be getting it and enjoying it. Never played a Pokémon game until Let’s Go and I liked it. I think this game looks great like you said. The kiddos and I will have a blast.
@TheLightSpirit tone it down a bit, take some time off and breathe.
I have never understood the Pokemon hype so i don't get why fans are so mad about not getting 1 million or so Pokemon on one game be grateful you get a Pokemon game every year most franchises are not that fortunate and release a game years apart from each other, Pokemon fans are very spoiled
@Seacliff But from a developer perspective that it just another way of saying that it is indeed about quantity above all Quantity of Pokemon instead of Forza cars and tracks or AssCred square miles and quests, but quantity nontheless. I mean, that is legitmate, for sure, but it is also sobbering in a way, bleak really.
I get the appeal of adventuring with a trusted Pokemon, nostalgia is a powerful thing afterall, but if that is virtually what it all boils down to .. ah well I'd prefer if it people reserved their outrage for more .. substantial aspects of the industry, but who am I to judge.
@TheLightSpirit is that ok? I got into it because of my kids. I get the criticism but I shall still enjoy.
Congratulations on writing an article filled with poorly researched nonsense to gather as many ad views as possible. Good thing I'm using an adblocker!
The article is called "Why Sword And Shield's Pokémon Purge Will Benefit Everyone". It's 1700 words. Sounds like a unique perspective with space to back up its points. Neat!
P4-5 criticise some of the online gut reaction. Fair.
So...where's the argument that supports Why Sword And Shield's Pokémon Purge Will Benefit Everyone? The article is more about discussing the community's gut reaction. The few arguments it provides (game balance and graphics) are the same as Masuda's, just reworded.
@TheLightSpirit we can't control them, only ourselves.
Just saying, you're reaching the "throw snide at random posts" state.
@KBuckley27 On the contrary, I believe most 'real' fans would prefer to have only one game every two-three years. There are way too many mainline Pokémon games way too fast, and as a result they're always rushed. No one wants a rushed game.
@Aslanmagic It's fine if you enjoy it, but the problem is that by culling the Pokémon, the long-time fans thanks to whom the series has made so much money are now also being culled in favour of an audience that's only just gotten to know the series. Instead of catering to their supporters, they've told those supporters to go to hell and look for a different monster collecting series. Well, don't mind if I do. I will never purchase another Pokémon game because the sheer lack of disrespect by Game Freak towards Pokémon fans has reached its peak, and it's simply disgusting.
@TheLightSpirit it’s ok, you’re point is probably valid.
Issa no for me dawg.
And why are we making excuses for a major corporation with the highest-grossing media franchise in the world? Make them work for your money or they WILL get lazy. Notice how as more people buy iPhones Apple actually removes features which each new product.
@nintendoknife I meant no disrespect to longtime fans. Just stating that I’m looking forward to playing with my kids
@nintendoknife I dont believe that because i remember 2011 and 2015 where there was no Pokemon games and all i saw daily was "where are the Pokemon games I want Pokemon give me Pokemon games" none stop for the whole year
@Xploder9825 That would be great, but on the other hand, having such options would make it even more sour if the pokemon a player really likes (Like how Ash feels about Pikachu) doesn't make the cut...
A guy on Reddit ran a poll about people's single favourite pokemon, the result: all but 4 of them got votes, so no matter which ones they remove, some people will get that bad feeling of their favourite getting the axe...
@TheHumbleFellow How much you wanna bet they've been payed off?
literally every damn piece of data and the models are there.
LGPE has data for every single pokemon and item in its data and they reuse the models made by creatures inc for the 3ds games anyways.
this is just being done to sell more mediocre games to make sure the second versions do better, as usum only sold half of what sm did.
they could sell a game that runs at 240p and struggles to run at 30fps, with a barebones main game and nonexistant postgame, and y’all would still consider it a 9/10 at lea- oh wait:
@KBuckley27 What are you talking about? There was no gap year in 2011, only in 2015. Besides, of course people are going to be asking when the next game in the single largest media franchise in human history is going to be released - especially when it's set in a new region with new creatures to collect - this does not mean that people want another rushed game every other week.
Good article. Seems rare to read something that doesn't join in on the entitled whining and instead take the developer's side.
Everytime Game Freak does something stupid, Nintendo Life never fails to run to their rescue.
@Ashunera84 It takes great courage to side with one of the richest companies in the world pulling anti-consumer stunts.
DISCLAIMER: I, for one, think the Pokémon cutting is not that big a deal, as it was bound to happen with the numbers growing so big, and we still don’t know how many will be cut.
Nonetheless, this article is simply embarrassing.
Not because of the opinion it endorses, not even because it uses flawed arguments to support it (again, I can respect the opinion), but because it is written only with the intent of riling up people on both sides on the argument, get K’s of clicks and 200+ comments.
This is way worse than licking GF’s boots, this is utter disinterest in your community.
why does the consumer need to look at the corporate side?
Dang, look at all these design experts talking about how there's no reason why Game Freak, a team of about 50, shouldn't be able to model, animate, and balance +1K Pokemon while also making the world BOTW-level quality, getting rid of random encounters, [insert more demands here].
@nintendoknife it takes more courage to state an opinion that disagrees with the Angry Internet Mob than it does to side with it.
It takes a special kind of stupid to not see why the status quo was unsustainable. The Angry Internet Mob is quite often wrong, like in this case.
@Ashunera84 While I am disappointed with the choice GF made I will never say people who side with GF are wrong. Both sides are entitled how they feel about the news.
I will always express why I disagree with it, how I feel and point out reasons why I don't like it.
Clickbait. There’s nothing of substance to this article. Thanks for wasting my time
@Wolfgabe realistically a company should have prepared for this. They knew as they kept adding Pokémon the work load would increase. It’s called management. It’s not exclusive to only game development. Forseeing problems and addressing them to appease customers is something every successful business does. And GF did a poop job of it.
@DanTheSausage well apparently they are adding about 200 new ones.
GF has been busy the past years churning out Pokémon games every year, so they don’t have much time to spend rendering old Pokémon since they are making more new ones than ever before. This is their first Pokémon game on the switch that is “proper” main series, and they are testing out the possibility of open world raid battles. Also there are just too many Pokémon and too little time, and their deadline is for 2019 so they can hopefully continue the trend of a new game every year, or at least take a break so they can plan an even better game for 2021, hopefully with even more old Pokémon. After all, they can’t just copy paste from the last game, there were only 153 Pokémon. All I’m saying is that this isn’t the last switch game, so they will continue to add old Pokémon as they go along, hopefully being able to finally have all of the Pokémon in the dex on the switch.
Of course nintendolife took the apologist route and somehow found a way to justify this inexcusable decision...
Can't wait to see the competetively balanced final product. Things are you going to be different without National dex.
As if.
@Aslanmagic
Pokémon Let’s Go was a really fun game. Before that I had played Pokémon (heck I own all the DS and 3DS entries, and Yellow on VC), but it never really grabbed me. Let’s Go was finally the one to grab me and hook me. I finally understood the appeal of what makes these games great.
I am SUPER pleased with Sword and Shield. Games look fabulous. Such a beautiful world they’ve created. I especially like how you can pull out the bicycle at any time to traverse the world, and it even morphs into a pedal bike when you drive over a lake, kind of like Xenoblade X where the skells would transform.
Everything about this game looks great so far. I am also really happy to see the Pokémon in the overworld appear like in Let’s Go, while still retaining random battles in certain grassy sections. It’s the perfect blend between the two. I’m also a fan of having full control over the camera now.
@iLikeUrAttitude
it isn’t inexcusable. They couldn’t release this game with the entire national dex because of the fact that ^see comment 249^
@WoolooSweater It is inexcusable GameFreak has been using the same models and animations since XY and now suddenly its too much work to transfers that to the switch? Also they already have the models for the pokemon ready, they just don't want to transfer them to the switch for some reason.
Pokemon is the largest multimedia franchise in the world and of all time.
There were no facts in your comment, just excuses defending the company and speculation.
@JaxonH I think that’s what I really liked about Let’s Go, the roaming Pokémon in the wild
The writer of this article is either being disingenuous or genuinely hasn't spent enough time researching the issue. Also if you use the term cherry pick then begin to cherry pick yourself then the argument itself becomes invalid simply because you are doing the exact thing you are accusing others of doing. Also in the article he says that the models are new. It would take someone about 5 seconds of comparing to notice that they are exactly the same. They have changed the lighting system a bit so that could make them look different, but they are reused models. The Wingull issue isn't that it's flying with it's wings out. The issue is that Wingull is going extremely slow in the air and then just spins in place to turn around. This is something that all Pokemon do and is not in itself a unique movement pattern. If you wanna take it even further all walking animations for existing Pokemon are in Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon so these have been done for quite some time. Yes there are new idle animations and intro animations, but does that equate to potentially cutting 200-400 Pokemon? I would take all my old Pokemon over animations that will be stale after the first few encounters. One final point is that the people that write the stories for the games do not animate the Pokemon. How could modeling and animating all the Pokemon somehow impact a completly different part of development? Sure maybe they wouldn't have time to model or animate characters, but this is something that is determined before any of these processes begin. I have no problem with people not caring about the Pokemon cut, but if you claim something to be fact that isn't and you paint those complaining as missing the point then you couldn't have possibly written this article without a certain level of bias.
Dang, this article made people salty.
I'm kinda bummed that you can't get all the Pokes, but it's not a deal breaker. Jax's analogy about fighting game rosters and monsters in MH is pretty solid. Let's be realistic, at some point they either have to a) Stop making new Pokes, which isn't the best route. Part of the excitement of new Pokemon games is discovering the new ones. Not to mention marketing and all that jazz. or b) Cut some Pokes. Just look at gen 6 and 7 of Pokemon, they added WAY less Pokes than prior generations. I know we all want every Poke but it eventually comes to a point where it's just not feasible.
I think there's a glimmer of hope though. Perhaps sometime next year they allow all Pokemon via Pokebank? The November deadline is pretty important for sales delaying it after they already delayed AC wouldn't be smart. Remember, Pokemon X/Y and S/M didn't support Pokebank at launch either.
Lastly, I can't believe people are calling for a delay.. Really? After the hate Let's Go got for not being a traditional Pokemon title and how people were screaming for said traditional Pokemon to come out??? It's one thing to delay a game if it needs more time. But delaying Pokemon just for this would be silly.
FYI to everyone "Gotta Catch 'em All" slogan hasn't been the slogan since X&Y, they knew back then it was unsustainable.
For me not this whole 'controversy' isn't a huge deal, and for 99% of players this isn't even an issue because they don't even use this feature. It's just the hardcore of the hardcore that are upset and being very vocal. I've played all the games and stopped using this feature at Black & White.
I appreciate that they're being open and honest about the complications they full admit is their own doing. Further they could always add it in later as well that's an option. As for now it looks like they're most likely going to have the first 151 plus all the new ones from this region. My guess would be they'll have all the starters and legendary throughout the series. If they're real smart they'll include all the top played competitive Pokemon to settle down the nay-sayers. But if they don't, oh well. @iLikeUrAttitude Modeling, Animation, and engines don't just automatically transfer over. They can base it off the old animations but there is still work to remake them in the new engine (the 3DS is not the same as the Switch just so you know). Now that the Pokemon are out in the world they have to do brand new animations ideal poses and walk cycles, plus battle animations for all moves and test all those. Think to most the games you play there aren't a huge variety of character models that require unique animations.
Example: Dragon's Dogma has about 18 characters to animate for; Harpies, birds, Griffon, Chimera, Dragons, Humans, deers, goblins (3 versions), Cyclops, Trolls, Beholders, rabbits, undead (3 versions), and wolves (probably more but I can't think off the top of my head), that took years to make.
Now think 900+ Pokemon to animate and battle animations add another few thousand variations to animate then testing all that. It does get very unreasonable if you want a product anytime soon. Sure they could have waited probably another 2 years to get all that done for a feature less and 1% of players use, but why.
And if you really value this above all then just stick to Ultra Sun and Moon. Pull a Melee and stick in the past. It's okay.
@Specters The models and animations are literally the exact same. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28RXaXC9jDE&t=307s
3:26
The battle animations are the same, they still stand and barely move when executing.
How can you say they can't transfer old animations when they are literally the exact same?
@RazorWind Once more this isn't how Black and White worked. In those games, you exclusively had access to the new Pokémon until you beat the game, at which point you gained full access to all Pokémon. In Sword and Shield, this is not the case. Instead, you exclusively have access to the Pokémon in the regional dex, including the excruciatingly boring Pikachus and Charizards and probably all of the first generation, and you never get access to the rest of the Pokémon in existence, not even after beating the game. Even more, you will never even be allowed to send over your old Pokémon to the new games because their data will simply not exist. Black and White's way of doing things was superb and refreshing, Sword and Shield, and every Pokémon game from now on's way of doing things is nothing short of lazy and insulting. Expect to be forced to catch Pikachus and Charizards in every Pokémon game from now until the end of time.
@iLikeUrAttitude well GF confirmed 1000 Pokémon in the national dex once SwSh releases. So yes, 200 Pokémon, which is significantly larger than the 70-80 Pokémon additions in the past game. It’s also a fact that 1000 is a lot of Pokémon. To compare, Sakurai from Smash Ultimate development has been overwhelmed by 80 characters in smash ultimate, which is literally the same game as Smash 4 but more and better, including the animations.
Was Let’s go also inexcusable for being different? SwSh is still gonna be a good game.
@WoolooSweater "well GF confirmed 1000 Pokémon in the national dex" No, they didn't. They mentioned 1000 models, and we already have nearly 1000 unique models for all different Pokémon formes. Don't expect them to make more than 80 new Pokémon because you will be sorely disappointed. Advice from a long time fan and connoisseur of Game Freak's communication strategies.
Questions I can’t find the answers to:
Why do we drive on parkways and park in driveways?
Why are there interstate highways in Hawaii?
Why isn’t ‘phonetic’ spelt the way it sounds?
Why is abbreviation such a long word?
Why do we still care or bother to complain about how ‘we can’t catch the past 7 generations of Pokémon in gen 8’
How is this Pokédex cut a problem and why does it matter?
If you don’t like it, don’t buy the game. The level of toxicity the community has reached is stupid. It’s ok to be disappointed, but this is nothing to protest with #s about.
@WoolooSweater Stop the whataboutism and stop sucking up to big companies that aren't even paying you to shill for them.
@WoolooSweater
"well GF confirmed 1000 Pokémon in the national dex once SwSh releases. So yes, 200 Pokémon, which is significantly larger than the 70-80 Pokémon additions in the past game."
GF never confirmed 1000 pokemon in the national dex like @nintendoknife they just mentioned 1000 models.
"It’s also a fact that 1000 is a lot of Pokémon"
Wow you're really desperate aren't you?
"To compare, Sakurai from Smash Ultimate development has been overwhelmed by 80 characters in smash ultimate, which is literally the same game as Smash 4 but more and better, including the animations."
Smash is a completely different game than pokemon it's astounding you even tried to make a comparison between the two, shows how clueless you are to this situation.
Smash has a multitude of fighting animations and specials for their fighters, each with different damage values, knockback, etc.
pokemon meanwhile having the most minimal animations for battles.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
@Yorumi they used X/Y models because all the games afterwards were for the 3DS.. they're the same engine. This is clearly a new engine which means models aren't 1-1, again as I said they're based on the old animations and models but there is still work to be done to get them working.
You think publishers hire porting companies to just click a button when porting games from one console to the next? Not to mention a new engine with HD graphics.
You can't just drag and drop 240p models and have them look the same as 1080p models with no extra work.
@Specters "This is clearly a new engine which means models aren't 1-1" Yes, they are the same models! There's no such thing as a '240p model' and in fact the models used in the 3DS games were far too detailed for the system they were on, precisely because they were futureproofed so that they wouldn't have to make new models for the next two decades. You have no idea what you're talking about and you refuse to ignore all evidence proving to you black and white that it is exactly as @Yorumi and many others are showing you. What is your goal?
Anyway, I am tire of Pokémon games where the main character is a prebubescent male or female where no damn adult with 40+ yrs of experience can beat them. Pastel textures. Judging from the trailers, main cities looks boring and unpopulated. Gym leaders looking like jap-queer. No full Pokédex and many more rants. SAD.
Yeah the models are done and the animations we've seen so far don't look that much different from what was in the 3DS games. I've come to the conclusion that the only way I will personally be okay with this decisions is if they used the time they would have normally spent coding the Pokemon in to upping the quality of other aspects of the game like the story, side quest, cut scenes, gameplay mechanics, etc. I don't believe that is the case though which makes this policy change all the more annoying. If you are going to go forward with this I want a console quality game in all aspects and I just don't think Game Freak is the developer to do that.
Here I was, about to sit down and craft a meticulous dismantling of each and every one of this article's weak arguments, and then I thankfully realized that such effort would be misplaced since this is obviously a click-generating, post-E3-slump, ad-revenue cough-drop, and will be buried and forgotten in less than a week.
So, here's my low-effort rebuttal to this low-effort article: Purging Pokemon from Pokemon is a benefit to absolutely no one, save those sorry low-achievers who openly admit to a rejuvenated motivation to Catch 'Em All due to the prospect of achieving less rather than more.
The Hardcore of the Hardcore, as toxic whiners of whiners have labeled them, are not suddenly complaining about Game Freak's complacency out of hypocritical spite. "The Cull" was the last straw.
This is an important phrase, The Last Straw, because it perfectly describes how they are feeling. From Google Dictionary:
a further difficulty or annoyance, typically minor in itself but coming on top of a whole series of difficulties, that makes a situation unbearable.
Game Freak's complacency and cynical creative decisions over the past 6 years (and some would argue much longer) have piled on top of each other, and The Cull was simply the final straw that broke the camel's back. Even more importantly, the excuses of graphics, animations and balance are a complete slap in the face, because not only does Sword and Shield's overworld look Ghastly, the models recycled and the animations phoned in, but also because all three have never ever been a priority for Game Freak in the history of the franchise.
However, ultimately these whiners of whiners make a fair point. If I am unhappy with the direction Game Freak is taking with the franchise, then I will put my money where my mouth is and simply not buy Sword and Shield, or any other Pokemon game afterward. Not because I want to boycott Sword and Shield over one single issue like The Cull, but because this really is the last straw for me.
Pokemon has felt lifeless and lacking soul ever since XY in 2013. I always felt like the 3D models and animations felt plastic and phoned in from the start. Game Freak clearly wasn't ready for the jump from 2D to 3D, and should have saved such a leap for a proper main console release like the Switch, but I have to feel for them. They were stuck between a rock and a hard place, being the glue to Nintendo's handheld success, and tasked with making the next generation for the 3DS. I really do believe that Junichi Masuda was burned after Black and White's negative reception, and his comments about a myriad of issues like post-game content reveal his transparent cynicism toward the Pokemon customer base.
Pokemon really does need a revitalization. I don't even know how such a thing could happen at this point, since Pokemon is such a money-making behemoth of a machine. But "The Cull" is just one more small step toward a downward trajectory, and eventually the nostalgia well will run dry.
Pokemon fans- the only time when people make excuses to be happy about getting less things in their game while still paying $60 . Great job Gamefreak, you've done something that EA has wanted to do for years. Probably will be the best selling game this year.
Here's what I'm not getting.
People saying stuff like "Were paying more for less!"
We don't know how many are cut out, we don't know how many we are getting, unless I missed that memo.
So for all we know, we could be getting more than before.
@Kalmaro how can we be getting more then before if they are cutting pokemon out?
@Kalmaro
People are simply saying:
$40 for 807 compatible, usable Pokemon VS
$60 for >400 compatible, usable Pokemon
@Ulysses I hear what you're saying, however, that >400 Pokémon could actually be higher depending on how many new ones we get as well as the old ones. As of right now, we don't know yet. For all we know we could end up with over 800 Pokémon in this game.
Is it likely to happen? Probably not, but not worth get frustrated over stuff we don't know yet.
@SilentHunter382 Absolutely, assuming the make more new Pokémon than cut out old Pokémon.
Like say they cut 100 but add in 200.
If it bothers you enough, simply don't buy the game. I'm not happy with the decision to limit the Pokedex and many other choices Game Freak has made over the years. If I want what I consider a "pure" Pokemon experience, I'll just go back and play HGSS anyway.
@Kalmaro ok then that does make sense then.
@Kalmaro
Game Freak has said so many times that they are done making 100+ new Pokemon for a new generation that I am 100% certain we would be blessed to have 80. Combined with old Pokemon, my most generous estimate would be 450~ total Pokemon in the regional dex when all is said and done.
I am not one of those people to claim that 300 less Pokemon automatically devalues Sword and Shield to 0, but look at the tradeoffs. The Wild Area, while a step in the right direction, is not an open world, but in fact just one open area. Not only is it just one open area, but it is one giant empty, flat landscape as of E3 due to the terrible pop-in draw distance of NPC's and Pokemon. I believe this is a direct tradeoff to the draw distance of visible Dynamax max raid battle locations, and I don't think it was worth it. Hopefully Game Freak makes some compromises and improves the Pokemon draw distance, because that is the only selling point of an open world Pokemon experience.
If Dynamaxing compromised Game Freak's ability to include all Pokemon, then I don't think the trade off was worth it either. We have older mechanics that easily could have been expanded upon, like Megas for bombastic duels, or even triple battles for the Football team sport feeling. It really just feels like a low-effort pop-culture cash-in on Japan's Kaiju fixation.
Everything else that could have compromised compatibility like potential story cutscene animations is speculation at this point, but in my opinion will not be worth it, given Game Freak's track record of introducing 3-5 half-baked gimmicks each generation for no apparent reason.
I don’t normally leave a comment on articles because I just enjoy the read or agree with the comments. I am not a hardcore Pokémon fan. I have dipped in and out of the series casually playing X, Sun and Let’s Go. As a casual fan of the series “catching them all” is not a priority. I get a party of Pokémon and build them up over time to be strong enough. Usually using the same Pokémon for most of my journey. Therefore my take on this whole Pokédex issue is a lot of casual players out there are not going to care about this, in fact it makes me feel a little relieved that there are not going to be 1000+ Pokémon to catch. I would not even go close to attempting that.
Also another point, we hear of developer’s over working and getting burnt out all the time. When these issues pop up we all defend the developers and are like don’t over work them just get the best game out. I feel like when people say “Just get more developers” is a horrible way of looking at human life. It is just a game guys and people’s mental health and welfare is far more important than 1000+ Pokémon! I would rather a better game then knowing developers worked ridiculous hours to just try and recreate all these Pokémon. Just be thankful you are getting a new game. Sometimes our first world problems sound a bit petty!
What a stupid opinion. Did GameFreak slip you a few bucks for your propaganda? Actually no they wouldn't do that would they, too expensive.
@Xelha
Even worse than the balanced smash but I guess the article meant was they tried. Bayonetta was literally pay to win for a while.
@Ulysses At the moment, all we can do is speculate. We just don't know enough information yet. We aren't sure how many are being cut or how many are being added.
We don't know what all is even in the game yet, there's just too many unknowns.
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather everyone be in too, but I'm not that unhappy about it, yet. Don't know enough to get upset.
First of all, I do not understand the drama at all.
For a game like Pokémon, it is important to have a lot of monsters to catch. So far we will probably all agree.
But this series has past the point of "ridiculous amount" a long time ago. While that is great, is it really a problem if future games do not contain everything anymore? Were past games bad because they contained less than 800 Pokémon? If they weren't, why would that be a problem now?
Actually, we do not even know if that will be the case, the Pokémon count could still be as high or even higher than SuMo.
Secondly, this had to happen at some point. You can argue all you want about how easy it would be to just port every Pokémon from all previous games, but even if that were true (it is never as easy and if you have no idea about game development, you do not know anyway!), the amount of work they have to do does grow with every single game that features new Pokémon and at some point it will be too much! You can argue that this isn't the case yet (though I find it pretty impudent, if you actually think you can KNOW this kind of thing just by looking at a game.), but this does not change the fact that at some point this has had to happen. Graphical overhaul and 2000 Pokémon in a game? Not gonna happen.
Get used to it.
Thirdly, a thing that is often forgotten in consumer rage.
What do you think would even be the motive for GameFreak besides what they said it is? Did they just do it to piss you off or something?
If the reason really is that they wanted to save money than that contradicts the whole idea of it being easy to do.
Lazyness? Same thing, if you argue if things like, "same models anyway" or "games are not balanced anyway" than that, again, contradicts the lazyness argument.
Incompetency? How could they be competend enough to feature all these old Pokémon, but not competend enough to bring the rest as well? And if that were the case, that would, again, mena that there is a certain amount of hard work involved. Work that might just be justifiable too much for this ridiculous amount of Pokémon.
All the arguments I have heard, that would point to a motive, seems to contradict something. Nothing makes sense.
(Another thing about the "not balanced anyway" argument, a game needs a massive amount of balancing to just be playable (!) for single player. And no, this is not comparable to rpg enemies, as they are far less complex as a pokémon. Rpg enemies are not player controlled, they are not skillable in any way, the attacks are fixed... In the end, there are far less variables involved in balancing them, then with Pokémon. Just because not all Pokémon are viable for competitive play, does not mean that there isn't a lot of balancing work involved.).
For all we know, Sword and Shield could have the highest amount of Pokèmon and content in general. But you are angry because you want even more?
Am I the only one who sees how utterly ridiculous that is?
@Ulysses
"People are simply saying:
$40 for 807 compatible, usable Pokemon VS
$60 for >400 compatible, usable Pokemon"
As someone who thinks this culling is nothing but a dumb and poorly conceived decision on Gamefreak's behalf, reducing a game down to it's price and number of ______ while ignoring literally everything else about the game (world, story, game modes, etc) is equally dumb.
It's not a "purge" The Pokemon aren't being removed from the canon they just aren't in this game. They will likely be brought back in future titles. I see this as being like rotations in card games with different Pokemon in different games.
"Gotta Catch'em All" hasn't been a thing for years. They abandoned that a long time ago.
@Heavyarms55
But...but...but...how will I be able to roast Gamefreak with Thanos memes?
@westman98
I'm not saying I agreed with it, as I explained in my next post, but rather was just answering his question.
The only good thing about this Pokemon Purge is that Pichu the rat brat will likely get left behind.
Yeah, you guys had to find a way to defend that stupid decision, as always.
This whole thing isn’t about being too hard to animate or balance movesets, it’s all about locking down the other half of the roster for a second game, or selling a separate app/service to let you transfer the rest of them. It’s not the first time they do that.
@Ralek85 Yeah unfortunately this is a case of a fan base painting themselves in a metaphorical corner. This isn’t a Diablo Immortal situation, where a developer has sold out the franchise for some quick cash. They are still making mainline games, along with those questionable mobile efforts ( which are outsourced) so fans can’t level criticism in that direction. Fans want high quality mainline games, that also include all the features of previous titles. If Game Freak deviates from that, then they will cry fowl and complain about a low effort release, when the quality of Sword/Shield looks to be on par or even better than previous releases. The fact that GF is doing this for creative reasons or as a means to revitalize the franchise gets overshadowed by those who just wanted more of the same. This attitude would inevitably lead to more stagnation for a series that desperately needs some fresh ideas.
This is also what I feel happened with some of those new Star Wars films. Demanding old actors return and reprise roles, for little purpose other than that’s what people expect, have detrimented the creativity that the films could’ve had otherwise.
I don’t think in any old franchises case that “the baby should be thrown out with the bath water” in an attempt to refresh it, but at the same time nothing is ever as magical the 5th time you’ve experienced it.
Changes are inevitable and many times they are for the better in assuring the longevity and relevancy of a franchise.
@NotTelevision nicely put...
I don't buy the balance excuse. Like many already pointed out, they could just adjust VGC rules, like it's been done. There's no escaping a group of pokemon being somewhat meta defining, we see it everytime at Smogon. Recently I've stepped out of OU because I was bored of seeing Landorus, Toxapex and Heatran everygame. Switched to UU and found myself hating Scizor, Ferrothorn and Amoongus just as much. Removing pokemon from the game will just create a new meta with different dominant Pokemon. It's fine to give someone else the spotlight, just not this way. And by the way, there are other ways to balance a pokemon. Not a lot of people know, but every generation some pokemon get their stats changed a bit. Some nerfs and buffs. And of course not just stats, this applies to abilities, moves and items just. Take Mega Kanga, for example. She was too OP in Gen 6, her ability (Parental Bond) was nerfed in Gen 7. The author of the article makes a lot of good points, and it's notable that he's well versed in Joe Merrick's (Serebii) corrections over twitter, but it sounds like he's unware of some aspects of competitive play and how it's been balanced over the generations. There are a number of ways to balance competitive without removing pokemon. As for graphics, that's where a lot of people are overreacting. I'm sure the game will look fine at launch, Let's Go was a pretty-ish game.
The problem is using this as an excuse to remove pokemon. At least they could've promised to patch them in later, but they said quite the opposite. I honestly don't know what's GF's problem with patches and updates. ORAS's new mega evolutions were never patched to XY, and that made those games incompatible if you tried to use a new mega. The same goes for SM and USUM with new forms and brand new pokemon. This is not working. It might have worked back in the DS and below era, but not in an age of patches and content updates. Game Freak doesn't have to looks very far from Nintendo's own games to see good examples of online support made good: Splatoon 2 is rocking it. We're at different times. If you release a game with missing features AND say you'll not even attempt to update it, of course the community will riot.
I'm sure the game will be fun, but we as fans deserve better. They need to be transparent with us. They need to make an effort to keep up with the times we live in. It's 2019, games get content updates, get over it.
Tl;dr: #BringBackNationalDex
Edit: typos
@Xploder9825 Tempers are running pretty high about this, some people have hundreds of hours worth of competitive breeding invested in their collection, i have some pokemon i have been taking from game to game since the Gameboy Advance, and to then have official channels act like nothing is going on, or the “It doesn’t affect me so beep you guys”-people are pretty galling.
Still no reason to get rude, but i can understand a fair degree of frustration at this point...
@Franklin it’s unrealistic. Ever see an elephant wandering the British countryside?
@NotTelevision The thing is... Why did they do Pokemon Home then?
Also, for what they replaced having all the Pokemon in one game? High quality animations? If they reworked compleatly the graphics and all I would actually understand why all Pokemon aren't in the game. They didn't do that.
@graysoncharles GameFreak said this is a "policy change" and that they'll never put all Pokemon in one game again tho.
"Let's justify laziness of an already notorious company as beneficial: BALANCE"
Give me a break for the love of God, just give me one bloody break Nintendo Life. There are many MANY ways to balance and make even the most irrelevant pokemon shine and cutting half of them is not the solution. Why not include different categories in competitive battles such as light, heavy, type and more, so many different classes to choose from yet it all comes around to which Pokemon are the meta. If Game Freak is oh so tired of seeing every party with a shiny Rayquaza then they could easily solve this issue with what I just suggested. There is nothing beneficial about cutting down the most important aspect of Pokemon, the freaking POKEMON.
@Lockjaw2814 I just saw a person commenting on a videogame website that people shouldn't complain about videogame and complain about real issues and I called him out. That's it.
@iLikeUrAttitude I don't even have to click that link to know it's going to be the same old tired "bad double kick animation" when it is only ONE Animation out of hundreds and other animations in the game look fantastic and they don't always stand there while attacking.
As someone for whom this will be the first Pokemon game(s) since Red and Blue I don't care about whether all are in the game or not. And I'm not alone. Many people from Pokemon Go will jump onto the train with those games. Of course it sucks for people who have been on the train for years, but for many it won't matter.
Plus, it's difficult enough with 300-400 new ones (for me) anyway (yes, assumption on my side, we don't have numbers).
@jowe_gw That was probably a poor move on Game Freak’s part. I understand that it must be frustrating for fans who want to resume progress. But I was just speaking from a creative development perspective. For Game Freak to make new games with all the Pokémon, carried over from all previous installments would put an unfair bind on the development process.
In the long run it’s probably better for every game to be a self contained entity, so it doesn’t feel like they are repeating themselves for the sake of it. I’d even go as far to say that it is better for the franchise as a whole. There should be enough new in every installment, so you’re not just catching the same old Pokémon, using the ones everyone is used to, and instead working within the resources that Game Freak has decided to be in the game.
This is what is behind the whole concept of authorship within the field of art. Giving players too many choices and characters can sometimes muddle the world that game makers create.
From now on Gamefreak should create less and less Pokemon,maybe 10 or 20 new pokemon per generations,it would be easier for them and if they knew making all those Pokemon would be a problem,why are they making an other game right now,nobody cares about Town,Sword and Shield is a super important game,the first new gen on a console,expectations are high
Ehh....less than ideal choice of words on the author’s part - taken enough counseling classes to know you don’t just throw around absolute words like “everyone” and “always”
I get where they’re coming from though (both the author and Gamefreak) about the need to streamline. Just thinking about the possibility of a game with over 1000 different Pokémon forms along with Megas, Z-moves and Dynamaxing all coexisting immediately calls to mind words like “cluttered” and “hodgepodge”.
On the other hand I definitely see the emotional attachment people have toward Pokémon they’ve raised up all the way through Gen 3. I’m far from the first person to note this, but the core issue here seems to be poor communication on Game Freak’s part. People are using references like The Purge and Infinity War implying that Pokémon not in the Galar Dex will metaphorically die or be rendered useless. Masuda mentioned very briefly that different Pokémon will have the opportunity to go on different adventures but didn’t give us any detail on what that means and he really should have.
An ideal future in my eyes would be one where Pokémon Home serves as a much more holistic base, covering main series games, remakes with old mechanics reincluded, and side games like Mystery Dungeon and Conquest. No gimmick or Pokémon would be fully retired and they’d each have their chance to shine in a meta that’s optimal for them. But right now this is all in my head based off a liberal interpretation of a single statement Masuda made in passing. I’m not saying that a big corporation like TPCi has the ability to be 100% transparent. But in the age of indie devs and Kickstarter communication has never been more of a big deal and they need to realize that.
It's a bummer for some people, clearly. My personal philosophy was to always experience the new regions with the new Pokemon presented in it. Why play a new game and use the same 6 Pokemon every single time region? I dunno. I caught every possible Pokemon in Sun, first time I ever did that, but my niece was recently in the hospital and couldn't run around much after, so I gave her a 2DS and wiped some Pokemon games for her, so maybe I'm not as passionate as other people.
Using balance as an excuse to leave out half the Pokémon is the absolute worst excuse they could have made up. I don’t expect every single Pokémon to be catchable, there are too many. If it really was about balance then make the several hundred they do choose to include in the regional dex the only ones that can be used in tournaments and online play. That’s is perfectly acceptable. Also dynamax is really stupid. Oooo... large Pokémon. Even Z moves were cooler. I want to like this generation so hopefully as they show us more it will catch my interest again.
I've no idea what's going on?
Is someone taking lots of cash and looking for shortcuts?
@Xploder9825 Well, it depends, just breeding a basic pokemon is easy, leave two compatible pokemon at the "Day care"-place, walk around a bit, retrieve the egg, walk around some more, yay! New pokemon!
But then inherited moves, natures, stats, and stuff come into it, and it can take a few dozen hours to get just one perfect pokemon (I never went down the metaphorical rabbit hole that deep though)
For me it's mostly sentimental value, those pokemon have been with me for years, i watched them go from unmoving pixellated sprites to 3D models that smile and hop around when i feed them, and to go on a new pokemon adventure without Shrubbery, my event Shaymin i got in Platinum on my DS by my (Again, metaphorical) side... ~_~,
Look at me, back for a final time. You all seem very passionate in believing the national Pokédex cut is a very serious mistake. As for myself, I’m still gonna play it, since I stopped Pokémon bank after let’s go.
But seriously, can you stop whining about it, you little babies, just cuz you can’t get what you want. Feel free to believe the game is bad. That’s all I’m gonna say here. Adios!
Edit: Learn that you won’t always get what you want when you want it.
I personally SUPPORT the creators in including less Pokemon. I am not emotionally attached to the Diamond Pokedex I completed 10+ years ago. A reduced roster seems fine to me. I am easy to please with games. Don't understand the upset here.
Balance? Is that a joke? With the right moves and strategy, you can defeat an Incineroar with a Magikarp. Balance has never been an issue because it’s a game of STRATEGY. Plus, they’ve banned pokemon for certain features without banning them from the whole game since the early days. Like the Battle Frontier. You couldn’t use certain Pokemon there, yet you could use them in the rest of the game, did everyone just forget that? Plus, concerning stats, they could easily implement super training again. And they’ve been reusing models since X and Y, so that’s not a good reason either. Especially since they’ve been working on these games for the better part of 2 years now(possibly longer), so they’ve had plenty of time to add small animations to all the older pokemon. They could’ve just assigned a small team of people to do specifically that. And the animations haven’t noticeably improved much in the past few games. Basically, EVERY reason they gave for this godawful decision is nothing short of an excuse to do less work.
@arekdougy The reason people are upset is cause people are attached to the pokemon they transferred through the games over the years either it be from gen 6 or all the way back in gen 3. People are scared that their favourite pokemon are not going to be in the game at all. It could have been their very first shiny they ever caught and have transfer it from game to game when they reach post game, now without knowing what pokemon are cut that person may not be able to transfer it into SwSh as the data for that pokemon is not in the game.
I understand people wanting to know which ones got purged but at the same time I understand why GF want to not tell anyone.
For you to not be emotionally attached to your pokemon and liking the Idea for having less pokemon is fine just giving you the reason why people are upset.
@Fazermint Greentexting AND saying fam in 2019? You brave, brave soul
This article has bait written all over it, and it seems like it worked pretty well. All for those damn clicks. After all, the fastest way to get a response on the internet is by being deliberately wrong.
Trying to play with a team of pokemon you didn't play before?
"Oh heck no!" Say all the people in this comment section.
"I will never play a pokemon game again!"
You're all getting angry about nothing, guys.
@konbinilife You probably lost interest for other reasons. You sound like you could get swept by a Rattata after all.
I want to this comment section to have more entries than there are Pokémon.
@Hawkcam1996 they had to redo alot of models for sun and moon and ultra sun and moon so no they havent been using the same models
@graysoncharles
-Just because a model worked in a 3ds game doesn't mean that it will work flawlessly in another system, especially if its several times stronger than the former.
It really has nothing to do with the system and more to do with the game engine when you are referring to the models to work in another game.
While I can see this argument from both sides but when it comes to the game models themselves with it working in another game or not (and I am not just talking about the pokemon games here)but it is a very high likely to be compatible with other game engines cause the the models and textures would be saved as a file and those files would be compatible with those game engines. Now can a game engine not have those files be compatible with it defo but it is more likely then not it will (talking about modern games engines).
Though with the SwSh it looks like it will be using the same game engine as used in gen 6 & 7 so compatibility wouldn't be an issue here.
Other then this argument you had and the last one (which to me personally I don't really like as a counter argument) but your other points I agree with you, more so on the first point.
So, I'm hearing the news, and I have been linked to this article so many times, that... Well, hello and welcome, I'm back to comment.
Let's sums things up.
Making games is really hard. And there are obviously deadlines as well. Balancing the meta game and competetive play is also hard, with ... well almost infinite numbers of combinations you can get with all the 'mons, their items, their forms etc (think about testing all of this!). I sure can understand that. And the fact that so many 'mons may become too much to handle on a single game someday. Yes, it's all true. As for me, I don't mind that much the pokemon cull. And they (TPC/GF) probably know what they are doing: old fans will buy the games anyway (twice), while the newcommers don't care about the previous mons that much. And the casual player doesn't have to be bothered with "catching 'em all". We may as well forget about the whole thing in the next few years, where it will become the new standard - who knows - it happens all the time. To the devs it looks like a path full of benefits! But let's see what GF's did in the retrospective:
1. To correct: GF doesn't make 3D pkmn models. Creatures does. In fact, GF has never done a 3D pkmn game up until XY. The first confirmed appearance of the modern models are in 2009 (until then they used N64 models too). By 2012 we are certain that they had all mons up to gen 5 done in 3D - fully animated. These models were used in Wii/mobile GO games too.
2. GF has never been that quite good at programming (coding) in their pkmn games (starting from their first pkmn games up to today's). Most probably they have a lot of legacy code to deal up with, and to patch up (ORAS & SuMo are excellent examples of culled graphics and shortcuts to make the games work). And now it... "leaks" I guess.
3. Yet, the poor performance of 6th & 7th gen may be explained if we assume these were simply... "ports" from an engine dedicated to Switch. Assuming that, they had to be cut down to fit the dated 3DS hardware. Then, why does the gen 8 look so bland? (I know, footage is not final, and I hope it will improve). If taking away mons makes the game to look and play better, then this isn't all clear now.
4. Balance issues was always handled by tiers, and bans. They know, from the very beginning of the series (Dratini with Dragon Rage in Petit Cup), that some mons may be overpowered. After the cull, people will find new powerful mons, which will dominate the meta - nothing will change. If anything, culling is only a begining (or just one step) of the solution of the problem (the 'mons need base states changes along with the availability of moves etc).
5. Long story short: these games are the same at their core base since 1997. Just easier, under different names, and where the same activities are called differently. The same old game, but with more sparkles sprinkled over it. It is rarely, very rarely as of a few past years, where something added to the games is either long-term influencing or holds up to the next generation. Fans are starting to noticing this now. ...Bad timing?
From a developer perspective: it looks like the core Pokemon games are victims of its own success. As if- the series doesn't know where to go. Doesn't know whom it should appeal to. It appears to be lost. The series doesn't want to take brave steps either (especially after the gen 5 backlash), and instead it serves us the same formula. Et cetera. You can't satisfy everyone. If you try to do that - you will end up with mediocrity at best. That's a hard issue to deal with.
6. Lack of communication (at least with the Western fans, dunno about Japan). Development of pkmn games is really secretive, and very little info comes up even after releasing the games. The fans are often clueless what's next (except, you know, getting the same game at its base). I think a dialogue would be better for anouncing an info like this, along with more transparency about what's happening behind the scenes. Less people would be shocked or suprised, and the could understand why a such decision has been made. In other words: a better PR would prevent most of the outrage.
In the end, it is not suprising to see a situation like this (the only suprise is that we are just seeing it now). I can understand the reasons behind the cull. The anouncement was delivered not very well though. And the fans can't see the gameplay improvements which supposedly happened thanks to the cull. That's the issue here. The trade-off is not visible. (Hopefully) yet. (Just in case: I wish GF the best and I hope for the franchise to stay strong).
@graysoncharles "The Let's Go games are a prime example of blatantly reusing models from the 3ds games..."
There is nothing wrong with reusing the assets if the assets are working great. But to the point.
The models you are refering to are models initially made for a Wii game (where they first appeared), actually. They were all made with reusing in mind though - that is their purpose - to be assets to be reused (that's A LOT of models after all!). The same models work just fine in fullest detail on 3DS (with hi-res textures), as well as on various mobile phones (Pokemon GO), and on Switch
Another thing that has me worried about the cull is about the type balance instead of "oh this pokemon is not liked lets cut it" or "too OP". Cause for now (Sun and Moon numbers) Water is the most common while ice is the least common. Will they truly balance this and water will see the largest number cut while ice being the least cut as type advantage is very important.
@graysoncharles Ah ok fair enough.
As has been mentioned previously here, if you can't make a game that is still advertised as a successor to the previous games in the series, stop making them. The "balancing" argument might work if there was no precedent for this (mainline) series to have every single creature in each entry, which there is. That might be the only unifying element in the mainline series (as gimmicks are annoyingly added and taken away all the time ever since Gen 3's removal of the amazing PokéGear, and types and ways of battling are constantly radically changed or removed or later retconned to be considered "gimmicks": eg, Triple Battles and Z-Moves, and the definition of Physical vs. Special types/moves) and now it is taken away for the sake of exploitation and avarice of The Pokémon Company to sell another "instant success."
I say this with very great disappointment: it is long past time for the mainline Pokémon series to end (there are far better and less stale monster-training games, now, anyway, such as Yo-kai Watch and Dragon Quest Monster), and it is very nice that there is now a mass realisation of this. It didn't have to be this way. They could have innovated the series even while keeping the same feeling and elements of gameplay of the old titles (like the mainline Dragon Quest has long and exceptionally managed to do), but this is the path that The Pokémon Company wanted to take. Hopefully this possible failure will lead to them learning from their mistakes and making great things once again.
If it's balancing they want, why don't they just ban every Pokémon that isn't in the Galar Dex? It's not that hard. Like... just let me transfer my whole collection over. I don't care if I can't use them in competitive, I just want them all in one place. It's an emotional thing for me, not a "Gotta catch 'em all" thing, or a competitive thing.
My PC boxes are like memory lane for me. They contain all of my partners ever since I first started playing in Gen 3. To give us the ability to transfer up to each new game for YEARS, and then just take it away, feels like a broken promise.
Okay I lied. But I have to make this point again. Don’t go acting like this is the last Pokémon game for the switch. And don’t act like GF doesn’t take into consideration what the fans want.They aren’t gonna cut Mewtwo or Greninja or fan favorites. It’s about as random as the Thanos snap. If or when we get the next Pokémon game, then we’ll probably get the rest of the dex. Then they can combine the two halves to make a whole. It’s plain simple. So don’t go crying to your mamas because you can’t get what you want no matter how much you whine. I wouldn’t be surprised is gens 4 or 2 got a lot cut in SwSh if they are gonna do remakes soon.
@graysoncharles Let's be real here, Pokémon Home is going to cost money. I'd rather not pay a fee in order to keep my collection intact. I'll let them rot in my Pokémon Sun/Moon save file before I do that. If it ends up NOT costing money, then fine. Great. But that would still kinda suck, since it's not an actual game. I just like the novelty of having my collection WITH my avatar.
Y'know, another thing is that a huge collection of Pokémon like mine makes breeding really easy. So that's always a plus, too.
Call these reasons petty, entitled, spoiled, or whatever. Honestly, I'll probably get over it eventually. But GameFreak has promised something for years that people expect, and now it's just... gone. It kinda hurts, even if it's not really THAT bad. And the really frustrating thing is that balancing and National Dex bloat are problems that are SO easy for them to fix without the need of Thanos-snapping Pokémon from existence. It just seems so... lazy, as bandwagon-y as that might sound.
@graysoncharles They are pretty hi-poly though (SD and HD doesn't matter that much, it's the engine and processing power that's important, not the screen resolution). I think they are great for HD games (I'd say they look as "same-ish" as Digimon models in the Next Order). Have you seen them on higher settings on an emulator? Search for it on YT (talking about emulation is often redacted here).
I would think that it's the opposite - they had to tone down the models for the other games, especially for 3DS. And this is what happens on 3DS actually - low-res textures etc.
Their assets are great for what they are being made - using them in all upcoming titles.
@graysoncharles You missed my points, perhaps I didn't explain well enough. My bad.
Paying ONE time just to transfer your Pokémon is a lot different than paying a consistent fee just to maintain the existence of your collection. I only paid for Bank once to transfer my collection from Gen 5 and 6. After that, the Gen 7 games were my go-to storage unit for my collection. I did address the fact that this is kind of a petty thing to be upset about, so I understand where you're coming from. But again, when you promise something for so long and then abruptly take it away, you have to understand when people get pissed.
As for the balancing issue:
I'd answer with, "I know enough about balancing to know that less characters = easier to balance. That's a given, and doesn't require some kind of professional." But deleting characters from the game completely isn't the only way to narrow down the metagame. Like I said before, GameFreak could just BAN the ones that aren't in Galar's Pokédex. Problem solved. I've yet to be told how this WOULDN'T work.
@graysoncharles But... That's exactly what I said the emulator does?
The 3DS models are just high-poly models which were crunched down in real time. Their pixelated textures is the result of purposely swapping them for the weaker 3DS's hardware. Outside the 3DS - the models have nice and smooth textures*.
People already saw that Let's GO uses the same models as XY did. (And these are also used in the GO app) https://www.reddit.com/r/pokemon/comments/8nbcfk/pok%C3%A9mon_lets_go_uses_3ds_games_pok%C3%A9mon_models/
These are already running on a "HD engine".
*Edit: exluding Pokedex 3D. These feel like the most hi-poly -uncrunched- models you could get, with the greatest textures so far shown in any game (unless Let's GO improved the textures further).
@Galenmereth I'm assuming you're talking about Gold/Silver being able to fit so much on a GB cart, but that wasn't Game Freak's accomplishment. They had no idea how to do it. Satoru Iwata is the one who should be credited for that.
@Devlind see, at least I know what a Rattata is without having to look it up..,
Personally I'm not surprised at this, Sun & Moon were a massive disappointment and in my opinion the worse of the 3DS gen. Far too many cut scenes and an underwhelming ending which inevitably spurred a better but tardy sequel of Ultra. That says it all in a nutshell about where the company was taking it: compromising gameplay for profit. Even using the excuse of the 20th anniversary of suddenly making ALL the légendaires available at once was like a slap in the face for those who have been playing the previous games since. Again, stolen satisfaction.
And as for the culling of the pokédex I stand on two parts about this:
1) Having a wide range of Pokémon and filling up the National Dex is a ALWAYS a staple of Pokémon games. Limiting that like they did in Sun/Moon was a massive mistake and was soon rectified.
2) What the article said about balancing was a fair point, Game Freak shot themselves in the foot and should have become foreseeable that 'tourny' specific Pokémon would become overused and dominant. Remember the cheapness of Garchomp? They really need to reign in an actually 'depower' some when in a tournament in order to maintain a competitive balance. If Nintendo can do it for its ever growing roster in Smash Bros, why not Game Freak?
3) A LOT of pokemon designs are already CHEAP and LAZY and are blatantly done for fans, some don't bring anything to the game, both in story or gameplay. I did find it amusing that 3rd gen pokemon were mainly a rehash of the 1st gen ones but they actually tried to innovate. 5th gen Unova pokédex was the freshest update in a long time, and still is, as they managed to add an extra 100 completely new pokemon in one game,many with 3 évolutions too. 7th gen Alola pokemon was ok at n'est, with only a core of innovation on designs. The update of type on some 1st gen Dex ones were welcome and have shown that a few subtle tweaks can be much more effective than creating a crappy design just for numbers.
@graysoncharles I’ve played plenty of strategy games, and I’ve always been able to win regardless of ‘balance issues’(not that I’ve ALWAYS won, but I mean I’ve always BEEN ABLE to win using characters/units that are considered weaker). Like I said, you can beat an Incineroar with a Magikarp it you have the right moves and strategy. It doesn’t matter if your opponent has higher stats(only time it DOES matter is if there’s a large level gap, but if both are maxed out, it doesn’t). And I wasn’t saying they should specifically use super training, I just meant they can introduce something similar to deal with the so-called ‘balance issues’. Like they could have certain limits to how much each pokemon can be ‘super trained’ or whatever, allowing weaker pokemon to be ‘super trained’ more than stronger ones. As for pokemon bans, my point was that they banned certain pokemon from certain features without banning them from the entire game in the past, so they could easily do it for whatever features has them concerned about balance issues(like pvp or co-op raids). And the models? They reused models for the Let’s Go games didn’t they?(I may be remembering that wrong, it’s been a while and I didn’t play them much). So if they can reuse models on those games, which are on the SAME console as Sword and Shield, why can’t they reuse them in Sword and Shield? Plus, I said they could’ve assigned a small team focused on new animations for the older Pokemon. That same team could improve any models that don’t work well on Switch when doing those animations. Since they’ve been working on Sword and Shield for about 2 or so years, that’s plenty of time for it if that small team focuses entirely on bringing older pokemon into the new games while everyone else handles the newer stuff. And they ARE excuses because there are solutions for every reason they gave, they just didn’t use them. That’s why they’re called excuses.
@Totalmage56 No, they didn’t redo the models from scratch. They took the models for X and Y, redesigned some of them for Alolan forms while keeping the design for others, and upscaled them a bit. They may not have just copy/pasted the models, but most of the work was already done for them. The only models they did from scratch were the new Pokemon introduced in S/M and US/UM. Yet, what I was saying is they could have a small team focused entirely on stuff like upscaling and new animations for older pokemon with everyone else focusing on the newer stuff. Like I said, by doing that, most of the work for the old Pokemon is already done. And there’s not really much of an improvement on graphics despite the Switch being capable of far better graphics than 3DS, so there wouldn’t be much upscaling to do compared to the jump from DS to 3DS, where they actually had to use entirely new models from scratch.
Nintendo Life makes an article defending Game freak
Literally everyone in the comments: oh boy i cant wait to about an article i didnt even bother reading!
And i mean, lets be real here, Sword and Shield are going to sell millions. Its just how pokemon works. So I say, instead of complaining, just go along for the ride and enjoy it!
@Rutty_YT GameFreak has never updated a game after launch beyond fixing game breaking bugs as mentioned in this article. Masuda has also stated there are no plans to ever support the full roster going forward. If they needed more development time they could have ignored the dumb Home and Sleep apps. I don’t want to use my phone to play Pokémon. This is more pandering to the Pokemon Go community and trying to convert them into game and console sales. It seems the core player base wants to catch all the Pokémon and are tired of gimmicks. Instead they add a new gimmick, raids for multiplayer which I personally don’t want, and strip down the Dex. I can’t think of any value added bonus that will get me to buy this or any future game. I will vote with my wallet like hopefully many other 20 year players will.
@Redelement "ignored the dumb home and sleep apps" You're joking right? Theres no way you just about game freak putting more effort into pokemon home, you know, the new way to transfer pokemon? How is that dumb? And whats more, we know literally know nothing about home, so we cant even call it dumb
Going off of that point, I highly doubt that home will just be a clone of poke bank. Gamefreak knows that people are upset about the cut down pokedex, so they're going to do something to conpensate. My guess is that home will be something akin to ranch or amie(amiie?)/refresh but on a bigger scale since its entirely its own thing
@Doger Home may have some use but with everything that’s confirmed it’s just Bank 2. Every time a Pokémon app (excluding what Go eventually became) is released it rarely lives up to expectations.
Most Pokémon players, myself included, have a bad habit of excusing the way GameFreak treats the fan base. At this point we are the battered spouse in an abusive relationship and we just haven’t realized it yet. I have no reason to anticipate these apps will be anything more than a way to lighten my wallet and neither Nintendo or GameFreak seem to want to prove myself or the other pessimists wrong.
I’ll be the first one to eat my words if I’m proven wrong and nobody will be happier than me if I am wrong. I’ve played Pokémon since it was released in America. I still have every game and system from the start. I bought a Switch just for the anticipated Pokémon release. It seems Pokemon Go player conversion is the core strategy and from a business standpoint I understand completely. That would be a lot of consoles and game units moved but as a fan I am disheartened and the more I learn about the new games and apps the more the wind is taken out of my sails.
And like, i see all these things going around the web "What went wrong with sword and shield?" "The TRUTH about Sword and shield" This smear campaign of whiney adults is getting ridiculous at this point. What went wrong with sword and shield? People are too busy whining about small things like actual children that their blinded from the good of the game. And i'm sorry, but if you are willing to demonize and attack a man and his company that pour their heart and soul into these games over something as minor ,in the grand scheme of things, as POSSIBLY not being able to use your favourite pokemon in sword and shield, then how dare you call yourself a true fan of pokemon. A true fan would yes be a bit bummed, but would look past it and look at the better things, not just stick to one thing and leech negativity from it.
@Doger I’m not demonizing Masuda or GameFreak. I’m simply stating they seem to have shifted their focus away from the core players and onto a POTENTIAL market of Pokémon Go converts. This will probably work out in their favor and it will probably be one of the biggest Pokémon releases in the franchise’s history but it will come at the cost of marginalizing the customers who have stayed loyal and financially supported this company for two decades. I’m not trying to win hearts and minds, I’m venting my frustration with a company I have given thousands of dollars to only to be ignored.
@Redelement "We are the battered housewife in an abusive relationship" you gotta be kidding me. Isn't just having the games good enough? I mean come on, the fanbase is victimizing itself at this point.
@Redelement I get what you are trying to say there man, but the COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE is taking this whole "gamefreak ignore us thing" way too far
@Redelement "This will probably work out in their favor and it will probably be one of the biggest Pokémon releases in the franchise’s history but it will come at the cost of marginalizing the customers who have stayed loyal and financially supported this company for two decades" You are proving my point! Why complain about this stuff? It's still going to sell millions, so why don't we all just enjoy the ride?
I'm sorry if I'm sounding rude or anything but I'm tired of everyday hearing "Gamefreak sucks!" "Pokemon is a dying franchise!" "Gamefreak needs to listen to our needs specifically and no one else's!" And I'm not sayin this is everyone, but those that are like that are getting louder and louder until we reach the point where thats all there is
@Doger I don’t like rollercoasters. They make a lot of money and a lot of people love them, but just because everybody else loves them I don’t need to sit back and enjoy the ride. I personally am unhappy about what’s happening and venting.
I don’t think it’s a dying franchise at all. This will probably revive it in a big way. I do think GameFreak as a company has lost their way a little (in the sense that it’s going in a direction that excludes players like me) but that’s neither here nor there. MY specific problem with them is that my particular play style for these games has been removed. I wouldn’t bother venting if it hadn’t been for the fact that I was very excited about the game and then had the rug pulled out from under me. It’s like being told you’re getting a new bike for your birthday then finding out it has no wheels.
I do agree that some of the negativity is very nasty and off base, The whole 5 minute render being the glaring one, but for the bulk of the players who are mad it’s all about the fact they just decided the way we play no longer applies.
The problem with the culling for balance is its still going to just have the competitive landscape devolve into the same strong Pokemon vs the same strong Pokemon. You used Overwatch and Smash as example that avoid this but Melee at the very least is played with the same five or six characters in top 8. New Smash games also face similar issues as well. Pro Overwatch matches are teams using the same strong composition vs same strong composition for that balance patch. The only reason League semi gets away with this because they have a pick/ban phase that you can outright ban champions that are overpowered. Something that Pokemon games lack.
The community around Pokemon have done a pretty solid job on trying to balance the game themselves using Smogon's tiering system and rulesets. Which fairly give pokemon of weaker stats a place where they can actually shine. To think that removing the Pokemon from the pokedex with all the other RPG elements the game has like you mentioned in the article will somehow balance the game is just not true.
I will buy Pokemon Sword by Day One and all the complainers can keep ranting in the loneliness, far away from us who will enjoy Pokemon Sword / Shield.
Stop trying to give this a positive spin its garbage laziness and we want all all the Pokemon.
Pokemon fan: WE WANT A NEW POKEMON GAME EVERY 2-3 YEARS.
GameFreak: That will be hard to do if we want to maintain this current trajectory.
Pokemon fan: foaming at the mouth DEW IT more foam
Gamefreak: so this is the best we can do with the development timeframe we have.
Pokemon Fan has unfortunately passed away due to stupidity meltdown from their own unrealistic and unreasonable expectations
I was a bit disappointed at first but the rabid backlash honestly makes me want the game more. Gamers are so damn touchy.
BREAKING NEWS: The writer of this article has openly admitted that he was paid by Gamefreak to write this.
https://twitter.com/TGK_22/status/1143112101659062273
This review site has been tainted by corruption. Everyone, unfollow these people, unsubscribe from their Youtube channel, and remove them from your lives. THEY ARE NOT TO BE TRUSTED.
I think that was meant to be sarcasm
> Pokemon fan: WE WANT A NEW POKEMON GAME EVERY 2-3 YEARS.
Yeah, sure, except no fan ever asked for it. GF has been doing it for years and it's an efficient commercial strategy, but no one got mad in 2015 or 2008 where there were no new games.
Anyway, bad article, written with arguments that have been debunked for 2 weeks. But hey, at least NintendoLife will have free copies of the game, so who cares about ethics?
I have $100 on +550 that this can get to 400 comments. Come on! We’re not done yet! Dig deep!
Wow there's a lot of comments here. It's like people feel strongly about this or something.
I look at it like I do other games-- if you want to play a certain pokemon that is not in this game, just play the older games. There has been a trend recently to have all previous entries return to new games-- all characters in smash, lots of old monsters return in monster hunter switch. But that's not the norm and is really just a bonus. Monster Hunter world didn't have many returning monsters at all.
I'm still excited for this game and think way too much is being made of all of this. People will still enjoy this game
@Razer
"Pokemon fan: WE WANT A NEW POKEMON GAME EVERY 2-3 YEARS.
GameFreak: That will be hard to do if we want to maintain this current trajectory."
TBH this is what we do want as in the last 10 years or so there has been only 2 seperate years where a pokemon game hasn't been release so giving them 2-3 years is far far better then them making a game 1 each year.
EDIT: and if you want to see what those are here they are.
2008 - Platinum
2009 - HeartGold and SoulSilver
2010 - Black and White
2011 - Nothing
2012 - Black 2 and White 2
2013 - X and Y
2014 - Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire
2015 - Nothing
2016 - Sun and Moon
2017 - Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon
2018 - Let's Go, Pikachu! and Let's Go, Eevee!
2019 - Sword and Shield
Come on guys, we've almost reached #400!
@Redelement “game breaking” This IS game breaking. Let’s say you have every shiny pokémon. Those 100+ pokémon that don’t make it in are pointless.
I am normally the kind to give the editor benefit of the doubt on articles like this, but in this case... there is absolutely nothing he can say to convince me that limiting the number of Pokemon transferable in game can benefit the franchise. Nothing. Anyone who says otherwise has either only played the game the past 3-5 years (which case would make sense, as there would be no sentimental value there), or would defend Game Freak regardless of what they do. Anyone knows the magic of Pokemon has always been the ability to transfer the Pokemon you had all your life to the new generation. I always look at my Pokemon Bank as a time machine. The fact that I can't use all of them anymore is detrimental. It's ridiculous for anyone to defend that, especially taking into account how the 3DS, which is atleast a good 10x less powerful than Switch, could easily handle over 800+ Pokemon in the game. The Switch isn't even using new models, just upscaled ones from Sun/Moon... So any arguments of this move benefiting anyone who ever played Pokemon is only good for an April Fool's joke at best.
@TheHumbleFellow If’s that’s real, I’m sending my switch to King Lian(a.k.a. Plainrock124)to make 50 ways to break a Nintendo Switch 3.
@Snoober To raise that argument up a couple, i’m pretty sure that 3DS cartridges can hold less data than Nintendo Switch cartridges.
EDIT: Unless they used lots of space on the worlds.
They're the same goddamn models, are you serious? all they've changed are the textures.
@Rutty_YT I personally agree that it’s game breaking but GameFreak clearly doesn’t.
@Rutty_YT also that tweet reeks of sarcasm. If he had been given a copy of the fame it’d be unfinished, he certainly wouldn’t have been paid enough to retire, and I’m sure the Pokémon that are being cut were already decided on before the Treehouse announcement.
@LetsGoSwitch Absolutely dude, just give me the same budget Gamefreak is getting and I'll make a Pokemon game that completely embarrasses them.
Pokemon sword and shield.... i was supposed to buy one of them, until i saw how lazy they were executed. The graphics look like two generations behind at times (if not more, those n64 trees are making a comeback in 2019 it seems). there is literally no reason why the game looks so damn bad when you have astral chain that looks a thousand times better and is made by a studio that has a smaller budget.
The missing pokemon and re-used animations lmao, just proves GF is japanese bethesda. I really want to believe it's gonna flop but it won't and it is exactly why they are not making an effort at all: because it will sell regardless.
It's not problem until your favorite pokemon cannot be played in Sword and Shield.
I'm really sad if the Porygon line doesn't make it.
I don't think I have ever seen this many comments on a Nintendo article haha!
We're talking about the most lucrative franchise from Nintendo. A franchise with a solid and loyal fan base, from the most casual to the hardcore (sale success garanteed). As a fan that grew up playing Pokémon since Yellow (in grayscale screen Gameboy classic), we have to admit that Pokémon never was about the story (at least for us that, as I said, already grew up), it's (and I believe it will always be) about the Pokémons (afterall, we Gotta Catch 'em all!).
We already overcome the 3D animations reusage, so most of the rework isn't necessary. The gap between 5th and 6th gen was just one year (when all Pokémons became 3D renderized), the excuse of time consuption isn't even close to be valid here. Doing Pokémon game is the main job for the Game Freaks (I would say the "only one", despite that mysterious new game that happens only inside one village) and it worthy it, this is its goldmine, so they have to do it right.
About the balancing excuse, it would be really valid IF the Nintendo had demonstrated in the past any signal of interest to competitivity in Pokémon titles. It's a deadlock: releasing the game without many of the already know pokémons but made them "balanced" (considering that Game Freaks really achieve it, once they couldn't make it happens until 6th gen) don't looks the best option than of releasing the game with all pokémons and rebalancing them "on the fly" throught patches as most of online competitive games.
Trying to dodge from their lack of responsability is the real shame and "fanboyism", and it only achieve to help Nintendo to cloud its true intention that is to make this IP even more lucrative possible, because I really believe that all Pokémon will get in this gen one day, maybe through the Pokébank (of course, if you pay both Pokébank and Nintendo Switch Online) and some future paid DLC. Now, believe me when I say it: this is me being optimistic about Nintendo based on its latest business decisions.
I agree completely with this article. There are a lot of issues with the mainline pokemon games right now and raging about the national dex is one way of making sure all those other problems never get solved.
With such a short turnover on pokemon games (which is a problem in itself), I'd prefer resources to go towards making a good game rather than a game that just has every pokemon.
@TheLightSpirit have you got a screenshot of what he sent you? I'd love to know what gave you that impression
@I-Choose-You No need for a screenshot, here's what he sent me and my reply.
https://twitter.com/Topaz_Carbuncle/status/1143509503155101696?s=19
Not quite sure where this 'rudeness' or 'smugness' comes from? If anything, Mr Carbuncle was the rude one!
@TheHumbleFellow have you.. have you ever experienced sarcasm before? Because mate, even if you didn't read the article, at least read his damned tweets properly XD
@TGK ahh yes. That makes sense. Explains why there was no screenshot too 👌
This article is a joke right?
Sigh...
Everyone is still arguing about the stupid Pokédex cut, aren’t they. People are still complaining about it, aren’t they...
Yeah this is a bad take Nintendolife, and this is coming from someone who doesn't even mind the limiting to regional dex only. (I gave up on catching them all a long time ago). I genuinely understand the frustration from long time fans. These issues can be resolved in GF were to delay the game and hire more people but we all know that they wont.
@WoolooSweater Lol you keep coming back to the comment section despite you saying you were done two comments ago.
People are going to display their opinions and not be shilling for a company making lazy excuses like you. Deal with it.
@NotTelevision The thing is I GET WHY THEY DID THIS and I actually agree. But then... why Pokemon Home exist? Why they made services like Pokemon Bank if they knew they couldn't do this forever? And why the graphics and animations of the game are reused still despite having way less Pokemon to animate? To me it feels that they are using the excuse without actually using those resources for anything else.
Welp so much for Pokemon Ultimate
@iLikeUrAttitude I meant done with that specific comment section.
@Galenmereth "You know nothing about game developing so shut it, please"
There it is ladies and gents the one and only, most common response in defense of Game Freak's apathy towards Pokemon. Since when giving constructive criticism requires extensive knowledge about the subject? if I don't like a movie but I'm not a director or an actor I cannot say it was bad? Can you give me somebody less lame for me to argue with?
This is the most inaccurate thing I have ever read in my life if you want to balance the game you can just ban certain mons it makes no sense to delete them from existence
@konbinilife
Been playing Pokemon since RBY days so I am in fact older than Pokemon. Having played other monster collectors as well, I can fairly say that both older ones like Dragon Quest and newer ones like Yo-Kai Watch honestly make Pokemon look like a joke YKW3 and DQMJ3P had the full monster count on a 3DS without tranfer for 700+ monsters each with way better animation, content, etc to boot. They were superior overall games on 3DS and it won't be even remotely surprising if it remains the same making Pokemon look bad on Switch despite having far greater staff with a smaller budget.
@JellyPop So if this game ends up sucking even without them all in it, then what? You can have every monster in a game AND have the game be good. The 2 aren't mutually exclusive. Series besides Pokemon have been able to accomplish that despite having just as big or a bigger monster count than Pokemon.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...