Junichi Masuda Says Cut Pokémon Will "Definitely" Return In Future Games

The backlash shall continue.

@Xelha This 100%.

Completely fine with this. It gets a little old seeing Zubat and Geodude everywhere, hopefully there's a big emphasis on the new 'mon during the main adventure like we saw with Black and White.

Pokemon fans are so weird, some of them (like myself) want change and new experiences but a lot of you guys would stick with the same battle ready team for the next five generations. Good on them for purging hacked 'mon moving forward, hopefully they'll stay out of Wonder Trade.

I see no problem with it. I like to use the new pokémon. And it's not like I'm gonna use all them anyway.

@Spudtendo yep, im getting sick and tired of op legendaries and mythicals like the tapus, kyogre, groudon infesting the battle spot.

I figured this was the case and have no problem with this. This is where the series would inevitably head to anyway. This actually will make me look forward to Pokemon games more in a way as I will be excited to see who made and who didn't make the cut. This also gives the newer pokemon more time to shine.

On a side note, I have yet to hear a solid argument for National Dex. Like, you aren't losing the pokemon by it not being in Sword and Shield. You don't even need to pay for Home it can just sit in Sun and Moon until the next game comes along to support it. I also don't understand why EVERY pokemon needs to be in, I understand that every pokemon is someone's favorite pokemon, but it's not like the pokemon is gone, it's still there in the previous game or in Home. The only way I can understand it is if you HAD to beat EVERY pokemon game with a SPECIFIC pokemon, but like why? If Sword and Shield comes out and my favorite pokemon didn't make the cut, I would be disappointed, but not mad, cause I know that maybe it'l be in the next one and I'll be that much more happy about it.

@Spudtendo

I couldn't have put it better or more amicable way myself. At the same time everyone wants change and nothing can change. Odd bunch of peeps we are. I know I'll enjoy the game.

To me mentioning “future generations” is just dollar signs to them. Why give the public everything they want when you could give it in small doses for full price each time? Gamefreak is greedy.

@Spudtendo As nice as that sounds, I'm sure every Kanto Pokemon will be back, and only 60-70 new ones.

I'd embrace this fully but only if Pokemon Home makes it worth transferring my Living Dex and they aren't just stuck there doing nothing there. I'd like to battle with them there at least if possible.

Seriously though. We NEED more information about what Home can do. Home is going to be the make or break factor for me.

@Spudtendo You're never going to escape Zubat, Geodude, Lucario, Gardevoir and the other Pokemon who always reappear in each Generation.

I still think they should add an option to Pokémon Home to play (online / local) battles.

So, I'm guessing that Pokémon Gun will pull the trigger on having all of them available?

This had to happen, it's the right choice. It's like competitive card games. Most card games have rotations allowing a mixture of classic and new cards in every format, and to explain why it's because making new cards becomes either a never ending power creep or new introductions have little to no effect of the game.

By limiting the dex in this way we can have a mixture of returning and new Pokemon each game without GF having to try balancing 1000 Pokemon this game, 1100 next gen, 1250 after that...

Haters can whine all they want, and hey, you don't have to buy it! You can go play something else. You're not obligated to buy this game. There is an abundance of other titles around for you to play, new and old.

@Xelha How many characters do you need lol

In other news,

AlphaDream filed for bankruptcy today.

This will possibly hinder the future of the Mario & Luigi series possibly for the Switch.

@AnnoyingFrenzy i dont see how its entailed to want an undisputed reason why pokemon are cut. before it was high quality animations which with every new trailer new content appears to argue that claim. Here its gameplay features without really having anything to back that up claim.
Heres a simple question that hasnt been answered why cant cut pokemon be added in later as free or paid DLC?

@Megasone Sorry, entitled was a poor word choice I'll edit that part. As for Game Freak's obvious and repeated lying about why they were cut, I got nothing, but that isn't about the National Dex that is about Game Freak lying; big difference. As for DLC, I don't see why not, but why announce something like that BEFORE the game is out? Smash Bros had a small amount of backlash when they did that and Pokemon has enough problems already.

If all Pokemon games have 18 gyms (i.e. more content) as a result, I think I'd be more okay with this (since I never transferred old Pokemon to begin with).

But that's just me.

@Xelha Nothing, really. Simultaneously, Pokemon is in a unique position where you have a franchise that needs to release two variations of a game every couple of years, each subsequent release needs new characters while retaining all the old ones, the graphical fidelity needs to constantly increase to match with new hardware meaning reworking animations for the hundreds of playable characters from the ground up, and more gameplay options need to be added to compensate for the core gameplay loop revolving around clicking through menus.

At some point something has to give. How large does the character count need to reach before Nintendo are allowed to say "damn, do we really have to rework 1,600 characters and add a few extras this next game haha"?

It's really funny how so many people continue to whine and throw fits about how not every single Pokemon is going to be in the new game. Just be glad you're getting a new game. They could've just ended the series with Sun and Moon you know so quit throwing the temper tantrum. You don't even know how many have been cut yet so grow up.

I had to register just to write this comment...

For those of you who did not have the chance to grow up with Pokemon, perhaps you did not remember the original theme of the whole series (gotta catch 'em all...), but those of us who do remember and are still invested in the series may, you know, actually believe in that theme.

It's just the recent direction that GameFreak has taken that is totally throwing us off, and here, I shall list a few:

1. Cross-region gameplay was always a possibility. They could have always made a Pokemon game that's much larger in scale, that spans multiple regions. The idea started in Gen 2 but never went anywhere else. If a game that had this scale was released and updated regularly to begin with, there would be a point to the National Pokedex, and there would be a way to fill it all up. Alas, the scale of each subsequent game was adjusted, and recently (in Sun and Moon), they became extremely... limited. But okay, I guess we can all agree that GameFreak understandably does not have the necessary resources to pull off a Pokemon game of that scale... yet (hopefully not never).

2. The character count was entirely up to them. GameFreak only has themselves to blame for the humongous roster of Pokemon available now. So they are their own worst enemy. I would argue... actually that if they start cutting old Pokemon so that they can introduce new ones, then it exacerbates the problem and essentially makes it practically impossible for any future game to ever contain the full roster. It's simple really: do they want to introduce 100-200 new Pokemon for every generation? Make the total roster >2K within the next 2 gens... Or do they want to do maybe 50 at most, and keep expanding on the regions you can visit in a game, with tweaks to already existing characters? The latter is exactly what sports games like FIFA (actually, prime culprit is indeed FIFA) does. But aside from the Switch version that changes very little, can anyone as a whole say that FIFA on other consoles, with tweaks to gameplay, visual upgrades, and some new modes to enjoy the same old characters... is a bad game? No? Hm... And ignoring FIFA, how bout Pro Evolution Soccer? Is that a bad game because it keeps basically the same characters around, just on different teams?

3. Is asking for the original promise of "gotta catch 'em all" to be fulfilled in at least one non-Go game about Pokemon an "entitled" wish? I honestly have waited for such a game for far too long, and judging by the direction of Sword and Shield, I guess I won't have to wait anymore as the answer is clear: it's a never from the current management at GF. I won't say "it's a disappointment" or "it's a disaster", but more like... "I guess the one Pokemon game I have been waiting for will never come". Instead, what will most likely happen now is... maybe there will be one or two games that I will see a mon I really like being in it, and then there will be games without that mon, and with a bunch of other mons that I may or may not give a damn about because... who friggin' cares when they may or may not appear in the next generation.

4. So you may not realize this yet, but GameFreak is essentially setting the stage for all Pokemon to essentially be "disposable". Whichever mon it is you like, if it's not popular enough, won't appear very frequently in a future game, or at all. So... why should I care about these new mon? Why should I invest my time in catching them, training them, or raising them when I know there's a chance I won't see them again until like... a few games later? Give me one compelling reason why I should even care about these new mons when even their creators don't seem to think they were made to last?

So that's my reasoning as to why I will most likely skip Sword and Shield, and many more after this generation... until someone at GF has decided to give all of these Pokemon the care and love they deserve. It's hard to be excited about a Pokemon game made by people who don't think some of these mons will be loved and used by people at all, you know.

@Xelha Choice? Give me a break!

Over 1000 pokemon in the Pokedex in previous games and how many of those do you see in Online battles?

Only a fraction of them! People just keep playing with the same overpowered (legendary) Pokemon over and over again. Transfered via Pokebank.
And what use is there to have over 1000 different Pokemon, when the vast majority are just terrible filler Pokemon who are useless in Battle. So their only use is to take a spot in your bank and put a picture entry in your Pokedex. Whoopitididoo!

I like the idea of a rotation system, where Pokemon dissapear/reappear in future games.
It also makes more sense. Not all Pokemon live in all regions after all.
Especially if this helps with making Online battles more exciting again with meeting new and different Pokemon´s in people´s teams! Instead of the same ol´ same ol´ over and over again. /shrug

I rather have Gamefreak focussing on a smaller number of Pokemon and rework those to make all of them more viable and usuable in battle, instead of just taking up a spot in your bank and fill up your Pokedex.

But when are they going to start using the new tag line "Gotta Catch Some of 'Em"?

The more time passes, the more I understand how Game Freak might feel the need to put a limit on how many Pokemon appear in any game. That said, I think the timing is bad. For me personally, I hate that the first true HD console Pokemon game is the one that has to make this change that was undoubtedly going to go over poorly at first. In my eyes, this should be the one Pokemon game that broke boundaries, not set up new, limiting ones.

I guess it's just opened up my eyes to the fact that Game Freak, unlike Nintendo, does not really care about evolving their franchise, which is really sad coming right off the heels of Breath of the Wild, and Mario Odyssey. Oh, and what other Nintendo game got delayed because the developers actually want to make a game that is fitting for its first true HD outing: Animal Crossing, and that news came right around the time of all the Pokemon hubbub almost like Nintendo is acknowledging the fact that they too know of the sad fate of Pokemon, but at least are trying the best with their own IPs lol

@Jeronan if only that carried over to the Regional Dex. I am sick of seeing Geodude, Zubat, Machop, Poliwag, Snorlax, and all the others who just keep reappearing every game. Pikachu and Eevee are exceptions as they're the mascots, no matter how tired I am of seeing Eevee.

My issue with this is still that the adventure becomes that little bit less enjoyable when I can't go catch a Mareanie and an Absol first chance I get, slap an everstone on Mareanie when possible, and outfit myself with 4 chosen Pokémon from the new generation.

Who knows, maybe I will get to catch a Mareanie and/or an Absol. But right now, I can't be sure. Also, you can replace those two with any other two, and you have the woes of another Pokémon fan.

It's still not okay to not include them all.

People make poor arguments like these mons infesting battle spot and so on, but they really only do that if the battlespot ruleset lets them.

A sensible battlespot ruleset would keep a healthy battlespot despite the inclusion of every Pokémon, legendary or not.

I hope that's really best for the game and if these new features can deliver the best Pokémon experience,
...but really, I also want new info on Pokemon Home ASAP...

I'm a BBNDer. I'm still f*****g p****d at this, and will not be getting these games.

@Xelha Why is there no excuse? It seems there are a lot of people under the assumption the "Catch Em All" catchphrase was the very soul of the series and not simply a catchphrase (enough people that Nintendo even saw it fit to drop it for a few years). You are also insinuating that the "best they can be" means "devoid of roster gaps", and that is nothing more than conjecture. What's your point of reference for this?

Thank you for implying I said SNS was pushing the console to its limits. How generous of you. Has Pokemon ever had a reputation for being a console benchmark? I don't think so. SNS undoubtedly isn't pushing the Switch to its limits. However, there's a big difference between creating something that can bring a console to its knees (and trust me when I say this isn't very difficult to do) and animating dozens of animation cycles for several hundred characters. I could boot up After Effects right now, throw a few dozen particle generators into a 4k project, and crash my PC in a couple of seconds. No matter how I went about it, I would not be able to draw a two second animation cycle for even just a dozen stickmen within 10 minutes because while the level of complexity is miniscule relative to particle generators and shading and fancy doodads, the workload is still necessarily tedious. You can throw as much money at the problem as you want. Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice is one of the best looking games of recent times and was developed on an indie budget by an indie team. Hours are hours.

Also, I know I wasn't the person you were responding to, but if you honestly think that the removal of characters stagnates competitive scenes, I have to only assume you don't play competitive games. Roster size and competitive health are completely unrelated ideas across every competitive scene I've encountered. I don't know who put that idea in your head but you should seriously think it through a little more.

@BlackTalon2 Then prepare to see 10 other pokemon taking up the "Oh no, not that one again!"-slots.

That's competitive gaming for you, people find the best and exclusively use those.

Oh here we go... I'm honestly tired of this discussion. It had to happen eventually. Some people just can't accept that producing a brand new pokemon experience every year or so AND having to mess around with 1000+ pokemon (forms, movesets etc) per generation would eventually become too much. All the naysayers just aren't thinking practically and that's why they're so angry. The mob mentality has really taken itself to absurd heights with this.

And yes, some of you will say "this is the final straw and its been building for awhile", I'll say this: Would you rather have all pokemon in and less/no new features or would you rather what we're getting now with Sword and Shield? Quality and only a select number of pokemon? People need to recognize this will be much healthier for the games in the long-run and make the meta much more interesting too. Rather than having the same 50+ pokemon being used by everyone over and over because of how they outclass every other pokemon, we're getting a chance to see new/less frequently used pokemon take the spotlight. And no way can that be a bad thing in any respect.

How tone deaf can he be? Then again, he's supposedly been guiding the series into its "buy just to get a high" state for well over a decade, so his brazen attitude on display here is nothing new.

@ThatNyteDaez .... But isn't choosing either side a mindhive? Just sayin'
sideing with one or the other is because of your own choice, then it is fueled by others on that same side.

Having certain Pokemon appear naturally in the games at random in regions is fine..... But why can't I bring old Pokemon not found in that region into the game through Pokebank!? A service that we will be paying to use anyways?

Like why is there that limit? And then say " well if they aren't here they will be in other games" .... So what's the deal then?
If sword shield can't have all because 'retrains' or whatever. Fine, that's expected for the 'first major' mainline game. But why does it sound like the future games can't have certain pokemon if not found in that region? The games don't change drastically artstyle wise.... So unless they start going for more of an cartoon/anime 2d look, I don't see why in the future games, we can't have all Pokemons in one game (as in bringing them over through Pokebank and using them in game).

But you know what. I don't care anymore. I'll just wait and see what will happen. I am honestly backed up on games and others seem way more exciting that I'll skip this game (probably the next few ones so that at least I'll be new Pokemon for me. Everyone else can enjoy it, and have fun.
For a franchise that ranks in billions a year, it's kinda strange that they decide to do these things. Making megaevolutions obselete, and other mechanics gone forever....why? Probably because they can just make another game the next year and say "new" on the box.

@ThatNyteDaez
I mean they don't need to produce a new game every year. They could take two to have both the pokemon and a new experience.

This issue really annoys me. As someone who likes to complete the living 'dex this is the reason I probably won't bother with Pokemon Home (based on current information of it) and stick with my living 'dex on Bank.

That being said; despite my minimal interest in this gen overall, i'll still buy it thus being a hypocrite who's part of the problem...

I'm just not interested in these anymore. Gamefreak and pokemon are big enough that they could easily have all pokemon. That and the underwhelming graphics at a $60 price tag makes these a hard pass. The first gen of pokemon I'll completely skip.

I bet every single one of you complaining will still end up buying this game juuuust sayin’.

@commentlife I won't be, pokemon is boring. I'm also not the target audience though, early 20's.

So when are we gonna see the new ideas and features? All we've seen is rehashed stuff that we've had for years like cooking or some special forms separate from main evolutionary mechanics

Translation: “We are withholding Pokémon so that we can use them to market future games.”

I'm all for a pokemon cull, but this was not the best way to do it. You can't treat the video game like a TCG - I can play with the TCG cards I have in for-fun games regardless of what's legal in tournaments, but I CAN'T play with the game-mon I have without the GAME as an interface. That's the big difference.

The idea of Pokemon Home allowing local and online battling and trading is brilliant. I severely doubt they'll do it, but that would solve the problem. You'd still need the game to capture, adventure, breed, etc., but if Home had the basic trade/battle functions you'd still be able to PLAY with any pokemon you have, whether or not it's in a particular generation. Again, doubtful it'll ever happen.

Pokemon is a victim of its own success. They've never really struggled. No main line game has been a flop. This means they've never truly been required to listen or to innovate. That's why they're just now implementing decades old gameplay like 3D movement...in 2019, we're excited that Pokemon finally has real 3D movement and camera control. That's why the gimmicks keep coming - they're "innovation" designed by people for whom there are no risks, because if there was a risk they'd have to do some analysis and figure out what might actually be good instead of just throwing things at a wall. And it's not going to change because a few disgruntled older gamers refuse to buy the latest game. They have a constant influx of new players in children who don't have anything to compare the new game to. I expect pokemon will limp along for many many years to come.

These comment sections make me ashamed to be a Pokemon fan these days.

@cryptologous they are seemingly reusing all of the animations and models from the 3ds games for the old Pokémon though. I can provide a bunch of comparison footage if you don’t believe me. Gamefreak created future-proofed HD models of the Pokémon for the 3ds Pokémon games that have been shown to be able to port over well to various platforms including mobile phones. The let’s go games have also ported all of the old models, battle, and unused walking animations over from the 3ds.
I think the real reason Gamefreak is doing this, is so that they can withhold and bring back Pokémon each gen to market future games. Gamefreak is notorious for removing loved things from their games and bringing them back years later as new.

@Spudtendo How does leaving out options for more mon, teambuilding and diversity equal "change and new experiences"?

Way to perpetuate the strawman argument that those wanting more content don't want new content as well, as if including all of the old mon doesn't mean that it will make for a more complete game instead of one like a patchwork quilt riddled with holes all over it.

@burninmylight

It's a complete game. You don't have to buy it. Again, I'm mostly happy that people can't carry over their hacked 'mon that they didn't earn.

@commentlife I already cancel my Pre-order , right after hearing the natdex demise. Plus, Is till have more interesting games to play, DQ11S, G5, and MHWIB. I also still haven't completed the dex in USUM. Once that's done I can say goodbye to the Pokemon series, except the anime...if it's any good

@Primarina you gotta be kidding me, Pokemon won't "die" or stop making games just because people lash out at them. In fact they don't even care about it. you know why, because you and I are not their target audience. Their aim is kids, if the kids want a pokemon game, they will ask their parents to buy it, and GF knows that. They don't care what you and I want, what you and I think and what you and I expect of the pokemon franchise. the games, the anime the toys. Pokemon stop caring for their fans after they realize there is much more money to be made when their audience are the kids. on Mobile however, their target audience is you and me, because they know that people our age or older can easily spend money on the apps. People are failing to see this because they consider themselves "true fans". you can have fun with it if you want, but to me Pokemon is already dead

@Xelha yet you probably have no idea how game development works or what goes on when making a game. Anyone who's complaining should start reading this blog post by a game developer. Seriously, it's a lot more complicated than you think
https://askagamedev.tumblr.com/post/186632316431/what-do-you-think-about-the-pokemon-sword-and/amp?__twitter_impression=true

@Primarina Money is a bigger motivating factor than you give credit. Matsuda probably really likes living comfortably with job security.

I completely understand this explanation Masuda is giving. And it's a bit more palpable to swallow than the balance one that was given before. I will say for many of us, battling online and wanting to use our overpowered Pokemon was never the issue. I know for me personally and from many others, completing the National Pokedex was the way we played. So its been understandable why so many were upset about the decision.

Now, you can argue whether or not their reactions are over the top or overdramatic. I think some have been. I've personally had no issue in expressing my disappointment in the decision. But since then, I am actually excited about some of the new features and Pokemon they've revealed

@cryptologous “needs” to release two gens each hardware gen?Sorry but no, that is a situation GF put themselves in and they can get out of that if they want to. We had two games (well three) per gen until Sinnoh, then they got greedy and bam, here we are.

@Aeleron0X thanks for the link, that’s a good resource, unfortunately people won’t listen. As someone with game design experience I’ve explained this, and usually the reaction is along the lines of, “but they already made future proof models they transferred from the previous games! But they look identical! But they have the same attack animation! If they remade them, why didn’t they make them look better??” I have a strong feeling even the size of the returning pokedex is still bigger than they could chew, and they couldn’t afford to make them look better... but they definitely remade them. You can’t future proof from new hardware. Sun and Moon reused X and Y. These were rebuilt from the ground up and it was expensive enough to just remake the same thing. But people without game design experience think it’s as easy as copying files from an SD card. That’s not how game design works, try spending hours modeling and texturing a single sword then get back to me. It’s less about manpower or money and more about time. Things take TIME, and if we never got new hardware than it would be realistic to keep reusing assets. But we will constantly get new hardware PLUS the roster is still expanding. Perhaps at some point they’ll release a Stadium-esque game that lets them focus 100% on including the entire Pokedex without having to worry about other things like building a region, programming new mechanics, etc. Of course, then we’ll hit new hardware and they’ll have to start over again. Honestly, I love Pokémon and was hoping the backlash wouldn’t get this bad with the inevitable decision, but at this point I wish it just ended with Gen V so people would’ve had to live with that instead. I sincerely look forward to the day these people just stop even talking about the games so the remaining fans can just get hyped for new games in peace. Unfortunately, seems like they’ll be complaining for a long time... :-/

It just seems so strange that some monsters will be completely incompatible. Not just unavailable in this game's region, but impossible to bring into the game. But aside from the strangeness, when there are 800 or whatever 'Mon in the series, it probably won't make a practical difference.

Kay.

Tbh, I'm not all that upset about them being cut. I'm not the catch em all type because a lot of em suck. I just catch whatever looks interesting and recatch my favorites. Unfortunately, they cut out a lot of my favorites and the new ones aren't very interesting. So I'm both mildly annoyed and bored.

@ShadJV I get the thing regarding the models needing time for new texture maps. But what about the wireframes by themselves? Could they be the future-proofed models mentioned? That would save a considerable amount of time, compared to building from scratch, and then there's file conversion.

@Saro they were future proofed for that hardware. It’s impossible to predict future hardware so true future proofing is impossible. That includes wireframes. It’s possible it was as simple as file conversion, but it’s just as possible that they were completely incompatible. It depends a lot on the 3DS and Switch architecture. Every console transition will be different, and once they moved from sprites this was inevitable. X and Y was a huge undertaking at the time, and likely pushed them to the limits in what they could accomplish during a development cycle. Now we’ve passed that limit. I suggest looking at the link @Aeleron0X posted because it does a good job of explaining all the work that has to be done with each mon. Wireframes would be just one piece of that pie and wouldn’t solve the problem. Not to mention even anything that does seem to transfer just fine has to be tested EXTENSIVELY because it’s hard to see where it might break in the new engine. Heck, sometimes reusing assets can take more work due to how much has to be debugged and changed. File conversion is not an exact since, things get lost in translation, textures apply improperly and animations behave wonky. Using something that wasn’t built for that engine can be a headache. And trying to fix something you imported that was created years ago for different hardware possibly by a different person can have a lot of its own problems. It’s similar to the reason why ports aren’t a matter of popping the compiled games into file converters and distributing them. Game development is many times more complex than a vast majority of gamers think.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say it’s about time. There’s no point in having different regions if every single Pokemon appears in every game. Make a distinction between games, stick with it, and let them have their own identities.

@ShadJV That makes sense, but we've had comparisons of X and Y wireframes to Let's Go,and they're very identical, with the same polygon count . If there was a problem that most wireframes can't work, they're really not saying anything. All I really want to know is regarding Home. Is it worth having a Living National Dex in Home? If so, then in what way?

@Saro I would be more surprised if the wire frames were different, they wouldn’t change them unless they were making them more detailed. They likely used the original wire frames as a reference because they had so much work to do. It’s more expensive and time consuming to start from scratch instead of at least copying what they did previously. I see no reason why they would talk to players about specific development hurdles like wireframes (which the average person doesn’t understand how much time that takes), PR talk is used in communication with the media, for better or worse. I think their communication on the matter has been poor and they’ve been making up excuses instead of being forthright, but once again it’s a combination of the fact that most people don’t understand what goes into the industry along with how standard PR talk is. It’s completely valid to be upset that they’ve made stuff up instead of being open about the reasons they have to cut the natdex, but it’s something than any developer agrees had to come and it should be considered a feat that they even got as far as they did without doing so. For all we know, the number of Pokémon is roughly the same as X and Y... but people likely would’ve thrown a fit regardless of what reasons they gave for this. So I’m not saying people don’t have a right to be upset about the lies, but not including the natdex was simply something that had to happen. They dug a hole when they weren’t transparent about why they had to cut Pokémon and now whatever they say will just dig it deeper - no one will believe any reason they give at this point.

@ShadJV What's sad is that most gamers don't realize that the hardcore fans only make up a small percentage of the total consumer base. Most people who play video games are mostly jusy casuals who just want to play a game and have fun (I recommend reading askagamedev's 80 20 5 post). But for hardcore gamers, they would rather believe in their own made up numbers. Even when you tell them the facts, they'll most likely ignore them just because it doesn't fit with their ideal worldview

@GetShulked That's definitely a big help but it still doesn't scratch the surface of the workload required to get everything working properly for a new console, not to mention introducing one new universal animation will require 800 individual animations to be created. @Aeleron0X has provided a post that'll give a brief overview from the standpoint of a dev regarding the workload here:
https://askagamedev.tumblr.com/post/186632316431/what-do-you-think-about-the-pokemon-sword-and/amp?__twitter_impression=true

@Kmno I wasn't saying it is a hard truth Pokemon games need to come in pairs, rather that's just an expectation from a large portion of the community. It is about as much an "essential" aspect of the series as keeping every single Pokemon in every single game. In fact (and unfortunately), I'd argue releasing multiple games at a time is even more important for Nintendo than keeping all the Pokemon, because technicalities about how many characters you keep in the game go over the heads of the casual audience. Pokemon is an empire at this point. It isn't run by Game Freak. It's run by investors. If you honestly think GF can just pce out with no issue, I think you are underestimating how much power the shareholders pulling the strings have.

@ShadJV Agreed. Personally, I'll be fine with what they did for Sword and Shield as long as Pokemon Home actually can let me do things with my Living National Dex in it, especially the ones who aren't allowed in the new games. If Home isn't worth transferring, I'm pretty much finished.

@Saro I mean, I’m sure it will let you transfer all Pokémon (and be compatible with future games) but that’s likely about it. I wouldn’t be surprised if it just has sprites for the Pokémon, it logically will have the same issues with models, textures, and animations. Not to mention it’s free. I could see them later on making a Stadium type game that used an increasing roster from the app, which would give them time to implement everything... but at this point, they might even pass on doing that, as it could just make the “natdex” issue resurface when people are like, “See? They could’ve had every Pokémon!” Despite the fact that the clear implication would be having every Pokémon would drastically delay the game. It’ll be interesting to see where Gamefreak goes with all this, because no matter what they do it’ll piss people off. Kinda hope they just ignore people at this point and do what they plan to do. Like, my favorite Pokémon, Malamar, has low chances of being is Sw and Sh. Oh well, there’s lots of choices still, I can use new stuff. I’d much rather they focus on quality over quantity, work on new content and not just throwing everything in. Maybe we can get longer stories. Maybe we can get more post game content. All of that is preferable to me over the bare bones but 1000+ Pokémon to choose from.

IF Umbreon is gone Ill be mad..