June 24th Pokemon Presents Discussion

[Juizel]

Yeah. Everyone is mad.

To be fair, it's pretty hard to not be mad.
To look forward to Pokémon Unite you have to ignore certain things about its developer (Tencent, or rather TiMi studios) and like MOBAs and enjoy games with the scope of a mobile game and not already be completely tired of free-to-start but pay-to-have-fun games. Or have really really low standards.

Don't mean to attack people who like the game, just saying a lot of factors not-too-common have to come together to make you actively look forward to it. Being neutral about it would be easier.

 

[thomaswiencek]

Why would most people hate Pokémon Unite, the game?

 

[Poke Dragon]

Why would most people hate Pokémon Unite, the game?

The lying, Tencent, and the fact that it's infested with microtransactions.

 

[Phosphene]

Why would most people hate Pokémon Unite, the game?

I don't think most people hate Pokémon Unite. However, to summarize some complaints I've seen...

1. It’s a free-to-start mobile game, which signals to many people that it will be laden with micro-transactions and have little effort put into it. People also dislike the fact that Pokémon is having a greater focus on mobile games as of late.
2. People were disappointed by the fact that there was a week-long hype build up to an eleven minute presentation dedicated solely to a mobile game.
3. It's being developed by Tencent, a company infamous for its ties to the PRC's government. Tencent has been accused of selling user data to said government, for example.
4. There appears to be Kanto pandering judging by the prominence of Kanto Pokémon in the few minutes of gameplay that have been shown.

 

[Juizel]

Why would most people hate Pokémon Unite, the game?

Just some reasons why a person could hate the game. From none of them to all of them, anything could apply.

• sort of infamous developer (some people actually care for who makes what they consume and what happens to their data, etc.)
• it's a mobile game (that is also playable on Switch, but still)
• it's a MOBA
• in-app-purchases (see below, it's already confirmed to be part of the game)
• essentially League of Legends with a Pokémon skin -> unoriginal (and from what things seem, people either love or hate the actual LoL anyway.)
• build-up implying it's bigger than the games shown in the last Presents (including New Pokémon Snap) and turns out it's not
• there are 10 Pokémon (for now) for 5 vs 5 battles
• 80% of the Pokémon currently confirmed to be playable are from Kanto (another is Lucario)
• Venusaur, Charizard and Blastoise seem to start as their first stage and evolve within the match, while others (Gengar, Machamp, Lucario, ...) start fully evolved
• there are no type matchups (which is part of the core of Pokémon battles)
• the budget used on it could have been spent on anything else instead

There's probably more.

Overall there's more reasons to hate the game than there are to like it already. No offense if you are one of the people who look forward to it (I have my fair share of games I do like, or even love, but which are pretty unpopular for objectively valid reasons, I don't judge lol) but a good number of people are pretty disappointed.

Personally I won't even install it. I can live with social media and Google having all my data but even I draw the line at some point. Also I don't like MOBAs, or free-to-play but pay-to-enjoy games.

 

[LuxrayOfTheWild]

Pokemon REALLY dropped the ball on this one. A lot are saying that they were unable to group Unite in with the week before because of China's utterly absurd ban on Pokemon Go, among other things. If this is true, they should have done it this way if they had to pander to Tencent because of this.

June 16th: They announce they have partnered with Tencent for an upcoming project and they want to share it with us on June 17th.
June 17th: They start by reminding us that the Isle of Armor has been released and they will give away a shiny Zeraora if 1 million players can beat Zeraora in a raid. Then, they shift over to Tencent and Pokemon Unite is announced. At the end, Ishihara mentions they're working on some exciting new projects they want to share with us next week.
June 24th: They announce Pokemon Smile, reveal Pokemon Cafe Mix and let us know its out, reveal Mega Evolution and Galarian Farfetch'd is coming to Pokemon Go, then close it out with the reveal of New Pokemon Snap.

People would still go into June 24th thinking they were gonna reveal a new mainline series game, but you wouldn't have people so disappointed because of the reveal of New Pokemon Snap. If they just swapped the order of reveals, there would be far less disappointment. People have a legitimate right to feel disappointed when they tell us they have a big project, hype up the event, then spend 11 minutes for a mobile game from a shady company. I personally don't blame people for getting hyped, thinking they were gonna announce a new main series game, considering how they hyped this as a big project that needed a separate event. MOBA's are big and among the top streamed games on Twitch, but to a lot of Pokemon fans online, a "big project" sounds like main series game.

 

[BlueWaves]

A Smogon Moderator's post rounds a huge portion of my thoughts.

Spoiler: Moderator's Thoughts

I think it leaves such a bitter taste in my mouth because there's no way this game wasn't conceived in a boardroom. It can't possibly have started with a designer having a vision, or an enthusiast pitching an idea to somebody, or a creative team gathering to figure out what project to do next. The question that spurred off the development of this game certainly wasn't "how can we make a new spin on the Pokémon franchise?", it was "How can we milk the franchise to make more money?" Because "microtransaction-riddled reskin of popular game genre" certainly isn't the result of any creative process unless you have a highly disagreeable sense of imagination.

Sure, I get that Pokémon needs to make money. They can't make games for free, and they have to pick a monetization scheme that leaves them with enough to keep the employees fed and the lights on. But they have a successful brand and a proven history of success, which gives them a lot of wiggle room. They can afford to take creative chances now and then, and still make money.

However, I don't see creativity anywhere in this. Monetary concerns seems to have triumphed creative concerns in every decision. Making money isn't enough; making all the money seems to have been the primary goal. From what I can see, the game format and mechanics are staples of the genre and without innovation on Pokémon's part (the core mechanic of type advantages seems to have been summarily discarded, even), the Pokémon available seem to have been selected because they are the biggest plushie pushers, and the number of times a free-to-start model has actually improved a game experience can surely be counted on one hand. And, of course, they got Tencent involved. Who ever went into business with them because they actually liked the company or its reputation?

So yeah, this game isn't made to break new ground, experiment with a new format, or take Pokémon in a new direction. If it is, they sure communicated it badly. It is, first and foremost, a scheme to make as much money as possible, and it seems that everything else has been a secondary concern.

Or TL;DR: This is so blatantly fuelled by greed and nothing else it makes me disgusted.

My biggest concern is the monetization. MOBAs like these are full of predatory transactions, and with Pokemon being aimed for kids, the wrong message could be sent. These games encourage the users to spend money, even if the lootboxes are purely cosmetic. There are several instances in which people have spent literally thousands of dollars and gone have actually broke. Several Middleschool teachers have reported cases in which students playing Fortnite games have bullied students who could not afford expensive outfits. LoL has a reputation for micro transactions, and currently this game is literally LoL but with Pokemon. Currently, I don't have high hopes for the handling of the micro transactions.

 

[Phosphene]

A Smogon Moderator's post rounds a huge portion of my thoughts.

Spoiler: Moderator's Thoughts

I think it leaves such a bitter taste in my mouth because there's no way this game wasn't conceived in a boardroom. It can't possibly have started with a designer having a vision, or an enthusiast pitching an idea to somebody, or a creative team gathering to figure out what project to do next. The question that spurred off the development of this game certainly wasn't "how can we make a new spin on the Pokémon franchise?", it was "How can we milk the franchise to make more money?" Because "microtransaction-riddled reskin of popular game genre" certainly isn't the result of any creative process unless you have a highly disagreeable sense of imagination.

Sure, I get that Pokémon needs to make money. They can't make games for free, and they have to pick a monetization scheme that leaves them with enough to keep the employees fed and the lights on. But they have a successful brand and a proven history of success, which gives them a lot of wiggle room. They can afford to take creative chances now and then, and still make money.

However, I don't see creativity anywhere in this. Monetary concerns seems to have triumphed creative concerns in every decision. Making money isn't enough; making all the money seems to have been the primary goal. From what I can see, the game format and mechanics are staples of the genre and without innovation on Pokémon's part (the core mechanic of type advantages seems to have been summarily discarded, even), the Pokémon available seem to have been selected because they are the biggest plushie pushers, and the number of times a free-to-start model has actually improved a game experience can surely be counted on one hand. And, of course, they got Tencent involved. Who ever went into business with them because they actually liked the company or its reputation?

So yeah, this game isn't made to break new ground, experiment with a new format, or take Pokémon in a new direction. If it is, they sure communicated it badly. It is, first and foremost, a scheme to make as much money as possible, and it seems that everything else has been a secondary concern.

Or TL;DR: This is so blatantly fuelled by greed and nothing else it makes me disgusted.

I haven't thought about the creative aspect of this game at all, but I feel this moderator's post is spot on. It definitely feels like Pokémon Unite is designed with the intentions of being a cash cow first, hence its flashy, eleven-minute long introduction.

Also, do you happen to have a link to the full discussion? Thanks.

 

[BlueWaves]

I haven't thought about the creative aspect of this game at all, but I feel this moderator's post is spot on. It definitely feels like Pokémon Unite is designed with the intentions of being a cash cow first, hence its flashy, eleven-minute long introduction.

Also, do you happen to have a link to the full discussion? Thanks.

Here's the link to the specific post, which is part of "Pokemon Unites" Thread.

 

[KenzeyEevee]

Pokemon where is the passion? The love?

 

[ShinyPokemon inc.]

Pokemon where is the passion? The love?

It's always there. You can tell that they put it in every mainline game.

 

[PinkIceFox]

Yeah I don't think the problem is lack of passion and love. I think the bigger problem are the older, higher up members of the company who have decided one thing is true (KIDS NO PLAY HARD GAEM. ONLY FONE) and make all the big decisions based on that.

No doubt in my mind that James Turner was passionate about his art direction. The towns are beautiful. The pokemon are creative. There are people passionate about pokemon in there. They're just unfortunately not the heads.

 

[RileyXY1]

Yeah I don't think the problem is lack of passion and love. I think the bigger problem are the older, higher up members of the company who have decided one thing is true (KIDS NO PLAY HARD GAEM. ONLY FONE) and make all the big decisions based on that.

No doubt in my mind that James Turner was passionate about his art direction. The towns are beautiful. The pokemon are creative. There are people passionate about pokemon in there. They're just unfortunately not the heads.

Especially Tsunekazu Ishihara, who actually thought that the Switch would flop because of competition from mobile devices.

 

[swiftgallade46]

Whether or not you enjoy the content is subjective, yes. But how much content there actually is is not, and that's the issue at hand here. The main games have less content now than they used to thanks to features constantly getting stripped from the game, Pokemon being cut over Dexit, and areas being emptier and more simplistic (although SwSh is starting to mitigate this by making the areas more open). And mobile games are typically very low on content with the game design being cheap and simplistic. Things like the size of areas, the amount of characters in a game, the length of the story, and the amount of quests and tasks to do can be quantitatively measured. It'd be somewhat complex to do, but you can do it and there's no two ways to do it. So that much is very much objective.

Sure, you could go through and count every single individual aspect of the game and attempt to assign a monetary value to it but the things you count, what counts, and the value each thing holds are all subjective.
You call things “cheap and simplistic”. That’s an opinion. You point out that Pokémon have been cut. The degree to which that affects the quality of gameplay is, again: subjective. Your opinion of the game is different than mine.

Stating your opinion is harmless, yes. Actually going out and buying the game though, that just encourages TPC to continue these kinds of practices, depriving the entire fanbase out of a better game. If you happen to like these kinds of games, good for you. But even if you do, the value (and by value I mean amount of content per cost, not your enjoyment of the game) is so poor that it's just not worth buying, and you should be pushing them to either include more content in the game for free, or pushing for them to make the game cheaper and avoid consumer unfriendly business models such as gacha and microtransactions. After all, how could you argue with having more content in a game you like or at a cheaper cost?

I mean this as respectfully as possible: I am not going to spend my money based on your opinions and you are not going to convince me otherwise. If I like the game—and I most certainly do—I’m going to buy it. Point, blank, period. I don’t subscribe to the notion that I’m harming anyone by doing this. I’m not going to boycott a game because someone else doesn’t like it.

 

[Daren]

My biggest concern is the monetization. MOBAs like these are full of predatory transactions, and with Pokemon being aimed for kids, the wrong message could be sent

This is mine as well. On a personal level Unite does not affect me at all--another game I just won't play, like Smile. It was a disappointment after that "big project" claim but I've been disappointed worse just by Pokémon, let alone by things more important to me then a multimedia franchise.

However, I've read stories--too many--about kids not quite understanding what they're doing and spending tons of money on games with in-app monetization. I've read about adults with addiction issues causing financial disaster for themselves on them.
All that is even ignoring the ominous stories I've read about Tencent that make me wary of anything they touch.

 

[LuxrayOfTheWild]

Honestly, the way I see it, you're going to have a few starting Pokemon, most of which are Kanto Pokemon. Any additional Pokemon is gonna be locked under a microtransaction.

 

[prog rocker]

I mean this as respectfully as possible: I am not going to spend my money based on your opinions and you are not going to convince me otherwise. If I like the game—and I most certainly do—I’m going to buy it. Point, blank, period. I don’t subscribe to the notion that I’m harming anyone by doing this. I’m not going to boycott a game because someone else doesn’t like it.

Considering the amount of times I have seen people doing that thing you're talking against, I guess I might put this in my signature. Because this is exactly how I feel.

 

[nickdt]

Honestly, the way I see it, you're going to have a few starting Pokemon, most of which are Kanto Pokemon. Any additional Pokemon is gonna be locked under a microtransaction.

Just imagine this: You want to let your Bulbasaur/Charmander/Squirtle evolve, 5 bucks.

 

[Phosphene]

Honestly, the way I see it, you're going to have a few starting Pokemon, most of which are Kanto Pokemon. Any additional Pokemon is gonna be locked under a microtransaction.

Is it common for MOBAs, specifically those by Tencent, to have playable characters locked behind paywalls, or are they more focused on cosmetics?

I could also see “skins” such as shiny versions locked behind limited time events or microtransactions.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

In conclusion, Sinnoh (74) is a bigger region than Galar (67) by count of areas.
(We cannot measure the actual size of the region, though. Even if I had any idea how to, Sinnoh being on NDS and not a full 3D environment.)

There’s also the fact that Sinnoh has areas completely non essential to the plot. Optional content. Which areas in Galar are completely optional? I don’t think there are many. And Sinnoh's caves are actual Multi floor dungeons whereas Galar abandons the cave dungeons entirely.

Ironically enough, Galar (510) wins over Sinnoh (493) in Pokémon count.
(Additionally, Galar added 86 new Pokémon and 16 regional variants to the game - overall 102 new designs. Sinnoh added 107. Sinnoh wins in this regard, although it is a close call.)

I don’t think the raw amount of Pokémon is a good metric (the total ones). I'd suggest the metric should be the percentage of total amount of Pokémon introduced at the time, since it’s a really unfair comparison to Sinnoh. There’s no way the developers could stick in Pokémon from Gen 5,6,7 or 8 there. Galar has 10 years worth more of a Pokemon selection to choose from.

Another point for added contents would be items - just think of the exp candies or mints. League cards are added content (that flesh out characters a bit more and you can customise your own.)

Unless you just walk through the game until the end and then put it aside for forever (which, I want to point out, is very fair), I wouldn't say we get "less content objectively" but rather different content. Whether you prefer the content of older games that got cut, or the content of newer games that got just added, that's subjective again.

I think you also forgot about similar content in Sinnoh like the entirely optional aspect of contests. Galar does have lots of quality of life improvements, I'll give it to that.