• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

June 24th Pokemon Presents Discussion

What do you think the new project will be?

  • Sinnoh Remakes

    Votes: 11 21.2%
  • Let's Go Johto

    Votes: 12 23.1%
  • Something else

    Votes: 29 55.8%

  • Total voters
    52
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
In one hand, yeah, some fans always overhype stuff. But in the other hand, one has to be very naive to think that making people wait one week for a "new project more special than the ones shown today" with that project being something nobody asked for and no one as any emotional connection to and the video itself centering only on that was a good idea. Specially in the time period we're in, where people are locked in their homes, lots of media are being postponed and where Nintendo itself is completely quiet about their E3 news.

As for my thoughts, I'd say that...it's allowed to exist. We got a "complete" spin-off three months ago and two more are on the way (and one of them could sell very well), so more apps is okay, and I hope it brings more people into Pokémon. I will play it without spending a cent because I really appreciate that unlike Masters it's available for Switch. However, like I said above the marketing did suck, last night I wondered "They can't just announce a fusion between Pokemon and those battle royal games the kids play nowadays, can they?" and here we are.
 
Last edited:
Let’s reel it in a bit here. This announcement isn’t in any way indicative of the franchise becoming “a mobile gaming company”. In fact it’s...playable on the Switch. The franchise’s core is still console based and that’s where most of of its revenue lies.
Considering the state of the franchise during the past few years, I'd argue that the Pokemon franchise is at the very least is being catered to a mobile gaming/extremely casual audience.

1. The Pokemon Company has released at least 8 free to play/mobile Pokemon games since 2015 (Pokemon Shuffle, two Pokemon Rumble games, Pokemon Duel, Pokemon Go, Pokemon Quest, Pokemon Masters, Magikarp Jump, and Pokemon Home to an extent) and we are going to be getting Unite, Smile, and presumably Pokemon Sleep in the near future. Not all of these games are bad (I play Go occasionally and Magikarp Jump is a guilty pleasure) but the rate at which these games have been produced is kind of alarming.

2. The Let's Go games were designed as way to attract the Go audience to the main series games as well as trying to attract more main series fans to Pokemon Go. Between this and the fact that Home's primary functionality is located on the phone app, I can assume that the Pokemon Company wants the main series to have a stronger connection to mobile devices/games.

3. The CEO of the Pokemon Company has been reported as saying that he originally thought the Switch would not succeed due to people not wanting to carry game consoles around in the age of smart phones. I can understand how someone could be skeptical of the success of the Switch after the Wii U bombed, but the fact that he tied his reasoning to smart phones is evidence that he has more faith in the mobile market than the console market. The lack of confidence in the Switch could also explain why the early Pokemon games for the Switch have been a bit lacking in content/polish.

Source: 'Pokemon' CEO Thought The Nintendo Switch Was Going To Fail - Goliath

4. The reasoning that Masuda gave for not including the Battle Frontier in ORAS (and why the overall difficulty is lower than older games) was essentially that it wouldn't be appealing to the casual audience that doesn't put a lot of time into individual games, citing that those people have access to a wide variety of games via smart phones and other devices.

Source: View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/2olmtb/interview_with_masuda_on_oras_and_why_there_is_no/



My conclusion from these observations is that the franchise is most likely moving towards mobile gaming/the mobile gaming audience due to the high profit margins and low cost of producing games. Games like Pokemon Unite are not designed for fans of the series, but they are highly appealing to the investors, due to how much money those games usually make.
 
To pass the time, I still have yet to complete Sword and Shield 100% including the Isle of Armor and there are other games I want to finish as well. So too bad Tencent isn't going to get a cent from me.
 
Considering the state of the franchise during the past few years, I'd argue that the Pokemon franchise is at the very least is being catered to a mobile gaming/extremely casual audience.

1. The Pokemon Company has released at least 8 free to play/mobile Pokemon games since 2015 (Pokemon Shuffle, two Pokemon Rumble games, Pokemon Duel, Pokemon Go, Pokemon Quest, Pokemon Masters, Magikarp Jump, and Pokemon Home to an extent) and we are going to be getting Unite, Smile, and presumably Pokemon Sleep in the near future. Not all of these games are bad (I play Go occasionally and Magikarp Jump is a guilty pleasure) but the rate at which these games have been produced is kind of alarming.

2. The Let's Go games were designed as way to attract the Go audience to the main series games as well as trying to attract more main series fans to Pokemon Go. Between this and the fact that Home's primary functionality is located on the phone app, I can assume that the Pokemon Company wants the main series to have a stronger connection to mobile devices/games.

3. The CEO of the Pokemon Company has been reported as saying that he originally thought the Switch would not succeed due to people not wanting to carry game consoles around in the age of smart phones. I can understand how someone could be skeptical of the success of the Switch after the Wii U bombed, but the fact that he tied his reasoning to smart phones is evidence that he has more faith in the mobile market than the console market. The lack of confidence in the Switch could also explain why the early Pokemon games for the Switch have been a bit lacking in content/polish.

Source: 'Pokemon' CEO Thought The Nintendo Switch Was Going To Fail - Goliath

4. The reasoning that Masuda gave for not including the Battle Frontier in ORAS (and why the overall difficulty is lower than older games) was essentially that it wouldn't be appealing to the casual audience that doesn't put a lot of time into individual games, citing that those people have access to a wide variety of games via smart phones and other devices.

Source: View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/2olmtb/interview_with_masuda_on_oras_and_why_there_is_no/



My conclusion from these observations is that the franchise is most likely moving towards mobile gaming/the mobile gaming audience due to the high profit margins and low cost of producing games. Games like Pokemon Unite are not designed for fans of the series, but they are highly appealing to the investors, due to how much money those games usually make.
Well of course Pokémon is going to participate in mobile gaming. It’s a massive part of the gaming industry that they can easily succeed in and already have. That doesn’t mean that their presence is suddenly or even gradually becoming 100% mobile. People have been saying this since GO’s overwhelming success in 2016 and yet here we are two generations later with our main series games still succeeding massively as console exclusives. We are going to keep getting mobile spin-offs because they are lucrative. That doesn’t equate to an exclusively mobile Pokémon gaming-front.
 
Last edited:
Unlike most people, I wasn't surprised at all that this ended up being for a shitty mobile game. This is just Pokemon's MO nowadays, TPC is pretty much allergic to anything that requires actual effort nowadays, so they just hype up low budget mobile games to high heaven. They were never going to release another main series game this year while they're working on the Expansion Pass, it's taking the place of a third version so that is a main series release to them, and they've really shown with SwSh that they're not capable of handling anything more. This is just how Pokemon is nowadays, their standards are pretty damn close to rock bottom so our expectations should be too (doesn't mean we shouldn't call out TPC on their bullshit and pressure them to come out with something better, but until they prove they're capable of giving us a game that's actually ambitious we shouldn't hold our breaths waiting for one).
 
That does not mean that some of the toxicity I've been seeing on social media and whatnot is okay. Insulting people who are excited, calling anyone who's positive about it or tries to understand a shill or a sheep, the extremes people go to at times in their anger... all of it has gotten old.
No arguments there, people attacking others is not an acceptable practice under any circumstances. I was really just trying to process my own reaction as well as express a viewpoint that might help newer fans understand why the reaction is as disproportionately negative as it is.
 
Unlike most people, I wasn't surprised at all that this ended up being for a shitty mobile game. This is just Pokemon's MO nowadays, TPC is pretty much allergic to anything that requires actual effort nowadays, so they just hype up low budget mobile games to high heaven. They were never going to release another main series game this year while they're working on the Expansion Pass, it's taking the place of a third version so that is a main series release to them, and they've really shown with SwSh that they're not capable of handling anything more. This is just how Pokemon is nowadays, their standards are pretty damn close to rock bottom so our expectations should be too (doesn't mean we shouldn't call out TPC on their bullshit and pressure them to come out with something better, but until they prove they're capable of giving us a game that's actually ambitious we shouldn't hold our breaths waiting for one).

You’re right. I know I’M not gonna be expecting anything stellar from them anymore after today (and 2019-2020 in general). I give up...
 
Well of course Pokémon is going to participate in mobile gaming. It’s a massive part of the gaming industry that they can easily succeed in and already have. That doesn’t mean that their presence is suddenly or even gradually becoming 100% mobile. People have been saying this since GO’s overwhelming success in 2016 and yet here we are two generations later with our main series games still succeeding massively as console exclusives. We are going to keep getting mobile spin-offs because they are lucrative. That doesn’t equate to an exclusively mobile Pokémon gaming-front.

You're not getting it, it's not just about the games being on a mobile platform, it's also about the gameplay shifting more towards shallow quickplay experiences. And we've seen this in the main series with features constantly being stripped from the game, the game design becoming more simplistic, the overall lack of content in the games, even going as far as to remove Pokemon for the game, all rather than scale up their resources to make a proper console game. So even if they do keep making main games on Nintendo hardware, they're not making the kinds of experiences that people would typically want from a $60 retail Nintendo console game.
 
You're not getting it, it's not just about the games being on a mobile platform, it's also about the gameplay shifting more towards shallow quickplay experiences. And we've seen this in the main series with features constantly being stripped from the game, the game design becoming more simplistic, the overall lack of content in the games, even going as far as to remove Pokemon for the game, all rather than scale up their resources to make a proper console game. So even if they do keep making main games on Nintendo hardware, they're not making the kinds of experiences that people would typically want from a $60 retail Nintendo console game.
I’m fully “getting it” I’m just allowed to have a different opinion? I’m all for criticizing the games where necessary, but I just don’t share in the opinion that the franchise is dying, declining, and money grubbing. I’m a bit tired of people trying to preach to others that that is how they need to see things when it’s highly speculative and subjective.

I loved Sword and Shield (+ the Expansion Pass) and the announcement of a new hybrid mobile game has not caused me to suddenly lose any fondness for the franchise nor suddenly view it as “dead as we know it”. You’re welcome to hold a dissenting opinion.
 
Well if course Pokémon is going to participate in mobile gaming. It’s a massive part of the gaming industry that they can easily succeed in and already have. That doesn’t mean that their presence is suddenly or even gradually becoming 100% mobile. People have been saying this since GO’s overwhelming success in 2016 and yet here we are two generations later with our main series games still succeeding massively as console exclusives. We are going to keep getting mobile spin-offs because they are lucrative. That doesn’t equate to an exclusively mobile Pokémon gaming-front.

I never said it would be 100% mobile; I argued it could end up being primarily based on mobile devices/designed for a mobile game audience and gave examples of where mobile gaming/casual gamers influenced the development of the franchise and main series games. The Let's Go games are not mobile games, but they are designed to cater to a mobile game audience and incorporate them into the more traditional main series. As the franchise continues to expand into mobile game development, the line between fans of the main series and the mobile games will continue to blur and interests will increasingly clash.

Also, just because something is lucrative doesn't mean it's optimal for the consumer/lower level employees. Companies will try to cut corners/ take advantage of their customers/employees if given the chance. Crunch, micro transactions, and low quality asset flips are all frowned upon, but continue to occur due to how profitable they are.
 
I’m fully “getting it” I’m just allowed to have a different opinion? I’m all for criticizing the games where necessary, but I just don’t share in the opinion that the franchise is dying, declining, and money grubbing. I’m a bit tired of people trying to preach to others that that is how they need to see things when it’s highly speculative and subjective.

I loved Sword and Shield (+ the Expansion Pass) and the announcement of a new hybrid mobile game has not caused me to suddenly lose any fondness for the franchise nor suddenly view it as “dead as we know it”. You’re welcome to hold a dissenting opinion.

It's really not subjective. You're paying more money for less content than we've had previously, for both the main games and the mobile spinoffs (the main games because of the jump to a $60 price point on console and mobile because they constantly nickel and dime you with microtransactions that add up to more than a retail game), that's all completely quantitative. Say what you will about liking the gameplay style or genre, but no one can argue that more content is better than less content, or a lower price is better than a higher price. So you're just blatantly ripping yourself off and the rest of the fanbase by supporting this instead of demanding better value.
 
I’m fully “getting it” I’m just allowed to have a different opinion? I’m all for criticizing the games where necessary, but I just don’t share in the opinion that the franchise is dying, declining, and money grubbing. I’m a bit tired of people trying to preach to others that that is how they need to see things when it’s highly speculative and subjective.

I loved Sword and Shield (+ the Expansion Pass) and the announcement of a new hybrid mobile game has not caused me to suddenly lose any fondness for the franchise nor suddenly view it as “dead as we know it”. You’re welcome to hold a dissenting opinion.

We are at the point where you can pay to keep your Pokemon trapped in a $15.99/yr cloud service for an indeterminate amount of time. I'd say that is kind of money grubbing or at the least is in poor taste.
 
I never said it would be 100% mobile; I argued it could end up being primarily based on mobile devices/designed for a mobile game audience and gave examples of where mobile gaming/casual gamers influenced the development of the franchise and main series games. The Let's Go games are not mobile games, but they are designed to cater to a mobile game audience and incorporate them into the more traditional main series. As the franchise continues to expand into mobile game development, the line between fans of the main series and the mobile games will continue to blur and interests will increasingly clash.

Also, just because something is lucrative doesn't mean it's optimal for the consumer/lower level employees. Companies will try to cut corners/ take advantage of their customers/employees if given the chance. Crunch, micro transactions, and low quality asset flips are all frowned upon, but continue to occur due to how profitable they are.
The post I originally quoted said Pokémon as we knew it was dead and it is now a mobile gaming company. I was arguing against that extreme and that’s it. I never insinuated anything about the economics of mobile gaming (other than the fact that it’s lucrative which you agreed with), and I never said Pokémon wasn’t trending towards more of a large mobile presence. I do reject the prediction that they will continue to “blur the line” between casual mobile gaming and main series titles until we are fully mobile. I just don’t see enough evidence for that.
It's really not subjective. You're paying more money for less content than we've had previously, for both the main games and the mobile spinoffs (the main games because of the jump to a $60 price point on console and mobile because they constantly nickel and dime you with microtransactions that add up to more than a retail game), that's all completely quantitative. Say what you will about liking the gameplay style or genre, but no one can argue that more content is better than less content, or a lower price is better than a higher price. So you're just blatantly ripping yourself off and the rest of the fanbase by supporting this instead of demanding better value.
It’s completely subjective. Saying “Sword and Shield are worth $60” and saying “Sword and Shield are not worth $60” is subjective. It depends entirely on what you value about the games and if they keep you interested and playing. I have logged nearly 300 hours in Sword alone (actually it’s more like 700 but shiny hunting doesn’t really count lol). I clearly found enough content to keep me busy.

And please don’t make things needlessly personal lol. I’m not “ripping anyone off” by stating my opinion. I’m simply hoping someone else gets the same enjoyment out of it that I do.
 
I'm sorry, I usually try to stay out of these conversations, but that last comment was just wrong. Basically guilt tripping people by saying they're ripping "the rest of the fanbase" off because they're satisfied with the newer games because you don't like them is wrong. I got plenty of enjoyment out of SWSH, more than some of the games that people call the glory days. It's easily been worth my money. I refuse to basically be told that I'm wrong for that. If you don't like the current direction the franchise has gone, fine. But don't drag everyone else into it by saying that they have to feel the same way. I am not ripping anyone off by quietly enjoying my video game.
 
So I've heard that Tencent gives user data to the PRC's government. Is there any reliable source(s) verifying this? Thanks.
 
Say what you will about liking the gameplay style or genre, but no one can argue that more content is better than less content, or a lower price is better than a higher price.

On the price side, yes indeed. And I would agree that I do think $60 is a touch steep; frankly for any of the big AAA titles these days, especially since that's usually the price regardless of whether you buy physical or digital (which is going to require significantly fewer production costs). But it's not so much that I find it a total dealbreaker, though I acknowledge I am fortunate to be in a position where I can afford such a compromise.

But content is more nuanced. In a general sense, sure, more content is inherently better because it has a better chance of appealing to more people, so more people can find something to enjoy in the game. But on an individual level - the only level I care about when I'm thinking about buying a game for my own enjoyment - if it's content I'll never use, it doesn't really make any difference to me whether it's there or not. There are plenty of games out there with more content than the games I play, but I don't care about those other games. Their content doesn't interest me. Besides that, I'm not here to protest Pokémon games on anyone else's behalf. If that makes you feel like I'm ripping you off then, uh, sorry mate? But I'm coming up on a 400th hour of fun thanks to the game, and I don't really feel bad for saying I value that more than I value appeasing dissatisfied forumgoers. :wynaut:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom