• 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.

SwSh Pokemon Home

arguably the DLC (which is still better than a 3rd version or sequel)
I get it's better than third versions but it's not better than sequels. Sequels can bring a ton more changes than DLC could ever had, specially having an actual different story and characters.

I mean, are some people thinking Black and White 2 were a waste time and money?
 
I get it's better than third versions but it's not better than sequels. Sequels can bring a ton more changes than DLC could have could, specially having an actual different story and characters.
If they ever do sequels again, since it has only happened twice, I hope they do something like the Memory Link feature. It was nice seeing my past character being recognized for once, and the scenes you unlock to bridge the events between BW and B2W2 were good.
 
I prefer it too, but my point wasn't that the "third versions" were better for consumers, it's that they were better at obscuring the fact you were paying way too much. The "third versions" were attached to a whole other 'complete' game, so where the value is in the pricetag was obscured. It's difficult to view the enhanced features or expanded story as "overpriced" (even though it is) when the only way to buy it is as part of that complete package. Whereas with Sword and Shield's DLC, two post game campaigns are priced at more than half of what the game itself cost. It's far easier to see its overpriced because, for the first time, it is being given its own separate pricetag.
Don't know exactly how well it obscured that, considering everyone I know knew that it was a bad practice, although that could be because the people I know were other Pokémon players or at least people that knew about the franchise (like other gamers).
 
I was referring to price
And i meant when it comes to price. Sequels can do far more than DLC could ever do like having much better written story, better difficulty scaling, improved graphics and animations. Changes to the region layouts, making cities and towns bigger and so many other changes that you are only limited by your imagination. DLC has limits of how much it can do without completely making an entire new game.

Yes, it would cost more, but i'll take a much more fullfilling experience from start to finish than something that was clearly rushed to meet a deadline and only being made better with DLC.
 
And i meant when it comes to price. Sequels can do far more than DLC could ever do like having much better written story, better difficulty scaling, improved graphics and animations. Changes to the region layouts, making cities and towns bigger and so many other changes that you are only limited by your imagination. DLC has limits of how much it can do without completely making an entire new game. Yes, it would cost more more, but i'll take a much more fullfilling experience from start to finish than something that was clearly rushed to meet a deadline and only being made better with DLC.
You’re reading way too deep into it lol. The only thing I was saying is $30 < $40. This means SwSh DLC < USUM.
 
I prefer it too, but my point wasn't that the "third versions" were better for consumers, it's that they were better at obscuring the fact you were paying way too much. The "third versions" were attached to a whole other 'complete' game, so where the value is in the pricetag was obscured. It's difficult to view the enhanced features or expanded story as "overpriced" (even though it is) when the only way to buy it is as part of that complete package. Whereas with Sword and Shield's DLC, two post game campaigns are priced at more than half of what the game itself cost. It's far easier to see its overpriced because, for the first time, it is being given its own separate pricetag.

I mean... shouldn’t the value being more visible be a good thing?

And aren’t they priced at exactly half of what the game costs?

I get it's better than third versions but it's not better than sequels. Sequels can bring a ton more changes than DLC could ever had, specially having an actual different story and characters.

I mean, are some people thinking Black and White 2 were a waste time and money?

To be fair, these DLC packs *do* have new characters, and they could at least in theory have original storylines (albeit not full campaigns), so you don’t necessarily need sequels for those things.
 
The only thing I was saying is $30 < $40. This means SwSh DLC < USUM.
USUM was a scam but that was a third version and you also said it's better than sequels (which USUM isn't). Pricing is also completely relative. Saying 30 bucks DLC is better than a 40 bucks game just because one is cheaper than the other is leaving out so much information. How much content does the DLC have and how much content does the game have? I have played 15 bucks games with way more content than 60 bucks games and a 30 bucks games having less content than another 30 bucks games.

So saying that something is cheaper therefore is better is rather misleading.
 
If they ever do sequels again, since it has only happened twice, I hope they do something like the Memory Link feature. It was nice seeing my past character being recognized for once, and the scenes you unlock to bridge the events between BW and B2W2 were good.
Personally, I wouldn't even consider USUM a sequel at all, since it just adds a few things like another third version. (Unless you're referring to Johto as a sequel to Kanto?)
 
USUM was a scam but that was a third version and you also said it's better than sequels (which USUM isn't). Pricing is also completely relative. Saying 30 bucks DLC is better than a 40 bucks game just because one is cheaper than the other is leaving out so much information. How much content does the DLC have and how much content does the game have? I have played 15 bucks games with way more content than 60 bucks games and a 30 bucks games having less content than another 30 bucks games.

So saying that something is cheaper therefore is better is rather misleading.
Im not sure how else i can get across to you that I’m not in any way speaking about quality or value or content. Math: $30 is less than $40. SwSh DLC costs less than USUM. That was my point in its entirety. You’re looking for an argument where there isn’t one.
 
Surely the "average gamer" would be more likely to just use the free plan or pay for a month/3 months when possible?

Besides that, I think considering Bank to be part of the "complete experience" of SwoShi is deeply dubious, since it's not relevant to anyone who doesn't have things from older games that they want to transfer.

Frankly I'm not even sure I'd say that Home contributes much to the "experience" - the only things it really contributes that are actually missing from the base games in comparison to older entries are the National Dex (which was already displaced last gen, and all it gives you are old entries that you could easily look up on Bulbapedia with the Internet connection that's required anyway) and the GTS (which is just a more specific version of trading).

Anyway, you still couldn't fully enjoy the games if you didn't also have a Switch, Internet, and electricity, so you should add those to your tally there too, no?

Yes and no your missing part of the points i elaborated on in the point in the expansion pass thread and lesser extent here and rather than type it all over gain 50 times (exaggeration)

if you wanna look more at my argument you can find my post actively (HERE)or a link to my first post in that thread (HERE) and goes from there

and if i did not post it there i'll post the fiollowing for the sake of the argument
it seem to me there doing what an EA and activision like company would do and that take out what use to be "major features" of a game to me anyway and put it behind a paywall

and some like myself only for the most part buy Nintendo consoles for Pokemon and thus everything else is a bonus thus this for me and proably some of them even more egregious

thus i'm waiting to see if they do a game of the year version or complete edition and while it won't include online features it may come at better price point
If not i may probably stay away and keep my old games and pokeball 2ds xl and play them instead for the time being and not buy a switch for now


This is exactly my concern, too. It's not that the price point is so steep that it makes Pokemon a rich-man's game, it's still affordable. But so many features that just came out-of-the-box since their introduction are now moving behind paywalls.

Online battling: Free since Gen IV, now paywalled behind NSO.

Online trading: Free since Gen IV, but now you need to pay for NSO or Home.

GTS: Free before, now you have to pay for Home.

Battle Frontier challenge: Free before, now it's in a mobile app (with in-app purchases!)

Transferring from an older game: You had to pay for Bank, which was fair enough because at least Bank was a new service in that it allows for mass-transfer. But now to move to a new Gen, you need to pay for Bank and Home.

Expanded storage: $7.50 a year... Now $25 a year!

On top of that, the games themselves are now $20 more expensive than they were before, and you also should probably consider paying for an Expansion Pass if you want the full experience (which costs about half of what the base game itself cost).

I wouldn't be shocked if next Generation, breeding was removed from the mainline games and they launched a new app called Pokemon Breeder which connected to Home and allows you to breed Pokemon, hatch Eggs, and buy faster incubators (for $1.49 a piece!)


Pretty much and people thought i was on crack for pointing this out

Most of that extra time came from the required minigame in Gen 5. It's one thing to improve the speed of something and charge for it, and quite another to add a roadblock and then charge for the version without it. Removing the minigame didn't require any labor to justify the cost. (And that's pretending that a process that requires you to use your 3DS, smartphone, and Switch is going to be more convenient)


correct

Yeesh, what a complete ripoff. A minimal upgrade in features for three times the cost? No thank you. I'll probably just transfer a few Pokemon to round out my Galar Dex and then stop using it. Man, between Dexit and this they're making me want to bring up my old Pokemon less and less.

I feel you Bolt it almost like they don't want me to play pokemon or buy Pokemon anymore


$60 - SwSh
$30 - DLC
$5 - Bank
$16 - HOME
$20 - NSO

> $131 to have these games fully-functional.
> still don’t have all the Pokémon.

£50 - SwSh

£30 - DLC

£5 per year - Bank

£15 per year - HOME

£18 per year - NSO



> £118 to have these games fully-functional in the UK Price.

> Have all the Pokémon (excluding the ones on DLC). But even with that said, it is still unfair for those that are starting out.



Correct and thats been my point since they announced the pass if not before that even Its EA, Activision Bethesda level shady


Add the Let’s Go games for an additional 120$ since Gmax Pikachu and Eevee can only be obtained through them.

thats even worse


That's still not something that merits an extra 15$. It's entirely up to where they put the event in the game. The problem of adding a roadblock and charging for the version without it still applies.

If Game Freak released a patch for Gen 5 that cost 15$ and put the transfer lab at the start of the game, would really say that was worth it?

I'd argue that would be entirely capable with what was being used already, but even if we assume that Bank needed extra labor to make that possible, it still doesn't justify Home's cost. Home requires a third device to be used as a go-between, objectively making the process more complicated- so how can you say that Home's convenience for transferring justifies another 10$?

This is true, but I think some people aren't posting prices to suggest that it's incomplete, but to compare it to past games which did include the same features. It's like combo meals at restaurants- sure, you have the whole burger and it's a complete item, but if the restaurant previously included fries, and now you have to pay extra, it's still frustrating.

I imagine that's been because people assumed it would be required to access the servers, which thankfully isn't the case.

I mean, even with workarounds like sharing a cost or buying secondhand, it's undeniable that the set price is what a business is saying they want a consumer to pay. I don't think it's totally pointless to say that a business' is setting expectations too high on customers.

correct for the most part imho

It’s more so because if you want to enjoy the most “complete” versions of the SwSh games you’re paying over $100 at this point. Game Freak and Nintendo, they’re a cooperation. People should be leery and critical of their product, SwSh didn’t have the content to justify $60 as a mainline console game and Game Freak have consistently gone back on their throughout this release cycle. Pokémon is the most massive franchise in the world, it’s not wrong to demand a more high quality and complete product. When I bought BW, BW2, Platinum or Emerald as a kid, that was it. I had a complete game and online play there for me and could do what ever I wanted for about $35 dollars and the games had the content to match. There’s been a lot of criticism and negativity over this release cycle because GF and Nintendo have been treating their consumers like trash.

There are people who never touched DP and instead bought Platinum, the most “complete” Sinnoh game. I never played the first PMD games and went with Sky the most meaty and “finished” version. You weren’t being left out if you skipped the initial versions foreseeing the third for the best deal. (BW2 were really a step in the right direction.) DLC has always been a spotty thing because many people caught on to the model of cutting content then slapping it on later for more money, coupled with SwSh being pretty empty (and potentially rushed) games it’s not hard to see why people are critical. I feel the need to remind y’all Pokemon is a multimillion dollar franchise and gigantic corporation not a human being.

Demanding a $60 game that plays like one isn’t being unfair as is being critical of their practices thus far. Continuously pouring money to get the “complete” experience of already $60 games is nuts. It’s not a case of not having the money but seeing the writing on the wall. I try not to dump on these games but that’s more than triple the cost of Ultra Sun/Moon.

This is true... But, the reason I think the shift towards DLC bothers people way more than the third versions/enhanced remakes did, is because with the third versions, you knew what you were getting into. You understood it was an optional upgraded game with minimal changes, and could take it or leave it. It was totally optional, and if the slight improvement to post-game content was worth it, it was there if you wanted to pay for it. It was a scummy way to essentially sell the exact same game again with some upgrades and story changes here and there, but that was no secret. As a consumer, you still felt in control.

Now, not so much. In order to get what would have been a "third version" experience, you must buy Sword/Shield and the expansion pack. Having a choice and choosing to spend more money of your own volition to get both the base game and the "enhanced" experience is miles away from having no other option, even if the vast majority of players are probably saving money overall. It's bothering people now because the illusion of being in control as a consumer is broken, the shoddy business model is more apparent with DLC than it was when the value of the enhancements and postgame was obscured within the pricetag of another game that was its own 'complete' package.



That has been my point since day one and it make me ill that people are ok with this or that their even doing it





I prefer it too, but my point wasn't that the "third versions" were better for consumers, it's that they were better at obscuring the fact you were paying way too much. The "third versions" were attached to a whole other 'complete' game, so where the value is in the pricetag was obscured. It's difficult to view the enhanced features or expanded story as "overpriced" (even though it is) when the only way to buy it is as part of that complete package. Whereas with Sword and Shield's DLC, two post game campaigns are priced at more than half of what the game itself cost. It's far easier to see its overpriced because, for the first time, it is being given its own separate pricetag.

I only played the remakes, Sequals and third games for the most unless they did not make 1 in the case of the X and Y then i only bought Y
because of that

I get it's better than third versions but it's not better than sequels. Sequels can bring a ton more changes than DLC could ever had, specially having an actual different story and characters.



I mean, are some people thinking Black and White 2 were a waste time and money?

true but i ended up trade in the Zekrom one for the Black Kyurem one before completion same with Moon to Ultra moon
I think i was maybe 2 or 3 hour in if that on each


And i meant when it comes to price. Sequels can do far more than DLC could ever do like having much better written story, better difficulty scaling, improved graphics and animations. Changes to the region layouts, making cities and towns bigger and so many other changes that you are only limited by your imagination. DLC has limits of how much it can do without completely making an entire new game.

Yes, it would cost more, but i'll take a much more fullfilling experience from start to finish than something that was clearly rushed to meet a deadline and only being made better with DLC.





Correct and that why i rather they kept them


USUM was a scam but that was a third version and you also said it's better than sequels (which USUM isn't). Pricing is also completely relative. Saying 30 bucks DLC is better than a 40 bucks game just because one is cheaper than the other is leaving out so much information. How much content does the DLC have and how much content does the game have? I have played 15 bucks games with way more content than 60 bucks games and a 30 bucks games having less content than another 30 bucks games.

So saying that something is cheaper therefore is better is rather misleading.

I true but i feel TPC forced them to realease something that that year because of the anniversary
 
Personally, I wouldn't even consider USUM a sequel at all, since it just adds a few things like another third version. (Unless you're referring to Johto as a sequel to Kanto?)
I don't consider USUM sequels either, they are just paired third versions to me. The two sequels thing were referring to GSC (which are a direct sequel to RBGY) and B2W2.
 
Where does it say that? And that’s still have to 30$ you have to pay?
It was mentioned during the expansion pass Direct that the Galar starters will be able to gain the ability to Gigantamax in the Isle of Armor or something along those lines. There's been some speculation as to whether or not this means that other Pokemon can gain the ability to Gmax (if possible for their species) if brought to the isle but I don't think anything of that sort has been confirmed.

Also, I don't think you have to pay $30 to obtain Gmax Pikachu/Eevee. Couldn't you set up a trade for one via HOME, as inconvenient as that will presumably be?
 
It was mentioned during the expansion pass Direct that the Galar starters will be able to gain the ability to Gigantamax in the Isle of Armor or something along those lines. There's been some speculation as to whether or not this means that other Pokemon can gain the ability to Gmax (if possible for their species) if brought to the isle but I don't think anything of that sort has been confirmed.

Also, I don't think you have to pay $30 to obtain Gmax Pikachu/Eevee. Couldn't you set up a trade for one via HOME, as inconvenient as that will presumably be?
But someone is going to pay for either DLC or the Let’s Go games before you trade it.
 
But someone is going to pay for either DLC or the Let’s Go games before you trade it.
I guess. But you can still obtain those Pokemon at no cost and it's not like people are purchasing the DLC/LGPE just to obtain Gmax Pikachu/Eevee. Thus, I don't really count LGPE as being required to have fully functional gen 8 games.
 
The price of LGPE and other Pokémon main series game have 0 bearing on the total cost of all optional software for SwSh and SwSh support. That’s awful logic.
Just borrow a copy of the game put it in your Switch and play the game for 2 minutes then give it back. Voila, you’ve unlocked G-Max Pikachu and Eevee for free.
 
I mean... shouldn’t the value being more visible be a good thing?

And aren’t they priced at exactly half of what the game costs?

Yes it should be a good thing, and it arguably is a good thing. I'm not saying the DLC is worse than having third versions– I much prefer DLC.

What I mean is that because the pricetag is more visible, it's now easier to see if something is overpriced as opposed to only being able to buy it as part of a completely separate "complete" product, and that's the reason why the DLC has made some consumers feel resentful and taken advantage of. It's not that the DLC is any more or less beneficial for consumers than the "third version" model was, it's that it's far more revealing of questionable aspects of Pokemon's business model, and that's why the pricing of the DLC has been met with some backlash, even though it means that most players might still be spending less overall.

In Australia, Sword and Shield are $80RRP ea, and the DLC is $45, slightly more than half of the price of the game itself.

RIP to the parents who have two kids that bought one game for each kid and now need to spend another $90 to get them both the expansion.
 
Last edited:
I was going to calculate the how the price would work for me, but apparently different shops have different prices, which caused a bizarre case where LGPE is $88 (from the place I generally get games), but SwSh is just $67 (from another shop I don't know). Seriously, what the hell? I don't know who has the right price anymore.
 
Please note: The thread is from 2 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom