• 4chan is an 18+ website, and as such we do not want to expose our underage users to that site.

    You may post screen shots and text from 4chan, but direct linking to the site or its archival sites is not allowed.

    Thanks.

  • To keep up with the hype driven by Sword and Shield's release, we are taking applications for new moderators in our Current Events: Sword and Shield as well as Anime and Manga sections.

    For more information, see this thread.We hope you all consider joining our team!
  • We hope you're enjoying Sword and Shield so far! So that everyone can enjoy it and not be spoiled, please keep the all story spoilers and any images from the games in the appropriate sections or in spoiler tags until January 3rd.

    Since spoiler tags are not allowed in signatures, please do not put images from the games in your signature either. You can list the names of new Pokémon if you want to list your team in your signature.
  • AussieEevee continues his perilous adventures in Johto. Watch his HeartGold Nuzlocke here.

Pokemon Home

debates about Rugrats canon
Joined
Oct 18, 2012
Messages
5,910
Reaction score
15,426
here's the article by itself

copying directly:

  • with the shift to the Switch, the amount of time needed for graphics/animation increased
  • apart from the graphics, balancing for new Pokemon with new abilities has become very hard
  • the team found that it would be hard for all the Pokemon to appear, even in titles going forward
  • the team felt the decision to not include all Pokemon in Sword/Shield is one that had to be made sooner or later for the series
  • even in Pokemon Sun & Moon, bringing in every Pokemon was something barely manageable
  • in Pokemon Sword & Shield, the team's need to redo models meant even more work to take on
  • the Wild Areas and story will have quite a bit of content to make up for the lack of all Pokemon
  • the team says once again that it's uncertain as to whether missing Pokemon will be added in future updates
  • even if not in Pokemon Sword & Shield, Game Freak plans on making those Pokemon shine in future titles going forward,
  • a large part of this will be with Pokemon Home, as the devs do not want the players’ past Pokemon to feel worthless
  • the team is deciding if Pokemon that receive new graphics through Sword & Shield will reuse them to appear in new titles
  • the inclusion of gimmicks like Mega Evolution and Dynamax that affect all Pokemon means doing so would be difficult
  • it’s not about adding more Pokemon in as they receive graphical upgrades
  • the team says it's a change towards bringing in Pokemon from Pokemon Home that fit the game
  • the reason behind the name Pokemon Home, is that it's a place to return to
  • bringing Pokemon out to games going forward is like bringing it on a trip
  • in terms of the feelings of the Pokemon, it's as if the Pokemon are saying, “This region is cold, so I’ll be staying at home.”
  • Game Freak once again says they're thinking of adding gameplay elements to Pokemon Home
  • Musuda has the concept of bringing Pokemon out to even the spinoff titles from Pokemon Home in mind
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Messages
2,019
Reaction score
2,234
You make it sound like I was using the term negatively, however, i did not. I said the very same thing, that meta games are inevitable in every game similar to this. That is precisely why I said that culling at least half the Pokémon from the entirety of the games doesn't solve any balancing/metagame issues, because new balancing issues/metagame will spring in it's place.
i mean, you literally do it (again) right here: 'culling doesn't solve any issues, new [issues] will spring in its place.' or essentially: the solution doesn't work because the problem (ie., balance issues and meta) still persist. nonetheless it's pointless to argue the semantics.
From a gameplay perspective, there is no difference between those two situations. In both scenarios, you'll have one Pokémon/team of Pokémon that are better than the others. But if that was really the issue, they have always made rules when it comes to competitive battling, such as banning Pokémon and what not. They did not need to completely remove Pokémon from the entire game just to 'fix' balancing issues. This is why I believe the sole reasoning for their decision is purely time restraints, and their 'balancing issues' remark was just a way for them to further justify making this decision. Of course, I could be wrong, but any balancing issues they think they have, they could have gotten the exact same result simply by banning those Pokémon from competitive play, not remove them entirely so that nobody can use them again.
there is a fundamental difference. metas will exist regardless. we know that and we agree on that. but metas can also be challenged by creativity, such as, say the famous usage of Pachirisu in VGC. the problem is what happens when a pokemon becomes too dominant in the meta and forces the game, the meta to play around it. a meta is fine and inevitable. a centralized meta is not fine and doesn't have to be inevitable. a quintessential recent example would be Primal Groudon and VGC. P-Groudon centralized the meta because there's no reason not to take it when it's allowed and it forces the meta to build itself around P-Groudon. a centralized meta results in stifled creativity and everyone pretty much has to use the same four things. an uncentralized meta can reward creativity and strategy as those elements can catch players off guard.

there aren't that many pokemon that centralize the meta. toss them out and you open up tons of creativity. of course a meta will form, but that meta can be challenged as players come up with new approaches.
 
Bulbapædist
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
714
That's feasible, but I wouldn't bet on it. It's fun to think about HD sprites for 1000+ designs, but that would be quite the undertaking. Go models with limited motion (even more than in SwSh, lol) would make the most sense, but that would be a minor difference that would undermine Game Freak's position...
I wasn't even thinking about HD sprites. I was thinking of literally just re-using the sprites from G1-G5 as static images. Perhaps players could even select which generation they want their Pokemon's sprites to be based on - like you could have your Pikachu display a Diamond and Pearl sprite or a Red and Blue sprite when other users look at it, battle it, or trade for it.

The issue would be designing 16-bit era static sprites for Pokemon from G6-8, and I'm not sure how feasible that would be and if it would be cheaper or not than downgrading the models.
 
Active Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2008
Messages
708
Reaction score
611
I for one will not be transferring any of my Pokemon to Gen 8. I like having them all available in one spot and that's not going to be an option anymore. If I need to start from scratch then so be it, but I played the hell out of those games for far too long to just port some of them over. Guess this is just how it's going to be from now on.
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
1,658
Reaction score
1,220
here's the article by itself

copying directly:

  • with the shift to the Switch, the amount of time needed for graphics/animation increased
  • apart from the graphics, balancing for new Pokemon with new abilities has become very hard
  • the team found that it would be hard for all the Pokemon to appear, even in titles going forward
  • the team felt the decision to not include all Pokemon in Sword/Shield is one that had to be made sooner or later for the series
  • even in Pokemon Sun & Moon, bringing in every Pokemon was something barely manageable
  • in Pokemon Sword & Shield, the team's need to redo models meant even more work to take on
  • the Wild Areas and story will have quite a bit of content to make up for the lack of all Pokemon
  • the team says once again that it's uncertain as to whether missing Pokemon will be added in future updates
  • even if not in Pokemon Sword & Shield, Game Freak plans on making those Pokemon shine in future titles going forward,
  • a large part of this will be with Pokemon Home, as the devs do not want the players’ past Pokemon to feel worthless
  • the team is deciding if Pokemon that receive new graphics through Sword & Shield will reuse them to appear in new titles
  • the inclusion of gimmicks like Mega Evolution and Dynamax that affect all Pokemon means doing so would be difficult
  • it’s not about adding more Pokemon in as they receive graphical upgrades
  • the team says it's a change towards bringing in Pokemon from Pokemon Home that fit the game
  • the reason behind the name Pokemon Home, is that it's a place to return to
  • bringing Pokemon out to games going forward is like bringing it on a trip
  • in terms of the feelings of the Pokemon, it's as if the Pokemon are saying, “This region is cold, so I’ll be staying at home.”
  • Game Freak once again says they're thinking of adding gameplay elements to Pokemon Home
  • Musuda has the concept of bringing Pokemon out to even the spinoff titles from Pokemon Home in mind
You know I haven't watched any f the avangers movies, just what I saw in memes. But your signature I can tell is a Thanos line isn't it? xD

Anyway, I'm finding it hard to accept this stuff. They cut features before but I never thought pokemon was just a feature that they could choose to cut. Now My living dex, shinies and ev trained pokemon might mean nothing but wasted time. If Home does have some play-ability, like battles, watch its use go way above sword and shield themselves xD
 
Step into my crib everything smell like Cool Water
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
2,124
Reaction score
1,184
i mean, you literally do it (again) right here: 'culling doesn't solve any issues, new [issues] will spring in its place.' or essentially: the solution doesn't work because the problem (ie., balance issues and meta) still persist. nonetheless it's pointless to argue the semantics.

there is a fundamental difference. metas will exist regardless. we know that and we agree on that. but metas can also be challenged by creativity, such as, say the famous usage of Pachirisu in VGC. the problem is what happens when a pokemon becomes too dominant in the meta and forces the game, the meta to play around it. a meta is fine and inevitable. a centralized meta is not fine and doesn't have to be inevitable. a quintessential recent example would be Primal Groudon and VGC. P-Groudon centralized the meta because there's no reason not to take it when it's allowed and it forces the meta to build itself around P-Groudon. a centralized meta results in stifled creativity and everyone pretty much has to use the same four things. an uncentralized meta can reward creativity and strategy as those elements can catch players off guard.

there aren't that many pokemon that centralize the meta. toss them out and you open up tons of creativity. of course a meta will form, but that meta can be challenged as players come up with new approaches.
I'm not sure you really get what my point is when using the word metagame. I am not using that word negatively. What I am saying is that there will always be a meta game, so if Gamefreak thinks there are balancing issues with the metagame, removing Pokémon from the entire game doesn't solve balancing issues, because there will still be balancing issues. This is not a negative look on meta games, it is a realistic look at it. Like I said before, How does removing Pokémon from the whole games improve the meta game, when new Pokémon will replace it as the new 'overpowered Pokémon' with far less potential counters for it?

Plus, If a Pokémon is too dominant in the meta, they can simply ban it, they don't need to remove said Pokémon from the entire game. Their 'Balancing issues' doesn't even make sense when you consider all the rules they have in place, and also considering they make new rules all the time to keep things fresh. So not only do we have the fact that meta games will always exist and that removing one Pokémon 'from the top of the list' will have another Pokémon in it's place, but there is also the fact that they don't even need to cull half the Pokémon from the entire game when they could simply implement new tournament rules to fix any balancing issues. I'm still not convinced that their 'balancing issues' statement is anything more than a mere excuse they came up with as an extra justification, and that their decision was purely developmental time based. If they had the time and resources to include all Pokémon, then they would have.
 
Last edited:
Pretense
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
18,123
Reaction score
11,516
Battle balance is indeed an excuse when they can restrict tournaments to the Galar Pokedex and/or ban specific Pokemon.

Development problems... I remain unconvinced. I suspect that above all, they wanted to streamline the process, but not because they had to do so.
 
Bulbapædist
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
714
Development problems... I remain unconvinced. I suspect that above all, they wanted to streamline the process, but not because they had to do so.
Less of these stupid monsters, moar TOWN!
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
1,658
Reaction score
1,220
They haven't even stated if home costs anything yet. What if its a free cloud storage up to a certain amount of data and then you pay up for more data if you need it, I think google does this with drive. Or if it's a one time fee and you get to keep it. Altough if it needs nintendo online you have to pay 20 a year to access it, but you can use home in your phone, so isn't it more likely to be free or a one time fee? (Or god forbid have micro transactions)
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
3,362
Reaction score
9,548
They haven't even stated if home costs anything yet. What if its a free cloud storage up to a certain amount of data and then you pay up for more data if you need it,
With previously-free functions like online trade costing money now, I can't imagine they'll lift the price on a service that's already established as costing money.
 
Previously known as 'Isamu Akai'
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
2,463
Reaction score
1,674
Then they need to take a break from Pokémon until after Town is finished.
They should in all honesty. But whether the franchise popularity and demand will let them is a whole other story.

But you know, seeing as it was Iwata who stopped Game Freak from making "UltraBlack and UltraWhite" in favor of sequels, then part of the pacing problem lies on Game Freak. I don't think they have any intention of stopping soon.
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
1,658
Reaction score
1,220
With previously-free functions like online trade costing money now, I can't imagine they'll lift the price on a service that's already established as costing money.
They haven't said home costs any subscription yet, I'm saying they'd charge money if you want more data storage, or just charge to initially download the app. It could even just be bundled with a nintendo switch online account.
 
#Shield
Joined
Aug 23, 2016
Messages
1,360
Reaction score
1,407
They haven't even stated if home costs anything yet. What if its a free cloud storage up to a certain amount of data and then you pay up for more data if you need it, I think google does this with drive. Or if it's a one time fee and you get to keep it. Altough if it needs nintendo online you have to pay 20 a year to access it, but you can use home in your phone, so isn't it more likely to be free or a one time fee? (Or god forbid have micro transactions)
I personally kinda wonder that it is free to store up to a certain amount of pokemon and if you pass it you have to pay a fee.
If it is micro transactions (which i doubt), what does that mean for countries that have those micro transaction laws?
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
3,362
Reaction score
9,548
They haven't said home costs any subscription yet, I'm saying they'd charge money if you want more data storage, or just charge to initially download the app. It could even just be bundled with a nintendo switch online account.
I'm referring to Bank. Bank has set a precedent where cloud storage for Pokemon costs money, and if other features like online trade now have costs, why would cloud storage get its price removed?
 
Informed Casual
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
253
Reaction score
330
I'm referring to Bank. Bank has set a precedent where cloud storage for Pokemon costs money, and if other features like online trade now have costs, why would cloud storage get its price removed?
Because we weren’t paying for the internet subscription on the 3DS?
 
Top