• 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.

Pokemon Stars Discussion Thread (Speculation)

Do you think that Stars is real or Fake

  • Real

    Votes: 61 59.8%
  • Fake

    Votes: 41 40.2%

  • Total voters
    102
  • Poll closed .
Since people are willing to pay $299 for the Switch, how much would they pay for Stars, if it's real? $40, $50 or $60?

I don't think it really matters, people will buy it anyway. Most non-handheld games are around $60, it's considered a normal price for a console/PC game so that price will certainly stop no one I think.
 
The high prices will certainly affect sales. Pokemon has always been a relatively accessible franchise: ever since the Game Boy, we have been able to enjoy Pokemon for 140 euros/dollars, more or less. 100 for the console (when it is new, then even less) and 40 dollars for the cartridge.

Suddenly having to spend 350 euros/dollars (nearly 400 if paid online applies to Pokemon) will definitely make a lot of handheld players decide to not upgrade to the Switch... and play their 3DS/DS collection of great Pokemon games instead.
 
Last edited:
Sure, it might stop some handheld gamers from buying it, but it will certainly motivate more than a few people to buy a Switch. And each Switch buyer is worth about 9 handheld gamers that would otherwise have bought the game for $40 if it was released on the 3DS instead. That's probably more than worth it. And now that these people have a Switch, they will probably buy more games for it too. It's a pretty smart decision for Nintendo really, that will earn them more money in the long run. And it's a lot less effort (and therefore cheaper) for GF to optimize an existing game than to create an entirely new one, so they can very probably handle a few losses with Stars. And Stars would make good practice for how to make games for the Switch, which will again save them time and money when making future games.

Also, there is a chance that Stars would otherwise have been a New 3DS exclusive, as it runs quite terribly on the 3DS (also on the N3DS, but let's imagine they'd optimize it somehow). This is probably, for example, the reason Fire Emblem Warriors is N3DS exclusive too, as Hyrule Warriors ran pretty bad on the original 3DS (and a lot of people have been saying it should've been N3DS exclusive). So if that would've been the case, a lot of people would've had to buy a N3DS for about $200 to play it. They're better off spending a $100 extra on a new system (the Switch) than on a dying one (3DS/N3DS) imo.
 
The high prices will certainly affect sales. Pokemon has always been a relatively accessible franchise: ever since the Game Boy, we have been able to enjoy Pokemon for 140 euros/dollars, more or less. 100 for the console (when it is new, then even less) and 40 dollars for the cartridge.

Suddenly having to spend 350 euros/dollars (nearly 400 if payed online applies to Pokemon) will definitely make a lot of handheld players decide to not upgrade to the Switch.
and yet pricing seemingly didn't seem to have an impact on Gen 6-7 where the 3DS and New 3DS line have been in the high 100s and mid-200s.
 
I do think the Switch is expensive, mainly because (here at least) you can buy a PS4 or an XBone for less than 300€, both of which are superior in everything but the portability aspect. I honestly think there's no reason to buy it right now unless you're a hardcore Nintendo fan or a really dedicated gamer that wants to have everything new right away. Even if Stars turns out to be real, I probably won't be buying it any time soon.
 
Last edited:
For the battle interface, a Reddit user posted a thread with a pic on how Pokemon would look on the Switch.
t51df1i5cpsx.jpg

Looks good, in my opinion.

Hm. Not bad actually. Not amazing, but definitely not bad. That could work I guess. Though once those menus open up it would definitely cover the battle scene.


The high prices will certainly affect sales. Pokemon has always been a relatively accessible franchise: ever since the Game Boy, we have been able to enjoy Pokemon for 140 euros/dollars, more or less. 100 for the console (when it is new, then even less) and 40 dollars for the cartridge.

Suddenly having to spend 350 euros/dollars (nearly 400 if paid online applies to Pokemon) will definitely make a lot of handheld players decide to not upgrade to the Switch.

and yet pricing seemingly didn't seem to have an impact on Gen 6-7 where the 3DS and New 3DS line have been in the high 100s and mid-200s.

More importantly than console price.... game price. Switch games seem to cost the same $60 standard for consoles. If that means Pokemon game prices go up to $50-60 that could be a problem.

If the Switch has a touchscreen (don't see a reason why it wouldn't)

No touchscreen when docked.
 
Last edited:
Anyone else concerned about the price)
Price shouldn't really be a concern specifically for pokemon, but for the Switch in general it is a bit of an issue when you add in accessories. Seeing as Pokemon isn't a mulitplayer game without multiple cartridges, if I'm only playing the Switch by myself I only have to shill out about $360 probably, which is entirely doable. But let's say I want to play a different game with friends, I have to spend another $80 for two more Joycons. But I also want the controller they dock into, that's more money. Oh, and I want a dock for each of the two tvs in my house, another $90. Yes, you're getting a console and portable in one, but in the end you are only getting 1 machine, and it could cost you upwards of $500 not even factoring in games. They could have probably produced Joycons for significantly less money by not including things like ice cubes in them. I'm sure that stuff's cool to play around with, but you're basically paying a lot more money for novelty. Nintendo knows that part of why the WiiU didn't sell was because the Gamepad made it cost so much more, but they're still making the same mistake with adding too much to the controllers that outside of party games probably won't bring too much to the table.

What I think is a really important point is that the Switch launch isn't competing with the launch of Sony or Microsoft consoles. This launch is competing with reduced price systems with years worth of games on the market. When you're dropping a system that's more expensive than what's also out, and with only like 5 games, it's a little weak.
 
Price shouldn't really be a concern specifically for pokemon, but for the Switch in general it is a bit of an issue when you add in accessories. Seeing as Pokemon isn't a mulitplayer game without multiple cartridges, if I'm only playing the Switch by myself I only have to shill out about $360 probably, which is entirely doable. But let's say I want to play a different game with friends, I have to spend another $80 for two more Joycons. But I also want the controller they dock into, that's more money. Oh, and I want a dock for each of the two tvs in my house, another $90. Yes, you're getting a console and portable in one, but in the end you are only getting 1 machine, and it could cost you upwards of $500 not even factoring in games. They could have probably produced Joycons for significantly less money by not including things like ice cubes in them. I'm sure that stuff's cool to play around with, but you're basically paying a lot more money for novelty. Nintendo knows that part of why the WiiU didn't sell was because the Gamepad made it cost so much more, but they're still making the same mistake with adding too much to the controllers that outside of party games probably won't bring too much to the table.

What I think is a really important point is that the Switch launch isn't competing with the launch of Sony or Microsoft consoles. This launch is competing with reduced price systems with years worth of games on the market. When you're dropping a system that's more expensive than what's also out, and with only like 5 games, it's a little weak.

With that money, you can buy a laptop.
 
It makes 0 sense to have a touch screen when docked. This is not Wii u game pad. The Switch is the MAIN console, and it gives touchscreen in handheld mode.
You don't need touchscreen when playing on Tv.

Never said it needed to have a touchscreen when docked. Nor does it. I frankly don't know why you're arguing with me over something I never even argued about lol.

The comment I replied to said that the touchscreen when undocked removes any issues regarding features like Refresh. Always read the context first. I was simply pointing out that there isn't one while docked, rendering the suggestion moot.
 
More importantly than console price.... game price. Switch games seem to cost the same $60 standard for consoles. If that means Pokemon game prices go up to $50-60 that could be a problem.
lmao a ten to twenty dollar jump? ok. if any $$$-factor were to be a problem it would be the console.
 
lmao a ten to twenty dollar jump? ok. if any $$$-factor were to be a problem it would be the console.

Factor in the fact many people buy both versions. Many of them will no longer buy both versions. The console price isn't really a big issue. It's $50 more than the 3DS originally was.

Use proportions. Compared to the original 3DS at launch, the Switch is 20% more expensive (and it can do much more, mind you). So it's actually more value for your money.

Pokemon games have been $40, and on the Switch they would be $60. Thats a whopping 50% increase in price. Same value, more money.

So yes, the increase in game price is definitely more important than console price. Especially when the competitors are equally or more expensive.
 
Factor in the fact many people buy both versions. Many of them will no longer buy both versions. The console price isn't really a big issue. It's $50 more than the 3DS originally was.
Not to mention that inflation makes $300 today lower than $250 in 2011.

However, the 3DS got a whopping $80 price cut pretty quickly. I believe that the Switch's price should at least be lowered to $250 for the holidays, but it depends on reception.
 
Paying for the console itself isn't the issue, we've been paying for new hardware to play Pokemon several times. The issue is in needing to buy a console for a third version instead of a new generation. Third versions are much less compelling and sell less than new generations, so there's going to be less demand for it than usual. New generations are built from the ground up around the new console and have new Pokemon, new regions, and new everything so they're much more effective at convincing people to upgrade.
 
That goes without saying. The critical difference is that a third version is feasible for this year, whereas a new generation isn't.

Honestly, before the Eurogamer report I thought that Game Freak should wrap up the 3DS with Kanto sequels. But that would entail waiting until late 2019 for Switch games, and it is really not hard to see why Nintendo wouldn't want that. And to be honest, Game Freak probably wouldn't do a very good recreating a region for the 3DS while learning the ropes with the Switch at the same time. They did a decent job with B2W2, but most of the assets were recycled from BW and the games did not outsell third versions by much.

At the end of the day, the combination of Stars and polished Kanto sequels (or DP remakes if you really insist - the point stands) for the Switch justifies delaying Generation VIII by a year. Especially if that way said generation can be made closer to the standards of BW and SM than to those of DP and XY (which, quite frankly, undersold their systems), and the generation after that can be released for the Switch's successor in a timely fashion.

I believe that with the right strategy Kanto sequels for the Switch can sell somewhere between ORAS and XY/SM's numbers, which is to say around 14 million units. Even if they didn't, just moving Switch sales before it turns 2 years old would be worth it.
 
I feel like they can release both Gen VIII and Gen IX for the Switch. Two high quality generations in a row would be ideal. Hopefully Stars can be the test of the Switch's quality. :)
 
GF are in a very weird spot as far as remakes go at this point, seeing as the current remakes have caught up to the first round of remakes. Sure Sinnoh's next in line since we just had Hoenn, but Gen III also gave us FRLG. We had an abridged visit to Kanto in 2009-10, but we haven't had a proper adventure in Kanto in over a decade, so it's a question of whether we'd revisit FRLG or DPP first. I know a lot of people on here think they're burned out on Kanto, but kids picking up new games today weren't even alive when we were still playing games on the GBA.

Nintendo says that the Switch won't outright replace the 3DS and that games'll still be made for that, but they also said the same thing about the GBA during the transition to DS, and we know how that worked. It was easy enough to port something like Mystery Dungeon to have a version for both, but at that time we really didn't see new games come out for the Advanced. I think releases like Fire Emblem Warriors for New 3DS, but mainly Switch, show that same thing happening here. I can't see them announcing anything further that doesn't at least have a version for the Switch. Pokemon is a console seller, so I don't see why Nintendo wouldn't push GF to develop for the new hardware and let SM be a last hurrah for the 3DS.

Honestly, what I see next would probably be a Switch game in Kanto, maybe including Johto, but with the early focus on Kanto. We know how much they love pushing nostalgia, and we saw that Pokemon can still attract past fans with Go. Those first two generations are the ones older fans and previous fans are most familiar with, while also being new to younger fans. Probably more of a sequel than straight remake, but close enough to the originals to draw in people who remember the original games. A pokemon game alone is enough to sell the system to a lot of people, and together with games like Mario Odyssey, which envokes more of a feeling of Mario64 than past releases, could be enough titles to make reluctant former Nintendo fans bite. I only say it could include Johto as well because a. we may be up to GenIV remakes and HGSS was IV and b. if the game is just Kanto I could see people complaining it's not enough given that it's now a pokemon game on a console.
 
if the game is just Kanto I could see people complaining it's not enough given that it's now a pokemon game on a console.
They could expand Kanto to be the biggest region yet, but I'm pretty sure that most people would rather see Johto even at the expense of fewer new locations. The fans who disliked the dual-region approach are in the minority, and I think that HGSS' issues are easy enough to fix in sequels. Making the focused region (the one not restricted to the relatively condensed post-game) depend on the version would be pretty brilliant (as it would, for the first time, give us a good reason to buy both versions without actually forcing us), but even that is not necessary to do justice to both regions.

Go is slowly but surely moving onto Generation II, so I think that it would be a missed opportunity not to capitalize on that. Two years of development should be enough to recreate both regions for the Switch (using the Stars engine).
 
The only reason to to put stars or kanto sequels on the switch is to let us know the switch is getting main series games. From there fans would buy it knowing he 8 would eventually come to it. Right now I'm still holding back Incase they announce a new hand held the 4ds or whatever.
 
Back
Top Bottom