• 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 it's archival sites is not allowed.

    Thanks.

  • Hey guys! Have you heard? We now have popup
    Yes, Popups!
    messages for your forum posts. Learn more about it here!
  • 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. Applications are due by November 26th.

    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.

There are petitions about Gamefreak fixing the 'Galar Pokedex' thing

Gobble Gobble Gobble
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
18,859
Reaction score
2,951
It's like a movie or a TV show, they have a way to see the things, and they do it their way.Either you like it or not, they don't give a f***
Actually they do. If they don’t write a show well enough, people stop watching and it’s gets cancelled. Viewers and players are everything. They screw up and they screw themselves over. Majorly.

I don’t think the petition is a wrong thing. I think it’s good so it does show GF how people feel.

What o believe is wrong is people who are throwing insults at GF, which isnt In this thread but apparently happening on other sites, most likely sites like Twitter. And saying the game isn’t worth playing. Is the lack of Pokémon making it through annoying for people, yes. Plenty do competitive battling or like to have them for post game. Not to mention breeding.

However it’s not all there is to a Pokémon game. And it seems wrong to not give the game a chance just because one feature does not exist. If the fans can’t support GF through all the ups and downs, then why should they bother?

I see constant complaints about how the games have become, and it seems like some of the great features are ignored. They are working to make great games for the fans, and to not make us wait too long, but we also do have to have another form of patience.

With petitions people can show that they’re upset, and that they hope GF will fix the issue later down the road.

But if people just stop buying over one thing and constantly insult them then we’ll probably lose a series we love. They screw up but I rather have screw ups mixed in with the greatness than them spending years and years on one game trying to shove every little thing that people want into it.

As it is right now, the games don’t cater to just one specific part of the community. Nor do they exclude any specific parts. No one is entirely happy, but with such a large and diverse community that’s fine since that’s what makes the community and games so unique.

And we still don’t know the full extent of what’s in the game. Nor will we till November. It’s better to give it time and see what they did, and decide once we have all the facts.
 
Formerly Juztiz
Joined
Mar 3, 2019
Messages
351
Reaction score
1,151
However it’s not all there is to a Pokémon game. And it seems wrong to not give the game a chance just because one feature does not exist. If the fans can’t support GF through all the ups and downs, then why should they bother?
I mean, look at it this way - the game is 60 bucks. For me, for that exact money, I could go eat ramen 4x instead of buying the game. Basically, GF "has to" show me why I should rather get a video game than a slightly overpriced good meal.
And Pokémon (like any other game) is made up of various features. Some value these features more than others, some value other features more. For some people there are certain features (or design decisions) that area absolute deal-breakers, and even if someone supported GF and genuinely loved playing Pokémon, if one of those happens, then yeah, it makes sense for them not wanting to play the game anymore.
It's like when I order food and there's onions in it. I absolutely hate onions. The meal can still be nice, but every time I feel the onion between my teeth, I will be reminded by just how much I hate onions. If it's a place that only serves that meal with onions, I'll have to not buy that meal anymore, or eat with regret.

I personally am still going to buy Shield (although I originally wanted both, but now that the collection purpose is kinda gone, why bother for that) specifically because a lot else of it looks like it could make the game fun. Doesn't mean it will. And I already know, 5 months before I play it, that whenever I see a Pokémon that I personally don't like, I will be reminded that that one made it while another one I really like didn't.

Like taking Electrike into the Galar dex when there's a new Electric dog, instead of...whatever, Chinchou. Just a plain example. I couldn't really just ignore that feeling, and I envy people who genuinely don't care and can still enjoy the games because for me they'll just have this bitter aftertaste and I really, really can't help it.

As it is right now, the games don’t cater to just one specific part of the community. Nor do they exclude any specific parts. No one is entirely happy, but with such a large and diverse community that’s fine since that’s what makes the community and games so unique.
This kind of thing is why I generally prefer niche things. Not trying to please a big majority of people allows for a bit more... not sure how to call it, unique charm? I'm not sure how to put it. But most of the time I prefer a game (, manga, show, anime...) that has a more unique identity and maybe isn't most people's cup of tea than a game that tries to please everyone as good as it can, and in the end making no group really genuinely happy with it. But that's just me and definitely not a fact overall.
 
Previously known as 'Isamu Akai'
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
1,673
I once said this before in the Speculation thread, but I'll say it again here: As irksome as this decision this, I can't say I'm surprised by it in the slightest.

I knew that at some point things would eventually come to a head with the constant generations and new Pokemon species. There is one thing I will agree with GF and there really is far too many Pokemon now. I knew that eventually they would have no other choice but for them to impose a limit, either by not introducing anymore new Pokemon (which I don't think would have gone over well with a lot of people either), or by dropping 'support' for older Pokemon. I've also said before that this practice isn't exactly new in other monster-raising RPGs. Games like Yo-Kai Watch, Monster Rancher, Robopon, Telefang, and others have also had to drop older, less popular species. The only difference was that they did that a lot sooner. We Pokemon fans have really been spoiled in that regard.

Though that doesn't mean I think the criticisms aren't sound, and I agree that people have the right to be upset by this policy. But this is also coming from someone who has honestly been very disappointed in the last few generations and I'm glad that fans are finally pushing back.

Someone said in the other thread that a big problem is how there have been too many generations in a short span of time. And I agree. Up until RSE, there were only one generation per major device. (I guess you could argue that the Game Boy and Game Boy Color are figuratively the same, since RBY could still be played on a GBC, and GSC could still be played on the GB. But I mean the latter was still designed to take full advantage of the GBC.) Then that changed by the DS era. Even way back when BW was released, there was a part of me that was surprised since I earnestly thought the next generation would be coming out for 3DS. And now I look at SM and feel that it would have been far better off if they released it on Switch. Of course we would still eventually get to the point of having too many Pokemon, but at least the generations would have been paced out a little more evenly than rushed every couple of years.

I believe what really happened was that TPCi, Nintendo, and GF have gotten too greedy and pretentious with the success of Pokemon, leading to these rushed releases and blatant disregard to feedback. Instead of progressive gameplay development like the kind we used to see in GSC and RSE, we've been fed rehashes. And now it's led to this. We're at the point now where GF has effectively shot themselves in the foot and there is no easy way to fixing that. All I can say though is that I'm glad to finally see this pushback and I am curious as to where it goes from here.
 
Stuck
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
18,020
Reaction score
11,370
... so they actually thought of two third versions before a pair of sequels? Did they actually expect people pay twice for a single mechanic.

I feel worse knowing people would actually buy them both. On release. But hey, I don’t get to dictate how people spend their money!
Well, it was worse with USUM because there was no such mechanic. Just the usual fare with version exclusives.

Games like Yo-Kai Watch, Monster Rancher, Robopon, Telefang, and others have also had to drop older, less popular species. The only difference was that they did that a lot sooner.
Yokai Watch has done that?
 
Bulbapædist
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
713
I knew that at some point things would eventually come to a head with the constant generations and new Pokemon species. There is one thing I will agree with GF and there really is far too many Pokemon now. I knew that eventually they would have no other choice but for them to impose a limit, either by not introducing anymore new Pokemon (which I don't think would have gone over well with a lot of people either), or by dropping 'support' for older Pokemon. I've also said before that this practice isn't exactly new in other monster-raising RPGs. Games like Yo-Kai Watch, Monster Rancher, Robopon, Telefang, and others have also had to drop older, less popular species. The only difference was that they did that a lot sooner. We Pokemon fans have really been spoiled in that regard.
And where are Robopon, Telefang, and Monster Rancher now?

Oh, that's right, dead as doornails. I was literally there to see it in the Monster Rancher fandom - every time an old favorite was missing from a new game, you had a spate of players swearing off the series for good and there hasn't been a new title in the franchise since the DS era.

Every time you delete someone's favorite from the roster, you loose that player FOREVER. And possibly any children they might had and otherwise introduced to the series.

The same fate awaits Pokemon. Not immediately, of course, I'm talking 5-10 years, perhaps. But once they start down this road - if they don't go back - they will eventually alienate every player whose favorite isn't Pikachu and Charizard. It's only a matter of time.

And while Pikachu and Charizard obviously have tons of fans, it's not enough to sustain the series for the foreseeable future.
 
I gotta focus. I'm shifting into pokemon mode.
Joined
May 19, 2003
Messages
1,598
Reaction score
2,787
I’d actually be okay if we got more glitch Pokémon; it’d make up for the lacking roster in my eyes.
To be honest, I was really hoping that the Ultra Beasts were some kind fun self jab at themselves and they made the glitches "canon" in a way.

But nope, they're still just incompetent as back then with the coding and decided to throw out the concept of ultra beasts entirely.
 
Previously known as 'Isamu Akai'
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
1,673
Yokai Watch has done that?
Actually I can't be too certain if they have dropped certain Yokai before. It may have already happened with some obscure Yokai (especially as far as the mobile spin-off releases are concerned). But I'm pretty sure it inevitably will come to that, especially with Level-5's crossover collaborations with other companies. They can't keep up support with those forever especially if they have to pay royalties each time.

My main point though is that monster RPGs dropping 'support' for older species is not new.
 
Gobble Gobble Gobble
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
18,859
Reaction score
2,951
Every time you delete someone's favorite from the roster, you loose that player FOREVER. And possibly any children they might had and otherwise introduced to the series.
Thing is that they’re not dropping these Pokémon forever. It’s just from one game, ad they’ll appear in later games. Eventually they’ll have to fix it anyways because it wouldn’t work we with online battling.

Online battling is too large a part of Pokémon, and if you only have certain species in games then they’re going to have to make some way to connect those to where all are useable for people to battle with, Becaise it just wouldn’t make sense to have a darkrai and dress it up as a pikachu. The Pokémon aren’t like the trainers where you can give them some standard appearanceZ
 
Bulbapædist
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
713
Thing is that they’re not dropping these Pokémon forever. It’s just from one game, ad they’ll appear in later games. Eventually they’ll have to fix it anyways because it wouldn’t work we with online battling.
Maybe they are, and maybe they're not. We've yet to see. We've had multiple gens where the same "unpopular" Pokemon is coincidentally missing from each regional dex. If that happens consistently, then it basically is the same as dropping them forever.


Actually I can't be too certain if they have dropped certain Yokai before. It may have already happened with some obscure Yokai (especially as far as the mobile spin-off releases are concerned). But I'm pretty sure it inevitably will come to that, especially with Level-5's crossover collaborations with other companies. They can't keep up support with those forever especially if they have to pay royalties each time.

My main point though is that monster RPGs dropping 'support' for older species is not new.
I don't think anyone in the YW fandom expects Detective Conyan or Dragon Quest Jibanyan to be in the franchise forever. They make it pretty clear they're temporary promotional monsters, and even if they didn't most of the tie-in monsters are just Jibanyan cosplaying, so it's not a huge loss. It's basically the equivalent of losing Spiky-eared Pichu and Cosplay Pikachu.
 
Bulbapædist
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
713
To be honest, I was really hoping that the Ultra Beasts were some kind fun self jab at themselves and they made the glitches "canon" in a way.

But nope, they're still just incompetent as back then with the coding and decided to throw out the concept of ultra beasts entirely.
They made the Ultra Beasts seem like a bigger thing then they were, but in the end all they were was a weird take on Hawaii's problem of invasive species. Which was redundant because that was already the point of Trump Mongoose.
 
Previously known as 'Isamu Akai'
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
1,673
And where are Robopon, Telefang, and Monster Rancher now?

Oh, that's right, dead as doornails. I was literally there to see it in the Monster Rancher fandom - every time an old favorite was missing from a new game, you had a spate of players swearing off the series for good and there hasn't been a new title in the franchise since the DS era.

Every time you delete someone's favorite from the roster, you loose that player FOREVER. And possibly any children they might had and otherwise introduced to the series.
No, they didn't drop from the face of the Earth because of older species losing support. They eventually disappeared because all three were always niche series. Even when they first came out, Robopon (certainly not that one), Telefang, and Monster Rancher weren't ever that popular to begin with.

And to be fair with Monster Rancher, it did very comparatively well. The last major release was a Japan-only MMORPG (Monster Farm Lagoon) that came out in 2010. And there's supposedly rumors that Tecmo Koei are preparing to revive that series. Though it remains to see if that is true. As for Telefang, there is a still fandom community for that that I've been a part of.

But no, I don't believe these games failed because of dropped support, but because they were niche series that didn't rise to the same level of popularity as Pokemon. Especially when people were constantly calling these games "poor clones of Pokemon". Back in the day, everyone considered Pokemon king and similar games to be "knockoffs". Nevermind the fact that Pokemon itself isn't even original. And for me, as someone who is a fan of monster raising RPGs in general, that comparison stinks. I'm glad that mindset is finally beginning to change.

Lastly, please don't be so combative with me. I was only making a simple statement.
 
Stuck
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
18,020
Reaction score
11,370
Actually I can't be too certain if they have dropped certain Yokai before. It may have already happened with some obscure Yokai (especially as far as the mobile spin-off releases are concerned). But I'm pretty sure it inevitably will come to that, especially with Level-5's crossover collaborations with other companies. They can't keep up support with those forever especially if they have to pay royalties each time.
It's reasonable to deem some designs exclusive to spin-off games. I don't think they were carried over to the main RPGs to begin with, except for maybe some of the Jibanyan forms that aren't a big deal.

I agree with your point in general, but it seems to me that Yokai Watch 4 is doing a better job than SwSh in this department.
 
Bulbapædist
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
713
Lastly, please don't be so combative with me. I was only making a simple statement.
I really don't see much, if anything combative about what I said. I was merely emphasizing that while everyone else is pointing out that other monster series get rid of monsters with each new game, only Digimon and Shin Megami Tensei have actually survived to continue that practice.
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
13,947
Reaction score
1,758
I really don't see much, if anything combative about what I said. I was merely emphasizing that while everyone else is pointing out that other monster series get rid of monsters with each new game, only Digimon and Shin Megami Tensei have actually survived to continue that practice.
Personally, I think Pokemon is big enough to survive a few hits. Hopefully they'll realize the issue and hire new programmers to better optimize data compression and storage in the games.
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
13,947
Reaction score
1,758
They made the Ultra Beasts seem like a bigger thing then they were, but in the end all they were was a weird take on Hawaii's problem of invasive species. Which was redundant because that was already the point of Trump Mongoose.
And they had regional variants that could have played that role as well. I was disappointed when they opted to focus on Ultra Beasts, rather than regional variants in USUM. Not that they necessarily had to choose one or the other, but they clearly chose Ultra Beasts.
 
Previously known as 'Isamu Akai'
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
1,673
I agree with your point in general, but it seems to me that Yokai Watch 4 is doing a better job than SwSh in this department.
It is and I find myself more excited for it than I ever have been with SwSh.

I think people are focusing too much on one statement I made in my post. Especially when I actually do agree with the criticisms for this decision. My main point with my contribution is that TPCi, Nintendo, and GF have gotten too greedy and it's led to them pumping out releases without any significant developments. The last few generations have honestly been lazy and essentially rehashes of the same-old. SM was a small step in the right direction (though I honestly suspect the only reason GF did what they did with that was because Yokai Watch was growing more popular), but the execution of it was poorly done and honestly feels like a step back to me than a step forward.

Granted, Level-5 hasn't been much better with how they released three major "generations" (if the YKW games can even be called that) on one platform alone. But they did see a dip in sales with YKW 3 and from the sounds of it they did recognize that fact and are looking to improve. Which we can see with YKW 4. So I at least have to commend to Level-5 that they are willing to take feedback and actually take risks with their series.
 
Bulbapædist
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
713
If they wanted to cut Pokemon, they should've done an entire Generation in the Ultraverse. They could've had 150 new alien Pokemon, some which would be alternate reality versions of existing Pokemon like Pikachu (imagine an astronaut themed version of Pikachu called Pikachu Ultra Form) in a world divorced from the physics and reality of the copy-paste Pokemon Earth. I'd have so totally bought that, sigh.

Instead we get British Sun and Moon with less monsters and no real justification besides saving GameFreak some cash.
 
Bulbapædist
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
713
It is and I find myself more excited for it than I ever have been with SwSh.

I think people are focusing too much on one statement I made in my post. Especially when I actually do agree with the criticisms for this decision. My main point with my contribution is that TPCi, Nintendo, and GF have gotten too greedy and it's led to them pumping out releases without any significant developments. The last few generations have honestly been lazy and essentially rehashes of the same-old. SM was a small step in the right direction (though I honestly suspect the only reason GF did what they did with that was because Yokai Watch was growing more popular), but the execution of it was poorly done and honestly feels like a step back to me than a step forward.

Granted, Level-5 hasn't been much better with how they released three major "generations" (if the YKW games can even be called that) on one platform alone. But they did see a dip in sales with YKW 3 and from the sounds of it they did recognize that fact and are looking to improve. Which we can see with YKW 4. So I at least have to commend to Level-5 that they are willing to take feedback and actually take risks with their series.
I wish YW3 had been released on the Switch in the west. I'm not looking forward to possibly digging out my 3DS to play it, but I really do want to support what Level5 is doing with that universe.
 
The Best Gym Leader
Joined
May 9, 2015
Messages
3,427
Reaction score
3,577
Why a petition? This is non-sense. You don't like the game,you don't buy that's all! They are not doing games for the fans, they are doing it for them. For the sake of art cash.
I mostly agree with you, but you had one word wrong. ;)
 
Last edited:
Top