Your controversial opinions

[Daren]

However they are only good if you have friends to play with or an NSO account. I don’t think it was done to “sell NSO subs” as some people think, judging by the usual development times I suspect GameFreak got a bit screwed over by Nintendo introducing the NSO sub scheme after they already started developing this online feature then just a had to roll with it.

I really hope so, because I seriously do not want any future games to have something as tedious and unfun as single player Max Raids that are so consistently used to gate content behind. Max Raids being in 9 without a serious overhaul could honestly be a deal breaker for me.

 

[Esserise]

'Only' 230 or so are missing.

On that note, I wonder how much the decision process came down to Pokémon with multiple forms (which don't always, but usually require separate animations and such for each form). If you look at the list of still-missing Pokémon, there's a lot of them that have multiple forms:

Spoiler

Rattata and Raticate
Geodude, Graveler, and Golem
Grimer and Muk
Unown
Deoxys
Burmy and Wormadam
Shaymin
Arceus
Deerling and Sawsbuck
Meloetta
Greninja (if we're including Ash-Greninja)
Vivillon
Pyroar
Flabébé, Floette, and Florges
Furfrou
Hoopa
Oricorio
Minior

Obviously some of these like Arceus and Vivillon are going to be a lot simpler since it's just elements of the textures that change, but then you have the ones like Oricorio, Furfrou, and the Unown (the amazing thing about the Unown is how they seriously do have unique animations for all 28 forms) which are going to require a lot more work and quality-checking for what is really just one species.

But yeah, I'm hoping that if there is another Gen 8 game, they'll be able to get all of the leftovers sorted and included. Since they brought 227 species back with the DLC, on the surface it seems doable.

(My personal pipe dream is being able to see Ultra Necrozma with SwSh's far superior lighting engine. The 3DS didn't really do the concept justice, but now we have seen with several Pokémon that have bioluminescent elements - Xerneas, Guzzlord, Dusk Mane Necrozma - that they can really come to life on the Switch where those elements can literally shine.)

 

[WyndonCalling]

Mega's, Z-moves, D-max... Why. I'm of the opinion that such mechanics are not necessary and made the already bursty combat even more bursty. I really dislike them...

That brings me to my final point; **** legendaries.

My response to the first of these takes is that the core Pokemon gameplay was perfected thirteen years ago now in Gen IV (if someone could kindly bring me a coffin catalogue, please) and I can't really envision an alternate universe where the series continued to enjoy success without those innovations or gimmicks - take your pick of the language. I know Black and White are very well regarded, but in a sense they're rather conservative and I'm not sure how long that kind of incremental growth would have maintained quite this level of buy-in.

This said, I completely concur with many of the criticisms of the mechanics themselves. I love Megas even if some of the designs are a tad ropey, but DMax and Z-moves are outright blights on the competitive landscape and only made a reasonable amount of sense in the playthroughs, where they added a dash of spectacle.

Regarding legendaries... I think there's a way to 'do' them, exemplified by the Regi trio in particular (self-plagiarised thoughts below):

I love Regigigas for elevating the trio's mythology while remaining true to what keeps them so interesting - they're obscure, difficult to get, badly signposted and not very rewarding. My immersion is always sapped whenever a new legendary with absurd offensive stats is introduced, because they're always clearly telegraphed to be the new hotness rather than an organic piece of the Pokémon world. Regigigas and his babies have nothing to prove and their awkwardness makes them feel more real.

In stark contrast is Sinnoh's approach, where the legendaries are thoroughly demystified by their story presence, ubiquity and obvious 'construction' for competitive play - Heatran being the worst offender of all time.

 

[Puddle]

I think this might be controversial... I would have preferred it if Sword and Shield had been released on the 3DS. I prefer the 3DS to the Switch in every way apart from the screen resolution. It's more affordable, more portable, has two screens, feels more robust, has free online play, and most importantly, doesn't have the awful - and inexcusable, on Nintendo's part - joy con drift problem.

Sun and Moon's graphics, while obviously not as good as Sword and Shield's, still look great in my opinion, and I still enjoy playing those games. I'd take lower-quality graphics over the Switch's issues any day. With lower-resolution models, it might have been possible to include every Pokemon as well.

Of course, there are some things I love about Sword and Shield - Wild Areas, the stadiums, Dynamax - that might not have been possible on the 3DS. But I wouldn't have missed those things if I'd have never known they were meant to be in the game in the first place.

 

[prog rocker]

and most importantly, doesn't have the awful - and inexcusable, on Nintendo's part - joy con drift problem.

Considering I've heard stories of people breaking the 3DS joystick while playing Smash, and hearing my own joystick making noises, I don't think the 3DS is that realiable in that sense. Plus the whole easy-to-damage shoulder buttons.

 

[Esserise]

I think this might be controversial... I would have preferred it if Sword and Shield had been released on the 3DS. I prefer the 3DS to the Switch in every way apart from the screen resolution. It's more affordable, more portable, has two screens, feels more robust, has free online play, and most importantly, doesn't have the awful - and inexcusable, on Nintendo's part - joy con drift problem.

Sun and Moon's graphics, while obviously not as good as Sword and Shield's, still look great in my opinion, and I still enjoy playing those games. I'd take lower-quality graphics over the Switch's issues any day. With lower-resolution models, it might have been possible to include every Pokemon as well.

I love my 3DS and prefer a dual-screen setup too, but I think with another release on that console, it's possible you would really start to see a drop in performance. For example, I think it's pretty astonishing the difference between a Gen 7 game attempting to handle 8 models + weather + terrain (at which point the system really starts to sweat, so the room for that kind of scenario to exist is kept to a minimum) and SwSh doing the same (which is a common occurrence in Max Raid Battles, but doesn't slow the game down at all). I feel like they had pretty much hit the ceiling in terms of what they could on the 3DS from a technical standpoint, and if I were GF, I'd have breathed a sigh of relief upon being able to work with the Switch's processing power. I also think those sorts of system limitations would have made a 3DS-bound SwSh feel just like "more of the same," and would have precluded it from being able to innovate as much as it did.

Of course, there are some things I love about Sword and Shield - Wild Areas, the stadiums, Dynamax - that might not have been possible on the 3DS. But I wouldn't have missed those things if I'd have never known they were meant to be in the game in the first place.

No offense, but this feels like some kind of logical fallacy. "If I lived in a universe where (this thing I liked) never happened, I wouldn't miss it because I wouldn't even be aware of it, and would find other things to be happy about with what I got instead." That kind of just goes without saying, no?

 

[Puddle]

Considering I've heard stories of people breaking the 3DS joystick while playing Smash, and hearing my own joystick making noises, I don't think the 3DS is that realiable in that sense. Plus the whole easy-to-damage shoulder buttons.

I wonder if I've just been really lucky with my consoles up until this point? My 3DS has even survived getting blue tack stuck behind the circle pad (I foolishly thought that blue tack would work as well as a coin for the Lumiose City egg hatching trick) without any issues. So it was a bit of a shock when my left joy con started to malfunction after just a few months, despite the fact that I was taking much better care of it. I did buy my Switch second hand, but I've heard of people having these problems with brand new ones too.

I don't know if it's just a coincidence, but I first noticed the drifting not long after I'd been stirring lots of curries in Pokemon Camp. That mini game does encourage you to be quite vigorous with the circle pads in handheld mode. I think I'll detatch the joy cons when making curries in the future, just to be on the safe side.

I love my 3DS and prefer a dual-screen setup too, but I think with another release on that console, it's possible you would really start to see a drop in performance. For example, I think it's pretty astonishing the difference between a Gen 7 game attempting to handle 8 models + weather + terrain (at which point the system really starts to sweat, so the room for that kind of scenario to exist is kept to a minimum) and SwSh doing the same (which is a common occurrence in Max Raid Battles, but doesn't slow the game down at all). I feel like they had pretty much hit the ceiling in terms of what they could on the 3DS from a technical standpoint, and if I were GF, I'd have breathed a sigh of relief upon being able to work with the Switch's processing power. I also think those sorts of system limitations would have made a 3DS-bound SwSh feel just like "more of the same," and would have precluded it from being able to innovate as much as it did.

I seem to remember GF saying that Sun and Moon pushed the 3DS to its limits. So yes, I don't think it would have been feasible for Gen 8 to be on the 3DS, because they wouldn't have been able to make any new advancements. I'm really just imagining a hypothetical scenario where Sword and Shield had been the Gen 6 or Gen 7 games. If Galar, my definitive region, had been in a 3DS game, I could have made the 3DS my last console (which was my original plan, before Sword and Shield were announced) instead of having to contend with the issues that the Switch has. It's really just a personal thing, rather than something that I think would have been better for the series overall.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate my Switch. I'm continually amazed by the HD screen whenever I boot up SwSh or Let's Go, and tabletop mode is fun to mess around with from time to time (I haven't bought a dock, and I'm not sure whether my old TV would be compatible anyway). But on the whole, I've had much more positive experiences with my traditional handheld consoles, all of which cost significantly less.

No offense, but this feels like some kind of logical fallacy. "If I lived in a universe where (this thing I liked) never happened, I wouldn't miss it because I wouldn't even be aware of it, and would find other things to be happy about with what I got instead." That kind of just goes without saying, no?

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that even though I love the Wild Area and the stadiums, I still think I would have enjoyed a 3DS version of SwSh more, in spite of the absence of those things.

To give an analogy... I really dislike eating in restaurants because they're noisy, overcrowded and expensive. I would much rather have a simple macaroni cheese in a small cafe, than a luxurious lasagne in a restaurant. The macaroni cheese might not taste quite as good as the lasagne, but my experience of eating it would still be more enjoyable overall, because I'd be in an environment I feel more relaxed in.

 

[Lanstar]

Another hot take I have:

Regional Variants are just as gimmicky as Mega Evolutions - and Regional evolutions are even more so.

The thing that makes this so is that regional forms are too often designed exclusively for a generation's region. Even if they have no gimmicks in their gameplay, their designs really stick out like a gimmick as they get get imported to other games - which gives them a gimmick label in my eyes.

With Megas, at least you can import the mechanic into other regions, and expand on it without the gimmick sticking out. The forms seem designed around the pokemon themselves - not really the region they came from - So they don't really stick out as much in new regions.

I.e.: Regional forms are trendy designs. Megas are much more timeless.

 

[prog rocker]

After seeing the Leon vs Cynthia debates, my appreciation for her has decreased.

 

[Shib]

Another hot take I have:

Regional Variants are just as gimmicky as Mega Evolutions - and Regional evolutions are even more so.

The thing that makes this so is that regional forms are too often designed exclusively for a generation's region. Even if they have no gimmicks in their gameplay, their designs really stick out like a gimmick as they get get imported to other games - which gives them a gimmick label in my eyes.

With Megas, at least you can import the mechanic into other regions, and expand on it without the gimmick sticking out. The forms seem designed around the pokemon themselves - not really the region they came from - So they don't really stick out as much in new regions.

I.e.: Regional forms are trendy designs. Megas are much more timeless.

I’d definitely give you that as a hot take but probably because I view it entirely the opposite. To me Megas are a bit of a nonsense gimmick and regional variations make more sense because they link more to real life evolution.

 

[Fan of Jarrus]

After seeing the Leon vs Cynthia debates, my appreciation for her has decreased.

I feel the same way about the Gen 4 games from this.

 

[Greninjaman]

I’d definitely give you that as a hot take but probably because I view it entirely the opposite. To me Megas are a bit of a nonsense gimmick

How is it a nonsense gimmick?

 

[Shib]

How is it a nonsense gimmick?

Just my opinion - falls too squarely into the anime cliche of “need to be stronger so add another transformation.” I’m not a fan of the lore as it doesn’t make much sense that it’s implied that either Kalos or Hoenn (depending on timeline) have had this stuff going on for years and no one knew. In terms of gameplay I’m not really a fan of any burst mechanics - I don’t hate them, just dislike.

When megas were added I just saw it as too similar to digivolving. I can’t think of a single mega design that I like more than the original, which isn’t the case with regional variants (or even g-max for that matter - although I’d have no problem with megas and g-max getting retconned to being the same thing)

I get a lot of people like megas but they’ve just never done anything for me personally.

 

[Cookies and Creme]

None of the games after Generation 5 are bad per se. It's just because Generation 5 set the bar so high that almost nothing else Game Freak has done and will do can surpass it. To me, the only things that has surpassed Gen 5 were the story and characters in the Alolan games.

 

[TechSkylander1518]

This is kind of a lukewarm take by comparison, but maybe it still counts as controversial because it's such a debate? But I think that both Megas and regional forms are good trends that should be mainstays in Pokemon. Both offer a new form of Pokemon design that wasn't possible with just standard designs, because they allow for variance on a Pokemon's base design rather than a separate evo, either as a powered-up form or as a reimagining. The execution of both hasn't been 100%- Mega Evolution struggled to keep its lore straight, regional evos sometimes had stuff like pancakes to justify it- but I think both are a good addition to the franchise.

Of the two, I'd say Mega Evolution at least feel more like a gimmick- regional forms already had prior examples like Shellos, Burmy, Castform, etc. to draw on- but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.

 

[prog rocker]

regional evos sometimes had stuff like pancakes to justify it-

Unless I'm mistaken (I still have not played SwSh so feel free to correct me), that only happened with A-Raichu. Masters even had Hau question it IIRC (might need to double check).

Of the two, I'd say Mega Evolution at least feel more like a gimmick- regional forms already had prior examples like Shellos, Burmy, Castform, etc. to draw on- but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.

Don't forget the Orange Islands arc and Delta species from the TCG.

 

[TechSkylander1518]

Unless I'm mistaken (I still have not played SwSh so feel free to correct me), that only happened with A-Raichu. Masters even had Hau question it IIRC (might need to double check).

Hm, yeah, I guess that one just really sticks out to me, lol. Although, reading back through the entries for other species, it's not often that a cause is mentioned, so I don't know that it's fair to say the others were handled better so much as they weren't handled at all. (Some are good, though, like Rattata, Vulpix, Sandshrew, etc.)

 

[Esserise]

The triggers for all the different regional form mutations are usually at least able to be inferred (pretty much all of the Ice-type variants can boil down to “they moved somewhere colder and adapted to it”), while some are elaborated on in more detail on the individual game websites (e.g. Ponyta mutating because of long-term exposure to the “overwhelming life energy” in the Glimwood Tangle).

I’ve always figured that the dubiousness of Raichu’s mutation logic was a deliberate contrast to the sensible explanations for most of the others. Alolan Raichu is supposed to be kind of an enigma, with the games having even the in-universe researchers being stumped about the exact reason for its change. Both its diet and the climate are mentioned as being potential factors, but the Dex entries remain willfully vague overall. Of course, most importantly is that it’s clearly a reference to Surfing Pikachu. They did it for the meta

——

Oh yeah, something I forgot to mention in my “Why I like Team Flare” spiel a few pages back. Those delightfully on-point details we’re given when we infiltrate Lysandre Labs, with Aliana outright admitting that Team Flare have more than enough resources to have generated the power needed to turn on the weapon, but decided to steal from the Power Plant because it didn’t “justify the cost.” Typical billionaire hoarding causing headaches for the regular folk in Lumiose who have to deal with the subsequent power outage. And then there’s that one grunt who mentions how they’ve been listening in on people and collecting data on them through the Holo Caster - that bit feels really prescient. Betcha’ they even sold that data to companies like Silph Co. and Macro Cosmos, too.

 

[Esserise]

Also I guess it's a hot take among the online fandom; who knows how the general audience feel about it, but I've mentioned a few times now that I think it's totally fine for GF to dump the new power-up mechanic from the spotlight when a new generation begins. My reasoning is threefold:

1) I think that if you kept all of them intact, you'd start to see a real nasty accretion of concepts that just don't blend together. Megas, Primals, Z-Moves, Dynamax, and whatever comes next all in one battle? It sounds like it would be awesome, but I bet the logistics would be a real pain to balance. While I suppose they could introduce battle settings that limit players to using just one at a time, I think that would only solve part of the issue. Each of these mechanics may have an internal sense of design balance, but they aren't really balanced around each other. One player choosing to use a Mega Evolution while another player chooses Dynamax might end up significantly favoring one player over the other. They could make it so that both players have to agree to use only the same mechanic, but see, now we're starting to get into a thorny bush of extra requirements and stipulations that the devs would have to design just to keep the playing field even. What if they were to introduce another mechanic that, like Dynamax, doesn't require a held item? It's like, okay, if your Pokémon is holding a Mega Stone, that acts as a check preventing it from using Z-Moves or Dynamax or the new thing. Holding a Z-Crystal? No Mega Evolving, Dynamaxing, or Newthinging. But what check do they implement to differentiate between Dynamax and the new concept, neither of which require held items? Can you choose freely? Does using one prevent you from using the other on a different Pokémon in the same battle later on? And designing this kind of coding architecture is not necessarily a simple thing. People worry sometimes about "item bloat" and "move bloat," but supporting all of these high-concept mechanics in the long term would be ten times worse.

2) Creatively, I believe that these concepts are very healthy for the franchise. I think it would be very limiting if the developers were stuck with only one for many, many years - I truly think it is good that they are able to wipe the slate clean and experiment with a new idea that takes lessons from what they tried previously. Megas were controversial at first, but proved to be popular with people and showed that there was still room to shake up the battle formula, and gave some long-neglected Pokémon like Kangaskhan and Beedrill a new opportunity to shine. Z-Moves tried to address some of the inherent problems with Mega Evolution, by letting every Pokémon utilize them, which in turn gave the player earlier access to the mechanic and also resulted in more NPCs being able to use it against you, while also varying up the damage output depending on the move that you used as the base (instead of just relying on a flat 100-point increase to the Pokémon's statline) which I feel had the potential to encourage some more creative combinations, even though I think the predominant choice ended up being to just juice up the strongest moves. And now there's Dynamax, which tries to keep the lessons from both in mind in various ways - but more than that, it is used even more than the other two to provide a cornerstone for the design of, not just the new region's culture and themes, but also new gameplay features that have turned out to be very successful. There will still be room to improve with the next iteration, of course, but these mechanics altogether are one of the big reasons why I think the series's creative output has been much stronger in the last few years than it had been in Gens 4 and 5, which I think refined a lot of under-the-hood elements but did not have a lot of their own strong ideas about what could be done to keep the battle scene fresh.

3) Three-ish years feels, to me, like a perfectly reasonable amount of time for these features to reign over the meta before being rotated out. Do you know how many battles are conducted over the course of 1095 days? An assload. Think about all the officially hosted tournaments, all the Battle Spot/Stadium matchups, all the 1-on-1 Link battles. All the battle facility streaks. And now all the Max Raids. These mechanics are getting used plenty before we move on to new ones. They get more time to percolate in the public consciousness than a (pre-Covid) Marvel movie or most TV show seasons do before the next one of those comes around.

 

[Nodqfan]

Since they changed the evolution method of Leafeon and Glaceon to the Leaf and Ice Stone respectively I could see them doing the same at some point with Umbreon, Espeon, and Sylveon it just makes too much sense and makes it as easy as possible to obtain all of the evolutions of Eevee.