Your controversial opinions

[Alola]

Isn't that a little unfair? It doesn't offer anything that the player couldn't do already, but it removes their ability to choose how they want to take on gyms.

No? How is using the same number of Pokémon as your opponent unfair?

It may limit them in their choices, but the ability to plan how they address the Gym and its rules remains.

 

[TechSkylander1518]

No? How is using the same number of Pokémon as your opponent unfair?

Unfair from the perspective of the different player bases, not between player and NPC.

Right now, the situation allows for both possibilities- you can choose to limit your party by the number of Pokemon your opponent uses, or you can choose to use a full party. And unless I'm misinterpreting your post, you said that, because not every player imposes limits on themselves, they should make these restrictions a game mechanic so that it's not an option anymore. Forcing players to stick to one of these just because you think it's the way things ought to be isn't really respecting the desires/preferences of the people who choose to use a full party.

That's not to say that things are perfectly balanced as they are- it's way easier to go in with a party of six than it is to set up a smaller team, and there's all sorts of things they could do to make it easier. (Include the "Select Pokemon" option like in Battle Facilities, let the player know about a gym leader's party length before going in, or even create alternate parties to match the length of the player's team) But you wouldn't have to make this mandatory for any of these to be possible.

 

[Nitro Indigo]

I don't agree with the theory that the Fire starters are all based on the Chinese Zoadiac. In fact, I don't think Game Freak should should have patterns for each type of starter became it would limit their creativity. Once I saw someone's starter Fakemon for an Australian region, which were a koala, a goat, and a platypus, and while the art was good, it felt so surface-level.

 

[Alola]

Unfair from the perspective of the different player bases, not between player and NPC.

Well my concerns, and original post, concern the perspective of the player and NPC. For eight battles out of their entire video game playthrough barring battle facility content, local or online matches, and real life tournaments, I stand by my opinion that they should battle those Gym Leaders fairly party-wise. I do not see a justification for an unfair party advantage in such a key battle, especially when there are accommodations or gameplay elements players can take advantage of to win if they are struggling or they can simply defeat the Gym Leader(s) to resume battling other in-game Trainers with however many Pokémon they wish.

Right now, the situation allows for both possibilities- you can choose to limit your party by the number of Pokemon your opponent uses, or you can choose to use a full party. And unless I'm misinterpreting your post, you said that, because not every player imposes limits on themselves, they should make these restrictions a game mechanic so that it's not an option anymore. Forcing players to stick to one of these just because you think it's the way things ought to be isn't really respecting the desires/preferences of the people who choose to use a full party.

It is not a limit to fight fairly; I disagree with you about that. I am not going to change or rescind my controversial opinion(s) due to hypothetical players, who want to unfairly challenge a Gym Leader with a full team to the Gym Leader's two, being upset about it. It also would be different if the Pokémon video game franchise respected all of the "desires/preferences of the people" who play the games, but they don't. If I had a quarter for every change, implementation, or ceasing of game mechanics they have done that did not sit well with me, or affected how I like to play the games, I would have enough money to buy a meal ; that has not stopped me from playing and loving this series any less. No matter what they do (or don't do), someone, somewhere, will always have an issue with it, feel slighted, not agree, criticize, feel disrespected, etc. That's just the way it is; it is an eventuality.

(Include the "Select Pokemon" option like in Battle Facilities, let the player know about a gym leader's party length before going in, possible.

This is what I envisioned; that way, players don't have to make any PC trips; they just choose who they want to participate from their party. The number they choose would obviously reflect the number of Pokémon there are to battle. Clyde, or the Gym Helper, can even throw in an introductory "Think carefully about the four Pokémon you choose to battle Tech, the Gym Leader who uses Steel-type Pokémon!" etc.

Anyway, it is clear we are not going to see eye to eye and this ongoing conversation I feel is now derailing the thread/going in circles. So, I am going to respectfully agree to disagree and move on to another topic.

 

[Norzan]

I don't think many people are saying the games should receive a blanket difficulty increase, moreso that difficulty options should become a thing. I think the biggest issue with self-imposed challenges is that they can be pretty restricting, and aren't always going to provide as much of a satisfying increase in challenge as, say, improving enemy AI, enemy teams, etc. I haven't been able to get into nuzlockes because I dislike the how restricted teambuilding is, for example.

This. And now there's the issue of ways to restrict yourself being actively removed. Can't turn off the Exp. Share in Sword and Shield, meaning you pretty much need to either micromanage your exp gain to avoid getting overlevled, need to have a large team of pokemon to rotate quite often to, again, avoid getting overleveled, and also need to pretty much avoid the majority of optional trainers.

There's nothing more satisfying when a game challenges me even after i'm using every tool available. Having to restrict myself always feels a little off to me, like i have to lower my "power level" so that mere mortals can keep up with me.

 

[FinnishPokéFan92]

And even here, it's just a pokemon (Ultra Necrozma). Everything else seems to fall in line with the reduced difficulty of the recent games.

The Totem Pokémon in US/UM were also much more challenging than in S/M.

 

[Norzan]

The Totem Pokémon in US/UM were also much more challenging than in S/M.

By comparison, they were still pretty easy to me (and i was playing gimped, no Exp. Share and other stuff that breaks the game) in the grand scheme of things. They were giving more of a challenge to the framerate.

 

[Neyo]

Recent Gens have some of the best Pokémon designs. But they also have the worst. I’m not sure if either of those statements are controversial, though.

 

[FinnishPokéFan92]

Recent Gens have some of the best Pokémon designs. But they also have the worst. I’m not sure if either of those statements are controversial, though.

One YouTuber tended to point out that Generation IV had the issue that many of its Pokémon could be broken down into basic geometrical shapes, with Drapion and Lickilicky being some of the most obvious examples.

 

[Fan of Jarrus]

One YouTuber tended to point out that Generation IV had the issue that many of its Pokémon could be broken down into basic geometrical shapes, with Drapion and Lickilicky being some of the most obvious examples.

Silver League Networks did.

 

[FinnishPokéFan92]

Silver League Networks did.

Bingo.

 

[Blaine.]

Not sure how unpopular this is but I think location-based evolutions (Vikavolt in SM USUM for example) are great, It encourages you to go explore the game just to evolve the pokemon, wish there were more tbh.

 

[Poke Dragon]

My only problem with location-based evolutions is that the location in question can be locked behind the post-game, making it impossible to evolve your Pokemon until the post-game. This in fact happened with Sun and Moon where it was impossible to evolve Charjabug into Vikavolt until the Pokemon League was defeated for the first time.

 

[Phosphene]

This in fact happened with Sun and Moon where it was impossible to evolve Charjabug into Vikavolt until the Pokemon League was defeated for the first time.

While I agree that Charjabug's evolutionary location was problematic, wasn't Vast Poni Canyon pre-post game?

 

[Poke Dragon]

While I agree that Charjabug's evolutionary location was problematic, wasn't Vast Poni Canyon pre-post game?

My mistake, but yes, that's still way too late in the game for the final evolution of Alola's regional Bug-type to happen.

 

[Norzan]

Yeah, i remember being really annoyed you can only evolve Charjabug until way later in the game. Meaning for a good chunk of the playthrough, Charjabug was kind of dead weight given how low its stats are.

Thankfullly it evolves with a Thunder Stone in Gen 8. But that's not to say i'm against pokemon evolving in specific areas, i just think the selection of pokemon for it needs to be better made, and specially don't lock very early pokemon behind it if the area to evolve it is way too late into the game.

 

[CynthiaLover]

This is going to be a very hot take but here goes... HGSS suck and don't deserve their "sacred cow" status. The level curve is atrocious, the Mon distribution is terrible, there is a noticeable lack of Johto Mons IN Johto, the TM distribution is horrid, the story is meh at best, the rival is overrated, the Spiky-Eared Pichu event takes away a more useful event, Johto as a whole is overshadowed by Kanto (again), the Pokethon is too much work for not enough reward, and the Kanto "post-game" is overrated (and I see it as the second half of the story, since Johto as a whole is rather shallow). On top of that, the Apricorn balls are terrible and highly overrated, as they suffer from a bad case of crippling overspecification. Concept-wise, they're great. Execution-wise, they're horrid and don't deserve this "sacred" status the fandom has for them. Overall, HGSS show just how bad some remakes can be, especially when they don't address the core problems outside of mechanics and glitches, which is something I'm worried about with the DP remakes coming up. So, yeah, HGSS suck and don't deserve this glorious status that everyone praises them for.

 

[FinnishPokéFan92]

the rival is overrated

Why do you think so?

the Pokethon is too much work for not enough reward

It gives you access to evolution stones much easier than the original Gold and Silver did.

 

[CynthiaLover]

Why do you think so?

It gives you access to evolution stones much easier than the original Gold and Silver did.

I saw this coming a mile away.

Because Silver is part of the "jerk rival" archetype that everyone seems to adore. I hate jerk rivals. Jerk =/= better rival. Jerk rivals are totally overrated and I don't understand the fandom's obsession with them. Rivals like Barry, Cheren, Bianca, and Hugh were great examples of rivals who were both competitive with the player and still respected you. Jerk doesn't automatically equal better. Jerk means jerk, that's all there is to it.

You still have to work very hard to get those stone, and they're not exactly cheap, either. I've gotten all the stones I needed from the NPCs that call you, like the lass on Route 34, so the Pokethon is a complete waste of time when you can get what you need for free from certain NPCs. It's like I said: too much work for not enough reward.

 

[TechSkylander1518]

Not sure how unpopular this is but I think location-based evolutions (Vikavolt in SM USUM for example) are great, It encourages you to go explore the game just to evolve the pokemon, wish there were more tbh.

Does it really, though? Most of the locations you can evolve them in are part of the main story.

Magnetic Field- Mt. Coronet, Chargestone Cave, Kalos Route 13, New Mauville, and Vast Poni Canyon are all required to go through in order to complete the story. (Also, Kalos Route 13 gets an extra "screw you" because even though the nearby power plant is causing the magnetic field, being in the power plant itself doesn't count)

Mossy Rock- Eterna Forest, Pinwheel Forest, Kalos Route 20, Petalburg Woods, and Lush Jungle are all required to go through to complete the story. (Lush Jungle does get props by only letting you evolve Leafeon in a specific part of it, though, so it does include a bit more exploration)

The Icy Rock is the only one I think is a good execution of this idea, with all of its locations requiring some exploration to find it.

There's also the fact that, apart from calling Cheren in BW2, there's not really anything that tells you how to evolve these Pokemon? (Unless I'm forgetting something else) So if you don't already know how to evolve them, you're not really encouraged to explore, because you don't know that you need to find a certain location to evolve them- and if you look it up, then you're given the location information as well. In generations after these Pokemon are introduced, returning players have the option of exploring- you know how to evolve them and what to look for- but a chance to explore in the next region isn't exactly great for a Pokemon introduced now.