Speculation Future Pokemon Game Speculation Thread

[Bolt Strike]

Only limiting the entire roster to the Pokédex of B2W2 causes more issues than just not having the same total roster:

Not only were there Pokémon you can not only catch in the post game that don’t appear in the Pokédex in either version of the Unova Pokédex, but I’m pretty sure that there might be trainers that use Pokémon not available in either Pokédex as well. If we assume that we still have to deal with copy-paste rosters and encounter data in the BW remakes like what was done with BDSP, then quite a few rosters also have to be adjusted in order to account for the downsizing.

Wouldn’t changing the roster for half of the entire region more time consuming than downsizing the game’s whole roster to what was listed in the B2W2 Pokédex than just including the models present from BDSP and copy-pasting rosters and encounter data from the original BW? At the very least they’ll probably include the Pokémon that fit the criteria mentioned above in terms of both trainer data and encounter data.

Of course, this is assuming that they don’t just scrap even more content from the originals in order to sidestep the issue, which would probably lead to bigger outcry than a simple roster cut would.

The roster adjustments are probably very simple actually, they're probably little more than just a list that references each Pokemon in the game. Maybe for some of the trainer rosters they might have to put a bit more thought into movesets and held items, but they usually only do that for major battles. The 3D models are probably taking up far more of their time than the roster adjustments, so cutting out the BW2 National Dex Pokemon is probably preferable for them.

If they insist on having real-time combat, I would at least appreciate it if they didn't make it so damn hard. I was near tears with the fights against Arcanine and Avalugg. The fight against Lilligant, at least, hit that sweet spot between being challenging enough to feel satisfying, and not so hard that it felt nearly impossible.

I would like it if super hard fights were saved for post-game, and have nothing to do with the story. I haven't even bothered with the Arceus fight yet. I seriously don't know if I'm capable of defeating it. The thought of being barred from obtaining Arceus because I'm just naturally poor with quick thinking and reflexes is extremely depressing to me.

I know I'm just one fan, and this is about what's profitable, and that there will probably be more Arceus-style games with real-time combat. But hopefully, after reading this, people will at least understand where I'm coming from, even if they don't agree.

This I think is valid, some of the later Noble fights were probably too hard for casual players and they should tone down the difficulty in the main game. Electrode, Avalugg, and Arceus all practically feel like bullet hells with how rapidly they attack you and how quick your reflexes need to be. That might feel appropriate for the post game, but for the main game, I would guess that you're not alone in not wanting to deal with fights that hard again and there might've been some casual players that even ragequit against Electrode or Avalugg.

 

[BorealRookidee]

I really liked the difficulty of PLA. The both the turn-based and real-time fight towards the end of the game were really hard but I feel like it was earned. This was a new type of Pokemon game that was really marketed towards veteran players rather than the casual crowd. Plus it would have felt a little disappointing if it was too easy (that's my primary problem with Let's Go and the Gen VI games).

I loved the bullet hell style of the real time fights, too. It made it feel like a 3D Undertale fight.

 

[Yung Dramps]

I'm with Rookidee here, I think the Noble fights were really fun and just the right difficulty for me. Not too easy, not too hard. I appreciate the player action focus making it so you can spend all the time you want in each zone and they dont get trivialized if your team gets really high level.

 

[Daren]

I wasn't really a fan of the noble fights, myself; the camera and controls always just felt a bit off to me (during the Avalugg battle the camera repeatedly just decided to stop tracking him, I believe it was also an issue in others but seemed most prominent there), and you have so few options that I found they got boring pretty fast compared to a proper action game.

 

[Poke Dragon]

I think that they can just repurpose the Entralink to allow you to get certain Pokemon, that should fix the availability issue. As much as I would like to see the return of the Dreamworld as a separate thing like back in the day, I know that it's unlikely, so why not make it so the Entralink tree spawns a Dreamworld-esque area that you can explore with your chosen Pokemon? They already have the movement done for a huge chunk of the Pokemon thanks to the Synchro Machine feature, so it wouldn't be that much of an effort to add it for the necessary Pokemon that will appear in the Unova remake, sequel, experimental, whatever game's Pokedex.

 

[Bolt Strike]

I think that they can just repurpose the Entralink to allow you to get certain Pokemon, that should fix the availability issue. As much as I would like to see the return of the Dreamworld as a separate thing like back in the day, I know that it's unlikely, so why not make it so the Entralink tree spawns a Dreamworld-esque area that you can explore with your chosen Pokemon? They already have the movement done for a huge chunk of the Pokemon thanks to the Synchro Machine feature, so it wouldn't be that much of an effort to add it for the necessary Pokemon that will appear in the Unova remake, sequel, experimental, whatever game's Pokedex.

What about if it's an ILCA remake in the style of BDSP though? They're not just going to reuse SV's artstyle and models for that, I don't think ILCA is capable of a big 3D game like that. I don't think it's quite going to be as easy as recycling what they did in SV to get all 649, I think the game might have a different artstyle and they might need to start from square one again.

 

[Norzan]

The best news that i can get from pokemon this year is that there's no game and they are pushing to 2025 or beyond to have an actual polished release with meaningful, subtantial content.

 

[RileyXY1]

The best news that i can get from pokemon this year is that there's no game and they are pushing to 2025 or beyond to have an actual polished release with meaningful, subtantial content.

If they do that I think that it would be next year that would have no game, not this year, and it would be to ensure that we get the biggest possible release in 2026 for the franchise's 30th anniversary.

 

[BorealRookidee]

I do think Pokemon is going to start taking gap years more often in the future. But I don't think 2024 is going to be one of those years.

 

[Poke Dragon]

I agree, I think they want to finish bringing back regions that are currently stuck in the sprite-based Pokemon games before they start having gap years.

 

[Thegameandwatch]

I do think Pokemon is going to start taking gap years more often in the future. But I don't think 2024 is going to be one of those years.

2025 seems to be the more likely one like what happened in 2015.

 

[Daenerys]

I've recently been having lots of Johto nostalgia, so I'm hoping that if there is a new game this year, that it's a Johto remake of some kind. I'd much prefer that over a Unova set game due to various reasons such as Gen 5 being one of my least favorite generations ever Pokemon design-wise, and Unova being more recently showcased in core games compared to Johto.

 

[RileyXY1]

2025 seems to be the more likely one like what happened in 2015.

That is assuming that they are saving Gen 10 for 2026, which I don't think will be the case.

 

[Bolt Strike]

I don't think Pokemon wants gap years, they want to keep the fanbase engaged with the brand at all times and the fanbase itself even gets pretty antsy about the next game so I can't see them simply having a year with no Pokemon games to sell. What I think they might want to do instead is lengthen generations and continue finding new developers to outsource the games to. Like, if they did a 5 year generation with Game Freak only handling the new gen games, ILCA handling remakes, and new developers handling whatever else they would want to do (Legends, Let's Go, NSO ports, whatever) and potentially extending even the mid-gen games with DLC, something like that would give the games enough time in the oven while still giving Pokemon a yearly presence. This is what CoD does, they have 4 studios working on the franchise and the developers just trade off between entries so each one has enough time to get it right. Pokemon should really follow suit on this, and I think with them already bringing in ILCA they may be starting to head in this direction.

 

[Rachael]

This I think is valid, some of the later Noble fights were probably too hard for casual players and they should tone down the difficulty in the main game. Electrode, Avalugg, and Arceus all practically feel like bullet hells with how rapidly they attack you and how quick your reflexes need to be. That might feel appropriate for the post game, but for the main game, I would guess that you're not alone in not wanting to deal with fights that hard again and there might've been some casual players that even ragequit against Electrode or Avalugg.

Thank you. I'm also aware that this is very YMMV. I'm sure someone out there found the Lilligant fight too hard, or even the Kleavor fight. I'm sure there's someone who was overwhelmed by the auto-battle part of raiding Team Star. In PLA, I found Electrode to be much easier than Arcanine and Avalugg because I just had to keep moving (I wouldn't say it wasn't intense, though). And I'm sure some people think that even Arceus was too easy.

I am curious how they'd go about making another Legends game, though. Obviously, none of the other Pokemon are portrayed as THE Pokemon universe's version of God. Celebi might work for Johto because it's got the whole time travel thing down. But maybe the battle to capture it will be easier than the battle against Arceus because, again, you're not fighting God-with-a-capital-G. I can only hope.

As for a gap year, I remember assuming that Game Freak didn't go with Pokemon Z because they wanted to focus on Pokemon Go. Of course, I later learned that it was developed by Niantic, not Game Freak. If it truly was a gap year, I agree that it's high time for another one, even if I agree with Bolt Strike that it's unlikely.

I feel like if you talk to Pokemon fans on forums like Bulbagarden, Serebii, and even the Pokemon subreddit, you're going to see a majority of people who want a polished game, even if it takes longer than the usual three years to come out (something I agree with). But I suppose that's not the message they're getting from the money they make.

 

[BorealRookidee]

I agree TPC doesn't like the idea of a gap year, but they may be forced to take them. Nintendo has not been shy about the fact that they are unhappy with the quality of SV and rumor has it they got a talking to by Nintendo behind the scenes. Gap years may not entirely be out of TPC hands then, considering one of their 1/3 shareholders is not happy with the current situation.

 

[Daenerys]

I don't think Pokemon wants gap years, they want to keep the fanbase engaged with the brand at all times

If that's their mentality, then it's incredibly ironic considering that they make games with very little post-game these days. Even with the introduction of DLC on the Switch core games, fans still have to wait months for that stuff to come out. and most of said DLC can be played through to completion within a week or two of release anyways.

If Game Freak wants to keep fans engaged in the games, then maybe they should put more effort into said games instead of making them incredibly easy to beat, or doing things like excluding a whole ton of Pokemon or cutting out features that fans actually want, among other things.

 

[Norzan]

they want to keep the fanbase engaged with the brand at all times and the fanbase itself even gets pretty antsy about the next game so I can't see them simply having a year with no Pokemon games to sell.

They will get engaged regardless if there's no game in one year. Plus, they have shown to not really care all that much about what the fanbase wants, so the fanbase getting restless means nothing.

ILCA handling remakes

And we know how they handle their first remake. That totally wasn't rushed out the door, pretty much what's happening with the main titles. Making someone question why not just cut your losses and not do the remake and instead have ILCA help with the main title.

This is what CoD does

And given how well received the last game was, this is also starting to not work.


Sometimes a franchise just needs to take a break because oversaturation is a thing. You release too many games in a short span of time, people will eventually get tired of it. And given the state of the last couple of releases, it's clear the developers are getting crunched and the games are being rushed out the door. The franchise needs to take a break, make people miss it, build hype while actually allocating more resources and time to the development of the game.

Me personally i'm tired of these "the game has some great elements buuuut...." games, i want an actual fulfilling experience with a good release state, meaning something not marred with major issues and old content getting cut out.

 

[Bolt Strike]

If that's their mentality, then it's incredibly ironic considering that they make games with very little post-game these days. Even with the introduction of DLC on the Switch core games, fans still have to wait months for that stuff to come out. and most of said DLC can be played through to completion within a week or two of release anyways.

If Game Freak wants to keep fans engaged in the games, then maybe they should put more effort into said games instead of making them incredibly easy to beat, or doing things like excluding a whole ton of Pokemon or cutting out features that fans actually want, among other things.

My guess is there's two things going on:

1. They want to include some of these extras but can't because they're being rushed. First they tried to get away with the bare minimum when they went to 3D because they needed more time to work on 3D models and then that wasn't even enough so they had to cut Pokemon and now it's so bad that they can't even do proper bug testing. They've tried to get around extending the development times as much as they could but now I don't think they have a choice. It's either spend more than 3 years on a game or put out a Sonic 06-esque broken disaster of a game.
2. They're afraid of the mobile market because they don't play the games for very long and then move on to something else. So if they make it too long the players will get bored.

These are solvable issues, they just need to change perspective. Extending the development times will give them more time to make better games. Meanwhile, they have to move on from the mobile market, mobile is not going to be interested in the main games because they don't want a dedicated gaming console like the Switch. Meanwhile, the console audience that actually exists on the Switch, the ones that want deep, involved games with tons of content, is now open to them now that they're on a full-fledged console.

They will get engaged regardless if there's no game in one year. Plus, they have shown to not really care all that much about what the fanbase wants, so the fanbase getting restless means nothing.

And we know how they handle their first remake. That totally wasn't rushed out the door, pretty much what's happening with the main titles.

So then either ILCA needs more time too or they need to find a better developer to partner with.

Making someone question why not just cut your losses and not do the remake and instead have ILCA help with the main title.

It doesn't seem like ILCA is competent/experienced enough to do that. ILCA's never really made a game by themselves before and has never really worked with a full scale open world 3D game. I don't think they can even assist with a game like SV.

And given how well received the last game was, this is also starting to not work.

I'm not a CoD fan (in fact I hate it, all of the military shooters look the same to me), so I can't really say how much the fans like the older vs. newer ones, but sales certainly have not fallen with the most recent game, Modern Warfare 3, being the 2nd best selling CoD of all time.

Sometimes a franchise just needs to take a break because oversaturation is a thing. You release too many games in a short span of time, people will eventually get tired of it. And given the state of the last couple of releases, it's clear the developers are getting crunched and the games are being rushed out the door. The franchise needs to take a break, make people miss it, build hype while actually allocating more resources and time to the development of the game.

Me personally i'm tired of these "the game has some great elements buuuut...." games, i want an actual fulfilling experience with a good release state, meaning something not marred with major issues and old content getting cut out.

It depends on how similar they are. Diversify things a bit more and then some people will naturally skip some just because they don't like that style of gameplay and they won't feel fatigue from the game being oversaturated.

 

[Yung Dramps]

and now it's so bad that they can't even do proper bug testing

I think now's a good time to point out one of the most critically underdiscussed elements of the state of SV, that being that like every mainline game since the shift to 3D it was playtested by Mario Club, Nintendo's own internal playtesting subsidiary that as far as I can tell has given the gold seal to basically every other big first party title they've put out including Mario Odyssey and Breath of the Wild. This is a key component of a larger issue, that being that Nintendo themselves doesn't get nearly a big enough share of the blame for how this game turned out. The most charitable explanation possible is that the team they assigned to this specific game was totally derelict; the more sinister and frankly more likely explanation is that they ignored the playtesters' warnings because they cynically reckoned it was "good enough" and that brand recognition would carry it over the finish line. If you're a fan of literally any Nintendo IP, even if you've never cared for Pokemon, the fact they've shown themselves capable of this Activision-tier hanky-panky should make you deeply worried about whatever series you like, but I digress.

Maybe the adequate share of blame will finally be given to the big N if the prophesized "Pokemon 06" ever does come to pass, but as you can imagine it would be preferable for all parties if things didn't get to that point.