• 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.

Official Pokémon Sword and Shield speculation thread (Updated June 5th, 2019)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
Defiant said:
As it's one way transferable it's actually cruel to put your Pokemon in Home. Let them stay in Alola where they can at least train and battle and come outside.
Pokemon Home is effectively purgatory for non-galar mons.
Click to expand...

We need a fallen angel to set them free.
Zeta said:
If you want them out of comp, ban them out of comp.

Instead they're asking us to pay for content that we can't access. lol
Click to expand...
We don’t know if they’ll be accessible later one freely, under payment...or not at all. We can all speculate at this point.

I do think they’re going to get an even bigger backlash if they’ll add them with paid dlcs.
 
Juztiz said:
As much as most hate the exclusion of non-Galar dex Pokemon through Home (and some still being in denial about it really happening) - can we talk about why exactly they picked this moment to bring it up?

I mean, there must be some people for who this was a deal breaker, who now will not buy these games (unless maybe a patch or whatever does happen) and, to be frank, there was no obligation to make any statement about this.

So why would anyone risk hurting their sales? I just can't make sense of it.

...am also not expecting a patch or anything of the likes. Let's Go sales kinda showed that much less content still gets great profit, so there's that.

Let's not point out how they wanna cut Pokémon to not have to model them (when the models exist??) yet made up foolishly looking bike and gym outfits that nobody asked for. Okay. Priorities. I'd honestly give up all about customization in favour of a national dex and being able to transfer all Pokemon, even if only post-game.
Click to expand...

I do wonder. But I only disagree with you about the patch. I do think they will do something after the feedback. I may be wrong, but I hope they will do so.
 
prog rocker said:
To those saying that GF needs to be replaced: Good luck finding someone that won't make a hard reboot of the franchise, possibly only keeping the Pokémon everyone is tired to see!
Click to expand...
I know that, which is why I have that bit at the end about treating the franchise with respect. Plus, I mentioned that TPCi should be able to take the reigns since they handle most of the franchise already. Giving it to them completely wouldn’t be that much of a stretch.

Zeta said:
They really need to spin off the games into a separate studio dedicated to only Pokemon titles if that's the case, as you've said. GF can do character designs for new Pokemon and final approval and work on their own titles.
Click to expand...
I feel like this is the absolute best case scenario for the franchise. If only this would actually happen.
 
PocketMonster said:
i guess that is a fair point, but i guess they could just bar pokemon that isnt revelant to Galar from dynamaxing like legendaries from other regions
Click to expand...

But then how do you explain being able to Dynamax them in later games? Or would you intend to only let a small percentage of pkmn dynamax?
 
TheElderKing said:
We need a fallen angel to set them free.

We don’t know if they’ll be accessible later one freely, under payment...or not at all. We can all speculate at this point.

I do think they’re going to get an even bigger backlash if they’ll add them with paid dlcs.
Click to expand...

I mean Home and Bank are already paid DLCs, they're just ones that don't work the way they were advertised.
 
Defiant said:
Gone through the video, at no point does he seem to say "The reason is not to make players wait and to bring the game before getting all Pokémon 100% ready" what time does he say that?
Click to expand...

Around the 26:00 mark they say something about HOME. Also, they will reveal more details about that in the future, but they say they wanted to focus more on quality than quantity for now.

Anyway, I want to be cautiously optimist for now.
 
I usually buy buy both 1 for a strictly new PKMN team and secondly for a mixture of old and new but.... Hm. Depends on what Pokemon will even be in the game at this point.
 
BlueWaves said:
If I had to be a Devil's advocate for cutting Pokemon, its because Pokemon suffers from the issue of content pile-up. They have to create a bunch of items for the sake of certain Pokemon, for example; stuff like DNA Splicers for Kyurem, Nectar for Oricirio, and the Griseous Orb for Giratina. That's a lot of programming to do. As long as there's a good variety of each Pokemon from each region, I'll be fine; though I have to admit doing this change on the Switch was a bad idea because we've seen with BOTW on how strong the system is. It should have been done on 3DS because its a lot weaker, making it more justifiable.
Click to expand...
Then someone in development should maybe go "Hey, you know, in the future, this might prove to be more trouble than it's worth now" and just not do so much special snowflake bs for single Pokémon if the solution is to cut them out.

A lot of small features are things that feel like someone just put in an idea that seems neat on paper, but nobody really thought how it would work in future installments and now it's a drag.

I still miss being able to change Sawsbuck's forms. Or just get any of the other forms at all.

If this is how Home works, I'm not even getting it. I don't need some more restrictive, gimmick-loaded Bank copy just so I can now also access it on my smartphone.

And I'll stay salty about this until there is official confirmation that the restriction is temporary and non-Galar Dex mons will not be behind a paywall. I don't really care about fan assumptions "They wouldn't!" or "There'll be a patch!" because listen - SM/USUM had no national dex ingame and LGPE only had 151 Pokémon. Going restrictive to the regional dex now is literally just the next step to it, it's not even coming out of nowhere.

Speaking of it - personally, I never hated any Pokemon or thought of it as useless. Because even if I'm not fond of it, it'll be someone's favourite, and they deserve to love it and I'd still have a great choice of Pokémon I do like.
Knowing that this game is restricted to the Galar regional dex just makes me actually despise Pokémon, because they waste a valuable spot. Back when there wasn't this kind of limit, that wasn't even worth a thought tbh.

Myth said:
I do wonder. But I only disagree with you about the patch. I do think they will do something after the feedback. I may be wrong, but I hope so.
Click to expand...
If sales were about as good as expected and usual, if not better, what are the odds there will be a patch just because people online complain? They already got their money and if the backlash is really too big, third version, or "fixing" it next gen. More cash, less work.
There may be a patch in the future but unless that's a fact, without having to read too much into things, I will just not expect it.
 
Kallyle said:
I know that, which is why I have that bit at the end about treating the franchise with respect. Plus, I mentioned that TPCi should be able to take the reigns since they handle most of the franchise already. Giving it to them completely wouldn’t be that much of a stretch.
Click to expand...
I don't know... then again, the franchises I liked that got rebooted ended up badly, like Spyro, Paper Mario, Guitar Hero and Crash.
 
Ally Switch said:
But then how do you explain being able to Dynamax them in later games? Or would you intend to only let a small percentage of pkmn dynamax?
Click to expand...
haha well so far they keep doing new things for each game so, the pokemon they could theoretically bar from dnyamaxing and still allow to be transferred to sword and shield wouldnt have the chance to dynamax in another region. they would have a different mechanic until they decide they should start building onto things they have introduced which i dont forsee that soon.

edit spelling
 
If they can't or aren't willing to add in a portion of the older pokemon, then I see no reason for them to give us less than 80 new pokmeon. If you are already gonna give us less pokemon overall in the dex, then I should expect a trade off, but knowing gamefreak they probably won't. They have the power and space on the switch to do it all, if they need to delay this game then I'm sure plenty of fans would support that for a better product.
 
Juztiz said:
If sales were about as good as expected and usual, if not better, what are the odds there will be a patch just because people online complain? They already got their money and if the backlash is really too big, third version, or "fixing" it next gen. More cash, less work.
There may be a patch in the future but unless that's a fact, without having to read too much into things, I will just not expect it.
Click to expand...

I don't think Game Freak is this kind of developer. But yeah, we will see how things will happen, I may be wrong.
 
MineFreak18 said:
If they can't or aren't willing to add in a portion of the older pokemon, then I see no reason for them to give us less than 80 new pokmeon. If you are already gonna give us less pokemon overall in the dex, then I should expect a trade off, but knowing gamefreak they probably won't. They have the power and space on the switch to do it all, if they need to delay this game then I'm sure plenty of fans would support that for a better product.
Click to expand...

I think the concern is that the audience that GameFreak wants for these games is skewering very young and that's the direction they want to go in. I'm not talking 9-13 year olds like previous titles, I'm talking 4-8 year olds, as that was the target audience for LGPE.

If that game, which was a half-assed retread with 90% of Pokemon cut, made money - then there's no reason for GF to expend effort on anything but graphics and marketing and letting people know that "Both Charizard and Pikachu, the only Pokemon in existence, are in this game".
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom