Poll of the Day > I've genuinely never seen this much bad PR for a game before (Pokemon)

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
LinkPizza 11/15/19 7:02:50 PM #102:	GanonsSpirit posted... The failed to answer the question in that post. How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice. --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930193962] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>The failed to answer the question in that post.</quote> How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OrangeDawn 11/15/19 7:05:02 PM #103:	LinkPizza posted... GanonsSpirit posted... The failed to answer the question in that post. How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice. willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line? --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>OrangeDawn posted [p:930194037] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>The failed to answer the question in that post.</quote> How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice.</quote> willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SilentSeph 11/15/19 7:09:04 PM #104:	A lot of the dex cuts hurt (RIP Houndoom) but I am honestly ok with cuts in general. It's just that the rest of the game looks so subpar and inferior to the handheld games in many areas. --- Delicious and vicious, while maliciously nutritious. <cite>SilentSeph posted [p:930194183] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>A lot of the dex cuts hurt (RIP Houndoom) but I am honestly ok with cuts in general. It's just that the rest of the game looks so subpar and inferior to the handheld games in many areas.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 7:16:22 PM #105:	OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... GanonsSpirit posted... The failed to answer the question in that post. How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice. willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line? The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930194483] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>The failed to answer the question in that post.</quote> How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice.</quote> willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line?</quote> The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OrangeDawn 11/15/19 7:17:46 PM #106:	LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... GanonsSpirit posted... The failed to answer the question in that post. How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice. willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line? The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content... Nintendo said to expect more from SwSh because they were mainline pokemon games where as Let's Go was for more casual players and those new to the series. Again, I ask: Where is the line? How much content needs to be cut for you to say the product they're putting out is bad? --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>OrangeDawn posted [p:930194533] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>The failed to answer the question in that post.</quote> How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice.</quote> willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line?</quote> The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content...</quote> Nintendo said to expect more from SwSh because they were mainline pokemon games where as Let's Go was for more casual players and those new to the series. Again, I ask: Where is the line? How much content needs to be cut for you to say the product they're putting out is bad?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 7:24:59 PM #107:	OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... GanonsSpirit posted... The failed to answer the question in that post. How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice. willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line? The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content... Nintendo said to expect more from SwSh because they were mainline pokemon games where as Let's Go was for more casual players and those new to the series. Again, I ask: Where is the line? How much content needs to be cut for you to say the product they're putting out is bad? Nintendo says a lot of things. But they probably meant expect more than the Lets Go games. Like you said, it was more casual... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930194816] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>The failed to answer the question in that post.</quote> How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice.</quote> willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line?</quote> The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content...</quote> Nintendo said to expect more from SwSh because they were mainline pokemon games where as Let's Go was for more casual players and those new to the series. Again, I ask: Where is the line? How much content needs to be cut for you to say the product they're putting out is bad?</quote> Nintendo says a lot of things. But they probably meant expect more than the Lets Go games. Like you said, it was more casual...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OrangeDawn 11/15/19 7:26:55 PM #108:	LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... GanonsSpirit posted... The failed to answer the question in that post. How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice. willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line? The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content... Nintendo said to expect more from SwSh because they were mainline pokemon games where as Let's Go was for more casual players and those new to the series. Again, I ask: Where is the line? How much content needs to be cut for you to say the product they're putting out is bad? Nintendo says a lot of things. But they probably meant expect more than the Lets Go games. Like you said, it was more casual... So you cannot answer my question? --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>OrangeDawn posted [p:930194888] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>The failed to answer the question in that post.</quote> How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice.</quote> willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line?</quote> The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content...</quote> Nintendo said to expect more from SwSh because they were mainline pokemon games where as Let's Go was for more casual players and those new to the series. Again, I ask: Where is the line? How much content needs to be cut for you to say the product they're putting out is bad?</quote> Nintendo says a lot of things. But they probably meant expect more than the Lets Go games. Like you said, it was more casual...</quote> So you cannot answer my question?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 7:34:05 PM #109:	OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... GanonsSpirit posted... The failed to answer the question in that post. How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice. willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line? The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content... Nintendo said to expect more from SwSh because they were mainline pokemon games where as Let's Go was for more casual players and those new to the series. Again, I ask: Where is the line? How much content needs to be cut for you to say the product they're putting out is bad? Nintendo says a lot of things. But they probably meant expect more than the Lets Go games. Like you said, it was more casual... So you cannot answer my question? About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930195170] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>The failed to answer the question in that post.</quote> How so? I said that we dont need anything in return. Its there game, its their choice.</quote> willingly taking less content and in return getting a higher price and a less polished product seems incredibly stupid. where is the line?</quote> The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content...</quote> Nintendo said to expect more from SwSh because they were mainline pokemon games where as Let's Go was for more casual players and those new to the series. Again, I ask: Where is the line? How much content needs to be cut for you to say the product they're putting out is bad?</quote> Nintendo says a lot of things. But they probably meant expect more than the Lets Go games. Like you said, it was more casual...</quote> So you cannot answer my question?</quote> About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GanonsSpirit 11/15/19 7:35:04 PM #110:	LinkPizza posted... The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content... I don't know why you can't seem to comprehend the idea that if the price goes up, people expect to get more content, not less. The fact that it's on the Switch is irrelevant when the product is worse than when it was on the 3DS. --- https://imgur.com/tsQUpxC Thanks, Nade Duck! [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] <cite>GanonsSpirit posted [p:930195207] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content...</quote>I don't know why you can't seem to comprehend the idea that if the price goes up, people expect to get more content, not less. The fact that it's on the Switch is irrelevant when the product is worse than when it was on the 3DS. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 7:38:42 PM #111:	GanonsSpirit posted... LinkPizza posted... The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content... I don't know why you can't seem to comprehend the idea that if the price goes up, people expect to get more content, not less. The fact that it's on the Switch is irrelevant when the product is worse than when it was on the 3DS. Doesnt matter why they expect. And it didnt go up. Switch games always cost $60. Just because Ive bought Zelda games for handhelds at less than $60 doesnt mean the system versions should be less, as well. I dont see why you cant comprehend that Switch games of Nintendo big name first party games would most likely start at $60. If thats too much for you to pay for the content, you dont get it. Some people dont think any of the handheld games are worth $40, so they just dont buy it. The fact thats its on Switch is not irrelevant. Its most likely literally how they chose the price. Like, I think the GC pokemon games had less content, as well... But still cost the same as other GC games... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930195358] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>The higher price was never going to change. And should never have been an issue. As thats he pricenof a Switch game. The higher price issue is asinine. And anyone who thought that the price would be anything other than $60 first day as a big Nintendo franchise on console sounds like they werent thinking. Just like the other console Pokmon games that also had less content...</quote>I don't know why you can't seem to comprehend the idea that if the price goes up, people expect to get more content, not less. The fact that it's on the Switch is irrelevant when the product is worse than when it was on the 3DS.</quote> Doesnt matter why they expect. And it didnt go up. Switch games always cost $60. Just because Ive bought Zelda games for handhelds at less than $60 doesnt mean the system versions should be less, as well. I dont see why you cant comprehend that Switch games of Nintendo big name first party games would most likely start at $60. If thats too much for you to pay for the content, you dont get it. Some people dont think any of the handheld games are worth $40, so they just dont buy it. The fact thats its on Switch is not irrelevant. Its most likely literally how they chose the price. Like, I think the GC pokemon games had less content, as well... But still cost the same as other GC games...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 11/15/19 7:49:00 PM #112:	LinkPizza posted... About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. What is your subjective line? LinkPizza posted... Doesnt matter why they expect. And it didnt go up. Switch games always cost $60. Pokemon games cost less than $60 based on old production. Being on switch means the price is higher so there is a higher standard to reach. They have produced less so shouldn't have released on switch when they don't reach the benchmark for their market. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:930195725] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective.</quote> What is your subjective line? LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Doesnt matter why they expect. And it didnt go up. Switch games always cost $60.</quote> Pokemon games cost less than $60 based on old production. Being on switch means the price is higher so there is a higher standard to reach. They have produced less so shouldn't have released on switch when they don't reach the benchmark for their market.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 7:53:50 PM #113:	Kyuubi4269 posted... What is your subjective line? Depends on the game... Kyuubi4269 posted... Pokemon games cost less than $60 based on old production. Being on switch means the price is higher so there is a higher standard to reach. They have produced less so shouldn't have released on switch when they don't reach the benchmark for their market. They dont have to teach whatever level you want. They reach whatever level they want. And then they sell it for the normal price of a Switch game. You just dont buy it if you dont think its worth the money... Just like how people do with other games... Buy it used, if you want... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930195877] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>What is your subjective line?</quote> Depends on the game... Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Pokemon games cost less than $60 based on old production. Being on switch means the price is higher so there is a higher standard to reach. They have produced less so shouldn't have released on switch when they don't reach the benchmark for their market.</quote> They dont have to teach whatever level you want. They reach whatever level they want. And then they sell it for the normal price of a Switch game. You just dont buy it if you dont think its worth the money... Just like how people do with other games... Buy it used, if you want...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metalsonic66 11/15/19 8:17:48 PM #114:	It would be cool if we could join Team Rocket or become a Gym Leader or take over a Pokemon Center as the new Nurse Joy --- PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69 Big bombs go kabang. <cite>Metalsonic66 posted [p:930196811] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>It would be cool if we could join Team Rocket or become a Gym Leader or take over a Pokemon Center as the new Nurse Joy </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GanonsSpirit 11/15/19 9:04:52 PM #115:	LinkPizza posted... Just because Ive bought Zelda games for handhelds at less than $60 doesnt mean the system versions should be less, as well You absolutely don't want to bring other Nintendo series into this. Yes, Breath of the Wild is definitely worth $20 more than Link Between Worlds. That's how it should look when you compare a console game to a handheld game. Take any Nintendo series and in general the console games are much better than their handheld counterparts. Then you look at Pokemon and it's actually worse. --- https://imgur.com/tsQUpxC Thanks, Nade Duck! [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] <cite>GanonsSpirit posted [p:930198668] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>Just because Ive bought Zelda games for handhelds at less than $60 doesnt mean the system versions should be less, as well</quote>You absolutely don't want to bring other Nintendo series into this. Yes, Breath of the Wild is definitely worth $20 more than Link Between Worlds. That's how it should look when you compare a console game to a handheld game. Take any Nintendo series and in general the console games are much better than their handheld counterparts. Then you look at Pokemon and it's actually worse. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metalsonic66 11/15/19 9:07:23 PM #116:	GanonsSpirit posted... Take any Nintendo series and in general the console games are much better than their handheld counterparts. Except Metroid lol --- PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69 Big bombs go kabang. <cite>Metalsonic66 posted [p:930198760] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted... </cite> <quote>Take any Nintendo series and in general the console games are much better than their handheld counterparts.</quote>Except Metroid lol </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blighboy 11/15/19 9:15:23 PM #117:	You can go to the Switch online store and get an asston of great games for less than $60. Just because that's what Nintendo charges doesn't mean it's worth that much, that's circular logic. --- I have no idea whether or not he's a racist, but apparently there are recordings of him using racial slurs so it's a distinct possibility. <cite>Blighboy posted [p:930199058] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>You can go to the Switch online store and get an asston of great games for less than $60. Just because that's what Nintendo charges doesn't mean it's worth that much, that's circular logic.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 9:17:59 PM #118:	GanonsSpirit posted... LinkPizza posted... Just because Ive bought Zelda games for handhelds at less than $60 doesnt mean the system versions should be less, as well You absolutely don't want to bring other Nintendo series into this. Yes, Breath of the Wild is definitely worth $20 more than Link Between Worlds. That's how it should look when you compare a console game to a handheld game. Take any Nintendo series and in general the console games are much better than their handheld counterparts. Then you look at Pokemon and it's actually worse. To you, though. Thats the problem. You think the console ones are better. Or think the handheld ones are worse. I know people who love A Link Between Worlds, but hates Breath of the Wild. And if we look at Pokmon, I think a lot of people probably like the handheld games more than the console ones. In those games, even more Pokmon we cut. You could collect only 48 or 83, depending on which game... Which goes back to what people think are better and worse is subjective. You thinnthe dex cut is unacceptable. But I wouldnt care if they cut out all the old Pokmon... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930199153] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>Just because Ive bought Zelda games for handhelds at less than $60 doesnt mean the system versions should be less, as well</quote>You absolutely don't want to bring other Nintendo series into this. Yes, Breath of the Wild is definitely worth $20 more than Link Between Worlds. That's how it should look when you compare a console game to a handheld game. Take any Nintendo series and in general the console games are much better than their handheld counterparts. Then you look at Pokemon and it's actually worse.</quote> To you, though. Thats the problem. You think the console ones are better. Or think the handheld ones are worse. I know people who love A Link Between Worlds, but hates Breath of the Wild. And if we look at Pokmon, I think a lot of people probably like the handheld games more than the console ones. In those games, even more Pokmon we cut. You could collect only 48 or 83, depending on which game... Which goes back to what people think are better and worse is subjective. You thinnthe dex cut is unacceptable. But I wouldnt care if they cut out all the old Pokmon...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OrangeDawn 11/15/19 9:18:16 PM #119:	LinkPizza posted... About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do... I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>OrangeDawn posted [p:930199159] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote> About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do...</quote> I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 9:20:17 PM #120:	Blighboy posted... You can go to the Switch online store and get an asston of great games for less than $60. Just because that's what Nintendo charges doesn't mean it's worth that much, that's circular logic. They do sale in digital because they want you to buy digital. But most of their first party games, especially when Brand New, are $60. You can also use points from buying other games to get discounts. Some exceptions were Mario Party, and maybe something else. But they normally charge $60 for most games. Especially new first party big name franchise games... Like Pokmon. Most people should have realized it would be $60... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930199226] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>Blighboy posted...</cite> <quote>You can go to the Switch online store and get an asston of great games for less than $60. Just because that's what Nintendo charges doesn't mean it's worth that much, that's circular logic.</quote> They do sale in digital because they want you to buy digital. But most of their first party games, especially when Brand New, are $60. You can also use points from buying other games to get discounts. Some exceptions were Mario Party, and maybe something else. But they normally charge $60 for most games. Especially new first party big name franchise games... Like Pokmon. Most people should have realized it would be $60...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blighboy 11/15/19 9:21:00 PM #121:	People assume that quality is a strict progression of handheld to console, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... gamey-wamey... stuff. --- I have no idea whether or not he's a racist, but apparently there are recordings of him using racial slurs so it's a distinct possibility. <cite>Blighboy posted [p:930199250] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>People assume that quality is a strict progression of handheld to console, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... gamey-wamey... stuff.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blighboy 11/15/19 9:21:42 PM #122:	LinkPizza posted... Blighboy posted... You can go to the Switch online store and get an asston of great games for less than $60. Just because that's what Nintendo charges doesn't mean it's worth that much, that's circular logic. They do sale in digital because they want you to buy digital. But most of their first party games, especially when Brand New, are $60. You can also use points from buying other games to get discounts. Some exceptions were Mario Party, and maybe something else. But they normally charge $60 for most games. Especially new first party big name franchise games... Like Pokmon. Most people should have realized it would be $60... This is still circular logic. Something is not worth $60 because it has a $60 price tag. --- I have no idea whether or not he's a racist, but apparently there are recordings of him using racial slurs so it's a distinct possibility. <cite>Blighboy posted [p:930199276] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Blighboy posted...</cite> <quote>You can go to the Switch online store and get an asston of great games for less than $60. Just because that's what Nintendo charges doesn't mean it's worth that much, that's circular logic.</quote> They do sale in digital because they want you to buy digital. But most of their first party games, especially when Brand New, are $60. You can also use points from buying other games to get discounts. Some exceptions were Mario Party, and maybe something else. But they normally charge $60 for most games. Especially new first party big name franchise games... Like Pokmon. Most people should have realized it would be $60...</quote> This is still circular logic. Something is not worth $60 because it has a $60 price tag.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 9:22:15 PM #123:	OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do... I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game That depends. Theres not just one thing. For me, its a whole concept. As I said earlier, I would care if they cut out ALL the old Pokmon from the game. I dont use them. I like to use the new ones. Its not usually just 1 thing that makes me not buy a game... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930199297] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote> About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do...</quote> I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game</quote> That depends. Theres not just one thing. For me, its a whole concept. As I said earlier, I would care if they cut out ALL the old Pokmon from the game. I dont use them. I like to use the new ones. Its not usually just 1 thing that makes me not buy a game...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 9:23:56 PM #124:	Blighboy posted... People assume that quality is a strict progression of handheld to console, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... gamey-wamey... stuff. I like that show... Blighboy posted... LinkPizza posted... Blighboy posted... You can go to the Switch online store and get an asston of great games for less than $60. Just because that's what Nintendo charges doesn't mean it's worth that much, that's circular logic. They do sale in digital because they want you to buy digital. But most of their first party games, especially when Brand New, are $60. You can also use points from buying other games to get discounts. Some exceptions were Mario Party, and maybe something else. But they normally charge $60 for most games. Especially new first party big name franchise games... Like Pokmon. Most people should have realized it would be $60... This is still circular logic. Something is not worth $60 because it has a $60 price tag. Yes it is. Whoever owns the product chooses the price. They could charge $100 for it. Or they could charge $20. The owner sets the price. If you dont think its worth it, you dont buy it... Not to mention that the word of something varies person to person. Like someone may think a chair is worth $10 while someone thinks its worth $100... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930199356] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>Blighboy posted...</cite> <quote>People assume that quality is a strict progression of handheld to console, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... gamey-wamey... stuff.</quote> I like that show... Blighboy posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Blighboy posted...</cite> <quote>You can go to the Switch online store and get an asston of great games for less than $60. Just because that's what Nintendo charges doesn't mean it's worth that much, that's circular logic.</quote> They do sale in digital because they want you to buy digital. But most of their first party games, especially when Brand New, are $60. You can also use points from buying other games to get discounts. Some exceptions were Mario Party, and maybe something else. But they normally charge $60 for most games. Especially new first party big name franchise games... Like Pokmon. Most people should have realized it would be $60...</quote> This is still circular logic. Something is not worth $60 because it has a $60 price tag.</quote> Yes it is. Whoever owns the product chooses the price. They could charge $100 for it. Or they could charge $20. The owner sets the price. If you dont think its worth it, you dont buy it... Not to mention that the word of something varies person to person. Like someone may think a chair is worth $10 while someone thinks its worth $100...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OrangeDawn 11/15/19 9:32:03 PM #125:	LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do... I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game That depends. Theres not just one thing. For me, its a whole concept. As I said earlier, I would care if they cut out ALL the old Pokmon from the game. I dont use them. I like to use the new ones. Its not usually just 1 thing that makes me not buy a game... I encourage you to think about more things. Do you think taking out quality of life improvements are important? How do you feel about removing entire gameplay features such as mega forms, z-moves, triple battles, etc.? Does lying about having to rebuild models from scratch (proven to be untrue) and using it as a reason to withhold more content matter to you (regardless of what that content could be)? Why or why not? I've seen you post essays about almost anything, I know you can give me more than just fluff. --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>OrangeDawn posted [p:930199666] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do...</quote> I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game</quote> That depends. Theres not just one thing. For me, its a whole concept. As I said earlier, I would care if they cut out ALL the old Pokmon from the game. I dont use them. I like to use the new ones. Its not usually just 1 thing that makes me not buy a game...</quote> I encourage you to think about more things. Do you think taking out quality of life improvements are important? How do you feel about removing entire gameplay features such as mega forms, z-moves, triple battles, etc.? Does lying about having to rebuild models from scratch (proven to be untrue) and using it as a reason to withhold more content matter to you (regardless of what that content could be)? Why or why not? I've seen you post essays about almost anything, I know you can give me more than just fluff.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 9:42:02 PM #126:	OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do... I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game That depends. Theres not just one thing. For me, its a whole concept. As I said earlier, I would care if they cut out ALL the old Pokmon from the game. I dont use them. I like to use the new ones. Its not usually just 1 thing that makes me not buy a game... I encourage you to think about more things. Do you think taking out quality of life improvements are important? How do you feel about removing entire gameplay features such as mega forms, z-moves, triple battles, etc.? Does lying about having to rebuild models from scratch (proven to be untrue) and using it as a reason to withhold more content matter to you (regardless of what that content could be)? Why or why not? I've seen you post essays about almost anything, I know you can give me more than just fluff. No. None of that matters. The game developers make the game. If I like it and think its worth the price, I buy it. If not, I dont. Its that simple. It really is. Im not going to argue and boycott a game because they didnt make it to my specifications. If I dont want it, I just dont buy it... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930200045] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do...</quote> I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game</quote> That depends. Theres not just one thing. For me, its a whole concept. As I said earlier, I would care if they cut out ALL the old Pokmon from the game. I dont use them. I like to use the new ones. Its not usually just 1 thing that makes me not buy a game...</quote> I encourage you to think about more things. Do you think taking out quality of life improvements are important? How do you feel about removing entire gameplay features such as mega forms, z-moves, triple battles, etc.? Does lying about having to rebuild models from scratch (proven to be untrue) and using it as a reason to withhold more content matter to you (regardless of what that content could be)? Why or why not? I've seen you post essays about almost anything, I know you can give me more than just fluff.</quote> No. None of that matters. The game developers make the game. If I like it and think its worth the price, I buy it. If not, I dont. Its that simple. It really is. Im not going to argue and boycott a game because they didnt make it to my specifications. If I dont want it, I just dont buy it...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 11/15/19 9:42:20 PM #127:	LinkPizza posted... Depends on the game... This one. LinkPizza posted... They dont have to teach whatever level you want. They reach whatever level they want. And then they sell it for the normal price of a Switch game. You just dont buy it if you dont think its worth the money... Just like how people do with other games... Buy it used, if you want... Which is why we're upset at them failing to reach the standard? It seems like you had no reason to argue and understand why we are disappointed and won't buy. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:930200054] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Depends on the game...</quote> This one. LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>They dont have to teach whatever level you want. They reach whatever level they want. And then they sell it for the normal price of a Switch game. You just dont buy it if you dont think its worth the money... Just like how people do with other games... Buy it used, if you want...</quote> Which is why we're upset at them failing to reach the standard? It seems like you had no reason to argue and understand why we are disappointed and won't buy.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OrangeDawn 11/15/19 9:42:42 PM #128:	LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do... I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game That depends. Theres not just one thing. For me, its a whole concept. As I said earlier, I would care if they cut out ALL the old Pokmon from the game. I dont use them. I like to use the new ones. Its not usually just 1 thing that makes me not buy a game... I encourage you to think about more things. Do you think taking out quality of life improvements are important? How do you feel about removing entire gameplay features such as mega forms, z-moves, triple battles, etc.? Does lying about having to rebuild models from scratch (proven to be untrue) and using it as a reason to withhold more content matter to you (regardless of what that content could be)? Why or why not? I've seen you post essays about almost anything, I know you can give me more than just fluff. No. None of that matters. The game developers make the game. If I like it and think its worth the price, I buy it. If not, I dont. Its that simple. It really is. Im not going to argue and boycott a game because they didnt make it to my specifications. If I dont want it, I just dont buy it... Ah, so you will just take shit served to you on a plate. Got it. --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>OrangeDawn posted [p:930200082] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>About how much needs to be cut? Obviously, I cant. Because its subjective. You think the game is bad because of the dex cut. That means nothing to me, though. So, the answer is different for everyone. Unless you think everyone has to like or dislike something because you do...</quote> I'm asking you what your line is. How lazy do they have to be for you to think paying $60 for a mainline pokemon game on a home console for you to say that less content is worth it for a full priced game</quote> That depends. Theres not just one thing. For me, its a whole concept. As I said earlier, I would care if they cut out ALL the old Pokmon from the game. I dont use them. I like to use the new ones. Its not usually just 1 thing that makes me not buy a game...</quote> I encourage you to think about more things. Do you think taking out quality of life improvements are important? How do you feel about removing entire gameplay features such as mega forms, z-moves, triple battles, etc.? Does lying about having to rebuild models from scratch (proven to be untrue) and using it as a reason to withhold more content matter to you (regardless of what that content could be)? Why or why not? I've seen you post essays about almost anything, I know you can give me more than just fluff.</quote> No. None of that matters. The game developers make the game. If I like it and think its worth the price, I buy it. If not, I dont. Its that simple. It really is. Im not going to argue and boycott a game because they didnt make it to my specifications. If I dont want it, I just dont buy it...</quote> Ah, so you will just take shit served to you on a plate. Got it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GameReviews 11/15/19 9:47:27 PM #129:	I'm pretty sure this isn't even the most negative PR for a POKEMON game. Pokemon Go got it way worse. --- Sign here. <cite>GameReviews posted [p:930200275] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>I'm pretty sure this isn't even the most negative PR for a POKEMON game. Pokemon Go got it way worse.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 9:54:27 PM #130:	Kyuubi4269 posted... LinkPizza posted... Depends on the game... This one. Hmmm... Idk. Though, one thing that would get it less points in my book was if it had no new Pokmon... Kyuubi4269 posted... Which is why we're upset at them failing to reach the standard? It seems like you had no reason to argue and understand why we are disappointed and won't buy. No. Ive heard your reasons. And you can not buy it for any reason you choose. And thats the easiest thing to do. But its a Switch game. And was mostly likely going to be $60. I dont understand why people thought it wouldnt be that much... OrangeDawn posted... Ah, so you will just take shit served to you on a plate. Got it. No. And I dont know where you got that from, but whatever. If I dont want the game, or its shit to me, I wont buy it. But you can go on thinking whatever you want. Or assuming whatever. As I said, I buy what I think is worth my money... For example, just because everybody else loves a game and says I should get it, doesnt mean Ill like it or think its worth my money. Just like I may like a game you dont. Its called different taste... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930200554] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Depends on the game...</quote>This one.</quote> Hmmm... Idk. Though, one thing that would get it less points in my book was if it had no new Pokmon... Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Which is why we're upset at them failing to reach the standard? It seems like you had no reason to argue and understand why we are disappointed and won't buy.</quote> No. Ive heard your reasons. And you can not buy it for any reason you choose. And thats the easiest thing to do. But its a Switch game. And was mostly likely going to be $60. I dont understand why people thought it wouldnt be that much... OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>Ah, so you will just take shit served to you on a plate. Got it.</quote> No. And I dont know where you got that from, but whatever. If I dont want the game, or its shit to me, I wont buy it. But you can go on thinking whatever you want. Or assuming whatever. As I said, I buy what I think is worth my money... For example, just because everybody else loves a game and says I should get it, doesnt mean Ill like it or think its worth my money. Just like I may like a game you dont. Its called different taste...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 11/15/19 9:54:30 PM #131:	GameReviews posted... I'm pretty sure this isn't even the most negative PR for a POKEMON game. Pokemon Go got it way worse. Pokemon B&W got plenty of shit too. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:930200555] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>GameReviews posted...</cite> <quote>I'm pretty sure this isn't even the most negative PR for a POKEMON game. Pokemon Go got it way worse.</quote> Pokemon B&W got plenty of shit too.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Yellow 11/15/19 9:54:36 PM #132:	adjl posted... Except all of the earlier points about game balance and ensuring that the competitive metagame is accessible for people who don't have access to 10+ other games to fill out their roster. That gets much, much easier with a smaller, self-contained pokedex than it is with a full National Dex. So you have wild and standard modes, just like there's always been... --- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZNqaAh6iLU <cite>Yellow posted [p:930200560] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>Except all of the earlier points about game balance and ensuring that the competitive metagame is accessible for people who don't have access to 10+ other games to fill out their roster. That gets much, much easier with a smaller, self-contained pokedex than it is with a full National Dex.</quote> So you have wild and standard modes, just like there's always been... </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OrangeDawn 11/15/19 10:01:01 PM #133:	LinkPizza posted... No. And I dont know where you got that from, but whatever. If I dont want the game, or its shit to me, I wont buy it. But you can go on thinking whatever you want. Or assuming whatever. As I said, I buy what I think is worth my money... For example, just because everybody else loves a game and says I should get it, doesnt mean Ill like it or think its worth my money. Just like I may like a game you dont. Its called different taste... Well you're unable to let me know what, if anything, would make you think it's not a good game to buy and you're only speaking in generalities so I'm just going to assume you would buy literal shit if that was the game they were selling. You saying "No, I would not buy shit," is more than what you've told me so far about what would make you decide to not buy the game. --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>OrangeDawn posted [p:930200845] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>No. And I dont know where you got that from, but whatever. If I dont want the game, or its shit to me, I wont buy it. But you can go on thinking whatever you want. Or assuming whatever. As I said, I buy what I think is worth my money... For example, just because everybody else loves a game and says I should get it, doesnt mean Ill like it or think its worth my money. Just like I may like a game you dont. Its called different taste...</quote> Well you're unable to let me know what, if anything, would make you think it's not a good game to buy and you're only speaking in generalities so I'm just going to assume you would buy literal shit if that was the game they were selling. You saying "No, I would not buy shit," is more than what you've told me so far about what would make you decide to not buy the game.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GanonsSpirit 11/15/19 10:34:40 PM #134:	LinkPizza posted... And if we look at Pokmon, I think a lot of people probably like the handheld games more than the console ones. In those games, even more Pokmon we cut. You could collect only 48 or 83, depending on which game... Ok, we're talking about main series Pokemon games. I know you want to bring up Pokemon Stadium or whatever, but that's not what we're talking about. LinkPizza posted... And was mostly likely going to be $60. I dont understand why people thought it wouldnt be that much... Everyone knew it would cost that much. They just expected it to be worth that much too. --- https://imgur.com/tsQUpxC Thanks, Nade Duck! [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] <cite>GanonsSpirit posted [p:930202079] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>And if we look at Pokmon, I think a lot of people probably like the handheld games more than the console ones. In those games, even more Pokmon we cut. You could collect only 48 or 83, depending on which game...</quote>Ok, we're talking about main series Pokemon games. I know you want to bring up Pokemon Stadium or whatever, but that's not what we're talking about. LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>And was mostly likely going to be $60. I dont understand why people thought it wouldnt be that much...</quote>Everyone knew it would cost that much. They just expected it to be worth that much too. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 10:42:22 PM #135:	OrangeDawn posted... LinkPizza posted... No. And I dont know where you got that from, but whatever. If I dont want the game, or its shit to me, I wont buy it. But you can go on thinking whatever you want. Or assuming whatever. As I said, I buy what I think is worth my money... For example, just because everybody else loves a game and says I should get it, doesnt mean Ill like it or think its worth my money. Just like I may like a game you dont. Its called different taste... Well you're unable to let me know what, if anything, would make you think it's not a good game to buy and you're only speaking in generalities so I'm just going to assume you would buy literal shit if that was the game they were selling. You saying "No, I would not buy shit," is more than what you've told me so far about what would make you decide to not buy the game. How so? As I told you, it varies game to game. I did say to someone that one thing that would take away points from me wanting it is no new Pokmon. But, as a I said, I look at the whole game concept. Its not just one thing or another that will make me not buy a game. Im not so simple that if a game has one thing I dont like, I just wont buy it. And how does that make any sense. Saying, I'm just going to assume you would buy literal shit if that was the game they were selling. Especially since I said that I wouldnt buy a game if I didnt think it was worth it. But you can assume all you want. But you know what they say about it. Anyway, like I said, I dont choose to buy or not buy a game wife only one thing. J cant say for sure what would make me want or not want to buy this game as I havent bought it yet. Or know anything about it. Off the top of my head, if it had no new Pokmon, no battles, and speed to travel other than walking at a slow pace, I probably wouldnt buy it... Unless it had something else really cool about it. But like I said, its not one thing... I dont understand why you dont understand why it takes more than one thing to make me not want certain games... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930202325] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>OrangeDawn posted...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>No. And I dont know where you got that from, but whatever. If I dont want the game, or its shit to me, I wont buy it. But you can go on thinking whatever you want. Or assuming whatever. As I said, I buy what I think is worth my money... For example, just because everybody else loves a game and says I should get it, doesnt mean Ill like it or think its worth my money. Just like I may like a game you dont. Its called different taste...</quote> Well you're unable to let me know what, if anything, would make you think it's not a good game to buy and you're only speaking in generalities so I'm just going to assume you would buy literal shit if that was the game they were selling. You saying "No, I would not buy shit," is more than what you've told me so far about what would make you decide to not buy the game.</quote> How so? As I told you, it varies game to game. I did say to someone that one thing that would take away points from me wanting it is no new Pokmon. But, as a I said, I look at the whole game concept. Its not just one thing or another that will make me not buy a game. Im not so simple that if a game has one thing I dont like, I just wont buy it. And how does that make any sense. Saying, I'm just going to assume you would buy literal shit if that was the game they were selling. Especially since I said that I wouldnt buy a game if I didnt think it was worth it. But you can assume all you want. But you know what they say about it. Anyway, like I said, I dont choose to buy or not buy a game wife only one thing. J cant say for sure what would make me want or not want to buy this game as I havent bought it yet. Or know anything about it. Off the top of my head, if it had no new Pokmon, no battles, and speed to travel other than walking at a slow pace, I probably wouldnt buy it... Unless it had something else really cool about it. But like I said, its not one thing... I dont understand why you dont understand why it takes more than one thing to make me not want certain games...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/15/19 10:49:14 PM #136:	GanonsSpirit posted... Ok, we're talking about main series Pokemon games. I know you want to bring up Pokemon Stadium or whatever, but that's not what we're talking about. No. Pokmon stadium had all the Pokmon out at the time, IIRC. I dont know why you thought I was talking about that game. But the XD games didnt. You could only catch the shadow ones. Though, in one, you could catch like a few wild Pokmon. But not many. And it was kind of weird... GanonsSpirit posted... Everyone knew it would cost that much. They just expected it to be worth that much too. But just because its not worth that to you doesnt mean it wont be worth that to others. The problem is youre trying to say what you think its worth is what everybody else should think its worth, as well... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930202566] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>Ok, we're talking about main series Pokemon games. I know you want to bring up Pokemon Stadium or whatever, but that's not what we're talking about.</quote> No. Pokmon stadium had all the Pokmon out at the time, IIRC. I dont know why you thought I was talking about that game. But the XD games didnt. You could only catch the shadow ones. Though, in one, you could catch like a few wild Pokmon. But not many. And it was kind of weird... GanonsSpirit posted...</cite> <quote>Everyone knew it would cost that much. They just expected it to be worth that much too.</quote> But just because its not worth that to you doesnt mean it wont be worth that to others. The problem is youre trying to say what you think its worth is what everybody else should think its worth, as well...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nade Duck 11/15/19 11:17:47 PM #137:	people who actively want less of something are strange. --- https://imgur.com/ElACjJD "Most of the time, I have a whole lot more sperm inside me than most women do." - adjl <cite>Nade Duck posted [p:930203537] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>people who actively want less of something are strange.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 11/15/19 11:47:51 PM #138:	Nade Duck posted... people who actively want less of something are strange. Large chunks of Japan actively wanted less water in March 2011. Was that so strange? --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:930204464] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>Nade Duck posted...</cite> <quote>people who actively want less of something are strange.</quote> Large chunks of Japan actively wanted less water in March 2011. Was that so strange?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BlackScythe0 11/16/19 12:09:06 AM #139:	adjl posted... Nade Duck posted... people who actively want less of something are strange. Large chunks of Japan actively wanted less water in March 2011. Was that so strange? ... seriously? <cite>BlackScythe0 posted [p:930205112] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Nade Duck posted...</cite> <quote>people who actively want less of something are strange.</quote> Large chunks of Japan actively wanted less water in March 2011. Was that so strange?</quote> ... seriously?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metalsonic66 11/16/19 12:16:03 AM #140:	In the sequel to Detective Pikachu, I wanna see them do a full battle with at least 3 Pokemon per side. --- PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69 Big bombs go kabang. <cite>Metalsonic66 posted [p:930205297] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>In the sequel to Detective Pikachu, I wanna see them do a full battle with at least 3 Pokemon per side. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BanjoBoomer 11/16/19 2:45:27 AM #141:	LinkPizza posted... Probably not. The only reason this is a big deal now is because its change. And people cant seem to handle that. If the game had made it so people could either never get pokemon from other games, or go back only one generation from the beginning, then it would have been normal. The series would probably be just like it is today except nobody would care about the national dex as it wouldnt be a real thing. There would probably be many fan made games with all of them. But the real games would be different. Except maybe a battle type game like Pokmon stadium and such... The universal collectability of monsters is the biggest thing that set Pokemon apart from the competition. If they had cut a bunch of Gen 1 Pokemon in Gen 2, I seriously doubt as many people would have stuck with the series. LinkPizza posted... I collect stuff. But Pokmon isnt one of them. I doubt that all collectors would be able to relate because this isnt like a physical collection. People who collect things physically may think more like me... A digital collection is very different... As for why I commented on it, thats because I was responding to you. I believe you responded to me first, though... Well it doesn't sound like you can relate to the collector mindset that Pokemon is made to appeal to. The whole point is that it's supposed to feel like a real, physical collection of monsters. What do you collect? LinkPizza posted... Maybe Im reading that wrong or something. You do find the new ones in the wild. What did Black and white do that was different? I didnt play that one much. My brother was into those a lot. This comment makes it sound like you aren't very invested in or informed about the ongoing Pokemon franchise, which explains why you can't understand the problem people have with dexit. Black and White exclusively featured new pokemon in the main game, and only featured new pokemon the postgame. If Gamefreak wanted everyone to try out new pokemon, they would simply do this again. LinkPizza posted... Plus, no matter what, people will be mad. This entire controversy would go away if Gamefreak would simply announce that they heard fans and will add all pokemon back in a future patch. This is not a situation where "there's no way to make people happy". adjl posted... Spoilers: The collection was always worthless. The value of that collection comes purely from the enjoyment of collecting it, which exists regardless of whether or not you can access it with the latest game. Wrong. For me the value comes from the enjoyment of collecting it, having access to it, and being able to use it for battling, trading, breeding, and whatever other things are available to do with pokemon in a given game. Seriously, who are you to tell other people how they get enjoyment from collecting pokemon? <cite>BanjoBoomer posted [p:930208763] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>Probably not. The only reason this is a big deal now is because its change. And people cant seem to handle that. If the game had made it so people could either never get pokemon from other games, or go back only one generation from the beginning, then it would have been normal. The series would probably be just like it is today except nobody would care about the national dex as it wouldnt be a real thing. There would probably be many fan made games with all of them. But the real games would be different. Except maybe a battle type game like Pokmon stadium and such...</quote> The universal collectability of monsters is the biggest thing that set Pokemon apart from the competition. If they had cut a bunch of Gen 1 Pokemon in Gen 2, I seriously doubt as many people would have stuck with the series. LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>I collect stuff. But Pokmon isnt one of them. I doubt that all collectors would be able to relate because this isnt like a physical collection. People who collect things physically may think more like me... A digital collection is very different... As for why I commented on it, thats because I was responding to you. I believe you responded to me first, though...</quote> Well it doesn't sound like you can relate to the collector mindset that Pokemon is made to appeal to. The whole point is that it's supposed to feel like a real, physical collection of monsters. What do you collect? LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>Maybe Im reading that wrong or something. You do find the new ones in the wild. What did Black and white do that was different? I didnt play that one much. My brother was into those a lot.</quote> This comment makes it sound like you aren't very invested in or informed about the ongoing Pokemon franchise, which explains why you can't understand the problem people have with dexit. Black and White exclusively featured new pokemon in the main game, and only featured new pokemon the postgame. If Gamefreak wanted everyone to try out new pokemon, they would simply do this again. LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>Plus, no matter what, people will be mad.</quote> This entire controversy would go away if Gamefreak would simply announce that they heard fans and will add all pokemon back in a future patch. This is not a situation where "there's no way to make people happy". adjl posted... </cite> <quote>Spoilers: The collection was always worthless. The value of that collection comes purely from the enjoyment of collecting it, which exists regardless of whether or not you can access it with the latest game.</quote> Wrong. For me the value comes from the enjoyment of collecting it, having access to it, and being able to use it for battling, trading, breeding, and whatever other things are available to do with pokemon in a given game. Seriously, who are you to tell other people how they get enjoyment from collecting pokemon? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Bulbasaur 11/16/19 2:57:23 AM #142:	there's over 900 pokemon that's, realistically, to many for them to feasibly do. despite what people are screaming about, gamefreak did actually have to do work on the models, they had to change their shading, their textures, how they interacted with new geometry, and many got new battle animations. gamefreak is not a big studio. and there would be even fewer people doing the work of changing the models. realistically, it takes about a day to do one pokemon. people who have only the models ripped from XY took over a day to several days to change one pokemon to even look similar to how they changed it for sword and shield, so saying it would take one person there at least one day to do it is a good estimation. now you have over 900 pokemon. it's not realistic to expect them to keep adding and adding more and more pokemon, while also keeping the entire previous roster up to date. they will not be patched in, they've already said this. --- it's hard to read my thoughts i'm feeling guess they're not real then <cite>Bulbasaur posted [p:930208978] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>there's over 900 pokemon that's, realistically, to many for them to feasibly do. despite what people are screaming about, gamefreak did actually have to do work on the models, they had to change their shading, their textures, how they interacted with new geometry, and many got new battle animations. gamefreak is not a big studio. and there would be even fewer people doing the work of changing the models. realistically, it takes about a day to do one pokemon. people who have only the models ripped from XY took over a day to several days to change one pokemon to even look similar to how they changed it for sword and shield, so saying it would take one person there at least one day to do it is a good estimation. now you have over 900 pokemon. it's not realistic to expect them to keep adding and adding more and more pokemon, while also keeping the entire previous roster up to date. they will not be patched in, they've already said this.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/16/19 8:58:39 AM #143:	BanjoBoomer posted... The universal collectability of monsters is the biggest thing that set Pokemon apart from the competition. If they had cut a bunch of Gen 1 Pokemon in Gen 2, I seriously doubt as many people would have stuck with the series. I disagree wholeheartly. When I was younger and played with my friends, most people were always playing for the new Pokmon instead of the old ones. Not only that, most never traded their old Pokmon in. Mainly because not many people even had the link cable or a way to trade. I did have a link cable and let m friends use it. And they did, but never to trade in older Pokmon. There are many people who never did. Because it wasnt a big deal to everyone. The series would have done just fine. Especially since they didnt have that much competition, if were being honest. BanjoBoomer posted... Well it doesn't sound like you can relate to the collector mindset that Pokemon is made to appeal to. The whole point is that it's supposed to feel like a real, physical collection of monsters. What do you collect? I use to collect the cards when I was younger. I would have still been collecting them. But I didnt have a job of enough money to continue on with it. Now that I have money, I want to try for dice. I know this one lady (played Shadowrun with her) who had this bag of dice. All sorts, too. Im probably not who they tried to appeal to. But I also dont believe that was the main appeal, either... BanjoBoomer posted... This comment makes it sound like you aren't very invested in or informed about the ongoing Pokemon franchise, which explains why you can't understand the problem people have with dexit. Black and White exclusively featured new pokemon in the main game, and only featured new pokemon the postgame. If Gamefreak wanted everyone to try out new pokemon, they would simply do this again. No. I just didnt play one game. So, I dont know what that game did that was different. But whatever. Except that wouldnt necessarily work. Especially if people just sent all their Pokmon from the older games in. BanjoBoomer posted... This entire controversy would go away if Gamefreak would simply announce that they heard fans and will add all pokemon back in a future patch. This is not a situation where "there's no way to make people happy". Sure. This controversy. And then they would start arguing about something else. Its like youve never been on the internet. They will always complain about something. This is a solution where some people wont be happy. Especially considering how people are already complaining about literally everything else about the game. This is one controversy compared to many other problems people have with it. And not everybody even wants all of them... Youre thinking interns of what you want... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930214886] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>The universal collectability of monsters is the biggest thing that set Pokemon apart from the competition. If they had cut a bunch of Gen 1 Pokemon in Gen 2, I seriously doubt as many people would have stuck with the series.</quote> I disagree wholeheartly. When I was younger and played with my friends, most people were always playing for the new Pokmon instead of the old ones. Not only that, most never traded their old Pokmon in. Mainly because not many people even had the link cable or a way to trade. I did have a link cable and let m friends use it. And they did, but never to trade in older Pokmon. There are many people who never did. Because it wasnt a big deal to everyone. The series would have done just fine. Especially since they didnt have that much competition, if were being honest. BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>Well it doesn't sound like you can relate to the collector mindset that Pokemon is made to appeal to. The whole point is that it's supposed to feel like a real, physical collection of monsters. What do you collect?</quote> I use to collect the cards when I was younger. I would have still been collecting them. But I didnt have a job of enough money to continue on with it. Now that I have money, I want to try for dice. I know this one lady (played Shadowrun with her) who had this bag of dice. All sorts, too. Im probably not who they tried to appeal to. But I also dont believe that was the main appeal, either... BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>This comment makes it sound like you aren't very invested in or informed about the ongoing Pokemon franchise, which explains why you can't understand the problem people have with dexit. Black and White exclusively featured new pokemon in the main game, and only featured new pokemon the postgame. If Gamefreak wanted everyone to try out new pokemon, they would simply do this again.</quote> No. I just didnt play one game. So, I dont know what that game did that was different. But whatever. Except that wouldnt necessarily work. Especially if people just sent all their Pokmon from the older games in. BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>This entire controversy would go away if Gamefreak would simply announce that they heard fans and will add all pokemon back in a future patch. This is not a situation where "there's no way to make people happy".</quote> Sure. This controversy. And then they would start arguing about something else. Its like youve never been on the internet. They will always complain about something. This is a solution where some people wont be happy. Especially considering how people are already complaining about literally everything else about the game. This is one controversy compared to many other problems people have with it. And not everybody even wants all of them... Youre thinking interns of what you want...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sarcasthma 11/16/19 9:10:27 AM #144:	adjl posted... Nade Duck posted... people who actively want less of something are strange. Large chunks of Japan actively wanted less water in March 2011. Was that so strange? C'mon adjl, that was in bad taste. --- What's the difference between a pickpocket and a peeping tom? A pickpocket snatches your watch. <cite>Sarcasthma posted [p:930215161] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>Nade Duck posted...</cite> <quote>people who actively want less of something are strange.</quote> Large chunks of Japan actively wanted less water in March 2011. Was that so strange?</quote> C'mon adjl, that was in bad taste.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BanjoBoomer 11/16/19 10:11:24 AM #145:	LinkPizza posted... I disagree wholeheartly. When I was younger and played with my friends, most people were always playing for the new Pokmon instead of the old ones. Not only that, most never traded their old Pokmon in. Mainly because not many people even had the link cable or a way to trade. I did have a link cable and let m friends use it. And they did, but never to trade in older Pokmon. There are many people who never did. Because it wasnt a big deal to everyone. The series would have done just fine. Especially since they didnt have that much competition, if were being honest. Well, it's impossible to know how well it would have done, but I personally wouldn't have stuck with the series for so long. LinkPizza posted... I use to collect the cards when I was younger. I would have still been collecting them. But I didnt have a job of enough money to continue on with it. Now that I have money, I want to try for dice. I know this one lady (played Shadowrun with her) who had this bag of dice. All sorts, too. Im probably not who they tried to appeal to. But I also dont believe that was the main appeal, either... Obviously Pokemon appeals to people for other reasons as well, I'm not arguing against that. But the franchise was inspired by bug collecting, that's part if its core DNA. And now that aspect is being neutered. As is the battling/team-building aspect, as we can not use many of our favorite pokemon or mix a lot of our old pokemon into our new teams. LinkPizza posted... No. I just didnt play one game. So, I dont know what that game did that was different. But whatever. Except that wouldnt necessarily work. Especially if people just sent all their Pokmon from the older games in. They could just restrict when people can transfer pokemon over, which is what Black and White did. As it stands, there's nothing stopping people from having a team in Sw/Sh that solely consists of old pokemon, whereas everyone who played through Black and White used new pokemon on their team. LinkPizza posted... Sure. This controversy. And then they would start arguing about something else. Its like youve never been on the internet. They will always complain about something. This is a solution where some people wont be happy. Especially considering how people are already complaining about literally everything else about the game. This is one controversy compared to many other problems people have with it. There has never been a controversy in Pokemon like this before. Hell, right up until the dexit reveal, everyone was hyped for Sw/Sh. Pokemon has always been behind the times in a lot of ways. But people alway overlooked those flaws because the main focus was on the monster-collecting/raising/training/battling aspect. They had one job, basically, everything else is just window dressing. But then they started cutting the number of monsters with the excuse that they wanted to improve other areas of the game, so now people are being much more critical of other areas of the game. <cite>BanjoBoomer posted [p:930216636] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>I disagree wholeheartly. When I was younger and played with my friends, most people were always playing for the new Pokmon instead of the old ones. Not only that, most never traded their old Pokmon in. Mainly because not many people even had the link cable or a way to trade. I did have a link cable and let m friends use it. And they did, but never to trade in older Pokmon. There are many people who never did. Because it wasnt a big deal to everyone. The series would have done just fine. Especially since they didnt have that much competition, if were being honest.</quote> Well, it's impossible to know how well it would have done, but I personally wouldn't have stuck with the series for so long. LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>I use to collect the cards when I was younger. I would have still been collecting them. But I didnt have a job of enough money to continue on with it. Now that I have money, I want to try for dice. I know this one lady (played Shadowrun with her) who had this bag of dice. All sorts, too. Im probably not who they tried to appeal to. But I also dont believe that was the main appeal, either...</quote> Obviously Pokemon appeals to people for other reasons as well, I'm not arguing against that. But the franchise was inspired by bug collecting, that's part if its core DNA. And now that aspect is being neutered. As is the battling/team-building aspect, as we can not use many of our favorite pokemon or mix a lot of our old pokemon into our new teams. LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>No. I just didnt play one game. So, I dont know what that game did that was different. But whatever. Except that wouldnt necessarily work. Especially if people just sent all their Pokmon from the older games in.</quote> They could just restrict when people can transfer pokemon over, which is what Black and White did. As it stands, there's nothing stopping people from having a team in Sw/Sh that solely consists of old pokemon, whereas everyone who played through Black and White used new pokemon on their team. LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>Sure. This controversy. And then they would start arguing about something else. Its like youve never been on the internet. They will always complain about something. This is a solution where some people wont be happy. Especially considering how people are already complaining about literally everything else about the game. This is one controversy compared to many other problems people have with it.</quote> There has never been a controversy in Pokemon like this before. Hell, right up until the dexit reveal, everyone was hyped for Sw/Sh. Pokemon has always been behind the times in a lot of ways. But people alway overlooked those flaws because the main focus was on the monster-collecting/raising/training/battling aspect. They had one job, basically, everything else is just window dressing. But then they started cutting the number of monsters with the excuse that they wanted to improve other areas of the game, so now people are being much more critical of other areas of the game. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Veedrock- 11/16/19 10:51:07 AM #146:	BanjoBoomer posted... But the franchise was inspired by bug collecting, that's part if its core DNA. And now that aspect is being neutered. Pokemon available to catch by game without any trading: -Emerald: 202-220 -Leaf Green: ~174 -Platinum: ~381 -Heart Gold: ~431 (may include pokewalker) -Black: ~352 -X: ~567 (includes ~100 from friend safari) -Omega Ruby: ~454 -Sun: ~300 -Ultra Sun: ~380 -Let's Go Pikachu: 135 -Sword: ~360 This is cursory research so the numbers are surely off (might include multiple starters and trade evos) but they're in the ballpark enough to make a point. Doesn't seem neutered to me, there's as many pokemon to catch as there's been in previous generations. --- My friends call me Vee. I'm not your friend, buddy. <cite>Veedrock- posted [p:930217845] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>But the franchise was inspired by bug collecting, that's part if its core DNA. And now that aspect is being neutered.</quote> Pokemon available to catch by game without any trading: -Emerald: 202-220 -Leaf Green: ~174 -Platinum: ~381 -Heart Gold: ~431 (may include pokewalker) -Black: ~352 -X: ~567 (includes ~100 from friend safari) -Omega Ruby: ~454 -Sun: ~300 -Ultra Sun: ~380 -Let's Go Pikachu: 135 -Sword: ~360 This is cursory research so the numbers are surely off (might include multiple starters and trade evos) but they're in the ballpark enough to make a point. Doesn't seem neutered to me, there's as many pokemon to catch as there's been in previous generations.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/16/19 11:20:43 AM #147:	BanjoBoomer posted... Well, it's impossible to know how well it would have done, but I personally wouldn't have stuck with the series for so long. True. It is impossible to know. And maybe you and others wouldnt have stuck(though also impossible to say as you wouldnt have known about a national dex). But many would have as most wouldnt have had a second thought about them being cut. They could have even made more games that would combine a Pokdex or two every so often.... BanjoBoomer posted... Obviously Pokemon appeals to people for other reasons as well, I'm not arguing against that. But the franchise was inspired by bug collecting, that's part if its core DNA. And now that aspect is being neutered. As is the battling/team-building aspect, as we can not use many of our favorite pokemon or mix a lot of our old pokemon into our new teams. Except I dont see it being neutered. At least, at the core. You still have he collection. It doesnt just disappear. Its still exist. And you have them, just as bug collectors have their bugs. For the other aspect, it depends on what the developers want. Not only that, but you dont know where they are going to go next. Maybe the next time, they cut out different Pokmon. And now, you may have your favorites to use again. BanjoBoomer posted... They could just restrict when people can transfer pokemon over, which is what Black and White did. As it stands, there's nothing stopping people from having a team in Sw/Sh that solely consists of old pokemon, whereas everyone who played through Black and White used new pokemon on their team. A restriction would probably be good. Like only in post game or something. Thats because they may want the take the cut slowly. Especially after seeing how people reacted to it. BanjoBoomer posted... There has never been a controversy in Pokemon like this before. Hell, right up until the dexit reveal, everyone was hyped for Sw/Sh. Pokemon has always been behind the times in a lot of ways. But people alway overlooked those flaws because the main focus was on the monster-collecting/raising/training/battling aspect. They had one job, basically, everything else is just window dressing. But then they started cutting the number of monsters with the excuse that they wanted to improve other areas of the game, so now people are being much more critical of other areas of the game. Yeah. There were hyped. But this controversy isnt the only thing they are complaining about. The Pokmon topics on just this board alone prove that. They also complain about the graphics. And the animations (or lack thereof) for the Pokmon. And the story. Which is probably written for children. And not really expected to be of a high caliber, tbh... And if they want to be critical, they can be. But its still the same game. And it still as fun as before. Just not every monster can be in it. And if what Helly said is true, they really did have a lot of work on their hands... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930218841] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>Well, it's impossible to know how well it would have done, but I personally wouldn't have stuck with the series for so long.</quote> True. It is impossible to know. And maybe you and others wouldnt have stuck(though also impossible to say as you wouldnt have known about a national dex). But many would have as most wouldnt have had a second thought about them being cut. They could have even made more games that would combine a Pokdex or two every so often.... BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>Obviously Pokemon appeals to people for other reasons as well, I'm not arguing against that. But the franchise was inspired by bug collecting, that's part if its core DNA. And now that aspect is being neutered. As is the battling/team-building aspect, as we can not use many of our favorite pokemon or mix a lot of our old pokemon into our new teams.</quote> Except I dont see it being neutered. At least, at the core. You still have he collection. It doesnt just disappear. Its still exist. And you have them, just as bug collectors have their bugs. For the other aspect, it depends on what the developers want. Not only that, but you dont know where they are going to go next. Maybe the next time, they cut out different Pokmon. And now, you may have your favorites to use again. BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>They could just restrict when people can transfer pokemon over, which is what Black and White did. As it stands, there's nothing stopping people from having a team in Sw/Sh that solely consists of old pokemon, whereas everyone who played through Black and White used new pokemon on their team.</quote> A restriction would probably be good. Like only in post game or something. Thats because they may want the take the cut slowly. Especially after seeing how people reacted to it. BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>There has never been a controversy in Pokemon like this before. Hell, right up until the dexit reveal, everyone was hyped for Sw/Sh. Pokemon has always been behind the times in a lot of ways. But people alway overlooked those flaws because the main focus was on the monster-collecting/raising/training/battling aspect. They had one job, basically, everything else is just window dressing. But then they started cutting the number of monsters with the excuse that they wanted to improve other areas of the game, so now people are being much more critical of other areas of the game.</quote> Yeah. There were hyped. But this controversy isnt the only thing they are complaining about. The Pokmon topics on just this board alone prove that. They also complain about the graphics. And the animations (or lack thereof) for the Pokmon. And the story. Which is probably written for children. And not really expected to be of a high caliber, tbh... And if they want to be critical, they can be. But its still the same game. And it still as fun as before. Just not every monster can be in it. And if what Helly said is true, they really did have a lot of work on their hands...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BanjoBoomer 11/16/19 11:23:52 AM #148:	Veedrock- posted... Pokemon available to catch by game without any trading: -Emerald: 202-220 -Leaf Green: ~174 -Platinum: ~381 -Heart Gold: ~431 (may include pokewalker) -Black: ~352 -X: ~567 (includes ~100 from friend safari) -Omega Ruby: ~454 -Sun: ~300 -Ultra Sun: ~380 -Let's Go Pikachu: 135 -Sword: ~360 This is cursory research so the numbers are surely off (might include multiple starters and trade evos) but they're in the ballpark enough to make a point. Doesn't seem neutered to me, there's as many pokemon to catch as there's been in previous generations. You're looking at it through an extremely simplified lens. Gen 1 obviously started it all, and thus every pokemon in the franchise was catchable. It already stood out from most RPGs due to the fact that every single monster in the franchise was a potential member. Gen 2 was designed almost as a direct sequel and compliment to Gen 1, with old pokemon even being transferrable back to Gen 1. So the idea was that you could collect every pokemon with both a Gen 1 and Gen 2 game complimenting eachother. Gen 3 is similar in that R/S/E is complimented by FR/LG and the GameCube games. Between these games you could collect every pokemon in the franchise. This pattern continued all the way up until Gen 7. All the games on DS form an ecosystem where you can collect all the pokemon with just the DS games (and Pokemon Ranger, for some reason), and then all the pokemon games on the 3DS form an ecosystem where you can collect all the Pokemon on the 3DS. And of course, throughout all of this, veteran players are rewarded by being able to transfer their pokemon across the different consoles (with the exception of Gen 2 to Gen 3, for technical reasons), which furthers the feeling the that your pokemon are tangible beings you can keep with you. The Switch games should be starting their own brand new ecosystem: For instance, they could have made it so you need Let's Go in order to aquire the Gen 1 pokemon that don't normally appear in Galar, just as you needed FR/LG to compliment R/S/E. But that's not what they're doing...most Gen 1 pokemon simply aren't in the data for Sw/Sh at all. <cite>BanjoBoomer posted [p:930218950] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>Veedrock- posted... </cite> <quote>Pokemon available to catch by game without any trading: -Emerald: 202-220 -Leaf Green: ~174 -Platinum: ~381 -Heart Gold: ~431 (may include pokewalker) -Black: ~352 -X: ~567 (includes ~100 from friend safari) -Omega Ruby: ~454 -Sun: ~300 -Ultra Sun: ~380 -Let's Go Pikachu: 135 -Sword: ~360 This is cursory research so the numbers are surely off (might include multiple starters and trade evos) but they're in the ballpark enough to make a point. Doesn't seem neutered to me, there's as many pokemon to catch as there's been in previous generations.</quote> You're looking at it through an extremely simplified lens. Gen 1 obviously started it all, and thus every pokemon in the franchise was catchable. It already stood out from most RPGs due to the fact that every single monster in the franchise was a potential member.Gen 2 was designed almost as a direct sequel and compliment to Gen 1, with old pokemon even being transferrable back to Gen 1. So the idea was that you could collect every pokemon with both a Gen 1 and Gen 2 game complimenting eachother.Gen 3 is similar in that R/S/E is complimented by FR/LG and the GameCube games. Between these games you could collect every pokemon in the franchise.This pattern continued all the way up until Gen 7. All the games on DS form an ecosystem where you can collect all the pokemon with just the DS games (and Pokemon Ranger, for some reason), and then all the pokemon games on the 3DS form an ecosystem where you can collect all the Pokemon on the 3DS.And of course, throughout all of this, veteran players are rewarded by being able to transfer their pokemon across the different consoles (with the exception of Gen 2 to Gen 3, for technical reasons), which furthers the feeling the that your pokemon are tangible beings you can keep with you. The Switch games should be starting their own brand new ecosystem: For instance, they could have made it so you need Let's Go in order to aquire the Gen 1 pokemon that don't normally appear in Galar, just as you needed FR/LG to compliment R/S/E. But that's not what they're doing...most Gen 1 pokemon simply aren't in the data for Sw/Sh at all. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BanjoBoomer 11/16/19 11:33:16 AM #149:	LinkPizza posted... Except I dont see it being neutered. At least, at the core. You still have he collection. It doesnt just disappear. Its still exist. And you have them, just as bug collectors have their bugs. For the other aspect, it depends on what the developers want. Not only that, but you dont know where they are going to go next. Maybe the next time, they cut out different Pokmon. And now, you may have your favorites to use again. It exists in an old game, yeah. But if I don't have access to those pokemon in a new game, then they don't exist in the context of that new game, and thus I have no interest in that new game. A new game isn't just a "binder" it's a whole new world to use pokemon in. That's the point. I don't understand why you can't understand the very real difference between "being able to collect and use every pokemon in Sw/Sh" and "only being able to collect and use a small fraction of them in Sw/Sh". LinkPizza posted... Yeah. There were hyped. But this controversy isnt the only thing they are complaining about. The Pokmon topics on just this board alone prove that. They also complain about the graphics. And the animations (or lack thereof) for the Pokmon. And the story. Which is probably written for children. And not really expected to be of a high caliber, tbh... And if they want to be critical, they can be. But its still the same game. And it still as fun as before. Just not every monster can be in it. And if what Helly said is true, they really did have a lot of work on their hands... Yeah, and I've complained about all of those things. But if dexit had never happened, I would have overlooked them, just like I did with previous games, and would be playing Sw/Sh right now. <cite>BanjoBoomer posted [p:930219283] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>Except I dont see it being neutered. At least, at the core. You still have he collection. It doesnt just disappear. Its still exist. And you have them, just as bug collectors have their bugs. For the other aspect, it depends on what the developers want. Not only that, but you dont know where they are going to go next. Maybe the next time, they cut out different Pokmon. And now, you may have your favorites to use again.</quote> It exists in an old game, yeah. But if I don't have access to those pokemon in a new game, then they don't exist in the context of that new game, and thus I have no interest in that new game. A new game isn't just a "binder" it's a whole new world to use pokemon in. That's the point. I don't understand why you can't understand the very real difference between "being able to collect and use every pokemon in Sw/Sh" and "only being able to collect and use a small fraction of them in Sw/Sh". LinkPizza posted... </cite> <quote>Yeah. There were hyped. But this controversy isnt the only thing they are complaining about. The Pokmon topics on just this board alone prove that. They also complain about the graphics. And the animations (or lack thereof) for the Pokmon. And the story. Which is probably written for children. And not really expected to be of a high caliber, tbh... And if they want to be critical, they can be. But its still the same game. And it still as fun as before. Just not every monster can be in it. And if what Helly said is true, they really did have a lot of work on their hands...</quote> Yeah, and I've complained about all of those things. But if dexit had never happened, I would have overlooked them, just like I did with previous games, and would be playing Sw/Sh right now. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Etheos 11/16/19 12:49:42 PM #150:	I wonder how many of the people complaining would actually complete the 890 pokemon national dex. <cite>Etheos posted [p:930222037] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>I wonder how many of the people complaining would actually complete the 890 pokemon national dex.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 11/16/19 12:58:43 PM #151:	BanjoBoomer posted... It exists in an old game, yeah. But if I don't have access to those pokemon in a new game, then they don't exist in the context of that new game, and thus I have no interest in that new game. A new game isn't just a "binder" it's a whole new world to use pokemon in. That's the point. I don't understand why you can't understand the very real difference between "being able to collect and use every pokemon in Sw/Sh" and "only being able to collect and use a small fraction of them in Sw/Sh". You dont have access to them yet. And its a whole new world. But depending on how they do the new games, maybe those other Pokmon dont exist in this new world. And I do understand. I dont see it as a major issue, though. Especially since things could change in the future. But like I said, you still have them. You just cant use them yet. Maybe never again in the new games. Only time will tell... You should be happy they are letting you use any. They could have just started over fresh. And then, even more people would have been mad. Which might be why they are taking the cut slowly... Also, they could have reasons or a patterns theyre working on. Just because you dont see them doesnt mean it doesnt exist... BanjoBoomer posted... Yeah, and I've complained about all of those things. But if dexit had never happened, I would have overlooked them, just like I did with previous games, and would be playing Sw/Sh right now. Exactly. You would have overlooked them. But that doesnt mean everybody would have. Even on games with be tree graphics, people complain about the graphics. Or the FPS not matching PC speeds. Not everyone would overlooked 10 other things they want to complain about for some extra Pokmon... Some of them probably dont even care about Dexit... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:930222362] in I've g... [t:78156886]...</cite> <quote>BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>It exists in an old game, yeah. But if I don't have access to those pokemon in a new game, then they don't exist in the context of that new game, and thus I have no interest in that new game. A new game isn't just a "binder" it's a whole new world to use pokemon in. That's the point. I don't understand why you can't understand the very real difference between "being able to collect and use every pokemon in Sw/Sh" and "only being able to collect and use a small fraction of them in Sw/Sh".</quote> You dont have access to them yet. And its a whole new world. But depending on how they do the new games, maybe those other Pokmon dont exist in this new world. And I do understand. I dont see it as a major issue, though. Especially since things could change in the future. But like I said, you still have them. You just cant use them yet. Maybe never again in the new games. Only time will tell... You should be happy they are letting you use any. They could have just started over fresh. And then, even more people would have been mad. Which might be why they are taking the cut slowly... Also, they could have reasons or a patterns theyre working on. Just because you dont see them doesnt mean it doesnt exist... BanjoBoomer posted...</cite> <quote>Yeah, and I've complained about all of those things. But if dexit had never happened, I would have overlooked them, just like I did with previous games, and would be playing Sw/Sh right now. </quote> Exactly. You would have overlooked them. But that doesnt mean everybody would have. Even on games with be tree graphics, people complain about the graphics. Or the FPS not matching PC speeds. Not everyone would overlooked 10 other things they want to complain about for some extra Pokmon... Some of them probably dont even care about Dexit...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Poll of the Day > I've genuinely never seen this much bad PR for a game before (Pokemon) (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > I've genuinely never seen this much bad PR for a game before (Pokemon)