This is seriously going to be the Forza Motorsport 5 of Pokémon games, i.e. everyone is going to want to forget this generation even existed when the next one comes along which will hopefully include all or at least more Pokémon.
Hopefully it won't be @KratosMD. You're a pretty passionate person and gamer so I can totally see why this information has caused this reaction in you.
I'm pretty sure you said earlier in the topic you'd never collect them all anyway 400 pokes total is admittedly a bit low in my opinion too but I'm sure it'll still give you endless hours of enjoyment (hopefully)
I played Pokemon X for about 200 (Which by the end I concluded it was good but had problems) and with Omega Ruby had a similar runtime (But enjoyed it thoroughly) and I've never come close to catching them all... Even when there was only 151!
I'm disapointed my boi Blastoise won't be in it though... Or Swampert or Empoleon. Maybe they'll patch in more pokemon?
I dunno if i'll ever get it @KratosMD (Or it'll be at least a good year... maybe even two away as I've yet to get a switch due to personal reasons) I'm just avidly looking at Sw/Sh as a pokemon fan and this whole topic in general from the sidelines.
I do hope you end up enjoying it, I look forward to hearing your and everyone elses thoughts!
Eh. I get that some people like to drag along their collection of Pokemon from one generation to the next in order to keep a living dex, and fully understand the frustration there, but I genuinely don't understand why people care otherwise. The regional dex is roughly on par with other Pokemon generations, so it's not like you're encountering fewer Pokemon than usual throughout the game. If anything, this game will have the most representative sample of Pokemon in any generation, given no favoritism seems to have been shown to any one generation, as is usually the case.
It would go a long way toward making people more accepting of this if Pokemon Home has actual gameplay elements to it and, more importantly, is included with NSO, I think.
Just watched a friend play the Switch version of Witcher 3 in person. I mean, it's obviously not as pretty as the PC version on ultra settings, but, I have to say, in handheld mode, it is damn impressive. The game doesn't look like it should be running on the system.
I think what helps is that the game's art direction is so vibrant and gorgeous that you're distracted from the low resolution textures. Honestly, what distracted me way more than the graphics was the framerate: going from looking at the game running at nearly locked 60fps to 30-ish is a bit jarring at first. But all the console versions target that framerate.
@Ralizah My mate showed it on his Switch in work a couple of weeks back too, and I came away with similar impressions as you. I couldn't tell if there was any wonkiness when he was playing, however he was only wandering around. I imagine it starts to struggle when there are various enemies/lighting effects on screen.
I tend not to notice the difference in frame rates. It's when there are sudden changes whilst playing, that is when I find it jarring.
Life is more fun when you help people succeed, instead of wishing them to fail.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
@JohnnyShoulder I didn't notice any issues when he got into combat. Maybe it bogs down in really busy encounters, but I doubt it. I've heard Novigrad is basically fine, and that is, far and away, the most demanding part of the game in terms of performance.
I'm not really a fan of a consistently low framerate, either. It's why I struggle to enjoy games like the first 3DS SK game and older 3D games like Ocarina of Time and Shadow of the Colossus these days.
So GameFreak confirmed that the EXP All is always on, no option to turn it off. And they suggested that if you want to play it the normal way, by training the Pokémon you use in battle, you should box the rest of team.
I mean, FFS, how difficult is it to make it optional? Let the players decide how they want to play the game. And they realise it's a thing people want, which makes it even worse.
Yeah I just saw that over on nintylife's Pokemon thread @Octane
Must admit I find that really perplexing... Pokémon isn't the kinda game you should have a "it's my way or the highway" approach for the most part as it's all about player choice on the pokémon you raise and collect.
It'll also make those self imposed challenge runs or Nuzlocke's(?) much more harder to do for people who enjoy them impossible actually now that I think about it...
I quite liked attempting one of those and trying to use an all grass team in Pokemon X. I failed even with relaxed rules.. but it was fun
@Foxy-Goddess-Scotchy Yeah, it's just so weird, and kinda stupid IMO. It wouldn't be difficult to implement either. We shall see. I've seen someone post on Reddit that they've avoided grinding and even trainers, yet they were still severely over-leveled during important fights (they mentioned 6-7 levels above the rival for example). That sounds like an unbalanced game, but like I said, we shall see.
No wonder that the fan-made hacks and games are so popular. Because people play the games for different reasons, and they've slowly shifted the games ever since gen 1, so people have different expectations, most of them can easily be solved with the ability to turn on or off certain mechanics, or different difficulty modes. In a way, it feels more restricted than the GameBoy games were.
I feel like some of the trouble is that, unlike certain other properties that people heavily associate with their youth, the Pokemon series hasn't really grown up with its oldest fans. It's still a firmly child-oriented series that tries to keep things simplistic and streamlined for young players. Arguably, this is part of why the games have continued to attract young people since the mid-90s, but I can understand a portion of the fanbase - primarily the older, late-20s-to-mid-30s set who frequent gaming communites online - feeling a bit sour that they've never gotten the deep mainline Pokemon RPG they've wanted for years.
It might not be quite like GTA or the likes, but Pokémon will always be a rather evergreen title and as Ralizah says it will always bring new blood into fandom.
I can't see why they couldn't have game freak keep doing what they're doing though with the core franchise but also let another company have a crack at making a more in depth Pokémon RPG.
They surely know there's a demand for it!
The Digimon Cyber Sleuth games show you can take what you'd consider a child friendly franchise and yet have a mature plot around it too.
Hell the first two Pokémon Mystery Dungeon games told pretty mature plots as well and sold rather well if I recall.
It's Pokémon so it'll sell well regardless surely...
Previously known as Foxy-Goddess-Scotchy
.
.
.
"You don't have to save the world to find meaning in life. Sometimes all you need is something simple, like someone to take care of"
@Octane I mean, I'm sure players were overleveled. The EXP system sounds similar to the way it was in Let's Go, and Let's Go made it insanely easy to level up quickly early on (maybe later on, too; I don't know, because I hated those games and stopped playing due to the lack of wild Pokemon battles and the horrible art style). Also, I've yet to play a Pokemon game where my Pokemon weren't dramatically higher leveled than the enemy trainers' Pokemon I came across, even with games that had the EXP share item.
The challenge in Pokemon games was never in the campaign (outside of Whitney and her stupid Miltank, anyway). It was in the eugenics simulator found within and competitive battling scene.
@Foxy-Goddess-Scotchy Pokémon Colosseum and Pokemon XD were JRPGs on Gamecube developed by a different developer, so it's not like this approach would be anything new for the property.
I think it'd be a good way to pad out generations AND keep certain segments of the fanbase happy.
@Foxy-Goddess-Scotchy Yeah, that was in Black and White. But one of the two had an easy mode, and the other contained the hard mode. And both were locked behind the credits. Incredibly stupid design choice IMO.
I don't know. I find the older games more difficult than the newer games, so to me it feels like they're making things too easy.
Couldn't care less about the story in the games though, I prefer minimal cut-scenes and mandatory character interactions, because it's just all very flat and emotionless in Pokemon games, even though it always seems like the fate of the entire world is at stake.
@Octane The "difficulty" in old Pokemon games is mostly down to the QoL features older gens were missing. It's the same reason most old JRPGs are harder than modern ones.
Actually, in some ways, SuMo was one of the harder Pokemon gens. Especially with that often infuriating reinforcements mechanic in wild battles.
I admittedly forgot about those @Ralizah ... In my defence they were on Gamecube...
Lol fair enough, I respect your opinion @Octane! I hope Sword and/or Shield turns out to be more to your liking
Digimon was not shown a lot at all in the UK @KratosMD (at least it wasn't on the basic tv channels that I had at the time) Pokémon and Yu-Gi-Oh were the bigger shows.
I think the original UK showing on the basic channels in fact may've skipped over some stuff to finish Digimon and get it off the air to then start broadcasting the adventures of ol' Yugi Moto and his fabulous hair.
So I only have the vaguest of recollections of the show (Not to mention my kids were little tykes back then) and I don't think Netflix or any of the uk versions of the streaming services has the series up to watch either!
Previously known as Foxy-Goddess-Scotchy
.
.
.
"You don't have to save the world to find meaning in life. Sometimes all you need is something simple, like someone to take care of"
Forums
Topic: Nintendo Switch --OT--
Posts 3,721 to 3,740 of 7,480
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic