1. We have moved to a new forum system. All your posts and data should have transferred over. Welcome, to the new Serebii Forums. Details here
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
    Dismiss Notice
  3. If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders
    Dismiss Notice

Pokemon Sword & Shield GENERAL DISCUSSION Thread [Spoiler-Prone Area]

Discussion in 'Pokémon Sword & Shield Discussion' started by Kage-Pikachu, Jun 9, 2018.


Does this idea seem at all plausible to you?

  1. Nah

  2. Yep

  3. I'm a kangaroo

  1. 1rkhachatryan

    1rkhachatryan Call me Robert guys

    I mean they have the right to be disappointed but not the irrational just absurdity that a lot of the comments I'm seeing everywhere seems to have.

    I've seen a lot of people being like we can't catch them all anymore which is just wrong because they fail to take into account that Japan never had that slogan in mind and has never used it. That's just something that would added in the west which tbh, I haven't heard in years now from any official source.
    wolf jani and Redstar45 like this.
  2. Redstar45

    Redstar45 Well-Known Member

    Yeah but anime show in the Japanese sub did have the Dr.Okido make big deal out of it in the Okorizaru episode during the classic pocket monsters os era!
  3. 1rkhachatryan

    1rkhachatryan Call me Robert guys

    Are you really talking about something 20 years ago now as an example of today lol?? I watch every episode of the anime and I never hear them say catch them all, they say the japanese version which is just everybody get pokemon.
    wolf jani likes this.
  4. TsengHyena

    TsengHyena Well-Known Member

    Yes. The only time I would entertain an alternative would be if we got a really strict cycle-in, cycle-out rotation with no pokemon being left out for more than one game, as well as each game being able to connect for online battles with future games.
    wolf jani likes this.
  5. Redstar45

    Redstar45 Well-Known Member

    It is similar though.
  6. 1rkhachatryan

    1rkhachatryan Call me Robert guys

    Which is what we might be getting for all you know. Again, far too soon to be freaking out like this when we don't know any details.

    It actually isn't. In Japan, the slogan is about everybody going out and playing and interacting with pokemon whether that is through pokemon go, watching the anime, collecting the cards, or playing the games. The end goal is just to enjoy pokemon which is what it should have been in the US from the start as well.
    Sliverbaer and wolf jani like this.
  7. Sceptile Leaf Blade

    Sceptile Leaf Blade Nighttime Guardian

    This stuff has already been debunked a while ago. Also, the separate models was something that was already gone over. That would only be a problem if storage space was a limiting factor for Sword and Shield, and nobody ever claimed it was.
    Pokemon Fan and wolf jani like this.
  8. TsengHyena

    TsengHyena Well-Known Member

    Its not freaking out to discuss it. Once information comes out that settles people's concerns then it'll die down.

    Actually, if you go to the Pokemon Twitter page, to this day it says 'Catching Them All'
  9. MadaMada

    MadaMada Well-Known Member

    imho, I guess could have added all the Pokemon for Sword and Shield like many have said. There is no hardware limitations, and they have the 3D Models. If it was a Dynamax issue, they could have scrapped Dynamax, and though of another gimmicks. I mean Megas are nice, everyone loves Megas.

    But I think this is part of their plan of conditioning the fans to adapt to the new policy. My entire point is you can't keep on adding to your inventory without removing some inventory. This is literally impossible in all cases in life. Whenever they start to do this, they will inevitably face this backlash, so why not get over with it now? When Gen 10, Gen 11, Gen 12 comes... are fans going to expect GameFreak to be able to add in all Pokemon again? I am guessing YES, we all want them to keep adding without reducing. But that is ridiculous... any logical person can deduct this is ridiculous.

    Imagine, in the year 2050, are we going to stick to our principals and demand gamefreak to have backwards compatibility back to 2001? Is it possible? Yes. But is it a good idea? The entire statement just looks dumb to me. Pokemon Bank probably aren't going to survive another 10 years.

    What about the reusable models you say? We dunno what lies in the future, and how long these "reusable" models can be "reused" and supported. There will come a time, probably in the next 15 years, they will need to remodel everything again... and that is a lot of effort.... sure hire people, take more time, but can they indefinitely continue this solution? it will break a tipping point that would break someday...
  10. JW1004

    JW1004 Well-Known Member

    I would have that expectation.With the current developments, I guess we shouldn't have any expectations though. But yeah in all seriousness, I also had the expectation for Sword and Shield. I expect every core game to atleast have all Pokémon programmed in or atleast have the oppertunity to DLC or buy patches to have them programmed in if they indeed had time limit and never done it before. I have done playthroughs with various Pokémon in every gen, so I can adapt to the limitations but at a certain point you have been through all the potential options you enjoy. Ruby and Sapphire also had a limited roster, but was expanded with Colloseum, XD, Fire red and Leaf Green and all Pokémon were be able to be traded to each game, even if they were not available in those games. Sun, Moon, Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon also only had no official National dex, only if you connected it to Bank, but still all Mon were programmed in and if you played the Virtual Console or sent over your mon from past games through Bank, you still could play with them.

    My personal problem is not even the limited roster itself, but more that it feels a bit stupid at this point in time? That is why I have that expectation that every mon will be programmed in aswell. Every new console gives more oppertunities and more space, but Pokémon as franchise have been less than innovative and for all I know also never used the full capacity or potential of the consoles they were featured on. I get development costs time and energy and they probably had problems with time restrictions etc. But this is more a descision that would have made sense in Generation 5. We had a complete NEW set of monsters, with every other gen excluded. Every gen forward could have been an altered roster and we basically already would have been used to it by now.

    It just feels odd to me personally that Gen 8 is the point they start these limited rosters, especially since it is the follow up generation to the generation where we could sent over Pokémon from every single game from Red/Blue/Yellow to Omega Ruby and Aplha Sapphire. Gamefreak has made us so used to be able to have everything ready and together that this descisions gives competitive players, players like me who do various playthroughs etc. a sort of panick attack since we are for the first time ever limited, since they basically already said that this is the new policy for the future aswell, so no game for all we know will ever have al Pokémon programmed into them.

    It is is what it is at this point, and I keep being curious to see what more will be revealed up until the games will be released. I just wish the descision itself woulf have had a little more sense and a little more information. It;s like they dropped a bomb and just left (for now)
  11. Orphalesion

    Orphalesion Well-Known Member

    And people who accuse those who still want to buy the game of being mindless whales or fanbois who just slurp up everything with the Pokemon name on it are better....how exactly?

    Look, I understand where you are coming from and I agree with a lot of the criticism and with a lot of your statements. Look in the thread I've said similar things to some of them myself (their excuses being ridiculous, for example, or that their management seems to be wonky)
    But... again, ad much as I agree with you, the Dex issue doesn't affect my affect me or my enjoyment of the game, at all. So denying myself Sword or Shield just because it affects other people in some illusory, and doomed to fail, Grass-Roots movement to stick it to "the (Masuda)man", is ridiculous to me.
    If they do something that makes me dislike the games strongly enough (such as turning them into MMOs or implementing a Real Time Battle System) then I will stop buying the games, but not before.

    Yeah you're in the rights of saying that if this game is succesful GF might not see any reason to change, but grouping everybody who does buy them as mindless consumer drones is neither okay, nor will it win anybody over to your side.
    wolf jani likes this.
  12. 1rkhachatryan

    1rkhachatryan Call me Robert guys

    Actually they said they wanted to first implement it in sun and moon but decided to wait until the home console so this isn't just a mic drop and walk away, they've been considering this option for awhile now. Also there will be more info about the games in like two weeks so they didn't just walk away and ignore the backlash. They're obviously gonna talk about it at some point.
    wolf jani likes this.
  13. JW1004

    JW1004 Well-Known Member

    Interesting, curious to hear what they have to say at that point.
    wolf jani likes this.
  14. Orphalesion

    Orphalesion Well-Known Member

    But why even implement it now?
    If you look at the interview:

    It sounds a lot like it wouldn't have been necessary now, but they are doing it because they believe it will be necessary in the future and they think the first SWITCH game is a good starting point of this new policy.
    If we take that by face value, they are implementing this waaaaaaaay before it's necessary, as some sort of precaution and that's just weird...
  15. 1rkhachatryan

    1rkhachatryan Call me Robert guys

    Regardless of when they implement this, it was always gonna create this same backlash so better to get it out of the way now so there isn't an uproar when the next gen comes then to keep putting it off.

    I sort of just had a thought and it made me feel like they are going the right route with this. If we think of each region as a place it in the real world, it actually makes perfect sense why the limit would be there. Think about it, the variety of animals and plants vary greatly between the UK, America, and Japan so it actually makes perfect sense to make each game feel like their own special place with their own pokemon found. If every single country and region had the same exact pokemon, it would be boring frankly and show a lack of diversity. Why travel at all if I can get all the same things right here at at home.
    wolf jani likes this.
  16. TsengHyena

    TsengHyena Well-Known Member

    They've been doing that with Regional Dexes for a while now; the National Dex doesn't change whats found in the game. Another way to look at this, is you can import reptiles found in foriegn countries and still raise them as pets normally. You don't need to actually have them catchable in game, just the data.

    Though, the idea of having a second Core Game series, that releases with bigger space between each release (leaving the normal yearly game alone); but continuously adds all the pokemon of each gen to it, without leaving out any could be good.
  17. Endless

    Endless Sun God ☉

    It does make sense to limit the catchable Pokémon in the game as some would obviously not be native to the region, and that has pretty much always been the case. If you would like to put more emphasis on that aspect you could implement trading/transfer bans on foreign Pokémon until you beat the main story, as has also been done previously in some cases.
    That is pretty different from them not being transferable at all though, and the actual in-universe reason given is that Galar is too cold for some Pokémon. That explanation doesn't really work unless at least every Ice Pokémon is transferable and only the most tropical ones aren't.
    Grey Wind likes this.
  18. 1rkhachatryan

    1rkhachatryan Call me Robert guys

    I guess what I'm saying is that to me it makes sense to limit the pokemon found in the games even though transferring as it'll sort of force players to play the new games fully and adapt to each games and regions specific rules instead of just a rushing through to get to all your old pokemon sort of thing.

    Literally every other game series in the world does this same thing where certain characters are only in certain games which is what makes those games so much more special then if you have a free for all in every game. Personally I think if they had done this sooner, it would have been better as I never liked the idea of a national dex much to begin with.
    wolf jani likes this.
  19. TsengHyena

    TsengHyena Well-Known Member

    Why does it seem impossible to not play the game on its own merits first and then use your transfered favourites?
  20. RileyXY1

    RileyXY1 Young Battle Trainer

    Some people have attachments to Pokemon that they've used in earlier games.

Share This Page