The point I am making is that people will always find an excuse to blame something for something else they like not being in the game.
Sure, some people do that. I'd guess they are the minority but I don't know either way. All I know is where I'm personally coming from so I'm speaking specifically about myself here. I don't like dynamaxing, I don't like pokemon, megas and z-moves getting cut and I think the animations could be much better. I also didn't like the cover legendaries. Of all of these issues, the only one I feel strongly enough to actually not buy the games is the cut. That doesn't mean I support Dynamaxing or the current animations, it just means I would be willing to live with them if they announced tomorrow they are patching the rest of the pokemon in.
If the cuts didn't happen I wouldn't have even bothered to go out criticizing dynamaxing or the animations because I didn't care that much, but I still thought they weren't good changes. Now that I am out here talking about the cut of course I'm going to bring up my other issues with the game, especially since Masuda gave "high quality animations" as one of the reasons for the cut. That doesn't mean I'm "scapegoating" other issues to blame GF.
If you look at my previous posts, you can see that there are changes I like about the games and that I was perfectly willing to give GF credit for those: The wild area, the large stadium-like gyms and the co-op raids all look great.
I'm so confused how making pretty much every pokemon viable is a lazy gimmick. With Dynamaxing, every pokemon in truly viable in raids and gyms, not just a couple of them. Plus it doesn't have the setback of having to wait until you have the proper z move to make some moves and pokemon useful. Every pokemon gets a short burst of power, that's the best type of power up. Plus unlike z move and mega evolution, it doesn't just turn your pokemon into 1 hit ko machines so there's still strategy needed.
No, dynamaxing does nothing to make every pokemon viable. If Charizard is viable, then Dynamax Charizard is gonna be viable. If Stantler is not viable, the Dynamax Stantler is not gonna be viable. Giving the same boost to every pokemon means that the boosted strong pokemon are still gonna be stronger than the boosted weak pokemon. Z-moves have the same issue. A Ho-oh using a fire Z-move is gonna be stronger than a vulpix using a fire Z-move.
Mega evolutions on the other hand were specific boosts to specific pokemon, often designed based on the pokemon's strengths and weaknesses specifically to make said pokemon stronger. Now of course it was given to pokemon that didn't need it like Rayquaza for the "wow" factor, but it was also given to pokemon like Beedril which then became viable.
So dynamaxing is a lazy gimmick not only from the designing point of view (you just enlarge the models), but also the balancing point of view (the gaps between pokemon remain unchanged). So just like the "high quality animations", their "balancing" excuse is also looking shady if they are taking Megas out and replacing them with dynamaxing.
It really isn't though, that's literally what the anime and the games are doing in each region. The national dex was never made the focal point, there was never a complete the national dex to beat this game, it was always on the back burner and optional.
I could turn this back on you and say that Pokemon Origins is more closely based on the games than the main anime and in Pokemon Origins Red is trying to complete the pokedex.