Is that so?
Well, if the speculation is right and they are trying to cater casual fans who play mobile games then i guess i am part of their intended demographic aswell. And, despite being a fairly casual gamer, i still feel like these game feel somewhat lacking :/
If anything, you are probably more of a hardcore fan than i am and you probably know more about bronies than i do lol
Even if so, that would be XY's problem not LGPE's.Worst part about these games is that Virdian Forest is the exact same map as Sanatalune Forest. Talk about laziness smh
Obviously a joke but okEven if so, that would be XY's problem not LGPE's.
There is no sudden change of heart. I'm just not letting this entire debate over these games seem like a big deal (i.e what most of the fandom is doing) but letting my personal gripe with these games be how I look at them.
Yeah, Pokémon Go isn't really that old. It was released in 2016, 2 years ago.
So they were rather quick with the development compared to other games like XY which took them 4 years to develop i think.
If people really want a game on the level of BotW or Mario Odyssey, then they better get used to having 4 to 3 years of no Pokemon games so GF (their whole team) could focus their attention on making one game, but (from my personal experience) there is push back from fans saying they don't like having huge yearly gaps between Pokemon games.
And that's where you screw up.
You assume Let's GO began production after Pokémon GO's release, because like most people, you don't actually know - or care - what it takes to make a video game, especially a Pokémon game.
Masuda said himselfand I'm tired of having to explain thisthat it takes roughly three to four years to develop a Pokémon game: 1-2 for groundwork and 2 for programming. Mind you, he mentioned this back in 2010, so you can imagine how accurate it is now with a new engine.
If it wasn't blatantly obvious, Pokémon games are often made simultaneously. How else do you think we've gotten a new game every year for the last ten years? Nothing was rushed. This was carefully planned.
Obviously, they began Let's GO's groundwork in late 2014, around the time they began Sun and Moon's programming. This would also be the same time Niantic began developing Pokémon GO. They allowed GO to finish development first, to capture the gist of its mechanics, and then appropriated accordingly. Sun and Moon was used as a toolbox/sandbox for Let's GO, hence the walking and running animations. After Sun and Moon's development, they took the basic animations from that, combined it with the graphics and mechanics of GO, put a little pixie dust on it, and began programming for Let's GO.
In short, this may not be what you wanted, but it was definitely carefully planned.
What reason would Game Freak have to make a main series game based off of a completely random (and mostly unremarkable) spin-off game? Planning to tie in with Go before its release would be like planning to tie in with a Mystery Dungeon game, or Pokken. There's no way anyone at Game Freak had even conceived of Let's Go before Go came out.
On any other Pokémon game I would agree with you, but Let's Go is almost certainly a special exception. Pokémon Go getting as popular as it did was essentially a mistake. No one predicted it, no one possibly could have. Niantic clearly didn't, as the game was so overwhelmed with players that it broken more often than not for the first month or two. Pokémon Go became an over-night phenomenon, and that's almost certainly the reason why Let's Go was made.
Given Game Freak's involvement with GO and the timing of all the respective elements, it is absolutely feasible that GO and LGP/E were conceived as separate but parallel tracks at the same time, with LGP/E being kept under wraps. We can't prove that, of course, but it would be foolish to claim it absolutely couldn't have happened.
And given that we know Game Freak had Switch dev kits many years ago, it's entirely feasible that Game Freak had a working Pokémon engine and assets on the Switch at the time of GO's announcement and release - a shell that hadn't been filled in, of sorts - and GO's overnight success informed much of the direction in which that unformed clay would be molded.
I am going to have to look for the sources, but early on following Pokémon GO's announcement in late 2015, Masuda stated in interviews that he had great interest in designing a Pokémon game that ties in with GO. This is why the reveal the Let's GO did not surprise me all that much; while I simply expected Gen 8 to have transferable capabilities with Pokémon GO, I had already known Masuda was planning something.
To correct myself from earlier, I will say I believe the groundwork for a Let's GO-esque game began in late 2014, and became Let's GO by mid 2016, when programming began.
For real, I do need to find these articles, because I am shocked so few people know that Let's GO - or a game of that design, at least - was predetermined. Never for a second did I ever think any of its development was due to Pokémon GO's popularity. Like you said, no one expected it to blow up.
EDIT: While it's not from 2015, or 2016, I did find this article (06/03/2018) that explains it, and it appear you and I are both correct.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...-borrowing-from-pokemon-go-and-lets-gos-story
Masuda confirms that both the 2019 title and Let's GO have been in development for the same amount of time. However, most of Let's GO features is due to Pokémon GO's success. While the game wasn't rushed, it did indeed take a massive turn in development after GO blew up.
Thus, I will concede to you on that.
I feel like the people complaining about LGPE are like bronies. They're mad because the product isn't aimed at them, even though they're not the target demographic and not the majority audience.
Also, if LGPE aren't aimed at hardcore fans, then why does GameFreak still want them to buy the games?
Yes, there are faulty business practices in the gaming industry, but Let's GO isn't one of them. This is people being pissed because the game isn't what they wanted. They're accusing it of being low quality because it's not what they wanted.
You're not basing this on any proof of malpractice, but simply not being satisfied with their plan of action.
Yes, I do agree that Mew being exclusive to the PokéBall Plus is a load of crap, but I realized going forward that the price of the Plus is strict due to its production costs, and has nothing to do with Mew. It would cost the same regardless.
Nintendo Switch Online costing $20 - the lowest in the market right now - is not highway robbery because the service is spotty. That would imply they deliberately made their service spotty as a plan to trick gamers out of money, and that's just ridiculous. As for the cloud save, that is a decision made by Nintendo to prevent cheating (for which Pokémon is heavily notorious for). Take it or leave it.
Pokémon Bank has never been accused of having malpractice, so the fact that you're even trying it now is pure bulls**t.
Actually, no Pokémon game has gotten a 9/10 from accredited outlets since X & Y, and it only got one, from IGN. The mode rating is 8/10, with consistent criticism.
And for the record, the reason it appears that you're getting a 5-7 hour experience is because you won't put the bloody thing down. Way too often players would complete an entire run of Pokémon in 17 hours, immediately after getting it. The recommended playtime is 1 hour a day, for all games. If you would just pace yourself, put the thing down, and do something else with your life, you will get more out of it.
Besides the fact it's Kanto again, and yes, that can be a factored too. Do you think having several versions of a single "generation" is not a faulty business practice?
Also, it's ridiculous to charge any money at all for a spotty service. "Don't worry, this service is cheap but is not effective" is not going to win over anyone.
To advertise Let's Go for "casual audiences" but then say "on wifi battles, from a competitive perspective, is full of cheaters" to say that as an excuse to not have the cloud save feature is bulls**t.
Plus, gen 7 had a great security feature that has banned many people, but apparently that wasn't enough.
They just want you not to use cloud saves in favor of paying Pokemon Bank when they announce it.
Like how Pokemon GO players aren't allowed to transfer a free Mew. I'll "take it or leave it" when Nintendo does more questionable decisions and that is your answer.
I know I said earlier that I would stop talking about these games, but I just can't help it. There's at least one more thing I want to bring up in response to the apologists. Why does it make sense to make the target audience of LGPE casuals and kids when most Switch owners are adults and hardcore gamers?
I know I said earlier that I would stop talking about these games, but I just can't help it. There's at least one more thing I want to bring up in response to the apologists. Why does it make sense to make the target audience of LGPE casuals and kids when most Switch owners are adults and hardcore gamers?
Prof. Salty already covered this, but I really just have to ask: how exactly did you think that the kids this series has been aimed at since day one have been playing it? I can't speak for you, but I was playing this series for the better part of a decade before I was buying either the games or the consoles myself.
Did you think that the Switch's parental controls and Child Accounts were just pointless fluff features? They exist for a reason.