• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

What exactly is the cause of the frequent negativity in the Pokémon fandom?

Status
Not open for further replies.

WaterTypeStarter

Well-Known Member
Is it that the fandom is toxic? That the developers are not putting effort? Or is it simply that the fandom and the developers have a different vision for the franchise? It does seem to be the third one. The developers' vision for the franchise often may not align with the majority of the fandom, hence the frequent backlash.
 

Vini310

Well-Known Member
It's the third one, and it gets worse:
- Since Pokémon's fandom is massive, it has different fans who want different things, and what fan A wants may be the exact opposite of what fan B wants. So every time Game Freak decides to cater to a specific side of the fanbase, the side who didn't get catered to gets mad.
- And then there are the Small Refence Pools: Most Pokémon fans only played Pokémon and don't realize that a huge portion of the things they hate about Pokémon nowadays... have been the standard in Mongame development since at least 1999, if not even before that.
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
There is a definite lack of effort in the games. Or perhaps it's more accurate to say that the effort has shifted away from the content fans liked about the older games and to the higher quality graphics that demand much more time and effort than the days when Pokemon games were entirely 2D pixel art. Large scale sidequests like Contests, Secret Bases, the Battle Frontier, etc. have been replaced by quick and cheap minigames and multiple other beloved features have gotten the axe most likely because of insufficient time and money to actually work on them.

- Since Pokémon's fandom is massive, it has different fans who want different things, and what fan A wants may be the exact opposite of what fan B wants. So every time Game Freak decides to cater to a specific side of the fanbase, the side who didn't get catered to gets mad.

I'm seeing very few explicit contradictions from the fanbase, it's been more of Fan A wants some feature and Fan B just doesn't care about that feature and ignores it. In that case, Fan B isn't really displeased if they include what Fan A wants and if they just include it both sides will still be happy with the end product. Including a large variety of content is the best way to please as much of the fanbase as possible, then there's something for everyone in the game and only a handful of fans (likely ones that are nitpicky about what they want out of a certain feature) go home unhappy.

- And then there are the Small Refence Pools: Most Pokémon fans only played Pokémon and don't realize that a huge portion of the things they hate about Pokémon nowadays... have been the standard in Mongame development since at least 1999, if not even before that.

Just because it's been a standard doesn't mean it's good or that it can't be improved, and I cannot think of anything off the top of my head that has to be the way it is. Have any examples?
 

Vini310

Well-Known Member
Just because it's been a standard doesn't mean it's good or that it can't be improved, and I cannot think of anything off the top of my head that has to be the way it is. Have any examples?
OH my Arceus, this will take a long time to write. My main points will be:
- Graphics?
- Lack of of post-game?
- Removing features/replacing them with worse alternatives?
- Roster/Dexit?
- Mandatory Exp. Share?
Not exactly in this order.
See you (and this thread) in 1-5 weeks... Screw that Gen 2 and HGSS review, THIS is going to be my first written essay...
 
Last edited:

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator
I'm leaving this open... but it will be watched closely. If it devolves into arguing, it will be locked. No questions asked.

Don't worry... things are ok now. It's just that these kinds of threads have had it happen before. So it's better to cut it off at the pass.
 
Last edited:

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator

I do that when the OP is trying to stir things up. This one isn't. But... if things even hint at it... it'll be locked.

Also... just a general comment to people... don't mini mod/tell mods how to do their jobs. That's frowned upon here.
 
Last edited:

Leonhart

Imagineer
Is it that the fandom is toxic? That the developers are not putting effort? Or is it simply that the fandom and the developers have a different vision for the franchise? It does seem to be the third one. The developers' vision for the franchise often may not align with the majority of the fandom, hence the frequent backlash.
It's a combination of all three I suppose [although I personally wouldn't use the term "toxic" to describe disgruntled fans]. The third option is particularly evident in recent years, however: Nintendo and/or Game Freak seemed to be stuck in a rut where they were doing whatever they wanted and not listening to what some of the fans wanted, although this has been remedied a tiny bit with the upcoming Arceus game, which includes open world gameplay that so many fans were yearning for.
 

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator
But one person's garbage is another person's game that they like. I view it as subjective to be honest. But I do wish that the more recent games had more to them. Last one that felt that way to me was Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire. Sword and Shield are ok... but they're lacking by comparison.

My biggest issue is that companies aren't letting games have enough time to be completed before being released for people to buy. This isn't limited to just Pokemon.
 
Last edited:

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator
I’m not talking about the entertainment factor but the quality of these games. You might enjoy them for what they are, but you can’t deny that they are low effort cashgrabs.

I agree to a point on it. They also are sticking with the same production model. That isn't helping them. Releasing the games like they have with more complex elements isn't working in their favor.

They needed more time in the oven. No excuses on it. So it's on Game Freak for a lot of it. It's been too long since the games had more to them.
 

Vini310

Well-Known Member
I’m not talking about the entertainment factor but the quality of these games. You might enjoy them for what they are, but you can’t deny that they are low effort cashgrabs.
"Low effort cashgrabs"?
Are we talking about Gen 2 and HGSS? Because they're the only ones that fir this definition: between most of the new Pokémon being locked behind post-game or being useless, the Kanto postgame feeling like filler, the horrendous level curve and HGSS refusing to fix these problems in favor of superficial stuff (Pokéwalker, Pokéathlon, GB Sounds, Battle Frontier), Johto puts quantity over quality.
And THIS is the game that Pokémon fans call one of the best in the series!? Maybe Pokémon was never good after all, if HGSS is what the fandom calls the best.

Even the definition of quality is subjective.
They needed more time in the oven. No excuses on it. So it's on Game Freak for a lot of it. It's been too long since the games had more to them.
What really matters when developing something isn't the time or budget in itself, but what the team does with that time and budget. Pokémon Red and Green were developed in six years and still turned out to be pretty buggy games with lots of design oversights (the Japanese Red and Green is more buggy than the international versions).
And then there's Cyberpunk 2077...
 
Last edited:

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
I agree to a point on it. They also are sticking with the same production model. That isn't helping them. Releasing the games like they have with more complex elements isn't working in their favor.

They needed more time in the oven. No excuses on it. So it's on Game Freak for a lot of it. It's been too long since the games had more to them.

It's probably less Game Freak (at best maybe Masuda) and more TPC. Game Freak likely does not have control over the budgets and release dates, it's probably set by some corporate executive in Pokemon's braintrust that knows nothing about how video games are actually made and is just setting them that way to maximize their bank accounts over making an actual quality game. This is honestly a much larger problem than Pokemon or even video games, this kind of business management has hurt a lot of aspects of society and there's a larger political/socioeconomic argument to be made here, but without derailing the thread with political arguments that are off topic Pokemon definitely seems to be a casualty of this style of business. You can feel it with how minimalist the recent games have been compared to some of the past ones.

Unfortunately, I think the only thing that can realistically fix this outside of larger political/economic changes that may or may not happen is Nintendo stepping in. Nintendo is one of the few companies that doesn't let the business side of things get in the way of quality gaming experiences (and even then that's not entirely true across the board, see: the NSO Expansion Pack being more than twice as expensive as the basic plan and offering very little to justify it), so they're the most likely entity involved in the Pokemon games to step in and say "No, spend more time on the games, we don't want you harming the reputation of our games with cheap, low quality games".

"Low effort cashgrabs"?
Are we talking about Gen 2 and HGSS? Because they're the only ones that fir this definition: between most of the new Pokémon being locked behind post-game or being useless, the Kanto postgame feeling like filler, the horrendous level curve and HGSS refusing to fix these problems in favor of superficial stuff (Pokéwalker, Pokéathlon, GB Sounds, Battle Frontier), Johto puts quantity over quality.
And THIS is the game that Pokémon fans call one of the best in the series!? Maybe Pokémon was never good after all, if HGSS is what the fandom calls the best.

While there were a few things they could've done better (the levels of some of the Kanto trainers could be bumped up and Red is probably a bit too high), most of Johto's issues with the level curve weren't fixable, it's inherent to the two region system.

Also they did improve the selection of main game Pokemon slightly in HGSS with the Safari Zone and a few species added to Rt. 47/48. Misdreavus, Diglett, Clefairy, Mr. Mime, Murkrow, Grimer, Kangaskhan, Larvitar, and Cubone are added to the main game as a result of these additions.

I would definitely say that there's some issues that aren't really fixed (in fact I would say that for every region), but most of HGSS' issues were either baked into its design, would require drastic overhauls that they've refused to do in any remake thus far (such as expanding the Johto Dex with new families from newer generations, completely overhauling the design for the whole region and individual areas, or dropping Kanto and making a game that only takes place in Johto), or weren't really done or possible at the time it was made (new Pokemon added to the games, regional variants, burst mechanics like Megas, removal of HMs, etc.). Meanwhile, there are very few games that add as much "superficial stuff" as HGSS added to GSC, and several of those other games also similarly receive high praise (other examples include Emerald, Platinum, and BW2).

Perhaps if they decide to make a Legends Celebi or a GSC2 or something we could see a true improvement for Johto, but within the scope of what a remake can and typically does improve, HGSS was about as modern and polished as you could get in a 4th gen remake. I can't say the same for the likes of FRLG, ORAS, LGPE, or BDSP.
 

Ophie

Salingerian Phony
What really matters when developing something isn't the time or budget in itself, but what the team does with that time and budget. Pokémon Red and Green were developed in six years and still turned out to be pretty buggy games with lots of design oversights (the Japanese Red and Green is more buggy than the international versions).
And then there's Cyberpunk 2077...
Also Sonic Forces, which took four years in development. A breakdown of it, however, indicates long-term planning, as three of those years were made building the engine for the game while approximately 9 months was made for making the game, which explains why it feels incomplete and the story reading like a first or second draft. For comparison, the only Nintendo project known to have a development cycle of several months was The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, which was, of course, achieved by reusing assets from Ocarina of Time and making a smaller world in Termina than Hyrule.

Pokémon Red/Blue/Green/Yellow came out as it was because it was made mostly by a small team from what would've been an indie studio at the time. (Game Freak is arguably still an indie studio now, albeit in the same category as Mojang and Toby Fox Productions due to having one breakout cultural phenomenon hit.) They didn't have the technical skill or manpower to make out something comparable to a triple-A production at the time. The production cycle mirrored that of other indie games today. Freedom Planet 2 is now at roughly 7 years in development, for instance, and it'll be 8 years when it's finally released in 2022.

It's probably less Game Freak (at best maybe Masuda) and more TPC. Game Freak likely does not have control over the budgets and release dates, it's probably set by some corporate executive in Pokemon's braintrust that knows nothing about how video games are actually made and is just setting them that way to maximize their bank accounts over making an actual quality game. This is honestly a much larger problem than Pokemon or even video games, this kind of business management has hurt a lot of aspects of society and there's a larger political/socioeconomic argument to be made here, but without derailing the thread with political arguments that are off topic Pokemon definitely seems to be a casualty of this style of business. You can feel it with how minimalist the recent games have been compared to some of the past ones.

Unfortunately, I think the only thing that can realistically fix this outside of larger political/economic changes that may or may not happen is Nintendo stepping in. Nintendo is one of the few companies that doesn't let the business side of things get in the way of quality gaming experiences (and even then that's not entirely true across the board, see: the NSO Expansion Pack being more than twice as expensive as the basic plan and offering very little to justify it), so they're the most likely entity involved in the Pokemon games to step in and say "No, spend more time on the games, we don't want you harming the reputation of our games with cheap, low quality games".
I want to point out that many Nintendo fans suspect SEGA is the reason behind NSO Expansion's jump in price (and there have been statements from SEGA to back it up, though I forget where I found it). SEGA refused to put games onto the Wii U's Virtual Console as they were dissatisfied with the money coming in from the Wii's Virtual Console; they wanted the prices to be higher on the Wii U but Nintendo refused, so they chose to avoid it entirely.

Not only would it make sense then for SEGA to ask for exorbitant amounts of money to put their games onto the Switch's Nintendo Switch Online service, but SEGA is a company that has been using the business model as you've described for far longer than The Pokémon Company has, as is evident in the Sonic franchise's many pitfalls due to their near absolute refusal to delay a game (the only known instance is the Sonic Lost World which may have had Nintendo's influence) and the "lock-on technology" used for Sonic 3 & Knuckles (the file size of Sonic 3 and Sonic & Knuckles combined could have fit into a cartridge of theirs, but because Sonic 3 was running behind schedule, they released whatever was completed as Sonic 3 with a minimalistic ending, then released the rest of it the following year as Sonic & Knuckles).

I'm seeing very few explicit contradictions from the fanbase, it's been more of Fan A wants some feature and Fan B just doesn't care about that feature and ignores it. In that case, Fan B isn't really displeased if they include what Fan A wants and if they just include it both sides will still be happy with the end product. Including a large variety of content is the best way to please as much of the fanbase as possible, then there's something for everyone in the game and only a handful of fans (likely ones that are nitpicky about what they want out of a certain feature) go home unhappy.
I think some of it is and some of it isn't. The Battle Frontier is an example as you described: fans who don't care about the Battle Frontier won't care that it's there, and they'll just ignore it. Pokémon Contests too except where required to proceed.

Dynamax and Gigantamax, however, is not. The people who don't want Dynamax and Gigantamax are not happy it's in Sword and Shield at all; some have refused to play them solely for that reason (and led up to Smogon's controversial Dynamax and Gigantamax ban, though my thoughts on that would belong elsewhere). On the other hand, now that Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl have released without them, you're seeing the people who insist Dynamax and Gigantamax should've been in it. This divide with this mechanc has also brought out of the woodwork those who disliked Mega Evolution in Generations VI and VII, who had kept quiet during then because the fans happy about them had drowned them out.
 

TwilightBlade

Well-Known Member
I can't speak for everyone but I've been frustrated with Nintendo's and Gamefreak's laziness in the past few years. I say laziness because they've been very uninterested in giving us quality post game content starting in Gen 6. Then they gave us the Let's Go games which barely added anything new and left you stuck with the original 151 Pokemon and a few regional variants and the Meltan line. Those games were so boring because of that plus the lack of meaningful post game content like I said before. Shield and Sword were better because at least there was downloadable content but even then it sucks that it was basically a pay to play kind of deal. :(
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
I want to point out that many Nintendo fans suspect SEGA is the reason behind NSO Expansion's jump in price (and there have been statements from SEGA to back it up, though I forget where I found it). SEGA refused to put games onto the Wii U's Virtual Console as they were dissatisfied with the money coming in from the Wii's Virtual Console; they wanted the prices to be higher on the Wii U but Nintendo refused, so they chose to avoid it entirely.

Not only would it make sense then for SEGA to ask for exorbitant amounts of money to put their games onto the Switch's Nintendo Switch Online service, but SEGA is a company that has been using the business model as you've described for far longer than The Pokémon Company has, as is evident in the Sonic franchise's many pitfalls due to their near absolute refusal to delay a game (the only known instance is the Sonic Lost World which may have had Nintendo's influence) and the "lock-on technology" used for Sonic 3 & Knuckles (the file size of Sonic 3 and Sonic & Knuckles combined could have fit into a cartridge of theirs, but because Sonic 3 was running behind schedule, they released whatever was completed as Sonic 3 with a minimalistic ending, then released the rest of it the following year as Sonic & Knuckles).

Who said Nintendo had to include SEGA Genesis in the NSO Expansion? I don't remember anyone clamoring for Genesis games on NSO. If that was true, they could've instead chosen to offer N64 and GB games and cut the price.

I think some of it is and some of it isn't. The Battle Frontier is an example as you described: fans who don't care about the Battle Frontier won't care that it's there, and they'll just ignore it. Pokémon Contests too except where required to proceed.

Dynamax and Gigantamax, however, is not. The people who don't want Dynamax and Gigantamax are not happy it's in Sword and Shield at all; some have refused to play them solely for that reason (and led up to Smogon's controversial Dynamax and Gigantamax ban, though my thoughts on that would belong elsewhere). On the other hand, now that Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl have released without them, you're seeing the people who insist Dynamax and Gigantamax should've been in it. This divide with this mechanc has also brought out of the woodwork those who disliked Mega Evolution in Generations VI and VII, who had kept quiet during then because the fans happy about them had drowned them out.

Burst mechanics are pretty much the only mechanic I can think of that's like that, where different fans want different things and there's just no reconciling it. Some fans want Megas. Some fans want Z-Moves (I haven't heard of anyone wanting Z-Moves in particular, but surely someone must). Some fans don't want any burst mechanics whatsoever. You can only make one of those factions happy at a time. Other than that though, most of the complaints I've seen have either been on the difficulty, which can simply be reconciled by having optional mechanics to make the game easier/harder to suit each players preferences, or not having enough extra content, which the people that don't want that kind of content can ignore, and that all falls more along the lines of the former where the people that don't want it won't really care.
 

Ophie

Salingerian Phony
Who said Nintendo had to include SEGA Genesis in the NSO Expansion? I don't remember anyone clamoring for Genesis games on NSO. If that was true, they could've instead chosen to offer N64 and GB games and cut the price.



Burst mechanics are pretty much the only mechanic I can think of that's like that, where different fans want different things and there's just no reconciling it. Some fans want Megas. Some fans want Z-Moves (I haven't heard of anyone wanting Z-Moves in particular, but surely someone must). Some fans don't want any burst mechanics whatsoever. You can only make one of those factions happy at a time. Other than that though, most of the complaints I've seen have either been on the difficulty, which can simply be reconciled by having optional mechanics to make the game easier/harder to suit each players preferences, or not having enough extra content, which the people that don't want that kind of content can ignore, and that all falls more along the lines of the former where the people that don't want it won't really care.
Regarding SEGA's games, I think that came from complaints that they were absent from the Wii U's Virtual Console whereas all of the other participating companies were there. I think this is a misstep on Nintendo's part to placate SEGA (and I've been a longtime fan of both companies), as Nintendo's the one in the driver's seat. Personally, the correct decision would be to not agree to their terms until they're willing to compromise (unless this WAS a compromise and their asking price was even higher, which I wouldn't put past SEGA's people to attempt, if you ask me). That being said, this is an optional service, so I think this was testing the waters to see if people were up for a price that high. The PlayStation Network and Xbox Live Arcade are already $60 for a year of their basic coverage though.

As for mutually exclusive things fans want out of Pokémon, another is the focus on stories. Some play it primarily to be part of a story, and some play it primarily to make a team of creatures to battle with. Some want to explore a region, and some want to get to the end ASAP to get the resouces to make competitive teams. People complained there was too much story in the Unova games, so it was dialed back for Kalos. Then, people complained the characters were flat and uninteresting and there was too much focus on the competitive aspects, so the story became the forefront in the Alola games. Galar being light on the story is probably this pattern continuing, with people who didn't care for Lillie, Hau, the Trial Captains, or anyone and wanted to get back to playing. Arguably, one way to meet them in the middle is to have a story-focused game with skippable cutscenes, though even this may lead to arguments I see among fighting game fans (and Monster Hunter fans in regards to the Monster Hunter Stories sub-series) in which people who don't care much for the story complain that development time and resources were spent making a story that could've been used to refine the core gameplay.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top