Why Does This Game Receive So Much Hate?

[Cassafrass1999]

Hmmm... interesting arguments everyone. I do have to say that certain Pokémon animations can be a bit jerky or awkward at times, the menus and such COULD be a little easier to navigate, and small stuff like that would be nice to have been made a little better. But overall the game serves what it was meant to do in the first place, and does a fairly well job with it. If we can just ignore the small things with this game, I think we could all (or at least some of us) like it much more. Plus, it is nice that it is compatible with SS as well as D/P/Plt. I am sure some games like PBR wouldn't be like that... but this is all just my personal opinion of course, so please don't bash me if you don't agree. Thank you.

 

[Zim Del Invasor]

I hated Battle Revolution because it didn't have a story mode in the same way that I hate Pokemon Red because it wouldn't let me play as Sonic the Hedgehog.

 

[Cassafrass1999]

I hated Battle Revolution because it didn't have a story mode in the same way that I hate Pokemon Red because it wouldn't let me play as Sonic the Hedgehog.

Haha, good point. XD

 

[golcarjack]

Mostly because it lacked the story/adventure aspect of ther gamecube games. Also you are pretty much forced to transfer, and if you have a decent lvl 100 team the game is way too easy. The wi fi is kind of slow and full of ragequitters.

 

[Toxicity]

Battle Revolution feels like Stadium, but where BR fails and Stadium succeeds is how you can just rip stadium out of the box and immediately play a match with your friend using whatever Pokemon you feel like. Then, when you feel like taking a break, you can try out the different mini-games. In comparison, it feels like you have to jump through a bunch of arbitrary hoops in BR.

 

[BCVM22]

Battle Revolution feels like Stadium, but where BR fails and Stadium succeeds is how you can just rip stadium out of the box and immediately play a match with your friend using whatever Pokemon you feel like.

But the eternal question remains: who would do this, and furthermore, who would complain about this? Who would buy a game that unabashedly and by its own admission exists for the essential sole purpose of battling your Pokémon on the big screen, and complain about the limited supply of rental Pokémon?

It is again and will continue to be like buying a console but no games and claiming you have nothing to play.

 

[Plus side down side]

I didn't hate it, but then again, you can't really call it a "new Pokemon game" it was a $50 battle simulator, and that's it. Other than dressing up your character, there weren't really any perks to owning it other than the pretty graphics. It was more or less just a Battle Frontier. Not saying this is necessarily bad, but there certainly could have been a lot more features to make the game have more longevity. As it stood, it was just kind of empty.

 

[The Federation]

Online play is where this game shined. You got to try silly teams of odd Pokemon, because the people who played were either doing the same or using their in-game teams. There was less of a hypercompetitive bent to it.

But people dropped out of games when they were about to lose like no other game I have ever played.

 

[tomatohater]

I thought this game was pretty easy IMHO. Also, it felt expensive for what is was, a lot of money for a pretty simple and easy game. The only decent bit was the online, but everyone decided to quit when they were about to lose (Which is a benefit of Gen VI making it count as a loss to you if you quit!)

 

[pikaskipper]

I love this game! I love the battling style! Before that, I just saw pokemon drop down from the screen! XD

 

[Celeb¡]

Have to say the hate isn't justified. I mean, sure the rentals were pretty confusing for me, but I should say it was a nice addition especially after a monotonous Colosseum. And they had Sinnoh Pokémon, so I liked it. I didn't really see anything wrong with the online games, that was a nice new feature to enjoy, quite unexpectedly.

 

[Cassafrass1999]

Nice opinions guys! I love seeing what everyone has to say about the subject...

 

[Bolt the Cat]

The box itself tells you outright that you'll have your best experience if you have a loaded Generation IV game to go with it. It's ridiculous that someone would buy this game - a game that exists for the sole purpose of allowing you to battle your hard-trained Pokémon as 3D models on your TV screen - without such a game to go with it and then complain I'M NOT HAVING FUN THIS GAME SUCKS! It's like buying a video game system but no games and then making the same complaint.

That people are complaining that the game "didn't have a story mode" is precisely what's meant by judging the game based on one's own personal, unfounded fantasies. Where is any possible logic in criticizing a game on the basis of something it not only doesn't have, but was never said, shown or suggested to have?

Forget what the game does or does not intend to do, the gameplay itself is just bad. You're paying $50 for a game that doesn't really have a lot of content in it (much less than the $35 main game that you'd play on your DS), and needs another game to make it work. It's DLC in a box. The complaints are justified in the sense that you're not getting what you pay for, it costs more than the main game but you get less game content for it. They don't have to do it exactly like Colosseum/XD, but it's not unreasonable to expect console games to be able to provide the same level of experience in terms of gameplay and storyline as the main games.

And anyone who says you didn't need a Generation I/II game to "fully enjoy" Stadium/Stadium 2 is kidding themselves. Unless you wish to commit the indignity that would be claiming that the minigames and using the rental Pokémon provides in the latter titles would somehow have been worth the price of admission on their own.

Again - that you need a stocked handheld game to fully enjoy PBR is not a negative nor is it something that was ever hidden or masked, no matter how much people still like to complain this is the case, seven years later.

Stadium and Stadium 2 are bad for the same reasons. PBR was just slightly worse because there was less to do in those games. But I agree, it's completely hypocritical to like Stadium/Stadium 2 and then hate PBR.

"Mushrooms", if we're really having this discussion, are a core element of the gameplay of a core Mario title. Minigames and a forgettable story mode are not core elements of a series of video games that have always existed for the purpose of letting you battle your Pokémon as 3D models on your television as opposed to sprites on a tiny handheld screen.

Catching Pokemon and exploring areas are also core elements of the gameplay, and those are missing from all console games except Colosseum and XD. Story also is part of the core experience in a way, but not exactly in the way that Colosseum/XD did it.

 

[BCVM22]

Forget what the game does or does not intend to do, the gameplay itself is just bad. You're paying $50 for a game that doesn't really have a lot of content in it (much less than the $35 main game that you'd play on your DS), and needs another game to make it work. It's DLC in a box. The complaints are justified in the sense that you're not getting what you pay for, it costs more than the main game but you get less game content for it. They don't have to do it exactly like Colosseum/XD, but it's not unreasonable to expect console games to be able to provide the same level of experience in terms of gameplay and storyline as the main games.

If you analyze the game and decide it's not value for the money for you, delightful, don't buy it, truly relevant issue that this is, some seven years later.

But you're fooling yourself if you think that's the reason for the countless ill-conceived and unfounded complaints.

Catching Pokemon and exploring areas are also core elements of the gameplay

Core elements of the gameplay in the core titles. This is not a core title. As I said, PBR is the most recent of a a series of video games that have always existed for the purpose of letting you battle your Pokémon as 3D models on your television as opposed to sprites on a tiny handheld screen.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

If you analyze the game and decide it's not value for the money for you, delightful, don't buy it, truly relevant issue that this is, some seven years later.

The game content has changed over the years, so no, it's still relevant. If you bought it 7 years ago or right this second, you'd still be getting significantly less game content than pretty much any main game in the series. In fact, once XY comes out it'd be even less acceptable because everything that could be done in PBR could be done in XY, and if they wanted to do another similar game, it could be done as DLC.

But you're fooling yourself if you think that's the reason for the countless ill-conceived and unfounded complaints.

To the contrary, it has everything to do with it. After Colosseum and XD gave us a taste of what a console RPG is like, going back to a battle sim style game like Battle Revolution is unsatisfying. Most of these people are probably just sick of battle sim games altogether.

 

[BCVM22]

The game content has changed over the years, so no, it's still relevant

No, a side title two generations and seven years defunct is the definition of irrelevant at this point. But go on.

significantly less game content than pretty much any main game in the series.

But this isn't a main game. So why is this a relevant statement?

In fact, once XY comes out it'd be even less acceptable because everything that could be done in PBR could be done in XY

Okay... and again, the key element here: seven years. Realize what you're arguing here. Why does it matter that a current core title does some things better than a seven-year-old side title?

After Colosseum and XD gave us a taste of what a console RPG is like

Stripped down, watered down, lacking in several elements key to the core title formula and ultimately completely forgettable? Because that's what Colosseum and XD were.

going back to a battle sim style game like Battle Revolution is unsatisfying.

Which, again is a separate matter entirely. If you feel PBR didn't have enough content for you, fine. But for the thousandth time, don't judge it on the basis of content it was never going to have, ever, at any point.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

But this isn't a main game. So why is this a relevant statement?

Because console games should realistically provide an experience greater than or equal to the handheld games, otherwise the $20 extra dollars I pay for it is a waste of money. Even if it's not a main game, it should be able to provide a greater experience in some way. If it's not a main game, fine, but it at least it needs to be a full, independent game with at least the same length and depth as one. Not a glorified add on that requires the main games for a lesser experience.

Okay... and again, the key element here: seven years. Realize what you're arguing here. Why does it matter that a current core title does some things better than a seven-year-old side title?

XY just took away the only advantage battle sims had over the main games, 3D graphics. Without that, any future battle sim game would be 100% pointless to make.

Stripped down, watered down, lacking in several elements key to the core title formula and ultimately completely forgettable? Because that's what Colosseum and XD were.

Still beats Stadium, Stadium 2, and Battle Revolution. It needs improvement, sure, but it's a good start.

 

[BCVM22]

Because console games should realistically provide an experience greater than or equal to the handheld games, otherwise the $20 extra dollars I pay for it is a waste of money. Even if it's not a main game, it should be able to provide a greater experience in some way. If it's not a main game, fine, but it at least it needs to be a full, independent game with at least the same length and depth as one. Not a glorified add on that requires the main games for a lesser experience.

"Should" and "needs" according to what? Is there a rulebook somewhere that states this? Why does it need to be completely independent of a core title, particularly given why this series of side titles exists in the first place?

XY just took away the only advantage battle sims had over the main games, 3D graphics. Without that, any future battle sim game would be 100% pointless to make.

And perhaps that's a major contributing factor in what future console titles we'll see, if any. But that doesn't make your comparison any better for what it is.

Still beats Stadium, Stadium 2, and Battle Revolution. It needs improvement, sure, but it's a good start.

And yet given the extent to which the games have been buried and forgotten by those in charge, clearly someone whose decisions carry more weight disagrees with you on the extent to which it was a "good start".

 

[Bolt the Cat]

"Should" and "needs" according to what? Is there a rulebook somewhere that states this? Why does it need to be completely independent of a core title, particularly given why this series of side titles exists in the first place?

It's a matter of value. Let's say you have two games which offer the same gameplay at the same price, but one has 1 hour's worth of content and the other has 10 hour's worth of content. It's almost completely indisputable which one is better, since game length is an objective measure of which game can provide better value. It's the same situation here, you can do much, much more in the main games or Colosseum/XD than you can in Stadium/Stadium 2/Battle Revolution so there's no reason to buy it. As for why it needs to be independent, it's because you have to shell out money for a DS and a game for it to make it work, which makes an already worthless game even less worth buying.

And yet given the extent to which the games have been buried and forgotten by those in charge, clearly someone whose decisions carry more weight disagrees with you on the extent to which it was a "good start".

Their decision to abandon Colosseum/XD style had nothing to do with whether or not the games were better, it was because they don't believe that the console games can provide the same level of communication as the handheld levels (which is a completely BS excuse, but whatever).

 

[alteredegoX]

My only issue with Revolution came down to a single stage in the 'story'. The Roulette stage. I enter and progress well with my well trained group, then come into this one, and every damn time I'm RNG'd a fail Minun(or something like that), and I wipe, cause the thing can't do sh**