[Megathread] Nintendo Switch

[jackofwind]

Gens 1 and 2 were quite difficult unless you knew where to farm the right Pokemon and at what time to do so.

Gen 1 is piss easy, what are you smoking? The hardest possible start in Gen 1 (not counting Yellow) is Charmander, and that's not even challenging. The Squirtle and Bulbasaur starts aren't even worth mentioning, they're a cakewalk.

[Jester Joe]

Bro... a wikipedia article (lol) saying that a few outlets had criticisms of the game is not proof that there was mixed reception of the game. I mean if we're going to use Wikipedia articles as sources then the Sword and Shield one seems much more negative than the Ruby and Sapphire one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3...ord_and_Shield.

It's not the 2000s anymore, wikipedia has cited all the info on what I linked.

It looks about on par to me, except Sw/Sh also has awards won. /shrug
not sure where you're getting "Much more negative".

Of course, there are aggregate sites like Metacritic who's whole goal is to gauge the reception of a title with both critic and user scores. If you're going to say that Ruby and Sapphire are the worst in the series, then you have to compare all the games, not just Sword and Shield. I think we both agree that the Sword and Shield user scores are inaccurate due to review bombing, but the scores for all the other Pokemon games have no evidence of review bombing.

As I said, I'm not a fan of going by user scores in general. Review bombing is the extreme example, but the phrase "everyone's a critic" comes to mind, in a more sarcastic way.

Also your point about them gutting features, sure that may be objective fact that they removed features. But the problem is the way you're using the facts. If you're using it to say, they removed these features, therefore the reception of the games were bad, then you need to prove it. One or two reviewers criticizing the games for removing the night cycle is not enough. This also ignores the fact that basically every game after Gen 3 removed stuff from the previous games, so you can't just choose to criticize Ruby and Sapphire for it and not criticize the other games.

Welcome to my point finally.

Or did you miss Val giving a huge list of "removed" features which was why I pointed out specifically R/S was the first to remove a ton of features? Either that, or you're genuinely missing my overarching point.

If you disagree with it being the worst, fine. You're entitled to feel that way. But the fact is that it did pretty lackluster even at the time, considering all it had to be compared to. And yet years later we have people calling it the "golden age".

The only valid comparison to be made is the fact that you can't transfer Pokemon to Ruby and Sapphire and you also can't transfer Pokemon to Sword and Shield, unless they already exist in the game. You handwaved it away as nostalgia, but nostalgia has nothing to do with it. What it is, is precedent. People generally get upset when you go against precedent in a way that doesn't benefit them. When Ruby and Sapphire came out, you were only able to transfer Pokemon from R/B/Y to G/S/C. One instance isn't enough to set a precedent. When Sword and Shield came out you were able to go from R/S/E to D/P/Pl to B/W and B2/W2 to X/Y to Sun/Moon. That is clearly a pattern. A pattern that they broke in Sword and Shield. Context is very important, always.

I didn't handwave anything by saying "nostalgia". You said this at the time-
"I think you're missing some very critical context here. Ruby and Sapphire are over 15 years old. There was far less precedent for what a Pokemon game was and Sword and Shield weren't preceded by games that people found disappointing in X and Y and Sun and Moon. Additionally, Pokemon Sword and Shield were going to be the first Pokemon games on a home console and that obviously comes with higher expectations."

What you did highlight there was saying that "people have been disappointed in the last few generations", which to me mostly comes off from people having nostalgia for the first few gens.

I would say this can be shown by critic review of X/Y being one of the highest for Pokemon, and even now past the games release after it was criticized, now people are up in arms about how good features in X/Y were. But people enjoy dismissing critics reviews while acting as if the user ones are better so not sure what good that would do.

At the very least, there's notable reason why R/S could be considered one of the weakest, just as people make the same argument for Sw/Sh. That's all I'm trying to draw attention to, that from what I see that R/S are the weakest entries objectively. Whether or not you agree in the end, the point still stands I feel that the argument at least could be made. And ultimately that's all I care for, that people can at least reflect on it while trying to minimize their bias for older generations.

[Darththeo]

• They removed Secret Bases

• They removed contests

• They removed follower Pokemon

• They removed Battle Frontier

• They removed the Safari Zone

• They removed the Underground

• They removed World Tournament

• They removed Game Corner

• They removed Soaring

• They removed Roaming Pokemon

• They removed Mega Evolutions

• They removed Z-Moves

• They removed being able to use any Pokemon

Half of these lists are one off. Games remove features all the time, it is hardly a trait unique to pokemon.

Game Corner removal is because of PEGI ratings, you really can't count that against Gamefreak. Especially now with it being a PEGI 18 rating.

[Shakzor]

Gen 1 is piss easy, what are you smoking? The hardest possible start in Gen 1 (not counting Yellow) is Charmander, and that's not even challenging. The Squirtle and Bulbasaur starts aren't even worth mentioning, they're a cakewalk.

Yeah, somehow people think that gen 1 and 2 were hard. They were inconvenient at most with possible situations like rival fight after a cave or something, but that's hardly "difficult", as walking back there means you'll either just use a repel or use potions before the re-fight and then steamroll the rival anyways. Somehow people pretend that going through a cave in gen 1 and 2 is like surviving a war or something, that you barely escape the thing alive with maybe an arm and leg only to get shot afterwards.

[Jester Joe]

Yeah, somehow people think that gen 1 and 2 were hard. They were inconvenient at most with possible situations like rival fight after a cave or something, but that's hardly "difficult", as walking back there means you'll either just use a repel or use potions before the re-fight and then steamroll the rival anyways. Somehow people pretend that going through a cave in gen 1 and 2 is like surviving a war or something, that you barely escape the thing alive with maybe an arm and leg only to get shot afterwards.

Gonna be honest, as a kid I barely even knew about repels. I probably didn't start using them until Diamond and Pearl honestly.

Can't say that was the case for everyone, but it sure would have made my life easier if I knew.

[Video Games]

It's not the 2000s anymore, wikipedia has cited all the info on what I linked.

It looks about on par to me, except Sw/Sh also has awards won. /shrug
not sure where you're getting "Much more negative".



As I said, I'm not a fan of going by user scores in general. Review bombing is the extreme example, but the phrase "everyone's a critic" comes to mind, in a more sarcastic way.



Welcome to my point finally.

Or did you miss Val giving a huge list of "removed" features which was why I pointed out specifically R/S was the first to remove a ton of features? Either that, or you're genuinely missing my overarching point.

If you disagree with it being the worst, fine. You're entitled to feel that way. But the fact is that it did pretty lackluster even at the time, considering all it had to be compared to. And yet years later we have people calling it the "golden age".



I didn't handwave anything by saying "nostalgia". You said this at the time-
"I think you're missing some very critical context here. Ruby and Sapphire are over 15 years old. There was far less precedent for what a Pokemon game was and Sword and Shield weren't preceded by games that people found disappointing in X and Y and Sun and Moon. Additionally, Pokemon Sword and Shield were going to be the first Pokemon games on a home console and that obviously comes with higher expectations."

What you did highlight there was saying that "people have been disappointed in the last few generations", which to me mostly comes off from people having nostalgia for the first few gens.

I would say this can be shown by critic review of X/Y being one of the highest for Pokemon, and even now past the games release after it was criticized, now people are up in arms about how good features in X/Y were.

They didnt sell as much because pokemania was fading since kids were getting older. It picked back up with gen 4 because of how popular the ds was. It doesnt have much to do with quality

[Traveler Voltin]

i have no idea what is going on here.

[Ashleyxoxo]

i have no idea what is going on here.

How dare you spam the Switch thread?!

[Rennadrel]

Well... the games ARE aimed at little kids that might've never played a game before. GameFreak doesn't give a rats ass about people that played the games for a long time and it shows again and again, yet people still act surprised that they aim it at little kids that never played the series before, rather than people that stuck with the series since gen 1. Little kids also don't give a shit if Hop or Hau interrupts them every 3 steps aswell or how bad the writing is, because they have no concepts of good games design, pacing or anything in that regard.
I'm not saying it's all fine and dandy, but people really need to stop thinking GameFreak will suddenly change their ways. They ALWAYS made games that way with 0 thought of old time fans and not a single generation was difficult aswell (no, gen 1 wasn't difficult aswell, at most, more tedious)

As a little kid I didn't need hand holding in video games like so many these days have. I swear video games too often try and treat the players like they are stupid. Not all of us are game journalist levels of stupid and inept at beating games as adults and as children we were far more capable of beating very difficult games and didn't whine about it.

[zealo]

As a little kid I didn't need hand holding in video games like so many these days have. I swear video games too often try and treat the players like they are stupid. Not all of us are game journalist levels of stupid and inept at beating games as adults and as children we were far more capable of beating very difficult games and didn't whine about it.

A lot of people have a tendency to vastly underestimate what kids are capable of if you just stick a controller in their hands and leave them to explore a game, especially in games as linear and at a surface level as mechanically simple as Pokemon have always been.

The whole "it's for kids!" argument in favour of pokemon rivals being as they have been of late and not more like how they used to be, vastly underestimates those same kids.

[Rennadrel]

A lot of people have a tendency to vastly underestimate what kids are capable of if you just stick a controller in their hands and leave them to explore a game, especially in games as linear and at a surface level as mechanically simple as Pokemon have always been.

The whole "it's for kids!" argument in favour of pokemon rivals being as they have been of late and not more like how they used to be, vastly underestimates those same kids.

Yeah, and games can have a challenge level that might be easy for adults but challenging enough for kids. I know some young adults who only play the modded Pokemon games with the randomizers or having fixed Pokemon for an entire playthrough, because those are things that kids might not be interested in but can still make a relatively easy game more challenging for adults.

[Jester Joe]

As a little kid I didn't need hand holding in video games like so many these days have. I swear video games too often try and treat the players like they are stupid. Not all of us are game journalist levels of stupid and inept at beating games as adults and as children we were far more capable of beating very difficult games and didn't whine about it.

For what it's worth, you were also more than likely playing games with only a d pad for movement and with only like, 2-6 buttons at most. While also having barebone features.

I don't think anyone can deny that Pokemon's become far more complex than it was at the start at least. Although it's also not the best game for an example like this, probably would be better to compare something like Super Mario 64 even to Super Mario Galaxy in terms of movement/controls. Granted, N64 controller was a bit more than D Pad and a few buttons, the controller overall was still more bare than current controllers.

[Traveler Voltin]

How dare you spam the Switch thread?!

what are you even talking about?
i dont get why there is another argument over pokemon when its basically the same thing over and over again.

[Fallen Angel]

what are you even talking about?
i dont get why there is another argument over pokemon when its basically the same thing over and over again.

Unless I’m seeing sarcasm that isn’t there, it’s a joke about how this thread has been spammed for pages about Pokémon games being shit for the past N generations.

[Shakzor]

Unless I’m seeing sarcasm that isn’t there, it’s a joke about how this thread has been spammed for pages about Pokémon games being shit for the past N generations.

Pretty much. It also always falls in the same "current game = bad, everything before = the holy grail of gaming". The discussions about Pokemon are basically like the stuff in the Star Citizien thread, it just repeats over and over

[Poppincaps]

Pretty much. It also always falls in the same "current game = bad, everything before = the holy grail of gaming". The discussions about Pokemon are basically like the stuff in the Star Citizien thread, it just repeats over and over

Except that wasn't what was said. We were arguing about whether Gen 3 was objectively bad or not. Most of the conversation wasn't even about the newer games.

[Kuntantee]

I will get my Switch OLED hopefully next Friday. This is my first entry into nintendo eco system, anything I need to know?

[Val the Moofia Boss]

I will get my Switch OLED hopefully next Friday. This is my first entry into nintendo eco system, anything I need to know?

Buy used games if you can.

[Kuntantee]

Buy used games if you can.

Thanks for the tip. I already got a brand-new BotW, didn't know I could get used games.

[Traveler Voltin]

Unless I’m seeing sarcasm that isn’t there, it’s a joke about how this thread has been spammed for pages about Pokémon games being shit for the past N generations.

pokemon has always had flaws. nothing new there.
what is good or bad will always be personal opinions.

i enjoyed sun, moon, ultra sun, and ultra moon but i consider it one of the bottom tier for me.
also as much i find the exp all from X, Y, and beyond, i feel like it has ruined me if i go back to play older games.
i still havent played Soul silver, heart gold, white 2, or black 2. i would like to at some point but i dont know how i will feel about going back to the old school grind.

anyway play what you enjoy not what you hate.