Pokemon Presents, February 27 2022, Reaction Thread

[lenticular]

23 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I do think different gyms between versions was a neat touch, though. Hopefully, if Pokemon is wedded to the multi-version model, they can at least keep putting in differences like this.

Personally, I prefer fewer version differences. Well, I'd prefer that they only did a single version, but if we can't have that then I prefer few version differences. I can't see myself ever wanting to buy both versions of a Pokémon game, so I want to keep the amount of content that I "miss" by just having a single version to a minimum. Giving the player extra incentive to buy both versions seems like a negative to me.

[Lord_Brand]

To me, any version differences should come down to things that would reward you for connecting to the other version, like version-exclusive Pokemon that evolve when traded. Or different evolutions based on which version the Pokemon evolves in.

Edited March 6, 2022 by Lord_Brand

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

22 hours ago, lenticular said:

Personally, I prefer fewer version differences. Well, I'd prefer that they only did a single version, but if we can't have that then I prefer few version differences. I can't see myself ever wanting to buy both versions of a Pokémon game, so I want to keep the amount of content that I "miss" by just having a single version to a minimum. Giving the player extra incentive to buy both versions seems like a negative to me.

I understand the rationale, certainly. But the flip side is, there are plenty of superfans out there who buy both versions. Shouldn't the developers put enough differences between them that such a purchase feels "worth it"? Like, suppose Sword and Shield didn't have alternate gym leaders between games (say, they both followed Sword's list). Is Sword suddenly a better game, or better purchase, by merit of Shield having one less difference about it? Personally, I don't think so.

19 hours ago, Lord_Brand said:

To me, any version differences should come down to things that would reward you for connecting to the other version, like version-exclusive Pokemon that evolve when traded. Or different evolutions based on which version the Pokemon evolves in.

Truthfully, I'm not a huge fan of the "Version" system going forward for the series. I've thought about making a thread on how future releases could emulate version differences in a single game. Of course, as a business move, two copies with minimal differences makes a ton of sense.

[lenticular]

13 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I understand the rationale, certainly. But the flip side is, there are plenty of superfans out there who buy both versions. Shouldn't the developers put enough differences between them that such a purchase feels "worth it"? Like, suppose Sword and Shield didn't have alternate gym leaders between games (say, they both followed Sword's list). Is Sword suddenly a better game, or better purchase, by merit of Shield having one less difference about it? Personally, I don't think so.

I would say that yes, it is. Not by a huge amount, but I do think that it is. And I actually think that the more significant the version differences become, the greater the problem becomes. There are a few main issues here, as I see it.

First, I would say that Pokémon is inherently a social game. It isn't designed as a solitary experience. It's designed as something that you talk about with your friends as you each play through the game. There are, after all, elements of the game (catching version exclusive pokémon) that cannot be completed solo and categorically require cooperation. And, since we're supposed to be chatting about the game, I think it's normal to talk about our experiences with the game. "Have you got as far as Witney yet?" "Yeah, she took me so many tries to beat!" "Wait, you beat her? What pokémon did you use to get past her Miltank?" And so on and so forth. For every version difference that gets introduced, that's one shared experience that I don't get to have with (approximately) half of my friends who are playing the game. For the relatively minor differences in Sword and Shield, that isn't a big deal. I played Shield, and while I'm pretty sure that means I got the ghost and ice gyms, I can't actually remember anything about them. But as I said, the more significant the differences, the bigger the problem. If there's something that's actually cool and memorable, I want to be able to talk about it with as many people as possible.

A second issue is the quality of the content. Let's imagine that the game designers over at Game Freak are sitting in their offices trying to decide which gyms they're going to put into their next game. They have a bunch of ideas, certainly, and then they choose only their best ones to go into the game. Conventionally, this means they take their best eight ideas and they go into the game. In the case of Sword and Shield they chose to have the same gym puzzles in the version exclusive gyms, meaning that they were limited to things that could be themed either way. As an alternative, they might have had completely different gyms, in which case we'd be going down to their ninth and tenth best ideas. It's not a massive compromise on quality, but it is a compromise on quality. And once again, the more version exclusive content they add, the bigger the compromise would have to be.

Third, there's the issue of researching which game to buy. Honestly, I already dislike this even when the only difference is version-exclusive pokémon, and adding more differences would only make it worse. It's sort of like the common complaint that people have about the Three Houses route split: you're forced to choose far before you can have any understanding of the consequences of the choice. Except that at least in Three Houses you can start over if you change your mind. In Pokémon, if you change your mind, then tough. You either deal with it, or you fork out the cost of another game. So what do you do? Do you just choose one at random and hope that you don't regret it later? Or do you wait for the information to end up online, spend time researching it, and essentially spoil yourself on in-game content before you even buy the game? Because I don't like either option.

And finally, let's not pretend that loss aversion, FOMO and jealousy don't exist, because they do. I'd love to be able to sit here and claim that I was above such petty concerns, but I'd be lying. I think it's a very rare human being who never experiences any of those things even a little bit. For all that I would try not to, and for all that I might believe it isn't rational, I know that if I bought Violet but then discovered that Scarlet had something really cool that I didn't get, then that would frustrate me and that would make me enjoy Violet less. Maybe it shouldn't, but it would do.

None of this is a huge deal but it is enough for me to prefer fewer version differences.

[Lord_Brand]

3 hours ago, lenticular said:

A second issue is the quality of the content. Let's imagine that the game designers over at Game Freak are sitting in their offices trying to decide which gyms they're going to put into their next game. They have a bunch of ideas, certainly, and then they choose only their best ones to go into the game. Conventionally, this means they take their best eight ideas and they go into the game. In the case of Sword and Shield they chose to have the same gym puzzles in the version exclusive gyms, meaning that they were limited to things that could be themed either way. As an alternative, they might have had completely different gyms, in which case we'd be going down to their ninth and tenth best ideas. It's not a massive compromise on quality, but it is a compromise on quality. And once again, the more version exclusive content they add, the bigger the compromise would have to be.

I am curious to know how they choose the types for the Gyms in each generation. I assume they have a rule that they can't repeat the exact same type combinations between generations, as that would be boring. However, if they implemented my idea of a Gym for each Type in future generations, that'd stop being an issue. The issue then would be coming up with the best possible idea for a given type's Gym, which would entail looking at that gen's main gimmicks and setting theme. For example, maybe one generation has a sport theme to it, so the Ice-type Gym is themed around ice skating. Then the next generation is focused on science, so the Ice Gym has a chemistry theme where you cool liquids.

That being said, I wouldn't assume their ninth and tenth best ideas are automatically worse than their first eight. After all, they had to come up with ideas for ten gyms in SWSH, so we're simply getting their ten best ideas. Having more Gyms simply means rising to the challenge of coming up with more good ideas.

This all said, I get where you're coming from regarding the emphasis on shared quality experiences. I also understand where SP1M stands in wanting the different versions to stand apart more. The hard truth is, Pokemon has multiple different markets to appeal to, including social fans like you as well as collector fans who want a reason to buy both versions (like SP1M, I'm guessing?). Pokemon's appeal is multifaceted like that.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

On 3/7/2022 at 5:33 PM, Lord_Brand said:

This all said, I get where you're coming from regarding the emphasis on shared quality experiences. I also understand where SP1M stands in wanting the different versions to stand apart more. The hard truth is, Pokemon has multiple different markets to appeal to, including social fans like you as well as collector fans who want a reason to buy both versions (like SP1M, I'm guessing?). Pokemon's appeal is multifaceted like that.

Truthfully, I almost never buy both versions. The one exception was in Gen V, where I bought Pokemon White, despite already having a playable copy of Pokemon Black, because I wanted to play a Nuzlocke without deleting my old file.

On 3/7/2022 at 12:22 PM, lenticular said:

And finally, let's not pretend that loss aversion, FOMO and jealousy don't exist, because they do. I'd love to be able to sit here and claim that I was above such petty concerns, but I'd be lying. I think it's a very rare human being who never experiences any of those things even a little bit. For all that I would try not to, and for all that I might believe it isn't rational, I know that if I bought Violet but then discovered that Scarlet had something really cool that I didn't get, then that would frustrate me and that would make me enjoy Violet less. Maybe it shouldn't, but it would do.

If anything, I kind of feel the opposite on this front. Like, the Alolan Raticate trial is exclusive to Pokemon Moon, whereas the Gumshoos trial happens in Pokemon Sun. The difference doesn't feel as though I'm missing out on something - rather, it makes the trial feel a bit more special to me, knowing that it's not something all players can get. Would I feel differently if I had the opposite version? I doubt it, but I can't deny the possibility.

On 3/7/2022 at 12:22 PM, lenticular said:

Third, there's the issue of researching which game to buy. Honestly, I already dislike this even when the only difference is version-exclusive pokémon, and adding more differences would only make it worse. It's sort of like the common complaint that people have about the Three Houses route split: you're forced to choose far before you can have any understanding of the consequences of the choice. Except that at least in Three Houses you can start over if you change your mind. In Pokémon, if you change your mind, then tough. You either deal with it, or you fork out the cost of another game. So what do you do? Do you just choose one at random and hope that you don't regret it later? Or do you wait for the information to end up online, spend time researching it, and essentially spoil yourself on in-game content before you even buy the game? Because I don't like either option.

For the record, I do think that if the version model is retained, then there should be a way to play a game in the style of the other version without having to purchase a whole new game. Let's look to Fire Emblem Fates for inspiration. The base game costs $40, but for an additional $20, you can get the other route. If Pokemon were to do this, then perhaps you could get Scarlet for $60, but for an extra $30, you could also get Violet. This wouldn't be a standalone copy, but a way to play the other game via DLC. You would get a second save slot, where you can start a playthrough where everything's like a native copy of Violet. You couldn't directly trade or battle between the files, but conceivably either one could use Pokemon Home for indirect trading. I don't know that this will happen, necessarily, but I think it'd be a way to keep minimal differences while also making "buying both versions" realistic for more people.

On 3/7/2022 at 12:22 PM, lenticular said:

A second issue is the quality of the content. Let's imagine that the game designers over at Game Freak are sitting in their offices trying to decide which gyms they're going to put into their next game. They have a bunch of ideas, certainly, and then they choose only their best ones to go into the game. Conventionally, this means they take their best eight ideas and they go into the game. In the case of Sword and Shield they chose to have the same gym puzzles in the version exclusive gyms, meaning that they were limited to things that could be themed either way. As an alternative, they might have had completely different gyms, in which case we'd be going down to their ninth and tenth best ideas. It's not a massive compromise on quality, but it is a compromise on quality. And once again, the more version exclusive content they add, the bigger the compromise would have to be.

That is fair, and that's part of why I'm all for giving the mainline "flagship" games of each generation a little more time in the oven. Overall, I feel like the "three years to a generation" standard has been to the detriment of the games' quality in certain aspects. More time would allow for more everything - more gym puzzles and dungeons to design, more fine-tuning the code to get rid of bugs (sorry, Caterpie), and possibly even time to up the ante in terms of presentation (i.e. cutscenes, voice acting). Obviously, it's reductive to think that, given enough time, Game Freak will come up with a game that I personally consider perfect. But I do think the extra resources could make for "better", and leave each new generation feeling more special than the last one.

Anyway, I've come up with a thread related to this topic! Well, tangentially, that is. Basically, a forum for discussion on possibilities for the future of the series in general, and "version differences" in particular. I'd certainly like to hear your thoughts on it, if you get the chance! Of course, feel free to reply here as well, but I don't want to get too far into the tall grass on what was originally a "Pokemon Presents Reaction Thread".

[Lord_Brand]

What if there was a way to unlock one version's exclusives in the other by connecting them? Say you have Scarlet and your friend has Violet; by connecting your games, you unlock each other's version exclusives, including certain species of Pokemon.

The series already allows for a very limited version of this thanks to Pokemon trading. Version A has Thingamabob and Version B has Whatchamacallit, so you catch an extra and trade it for the other. They can expand on this concept to allow for "content sharing". Especially if they start implementing some form of co-op, like Raid Battles in SWSH.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

4 hours ago, Lord_Brand said:

What if there was a way to unlock one version's exclusives in the other by connecting them? Say you have Scarlet and your friend has Violet; by connecting your games, you unlock each other's version exclusives, including certain species of Pokemon.

The series already allows for a very limited version of this thanks to Pokemon trading. Version A has Thingamabob and Version B has Whatchamacallit, so you catch an extra and trade it for the other. They can expand on this concept to allow for "content sharing". Especially if they start implementing some form of co-op, like Raid Battles in SWSH.

...

On 3/11/2022 at 8:30 PM, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I don't want to get too far into the tall grass on what was originally a "Pokemon Presents Reaction Thread".

Anyway I responded to this one in the other thread.