Do you play Pokemon?
Galarian Ponyta Revealed in Famitsu Magazine, Fairy-Type
- Thread starter Water Pokémon Master
- Start date
Yes. And while it's scummy that they still do two version releases instead of having things like save files, what I'm trying to say is that plenty of other IPs have release methods are just as scummy if not scummier than Pokemon's. Such as the WWE games that put forth the smallest effort possible every single year and still sell.
Except you can't really say that because they don't release two at the same time with different content. Its more in line with say, Pokemon Ultra Sun/Moon.
Pokemon also never removed Pokemon from a main title game. Can't say I've ever met a person who argues for the same game existing twice, just with different content that is already in the game. It's almost like how Capcom sells you the character already on the disk, except TPC expects you to but another 60 dollar game to complete the other.
Last edited:
I know how hard it is to change your mind, but the whole reason behind having 2 versions of the game is the trading aspect. If there weren't version exclusives, trading (read: trading) wouldn't be necessary to 100% the game, and so the mechanic would go a little to waste. And trading was one of the main selling points back when the series was first made -- note how it appeared very early on in the anime.
TPCi doesn't even expect you to spend another $60 to 100% the game. Especially now with online trade and not just local, it's never necessary to buy both versions in order to get every Pokémon. If it's something you choose to do then yes it's an option available to you, but it's not the intended or easiest one.
Trading is cool and version exclusives can mix challenge runs like nuzlockes up a bit. I'm a fan.
It's old and outdated. Also notice how they don't use the "gotta catch'em all" slogan anymore and even back in the day, trading wasn't even all that big. The game did things to encourage it, sure and Ash did trade in the anime but he got a trade back, which pretty much made me never trade because I form attachments to things so to see in 2019, going on to 2020 that they are still releasing two versions of a game just so they can say trading is still a thing is a poor excuse to keep doing it. A lot of people are going to buy both versions and they know this and 60 bucks for the same game just to get a few more Pokemon is just anti-consumer. Also, dont the games give credit for a Pokemon in the dex for just seeing it? They don't even require you own them anymore.
They just need to ditch it and make a complete game with all the content intact. Its worse that day one DLC and at least thats just a few more bucks.
It's not actually old and outdated in concept, but rather in execution. We have enough Pokémon now that they could split the cast clean in half and have no Pokémon the same between versions, except for starters and legendaries, perhaps. Cacnea in one game and Maractus in the other, Starly in one game and Hoothoot in the other. Go through the entire dex identifying counterparts and spreading them out, and then the version exclusive thing would feel really worth it. It'd also be a way around Dexgate.
It's not about signifying that trade is a thing, it's about actually getting players to do it. No one's suggesting you trade your beloved Pokémon that you took through the game with you to fill out your dex, but rather that you just catch a random version exclusive in your version and trade it with another player for their own random version exclusive. No attachment.
The "gotta catch'em all" thing was only an American tagline anyway -- it barely ever featured on merch in Europe, and wasn't a thing at all in Japan. Therefore it doesn't really matter since it's got nothing to do with the games.
If people choose to buy both versions then that's their choice but it's not the intended choice. Generally it's only reserved for game collectors to do that, not the standard Pokémon fan.
Last edited:
That’s generally how I look at it. I don’t see really anything that’s so god awful about the whole two version thing to the point where they should be thrown out of the window. That’s not to be confused with that stuff like USUM shouldn’t have been two versions, since that game was basically paying for a harder mode of sun and moon plus some new postgame stuff (it could have been DLC or a sister version honestly).
That being said, I’ve had a lot of times where when I nuzlocke or want to start over a game, I’ll play the other version to mix things up a tad, especially with the gen 5 games having a few notable differences between versions. I know people could argue it not being necessary or whatever and sure that’s valid, but it just never bothered me all that much. It’s not like anyone’s being forced to buy both, like you said.
I tend to agree that two versions per game is a silly cash grab at this point. If encouraging trading is the goal, I think there are more effective ways of doing this.
XY's friend safari is perhaps the perfect illustration of this. When these games debutted, everyone was clamering for friend codes. All safaris yeilded high IV Pokemon, so even if you didn't get the coveted Ditto or Eevee safari, yours still had worth. It was a great system and it was pretty fun chasing people around for the safaris I needed. It's one of the features I wish GF would resurrect.
There are no doubt countless other ways you could approach this with a little imagination. Maybe you could have Pokemon availability influenced by decisions you make throughout the game (such as Helix VS Dome fossil), or randomly assigned to each player (like the friend safari). It's really not that difficult.
XY's friend safari is perhaps the perfect illustration of this. When these games debutted, everyone was clamering for friend codes. All safaris yeilded high IV Pokemon, so even if you didn't get the coveted Ditto or Eevee safari, yours still had worth. It was a great system and it was pretty fun chasing people around for the safaris I needed. It's one of the features I wish GF would resurrect.
There are no doubt countless other ways you could approach this with a little imagination. Maybe you could have Pokemon availability influenced by decisions you make throughout the game (such as Helix VS Dome fossil), or randomly assigned to each player (like the friend safari). It's really not that difficult.
Splitting between games makes it artificial. Why in the same region would one have Starly and the other Hoot-Hoot? Why not have them in the same game if nothing is preventing them from doing so other than "its how its always been"? All I'm saying is no other developer would be allowed to do this and have fans defending it.
And to add @Celever to this since his idea is pretty good. Why not just do what Celever said, split the game, have a restricted dex, say 200 is mons in the region and have the rest obtainable via the Friend Safari. This way, they can make one game and it forces people to trade, not in a unfriendly way to the consumer or have a system where based on the Player ID and the secret ID a "Mystery Area" will spawn like ten or so Pokemon not found on the in-game dex that people can trade. There are lots of ways they can do this without making two games.
Last edited:
I really do like the idea that @Celever and @crystal_pidgeot are adding onto. Even when the two versions aren’t really anything that ever bothered me, I definitely think that it’s an outdated way to encourage trading especially when we have online now. They did something similar with the Player ID back in platinum that determined whether you’d get Cranidos or Shieldon. They could definitely easily do something like that now I’m a more advanced manner seeing it’s been ten years since platinum came out. I think a healthy mix between a good enough Pokédex size to account for replay value and having those kinds of safaris or some other feature could definitely help improve it.
Perhaps, they could even make the amount of Pokémon you can find grow in that place the more you trade or something. Or you could do an XY thing where you get peoples safaris with a cap of 10-20 Pokémon. I think that it could also help with the regional dex being more condensed and more focused, something that sun and moon especially kinda felt like it lacked. I have NO idea what the hell is in that game, lol. But I know what’s in other games and it lets me plan what I want if I’m doing a new play through or something. That mix of focus and also decent size is something I miss from gens 4 and 5 especially.
Perhaps, they could even make the amount of Pokémon you can find grow in that place the more you trade or something. Or you could do an XY thing where you get peoples safaris with a cap of 10-20 Pokémon. I think that it could also help with the regional dex being more condensed and more focused, something that sun and moon especially kinda felt like it lacked. I have NO idea what the hell is in that game, lol. But I know what’s in other games and it lets me plan what I want if I’m doing a new play through or something. That mix of focus and also decent size is something I miss from gens 4 and 5 especially.