• The GiftBot 2.0 Launch Giveaway Extravaganza has come to a close with an astounding 8073 games given away to the community by 696 members, a huge success thanks to you! The gifting now continues with more official prizes in the new Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Leftover Steam codes are also being given away to the PC Gaming Era community.

Gamefreak should have been mass cutting Pokemon from the very start.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oct 27, 2017
3,544
Now I'm not a Pokemon fan right now but I'm intending to hopefully enjoy the series starting with S&S so let me know if any of this doesn't make sense.

As a warning lets keep this spoiler-free, I haven't seen any leaks or anything for S&S and it's not relevant to the upcoming discussion so please keep all spoilers contained in the spoiler thread for those games.

I view Pokemon as animals, so much so that I still expect Gamefreak and Nintendo to eventually develop real-life Bio Pokemon for people to bring home as pets. Imagine how awesome it would be to have a Drowsee who wakes you up in the morning with a snort or something like that. Animals in real life aren't seen all over the world, if I walk down my street I wouldn't expect to see a chimpanzee, a turtle or a bear but I would expect to see perhaps a dog, a cat, and a pigeon. We have a great variety of animals in this world but they all have their own places they feel most comfortable in and so they choose to stay there.

I think Pokemon should be the same, with each different region in each different gen there should be a whole new group of pokemon that fit the region and only a few returning that make sense. Like Charmander wouldn't choose to live in a place with a lot of water but you'd be more likely to see a Squirtle and other water-loving pokemon. So I say Gamefreak, starting from gen 2 should have cut the majority of Pokemon from the first gen and come up with just entirely new designs to fit the new region they made. Then gen 3 cuts the majority of gen 2 pokemon for new ones that make more sense and so on. This would make a lot more sense and make the world of Pokemon feel like an actual world with unique Pokemon for each region. Bringing over Pokemon from previous games would still work and make sense cause it'd be like if you brought your pet dog with you to africa, it might not fit in there but it's still allowed to go.

It would also make Pokemon feel more special cause maybe Poliwag shows up in gen 1 but then doesn't show up again until gen 5, seeing him again would be like seeing a long lost pal or something like that. I know people would initially be disappointed but it makes a lot more sense for the Pokemon world and in the long run it would be seen as the correct decision. It didn't happen back then, hopefully from now on it will in future Pokemon games.
 

alexi52

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,580
No, I wouldn't have continued with the series without the gotta catch'em all aspect
 

Lant_War

The Fallen
Jul 14, 2018
10,909
Gen 5 having mostly new Pokémon is part of the reason why it's secretly the best generation. It also would give waaaay more variety to the meta.
 

RochHoch

Member
May 22, 2018
5,059
Or maybe Gamefreak should have not gone to a yearly release schedule so they could give us more complete games.
 

Strings

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,620
You already had this. The only difference was that you could transfer in Pokemon who didn't live there, like importing an exotic pet. You can no longer do that. Galar is Australia, but less fun.
Or maybe Gamefreak should have not gone to a yearly release schedule so they could give us more complete games.
Or maybe they should leverage some of the money they're making (10m copies sold yearly, minimum)? I don't understand how they've fallen so behind while selling 10x more than any comparable competition every goddam year.
 

SheriffMcDuck

Member
Oct 27, 2017
357
See, that's what Gamefreak says they do. They pick Pokemon based on what makes sense for region. And usually all of the Pokemon are only available to transfer after the main game is over when you receive the National Pokedex.
 

Mekanos

Member
Oct 17, 2018
13,582
People aren't asking for literally every single Pokemon to be available in a region. That would be unrealistic. Previous games have had region-specific Pokemon, then you can transfer Pokemon from other games and regions between each other.

You can have specific focuses on Pokemon appearing in biomes and environments and still keep all the Pokemon in the game data. (Well, you could until now, apparently.)

I'm not even gonna touch the bioengineering section.
 

Jonneh

GameXplain
Verified
Oct 24, 2017
3,857
UK
They kind of have been. You can't obtain every Pokémon in any game without trading over extensively from previous generations. The national dex has of course been a staple but the actual regional in-game Pokémon have always had cuts.
 
Aug 22, 2018
2,005
No matter how much people fight the decision they won't change it, I agree with you on it being the correct one for the long run.
 

Minishdriveby

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,612
I mean this was somewhat the case going into Gen III, Ruby and Sapphire; the Pokemon were programmed into the game, but otherwise unobtainable outside of hacks until the release of other games allowing you to trade (one Pokemon at a time) into them. It was convoluted and arduous.
 

TRUSTNO1

Member
Dec 28, 2017
61
There is a huge difference between trying to be organic (hint : they're not very good at doing that) by limiting which Pokemon appear where because it makes sense environmentally and not having Pokemon from around the world appearing in that specific region. Its like they don't even exist at all.

Then gen 3 cuts the majority of gen 2 Pokemon for new ones that make more sense and so on. This would make a lot more sense and make the world of Pokemon feel like an actual world with unique Pokemon for each region.
Except nope, the old ones could still appear ingame, they were just not made available because of the engine changes. They were available in other games and transferable later on.
 

Finale Fireworker

Love each other or die trying.
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,933
United States
What you are describing is literally what has always happened. Pokémon games have never had every Pokémon available, or even most Pokémon available. That isn’t how Pokémon works.

You could just always carry your collection forward so that your sunk cost/time isn’t lost. Because why would you spend 100+ hours hatching a Shiny Starmie is you can’t even keep it? The difference between the past and present isn’t the availability of Pokémon. It’s their permanence.

Edit: Pokémon are already real. I have seen them. I killed the Mothman and I saw a Pokémon and it was real.
 

Castile

Member
Dec 1, 2017
3,773
Only if it meant us getting new animations for the pokemon that do appear in the new game. Sadly, they don't even do this in sword and shield.
 

BeanBoi

Member
Jun 20, 2019
61
I really loved their approach to Gen5, and don't see what that wasn't the standard moving forward. I get why it wasn't (marketing and drawing in established fans), but it felt fresh and awesome. Lock out all previous monsters until the end of the game. Logistically it would make sense to have new pokemon only in a new region.

Probably one of the cooler additions to the new games were regional forms. Shit like that is cool.
 

KartuneDX

Member
Jan 12, 2018
943
No matter how much people fight the decision they won't change it, I agree with you on it being the correct one for the long run.
And I refuse to believe it won't harm their bottom line in the long run, especially if the long run solution is being forced to remain subbed to Pokemon Home until my favorite Pokemon is playable again 2-3 years down the line.
 

swaggy

Member
Mar 11, 2018
883
They have always done this. The games used to be compatible with older Pokémon, so you could transfer them in.

Just the forward compatibility of being able to transfer them into newer games takes a big amount of work. In Gen 5, they had moving sprites for every Pokémon and that was a mid-console change that lasted for only Gen 5. For Gen 6 and Gen 7, every Pokémon and form had new 3D models and animations for Pokémon Amie and Refresh.

So, it seems like an insane amount of work for something that's not really touching the main story of the games, and only really matters for competitive play and postgame. And while those things are important, the fact that Pokémon has had forward compatibility adds a huge workload on Game Freak. With Pokémon not being forward-compatible anymore, they could theoretically use that time instead to make each entry even more special.

Personally, I don't think Gen 8 stand outs any more than Gen 7 or Gen 6 when they were released, and I'm not seeing a huge improvement to the games as a result of the cuts. It feels like any new generation, just without the one thing people have spent a lot of money and time over for decades. I wanted more work done with the new Pokémon since the majority of the total roster won't be in this new game. But I think going forward, there's a huge potential for the series to improve.

It's why I overall like the decision to cut the roster, only if it brings a noticeable improvement to the games (higher quality animations, interactivity, more cohesion, etc.). I have to see it first from Game Freak though, and I don't have a lot of faith in that part since they're trying to sustain small scale development even if the amount of work required for quality games on newer systems is increasing at a faster rate. That's something that's been really apparent since the 3DS.
 
Last edited:

Biske

Member
Nov 11, 2017
2,916
They really should just make Pokemon Stadium again, slap every pokemon into it, work on that as a constantly in progress battle series and then do whatever they want with the main series. That way they can narrow down the scope of the main series and focus on things and have "everybody battle it out" series separate.
 

Strings

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,620
They really should just make Pokemon Stadium again, slap every pokemon into it, work on that as a constantly in progress battle series and then do whatever they want with the main series. That way they can narrow down the scope of the main series and focus on things and have "everybody battle it out" series separate.
This is a sentiment I've seen crop up more and more as the reality of Sword and Shield sets in, and it's personally baffling. The Stadium games sucked. They were like the epitome of a cash grab, and now we've got people pining for them. It's crazy.
Edit: Pokémon are already real. I have seen them. I killed the Mothman and I saw a Pokémon and it was real.
 

BassForever

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,529
CT
This is a sentiment I've seen crop up more and more as the reality of Sword and Shield sets in, and it's personally baffling. The Stadium games sucked. They were like the epitome of a cash grab, and now we've got people pining for them. It's crazy.

It was the novelty of being able to battle with a friend in the room, and pick from every pokemon in the game. The mini games were pretty fun as well.

While I’d like a modern stadium to have a lot more going on, I’d happily take that as an alternative to no national dex in the mainline pokemon games. I’ll take any solution at this point that isn’t “wait for home which we haven’t bothered to detail yet”
 

BinaryPork

Member
Oct 31, 2017
258
there’s a lot to unpack here.
I view Pokemon as animals, so much so that I still expect Gamefreak and Nintendo to eventually develop real-life Bio Pokemon for people to bring home as pets. Imagine how awesome it would be to have a Drowsee who wakes you up in the morning with a snort or something like that.
I feel like including this was a mistake. I mean, I too would love a Gengar to sneakily murder my enemies but let’s not get carried away here

Animals in real life aren't seen all over the world, if I walk down my street I wouldn't expect to see a chimpanzee, a turtle or a bear but I would expect to see perhaps a dog, a cat, and a pigeon. We have a great variety of animals in this world but they all have their own places they feel most comfortable in and so they choose to stay there.
I also wouldn’t expect a floating sword like Aegislash from X/Y to suddenly appear in front of me in a dark alley but it’d be terrifying and rad as fuck in this made up timeline.

I think Pokemon should be the same, with each different region in each different gen there should be a whole new group of pokemon that fit the region and only a few returning that make sense. Like Charmander wouldn't choose to live in a place with a lot of water but you'd be more likely to see a Squirtle and other water-loving pokemon. So I say Gamefreak, starting from gen 2 should have cut the majority of Pokemon from the first gen and come up with just entirely new designs to fit the new region they made. Then gen 3 cuts the majority of gen 2 pokemon for new ones that make more sense and so on. This would make a lot more sense and make the world of Pokemon feel like an actual world with unique Pokemon for each region. Bringing over Pokemon from previous games would still work and make sense cause it'd be like if you brought your pet dog with you to africa, it might not fit in there but it's still allowed to go.
This is exactly what they did, excluding gen 3, which was unique due to how data transfer worked at the time. Now the pet you want to take with you to Africa will be barred from entering the continent and placed into a kennel called Doggomon Home.

It would also make Pokemon feel more special cause maybe Poliwag shows up in gen 1 but then doesn't show up again until gen 5, seeing him again would be like seeing a long lost pal or something like that. I know people would initially be disappointed but it makes a lot more sense for the Pokemon world and in the long run it would be seen as the correct decision. It didn't happen back then, hopefully from now on it will in future Pokemon games.
It did, as others have pointed out, which is one of the major complaints ongoing.
 

Somnid

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,741
The cuts should have been to all Pokemon. Just a new 150 (variations ok), Pokemon home for the rest. It creates a distinctive split that is more respectable. Trimming the starter and Legendary bloat is a good thing because they are so unnecessary outside the national dex.
 
Aug 22, 2018
2,005
The cuts should have been to all Pokemon. Just a new 150 (variations ok), Pokemon home for the rest. It creates a distinctive split that is more respectable. Trimming the starter and Legendary bloat is a good thing because they are so unnecessary outside the national dex.
If 400 got this reaction, imagine 150!
 

Lothars

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
5,232
Or maybe Gamefreak should have not gone to a yearly release schedule so they could give us more complete games.
Exactly. This is the thing that should have happen but we are stuck for whatever reason where we are now.
This is a sentiment I've seen crop up more and more as the reality of Sword and Shield sets in, and it's personally baffling. The Stadium games sucked. They were like the epitome of a cash grab, and now we've got people pining for them. It's crazy.
They were far from that, The stadium games were fun and being able to bring pokemon from them were huge.
 

Apopheniac

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,990
I remember when we had threads suggesting that the series cut Pokémon and everyone laughed the suggestion off and said it was stupid
 

Zeroth

Member
Oct 25, 2017
80
I love how most people are ignoring the fact OP is certain that we'll have bioengineered Pokemon in the future.

Easily thread of the year to me
 

Adventureracing

The Fallen
Nov 7, 2017
2,576
This is a sentiment I've seen crop up more and more as the reality of Sword and Shield sets in, and it's personally baffling. The Stadium games sucked. They were like the epitome of a cash grab, and now we've got people pining for them. It's crazy.
The Pokémon stadium games are absolutely fantastic and are no more a cash grab than any other pokemon game (that term makes no sense anyway as all games are made to make as much money as possible).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.