-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Jim Sterling: Pokémon's Business Model Has Always Been Trash
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
It amazed me when I saw that the DLC had two versions as well, one for Sword and one for Shield. Instead of one version that works for both games.
I knew this about 20 years ago. Loved Pokemon Red/Blue, heard about a new Pokemon...checked it out and it was the same fucking game. Didn't play another since - if I miss Pokemon I'll go back and play the original. It took them so damn long just to go to 3D too. And it's still not the epic 3D pokemon I imagined about 15 years ago.
I'm surprised nothing surpassed them yet with how little there is to the game design.
I'm surprised nothing surpassed them yet with how little there is to the game design.
I thought it was the same thing... they get both parts just some pokemon will be different..
He's right. I'm glad third versions are gone but now they need to get rid of the 2 version thing.
What he means is that there is a Sword expansion pass and a Shield expansion pass so if you're one two own both versions of the game, you need to buy both expansion passes.
Is there really a good reason to own both and own both expansion passes?
Yeah but it's still a Sword version and a Shield version in the e-shop, instead of just one
To this day removing the GTS is the most mind boggling thing Game Freak has ever done. I'm surprised it's not talk about as much.
The Pokemon business model is to sell kids merch, not to sell adults video games. If your criticism of the brand is focused on the games and the desires of their adult players, you're off the mark.
I wouldn't, i would only ever buy one game but it's still a shitty move done for practically no reason.
It bloody well better be part of Home, especially if they expect us to pay for that service.
DLC has version exclusive Pokemon just like the base games so not sure how that would even work.
Anyway Sterling is off base here. He's arguably correct about the traditional full-priced third versions, but Pokemon having two versions isn't a scam it was literally designed to encourage kids to be social. Hence why trading exists and why the series main games never appear on non-portable systems. GF isn't expecting single users to buy both versions to catch em all, you're not supposed to do that.
I think a lot of people on Twitter are trying to turn this game into a Fallout 76-like disaster, but most of this stuff is standard AAA bullshit. Wake me up when there's a gacha and premium currency.
I don't quite understand this complaint. Surely you would still have to buy a singular version of the DLC twice if you wanted it for both Sword and Shield?
i dont think ive ever felt particularly enticed to buy a third version of a pokemon game. its always felt as though they were meant for late adopters, as the differences were slim.
I find it baffling people ever did this, unless they somehow lose the old game. even more baffling for buying both versions of a game.
but the expansion is a step in the right direction. lets them add a substantial amount of content without making the base game buyers feel like they wasted their money, and
I find it baffling people ever did this, unless they somehow lose the old game. even more baffling for buying both versions of a game.
but the expansion is a step in the right direction. lets them add a substantial amount of content without making the base game buyers feel like they wasted their money, and
Just wait until they give out more info on Home. If the gts is locked behind it.....its gonna cause a real shit storm.
You're not supposed to own both versions and both expansion passes
I mean, it's really straightforward in terms of coding to have two lists of data (i.e. which wild Pokémon can spawn) to load from on entering an area, with which you get decided by whether you booted sword or shield.
This was a business motivated decision than any technical difficulties they couldn't get over in programming, I would assume.
This was always the case which is why I've never bought the other version or the 3rd versions before. Since D/P, the GTS made the other version unnecessary (although I did miss out on the additional content in the 3rd versions), but that's removed now
Just buy the version of the DLC that corresponds to the game you own. It's the same content sans a few Pokemon anyway
I do it for Masuda Method reasons and the like.
For normal people though no, there isn't lol
They're entirely different SKUs. There isn't even a way that one DLC could work for both. They could theoretically provide you with a download code for the other if you buy one, but there's separate coding/work in making the content for each different game so why shouldn't they charge for it? It's not like households with two people playing WoW can use one expansion pack on both copies. It's a separate game -- if you opt to buy it, then you need to expect that you'll buy a separate expansion.
The core of Pokemon is two different people playing together and trading. If you opt to buy the different games for yourself, you're a.) in the vast minority and b.) can't expect Nintendo to cater their decisions towards you.
Actually, I'd be happy if its locked behind home.
I will mean it exist at least, wich is way better than it just being dumped.
Why?, there's literally no downside for the two versions as all pokemon can be gotten via trading
While I agree about it, making the unique legendaries exclusives, actually points to GF wanting people to double dip.
Trade evolution, and version exclusives promote trading when you dont loose the main pokemon of the game when trading.
Looking back all the way to Crystal, I realize I never "double dipped" for the 3rd version, well up until B2/W2 with its entirely new story and changed landscape. Then I didn't touch Ultra Sun/Moon which seemed like pure cash grab.
Of course I never bought the other version as well, my brother is there for that ;)
Of course I never bought the other version as well, my brother is there for that ;)
Well, in this scenario they'd get the "full" experience for $60 -- Nintendo would not sell Pokemon Lance for $40. Now they'll pay $90 instead of $60. I've been playing Pokemon since Red and have never bought a third version myself.. it never made any sense to me personally. I'll definitely be getting the expansion though. Either way, from what I understand though, even with additions in the third versions, weren't their also subtractions?
That would have been a complete wtf moment. Lol.
My mind is not ready for the 2020 console wars. Shit is already putting a strain in my thinking!!
Pretty sure they somewhat expect that now, atleast from the age group Sterling is in, but anyone who thinks they designed it that way back in the 90ties in the expectation that people would double buy, is a bit crazy.
I'm really not seeing it, just buy 1 version, its not even a case of half a game and you needing the other version. Just one version having slightly different things and mostly for the purpose of trading, and not even super beneficial for gf/Nintendo, they have to stock 2 discs instead of 1