effin

Member
Jan 20, 2019
210
I saw a brief mention about it in one review but can't seem to find any good answers on it. Does anyone know the difficulty level of these games?

Ive been hearing mixed reports on whether or not the mandatory exp share makes it too easy or isn't really a concern. I'm basically just hoping it ain't as simple and easy as Sword/Shield was.
 

Kirbivore

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,967
Well that I can at least agree with, although it's clear they don't actually want players to have to learn any sort of strategizing during the normal play throughs of these games. They've done their best to undermine any need to learn the battle system before the end of the main quest for some reason

Sounds like my intuition was spot on. Yeah, I can vibe with that.

Megas, Z Moves, and Dynamax annoy me considering the amount of dev time it takes up for when it gets ditched. More importantly though, the real reason I'm not really happy with them is because Pokemon already has underutilized concepts that were implemented into the games like Doubles, Triples and Rotation (The latter two I wouldn't be surprised if it was gutted because it was a technical nightmare on 3DS) if it really wanted to improve on its mechanics. And they don't build towards that, especially when VGCs and the aforementioned gimmicks implemented each generation compliments 2v2 more than 1v1.

Coupled with improvements that only makes sense in a competitive standard while also not delivering much in game content for the end game, and I guess even the main game... it feels like the franchise is at odds with itself and how it moves forward..

EDIT: It's funny to think back to Dragon Quest 1, which was like the OG entry way RPG (in a different way) to break the concept to console players, and each one builds upon that in sequels, with the second one expanding your party to three members.
 

emperor_ing

Member
Jan 10, 2018
119
United Kingdom
Kinda what I expected really, for the 6s they read like the reviewers were expecting a bit too much, elsewhere largely positive apart from a few niggles. It's sounding like a standard Pokémon game and does the job, and if you're a fan you'll have a fun time.
 

Metto

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,115
I saw a brief mention about it in one review but can't seem to find any good answers on it. Does anyone know the difficulty level of these games?

Ive been hearing mixed reports on whether or not the mandatory exp share makes it too easy or isn't really a concern. I'm basically just hoping it ain't as simple and easy as Sword/Shield was.
The consensus at least seems to be that the game up to the Elite 4 is relatively comfortable with maybe a chance of over leveling but once you get to the Elite 4 the level jump and more advanced teams will put more spice in the playthrough and post game gets some of the most challenging Pokémon content in the series
 

Charizard

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,914
Please remake Black and White 2 next GF and NOT Black and White. Black and White 2 are vastly superior and the post game is huge. Heck GF might even do it since there are two versions to remake. Cash cash cash :D
It would be weird to remake the sequels without the first games.

*However*, after remaking the first games, remaking 2 shouldn't be too hard since a significant portion of the assets are already made so there's really no excuse there IMO.
 

MayorTortimer

Member
May 27, 2018
773
For most video games, especially big AAA franchises like Pokemon, a MC in the 70s is basically an unmitigated disaster.

It's like 5% below ORAS on metacritic right now. Hardly a disaster - especially when you consider this is a third party developed Pokemon game. Arguably, it'd be more understandable to compare it to other third party Pokemon games, many of which it is performing better than (Pokemon Rangers: 69%; Pokemon Colosseum: 73%). Why is this community so hyperbolic? lol
 
Mar 8, 2018
1,161
The Polygon is review isn't about "too much innovation," it's about how Pokémon has flailed around for the past couple generations, introducing new ideas with no long-term staying power, or treading into spaces that are outside the scope of the series' core appeal, instead of doubling down on the strongest basic elements of the series and building the best possible game around those elements. It's a well-reasoned review that captures a lot of my personal feelings about the series right now.
 

-Peabody-

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,609
I understand where the NintendoLife review is coming from but it's not like old Pokemon DS copies are easy to come by. For someone wanting to revisit this Gen, the new release is the best option.
 

Quasi

Banned
Aug 24, 2021
702
Kinda what I expected really, for the 6s they read like the reviewers were expecting a bit too much, elsewhere largely positive apart from a few niggles. It's sounding like a standard Pokémon game and does the job, and if you're a fan you'll have a fun time.
I think it's more that the positive reviews have come to expect too little from Pokémon games, which is why they're praising mediocrity.
 

Farrac

Member
Nov 3, 2017
2,082
Alcalá de Henares, Spain
Nintendo Life's review is super interesting. If you look at these as faithful remasters then they do that job well, but if you look at these as remakes that could bring more to the table, but don't, then that 6/10 score and everything they say is totally fair.

Like for me I want remasters of the originals, whereas NintendoLife talk about there being no reason to play these when you can just play the originals. It's a completely different stance based on different expectations.

I think these products that blur the line between remake and remaster will become more common, and the critical argument over whether to innovate, or stay true to the original vision, is going to continue to be a point of contention in the future. At least that's what I think.
Yes, and I think it's a good thing. I've been noticing this recently, like with Bluepoint remakes. Some criticize them for changing too much from the originals, which blows my mind cause I find them annoying precisely because they don't change or add nearly enough in my eyes.

However, I don't necessarily dislike the direction of these remakes for being too faithful. What I dislike is the choice of being faithful to Diamond and Pearl instead of the obviously better Platinum. Like, it was right there. I don't understand why they chose to go this way.
 

spyroflame0487

One Winged Slayer
Member
Nov 3, 2017
3,111
I saw a brief mention about it in one review but can't seem to find any good answers on it. Does anyone know the difficulty level of these games?

Ive been hearing mixed reports on whether or not the mandatory exp share makes it too easy or isn't really a concern. I'm basically just hoping it ain't as simple and easy as Sword/Shield was.
It really does seemed mixed but i attribute that to a huge gap between competitive players and regular average passing fans.

From my understanding, if you use the friendship/EXP share as it is, you'll probably be overleveled through most of the game and shouldn't have much of a problem. But if you use the herb items for healing your Pokemon to lower friendship, you'll actually have a somewhat more challenging time.

I saw someone say the other day that increasingly it seems like the Pokemon games are designed to shuttle you through the main story and try to get you into competitive/online battles as quick as possible which i've been thinking about a lot recently.

Megas, Z Moves, and Dynamax annoy me considering the amount of dev time it takes up for when it gets ditched. More importantly though, the real reason I'm not really happy with them is because Pokemon already has underutilized concepts that were implemented into the games like Doubles, Triples and Rotation (The latter two I wouldn't be surprised if it was gutted because it was a technical nightmare on 3DS) if it really wanted to improve on its mechanics. And they don't build towards that, especially when VGCs and the aforementioned gimmicks implemented each generation compliments 2v2 more than 1v1.

Coupled with improvements that only makes sense in a competitive standard while also not delivering much in game content for the end game, and I guess even the main game... it feels like the franchise is at odds with itself and how it moves forward..
I really REALLY like the Raid Battles. If they can't give us doubles/triples, raid battles is a brilliant addition to the game (and ported from Go no less) that works really well in tying in multiple aspects of the game (teamwork, type matchups, and optimizing Pokemon "builds" ). While most of the raid battles are simply brute forcing, GF has shown us that they know how to make truly evil Pokemon builds (Like the Mewtwo and Pikachu raids) that will absolutely knock anyone down a few pegs. I really hope this concept or something similar is brought over into future games where its you with other players vs one super strong Pokemon you take on.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 34949

Account closed at user request
Banned
Nov 30, 2017
19,101
I saw a brief mention about it in one review but can't seem to find any good answers on it. Does anyone know the difficulty level of these games?

Ive been hearing mixed reports on whether or not the mandatory exp share makes it too easy or isn't really a concern. I'm basically just hoping it ain't as simple and easy as Sword/Shield was.
EXP share definitely seems to have you at least even, if not above trainer/gym leader levels, but it's somewhat offset by trainers and especially Gym Leaders having more well thought out movesets. The Pokemon following mechanic is tied to the friendship/affection thing, and that seems to be a bit more egregious, since high affection gives you buffs in battle like higher critical hit ratios or being able to survive attacks that you otherwise shouldn't. You can apparently offset this by feeding Pokemon bitter herbs to keep affection low. (And they're relatively easy to obtain in bulk early on)

The postgame content might arguably have some of the most difficult, but well put together trainer battles in series history, though.
 

effin

Member
Jan 20, 2019
210
Awesome, thanks for the answers about the difficulty stuff y'all. That honestly sounds really good to me- and I'm considering picking this up a lot more now.
 

Alooful

One Winged Slayer
Member
Mar 27, 2020
450
I do wonder if the grading curve changed for a portable game to what would be a console game. In addition to the actual game too ofc.

Good question
Imo, the Pokemon Switch game scores would be lower if reviewers weren't largely still treating them like portable games.

For example, I've seen some reviews praising BDSP battle backgrounds and while they're better than any previous mainline games', they're still way worse (subjective) than what other 1st party Nintendo games manage, or even what Battle Revolution on the Wii managed
 

Kirbivore

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,967
Good question
Imo, the Pokemon Switch game scores would be lower if reviewers weren't largely still treating them like portable games.

For example, I've seen some reviews praising BDSP battle backgrounds and while they're better than any previous mainline game's, they're still way worse than what other 1st party Nintendo games manage, or even what Battle Revolution on the Wii managed

It doesn't particularly help when the portable experience feels like better way to play in some cases like with Let's Go.
It really does seemed mixed but i attribute that to a huge gap between competitive players and regular average passing fans.

From my understanding, if you use the friendship/EXP share as it is, you'll probably be overleveled through most of the game and shouldn't have much of a problem. But if you use the herb items for healing your Pokemon to lower friendship, you'll actually have a somewhat more challenging time.

I saw someone say the other day that increasingly it seems like the Pokemon games are designed to shuttle you through the main story and try to get you into competitive/online battles as quick as possible which i've been thinking about a lot recently.


I really REALLY like the Raid Battles. If they can't give us doubles/triples, raid battles is a brilliant addition to the game (and ported from Go no less) that works really well in tying in multiple aspects of the game (teamwork, type matchups, and optimizing Pokemon "builds" ). While most of the raid battles are simply brute forcing, GF has shown us that they know how to make truly evil Pokemon builds (Like the Mewtwo and Pikachu raids) that will absolutely knock anyone down a few pegs. I really hope this concept or something similar is brought over into future games where its you with other players vs one super strong Pokemon you take on.
.
Im... somewhat mixed on the idea, partly because at the same time, it hammers on the fact that Gamefreak didn't make the base game Doubles or even Triples and so you had other players committing mistakes for their side they wouldn't have committed if the base game utilized it way more. That and the debuff removal in cases felt like your main incentive was to pump in attack moves, which the main game already does considering how easy it is, and how utterly absurd the attack bonuses are for moves.
 

JordianKnot

Member
Oct 27, 2017
873
I had my eye on this but I think I'll pas and go with the Sword and Shield DLC for the holidays for my Pokémon fix.
 

KillstealWolf

One Winged Slayer
Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
16,276
I saw someone say the other day that increasingly it seems like the Pokemon games are designed to shuttle you through the main story and try to get you into competitive/online battles as quick as possible which i've been thinking about a lot recently.

I want to say that but the online experience you rarely even see new players on it.

It's more the games seem to be designed so they can be finished more than anything. That includes little jimmy with his 4 fire moves Starter that he only ever wants to use. Some of the changes have been good (Seeing if the move will be super effective or not on the battle screen is a good call) others questionable (The EXP Share is something that could work, but it needs to be stricter, make it so overleveled pokemon gain a lot less exp, and you can balance it by making underleveled pokemon gain a lot more EXP) and some that are downright bad (Linearity of routes probably being the biggest one of the bunch)

The wild thing is knowing from early players, the gym leader sets are more decked out and stronger than they were in the Diamond and Pearl equivalents, but the EXP Share and Friendship Buffs are so dominatingly stronger a lot of the reviewers aren't even noticing them at all.
 
Oct 27, 2017
42,971
(The EXP Share is something that could work, but it needs to be stricter, make it so overleveled pokemon gain a lot less exp, and you can balance it by making underleveled pokemon gain a lot more EXP) and some that are downright bad (Linearity of routes probably being the biggest one of the bunch)
I think that's how EXP worked in BW, but obviously it was changed because
 

KillstealWolf

One Winged Slayer
Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
16,276
I think that's how EXP worked in BW, but obviously it was changed because

EXP has been the following...

Gen 5 had you gain Scaled EXP depending on level. Lower level mons get more EXP, higher level mons get less.
Gen 6 revised the EXP share to it's current form and removed EXP Scaling, this is probably why you had multiple level 40 pokemon by the time you got to Korrina. You also gain EXP on capturing pokemon now as well (I don't mind this addition)
Gen 7 brought back the EXP Scaling system, but it's scaling not strong enough to account for the 250% more EXP you get per pokemon. No problems though, you can turn the EXP Share off if you wish for something more traditional.
...Until Let's Go which removed the ability to do so.
Gen 8 merged the Happiness and Affection Stats into the one new Friendship stat. One of the buffs you get at the higher level of Friendship is 1.2x EXP per battle.
In Sw/Sh, there is a cap on Friendship you can earn without using special methods like the Pokemon Camp, so the buffs were optional for the most part.
In BD/SP that cap no longer exists, so you can get all the Friendship Buffs like the boosted EXP, dodging moves, surviving moves that would KO you and such just by leveling up and walking about.

I'm sure there's extra stuff in there (I only just found out about boosted EXP if you pokemon can evolve last week) but that's the main gist of things.
 
Jun 5, 2018
3,240
The problem with a lot of these reviews is the bias of the writers, a few of the ones I read don't offer objective reviews and just stare nostalgia as a selling point, anyway that's reviews for you.
 

J_ToSaveTheDay

"This guy are sick" and Corrupted by Vengeance
Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
18,979
USA
As a very distant and casual observer (won't even call myself a fan) of the Pokémon franchise, this seems pretty good and certainly has piqued my interest.

I don't love the overworld art style -- I understand it's trying to be more of a direct translation of the old sprite art style into 3D graphics but it ends up looking a bit weird to me, especially with full-sized humans and Pokémon in the battles. That said, I am guessing the full-sized models didn't fit into the faithful top-down viewpoint, either, as the recent games have all had 3D camera work to better take advantage of the more normal-proportioned in-game models.

But, this is one of my brother's favorite generations of Pokémon and he's been into the series from the start. He's been excited for these remakes, so I'm of mind to give them a go. I would only get one or the other, not sure if I want Diamond or Pearl...
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,851
The problem with a lot of these reviews is the bias of the writers, a few of the ones I read don't offer objective reviews and just stare nostalgia as a selling point, anyway that's reviews for you.

That's not fair to the people reviewing the games.

Every Pokémon thread we have seen here every month is someway involving nostalgia too.

It's a remake at the end of the day. If this was a broken clock being right once/twice a day situation then surely it would fit in here.

Nostalgia as a descriptive word in gaming chats/analysis has also lost a lot of its real meaning as well, some times I just roll my eyes at the word. But that's another kettle of fish.
 
Oct 27, 2017
42,971
I don't love the overworld art style -- I understand it's trying to be more of a direct translation of the old sprite art style into 3D graphics but it ends up looking a bit weird to me, especially with full-sized humans and Pokémon in the battles. That said, I am guessing the full-sized models didn't fit into the faithful top-down viewpoint, either, as the recent games have all had 3D camera work to better take advantage of the more normal-proportioned in-game models.I don't love the overworld art style -- I understand it's trying to be more of a direct translation of the old sprite art style into 3D graphics
I would argue it's really not. If you want to look at the sprites faithfully translated into models, while still retaining the top down perspective, you only have to look at the first fully 3D Pokemon mainline games XY and ORAS. The fact those look better, art style wise, makes these remakes even more disappointing
 

Efejota

Member
Mar 13, 2018
3,750
It would be weird to remake the sequels without the first games.

*However*, after remaking the first games, remaking 2 shouldn't be too hard since a significant portion of the assets are already made so there's really no excuse there IMO.
If they went in with that mindset we could be seeing an update with more Platinum content for this game, but I don't expect it.
 
Please remake Black and White 2 next GF and NOT Black and White. Black and White 2 are vastly superior and the post game is huge. Heck GF might even do it since there are two versions to remake. Cash cash cash :D
If they're so obsessed with faithfulness that 3rd version features for the gen that benefited from the most was off limits, they certainly aren't going to remake Gen 5 starting with its sequel. The dream is dead.
 
Last edited:

Nocturnowl

Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,221
They also had the fantastic idea of... *looks at smudged writing* locking out evolutions that weren't in the original until after the postgame? What the fuck, Gamefreak?
Look pal, your Kanto Golbat isn't truly happy enough to evolve until you're a goddamn pokemon league champ, they have standards
 
Dec 2, 2020
2,520
I take it the metacritic was much lower after reading the posts on the first page. 78 is a solid score for an old school portable Pokemon remake no.
 

ned_ballad

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
48,319
Rochester, New York
Look pal, your Kanto Golbat isn't truly happy enough to evolve until you're a goddamn pokemon league champ, they have standards
I didn't know this was a thing the first time I played FR and was using a Golbat and it tried to evolve and I got denied and I was pretty disappointed

So I just boxed Golbat and used someone else

It was such a goofy restriction
 
Jun 5, 2018
3,240
That's not fair to the people reviewing the games.

Every Pokémon thread we have seen here every month is someway involving nostalgia too.

It's a remake at the end of the day. If this was a broken clock being right once/twice a day situation then surely it would fit in here.

Nostalgia as a descriptive word in gaming chats/analysis has also lost a lot of its real meaning as well, some times I just roll my eyes at the word. But that's another kettle of fish.
My main point is reviews should be objective, I want a review that tells me about any technical issues, ideally someone who has played the last 5 Pokémon games with experience in the franchise would help for a comparison, not a fan of this whole scoring system anyway since it's complete nonsense and means as much as too much water.
 
Sep 5, 2021
3,116
If they're so obsessed with faithfulness that 3rd version for the gen that benefited from the most was off limits, they certainly aren't going to remake Gen 5 starting with its sequel. The dream is dead.

At least when they make a game that takes place in Unova around the time of the BW remake, it should probably be B3W3 (unless they copy LA and it's set in the Wild West).
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,851
My main point is reviews should be objective, I want a review that tells me about any technical issues, ideally someone who has played the last 5 Pokémon games with experience in the franchise would help for a comparison, not a fan of this whole scoring system anyway since it's complete nonsense and means as much as too much water.

I could talk about the anatomy of a game review all day.

Reviews can be objective, that's why we have multiple reviews at the release. There's inherent bias especially when it comes to remakes, so even then it's a little bit hard on on the part of the reviewer to try and write something that's going to appeal to absolutely everybody.

I think my appreciation for scores is where I actually agree with you that a review of a game should still retain some sort of 'sterility' (not the word I want to use but it'll do).

Technical issues in a Pokemon game aren't the same as an artistic choice like the graphics. There is a lot of overlap of course. The HD-2D stuff in the Octopath games is a completely artistic choice that technically looks less-than-modern, for example. Nostalgia (again, I hate using the term in discussions like this about games) is clearly a factor there.

New Pokemon games are unique at each release/gen for the most part, for someone to have the experience that you're craving before they can even be considered to get the chance to review these games is a fair call, but we are also forever asking the series to be more critically reviewed against its contemporaries like Dragon Quest or SMT V. On this very messageboard.

'Too much water' actively damaged Pokemon game discussion and the poor reviewer wasn't even responsible for that. If there was a positive then hopefully it changed the technical way a game review at the site is even published.
 
At least when they make a game that takes place in Unova around the time of the BW remake, it should probably be B3W3 (unless they copy LA and it's set in the Wild West).
That's what I've been saying in pretty much every Gen 5 discussion. The true way to do the spirit of Gen 5 justice is a another sequel. Release online compatible ports of the original so new players can have context going into BW3.
 

Ramsay

Member
Jul 2, 2019
3,625
Australia
A 78 MC is surprising given that Pokemon on the DS and 3DS typically hovered in the mid-80s (even ORAS was like a 83) - which might be an indication that Gamefreak's decisions in Gen 7 and Sword and Shield are starting to catch up with them.
 

RM8

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,914
JP
Pokémon needs difficulty options more than Souls games do to be honest. I wouldn't mind revisiting this game but I just know it's going to be a full priced cakewalk and it's just not worth it to me. Coromon does this perfectly, if only the series that inspired it would too :x
 

Pop-O-Matic

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
12,995
I take it the metacritic was much lower after reading the posts on the first page. 78 is a solid score for an old school portable Pokemon remake no.
Nah, mid-to-high 70s has been where it's hovering since the start. It's just that this is also the lowest score of any traditional Pokemon game to date.
 
Jun 5, 2018
3,240
That's what I've been saying in pretty much every Gen 5 discussion. The true way to do the spirit of Gen 5 justice is a another sequel. Release online compatible ports of the original so new players can have context going into BW3.
I imagine we will get an origin dragon legends game set in the past seeing how they made a big deal about it no longer existing, but with how the remakes made the second screen poketch a toggle it should be possible to have ds ports do the same.
 
Oct 27, 2017
42,971
I imagine we will get an origin dragon legends game set in the past seeing how they made a big deal about it no longer existing, but with how the remakes made the second screen poketch a toggle it should be possible to have ds ports do the same.
Why would you imagine that? Yall keep trying to look for patterns, meanwhile LGPE was a one and done and Legends probably will be too. At most they'll incorporate some of the mechanics in it into other games, but I VERY much doubt we'll get another game set in the past of a region
 
Jun 5, 2018
3,240
Why would you imagine that? Yall keep trying to look for patterns, meanwhile LGPE was a one and done and Legends probably will be too. At most they'll incorporate some of the mechanics in it into other games, but I VERY much doubt we'll get another game set in the past of a region
Because it makes a lot more sense than black and white 3? Because legends has the potential to not be as polarising as let's go? Or perhaps because if legends isn't good enough to denote a sequel (either because of execution or gamefreak's recent disinterest in being predictable) I don't have faith this franchise is going to be for me much longer, either way I have nothing to lose in speculating, unless you see something here that states what I sad as a matter of fact going to happen?

Either way, enjoy dismissing people's concepts.
 
Oct 27, 2017
42,971
Because it makes a lot more sense than black and white 3? Because legends has the potential to not be as polarising as let's go? Or perhaps because if legends isn't good enough to denote a sequel (either because of execution or gamefreak's recent disinterest in being predictable) I don't have faith this franchise is going to be for me much longer, either way I have nothing to lose in speculating, unless you see something here that states what I sad as a matter of fact going to happen?

Either way, enjoy dismissing people's concepts.
I'm not dismissing your concept, I'm saying it's unlikely something you want to happen and that makes sense to happen will happen because this is from a company that regularly does whatever they want, regardless of the logic behind it
 
I imagine we will get an origin dragon legends game set in the past seeing how they made a big deal about it no longer existing, but with how the remakes made the second screen poketch a toggle it should be possible to have ds ports do the same.
The x-transceiver could be reprogrammed into a sub-menu, it didn't really be efit from being constantly on screen like the poketch did
 
Jun 5, 2018
3,240
I'm not dismissing your concept, I'm saying it's unlikely something you want to happen and that makes sense to happen will happen because this is from a company that regularly does whatever they want, regardless of the logic behind it
As I say, nothing in thinking it's a possibility, especially when there's some logic behind it, not got any expectations beyond they could.
 

Aprikurt

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 29, 2017
18,810
They also had the fantastic idea of... *looks at smudged writing* locking out evolutions that weren't in the original until after the postgame? What the fuck, Gamefreak?
Heh I remember as a kid desperately trying to evolve Golbat and not understanding why I couldn't.
 

Watershed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,910
I think Gamefreak is trying to make Legends a separate spin-off series from mainline games, not just a one and done spin-off. The naming convention of Pokemon Legends: Arceus suggests to me that we could see future Pokemon Legends: _______. I don't think it will be a frequent series, just every couple years after the latest big Zelda game so they can keep cribbing off the Zelda team.
 

Stencil

Member
Oct 30, 2017
10,476
USA
I mean. Whatever. It's Pokemon. I don't know why on earth they wouldn't have at least remade Platinum (like wtf) but at this point I can't even muster the curiosity for the ever-incompetent Gamefreak, or TPC, or whoever makes these asinine decisions. I liked the original so yes I'll be buying it, and yes, I realize I may be "part of the problem" by doing so, but I suppose I just need a shot of nostalgia, and this looks like the hit I need. Pretty iffy looking but I'm sure it'll do the trick. As someone said earlier: Pokemon/10. It was a foregone conclusion seen a mile away.
 

Galkinator

Chicken Chaser
Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,036
I think it's more that the positive reviews have come to expect too little from Pokémon games, which is why they're praising mediocrity.
"bad art style, lack of content, too easy

8/10!"

It really seems like pokemon is somewhat immune to lower scores even though reviews themselves aren't that hot.
 

Terraforce

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
18,945
Things in BDSP not in Pt:
-Following Pokemon
-Expanded Underground
-E4 Round 3 (And in general, improved rematch for gym leaders/e4)
-Ramanas Park

Things in Pt not in BDSP:
-Extra plot/battles due to introduction of Giratina, Charon, and Looker to main story. This includes a post game subplot too.
-Distortion World
-A few updated gym designs
-Various visual updates (BDSP is based on the original look)
-Updated boss lineups
-Battles with the NPC doubles partners you encounter throughout the game
-Customizable postgame cabana
-Battle Frontier

Im sure I'm missing some things for both, but that should include all the big stuff. The biggest thing in BDSP is probably Ramanas and the improved boss rematches, but I feel like the Battle Frontier alone makes up for that, it took me a ton of time back in the day just to get all the silver symbols, let alone the gold ones. Battle Frontier can easily take up dozens of hours for people who really get into it.
Missing a few points for BSDP. Quality of Life is something so many people seem to be undermining, but they improve the experience vastly. HM moves and the competitive changes especially (egg moves, relearning moves, nature mints, exp candy, etc).

Also a few of those from the second list actually are in BDSP.
Updated boss line ups make sense as an unlockable rematch. You can battle the Stat Partner NPCs in the battle tower (as well as team galactic). And Distortion Room isn't much worse than Distortion World. Just lacks the spectacle, but both are glorified corridors. There's YT videos of people beating it in under ten minutes.