- Pronouns
- he/him
As long as the postgame content is good, and the EXP share always being on helps me access that content faster, I don't particularly care about it always being on.
I didn't mean to say that it wasn't a mistake. Still irresponsible. Gamexplain touts(or touted) itself as a channel with attention to detail.Could very well just be a mistake on their part, not sure what they would gain from actively propagating misinformation if that is what you’re implying.
Gotcha! Makes senseI didn't mean to say that it wasn't a mistake. Still irresponsible. Gamexplain touts(or touted) itself as a channel with attention to detail.
Do we know the size of the NationalDex?
I don't mind EXP share anymore, but I do think they should give us the option to turn it off.
You can do that, but it's very inconvenient compared to just being able to toggle it.Seeing as you can access your box from anywhere now can't you just take Pokémon you don't want getting XP out of your team? Seems like an easy way to get around the EXP share problem that some people seem to have.
Some mainstays that had always remained ever since the first Pokémon games were also changed. An example of this is the usage of TMs. Originally, they would disappear after one use. Game Freak learnt that, as a result, there were many people who would kept TMs in their item box, and they became a sort of collector’s item, never to be used.
Masuda had noticed, though, that people liked to change moves often, and experiment with new combinations. In light of this, in Pokémon Black/White, TMs can be used more than once.
What's worse is that the gaming media does not ask the questions that need to be ask.Ngl if they weren't gonna put much effort in these Remakes why not just bring Platinum to Switch lol.
The remakes have quite a few baffling decisions when the game could have been fantastic. This is why my faith in Game Freak is so damn low all these years. They know how special Gen 4 is for a lot of people considering it's one of the best-selling gens in general. Yet, they couldn't give it the treatment it deserves.
It is what it is.
What's worse is that the gaming media does not ask the questions that need to be ask.
"Why cant the exp share be an option?"
"Since you talk about accessibility so much....what aren't the TMs infinite?"
"Difficulty options are a standard in modern RPG....so what's going on with Pokemon in that regard?"
Is there an article that expands on the TM situation? Is it like Sword and Shield where there are both permanent TMs and consumable TRs, or has everything become consumable?
Another potentially controversial, er, not-change is the return of single-use TMs. Since the series’ fifth generation, TMs — or Technical Machines, which teach a particular move to a compatible Pokémon — have had unlimited uses, meaning you could teach them to as many Pokémon as you like, as many times as you want, without worrying about running out, or saving it for the perfect situation. Prior to that, if you used a TM, that was it, it broke forever. Sometimes you’d get multiple of a particular TM, and sometimes you could buy certain TMs as many times as you like, but some were single-use, and usually good ones at that. The Nintendo rep in the session assured me that there would be plentiful amounts of every TM you’d want, and I have no reason to doubt them, which opens up the possibility that there might be new ways to obtain TMs. Maybe buying them, maybe digging them up in the Grand Underground (more on that in a moment), or maybe your walking buddy (another new feature) can find them and give them to you. It’s hard to know at this stage, and it’s a bit of an odd decision to stick with single-use TMs so long after they were phased out — even Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire had infinite TM usage.
There's no need to be so aggressively dismissive of people's issue with the choice. Handwaving it as outrage and that the people who have issue with it simply need to "broaden their horizons" is a needlessly toxic stance on it. I personally bent over backwards to try to make the new Exp Share work for me and I just find the negative impact it has on the gameplay for me is materially large enough that it's a pretty damn big deal.So much of the outrage over EXP share is really overdone. If they maintain the ease from Sw/SH to switch pokemon from your party to your box(and vice-versa) it's not really an issue. Broaden your horizons and play with more Pokemon. I say this as someone who quit x/y because the EXP share made the game too easy.
Sw/SH I adapted and just played with a team of 8 or 9. I wasn't over-leveled much. When I was I just brought in a new Pokemon. So much more fun than sticking to the same 6. It's just weird seeing some people say they will just quit the entire series over it.
As for the single-use TMs, it is weird. If they hand them out like candy like in Sw/Sh then it's not a big deal but it's also kinda pointless to do that when you could just do away with single-use TMs lmao.
I'm handwaving the outrageous reaction. I gave an example of such. I'm really not being aggressive but okay. I didn't say there shouldn't be a toggle option nor did I attempt to invalidate everyone who have an issue.There's no need to be so aggressively dismissive of people's issue with the choice. Handwaving it as outrage and that the people who have issue with it simply need to "broaden their horizons" is a needlessly toxic stance on it. I personally bent over backwards to try to make the new Exp Share work for me and I just find the negative impact it has on the gameplay for me is materially large enough that it's a pretty damn big deal.
Seeing as you can access your box from anywhere now can't you just take Pokémon you don't want getting XP out of your team? Seems like an easy way to get around the EXP share problem that some people seem to have.
I think some journalist asked that when SwSh were coming out. If I remember well the answer was: "just rotate your pokemon lol"."Why not give the player to turn off the exp share?"
A simple question that any journalist can ask gamefreak and yet they refuse to ask them this for some reason.
But that's not how I prefer to play Pokémon. I did for the last couple of games because I was basically forced to, but I prefer to play with a steady team of six. Options are good, even if you yourself see no personal use for them.So much of the outrage over EXP share is really overdone. If they maintain the ease from Sw/SH to switch pokemon from your party to your box(and vice-versa) it's not really an issue. Broaden your horizons and play with more Pokemon. I say this as someone who quit x/y because the EXP share made the game too easy.
Sw/SH I adapted and just played with a team of 8 or 9. I wasn't over-leveled much. When I was I just brought in a new Pokemon. So much more fun than sticking to the same 6. It's just weird seeing some people say they will just quit the entire series over it.
Because the games are absolutely not balanced around it. If you stick with the same mons, you will end up 20+ levels above the competition. It really limits the ways you can play if you want even an iota of challenge.Is EXP share basically the massive QOL feature that JRPGs got like 20 years ago where the entire party levels up so you don’t have to grind as different characters? If so why is it a bad thing for Pokemon?
Because the games aren’t designed around it, as it’s been mentioned, and in previous games it was a toggle that got taken away for no apparent reason.Is EXP share basically the massive QOL feature that JRPGs got like 20 years ago where the entire party levels up so you don’t have to grind as different characters? If so why is it a bad thing for Pokemon?
I wouldn't say it's an objectively bad thing for Pokemon and there are theoretically ways it could be implemented well, but there are a few reasons people don't like it.Is EXP share basically the massive QOL feature that JRPGs got like 20 years ago where the entire party levels up so you don’t have to grind as different characters? If so why is it a bad thing for Pokemon?
Movesets are revamped in remakes to account for mechanical changes like Fairy-type or new moves, so enemies can use them against the player. They don't balance around the extra Exp. generation from nuExp Share, though.I've always wondered, when they introduce things like new types, like Fairy, and EXP-share in remakes, doesn't it break the game? Or do they try to balance around the additions?
Because the games are absolutely not balanced around it. If you stick with the same mons, you will end up 20+ levels above the competition. It really limits the ways you can play if you want even an iota of challenge.
Oh god the music is awful. How do MIDIs on Switch sound worse than they do on DS?
Because the games aren’t designed around it, as it’s been mentioned, and in previous games it was a toggle that got taken away for no apparent reason.
Also anybody who needs to grind to reach the credits of any Pokemon game is bad at team building. If you fight every trainer in the game you’ll have enough EXP to win.
Wait so I’m confused on what the mechanic is then (I’m not a Pokémon fan just always been curious). How does it make you above the level curve? I always thought it was something like, if I were using FF7 as an example with a team of only cloud Barrett and Tifa. Fighting battles with them only means Aerith doesn’t level up, which I remember people disliking and now modern RPGs have everyone level up regardless if they’re in the party. there’s no change to the level curve, everyone just becomes even so that you don’t have underlevelled characters you have to grind simply because you didn’t use them and is more encouraging to try switching your team out because no one is at a disadvantage. Is that not how it works in Pokémon?I wouldn't say it's an objectively bad thing for Pokemon and there are theoretically ways it could be implemented well, but there are a few reasons people don't like it.
The more direct reason is that these games simply aren't balanced around it. Sword/Shield were basically balanced in a way that assumed it was still an optional mechanic, similar to Pokemon X/Y and Sun/Moon, where if you exclusively didn't use it you'd be slightly below the level curve but if you did use it exclusively you'd be high above the level curve. Like I mentioned earlier in the thread, I used upwards of 14 Pokemon swapping in and out of my party constantly just to try to remain on similar terms with the level curve. If these remakes are keeping the level curves from the original game mostly intact, the issue will be present here as well, where using the classic 6 Pokemon party will push you far above the level curve and it will require frequent swapping in and out of Pokemon just to create a reasonably balanced experience, which absolutely never feels intentional, at least to me. It feels like an overcorrection to me, especially since the older games have never at any point actually required grinding to beat the league.
A less direct reason that I think still applies to many is that these are games designed around capturing Pokemon and raising them. A lot of people enjoy having to use your Pokemon in battle to level them up and raise them. This isn't a party-based JRPG where you're using all your characters in battle (and even then you'll find a subset of JRPG fans that appreciate games that divide experience differently for in-battle units vs out-of-battle units for similar reasons), but a game designed around raising up your Pokemon. The games were designed around this aspect for so long that some just don't like not having the option to more directly raise up their Pokemon like older games.
I think most people would just like the option. I don't think anybody feels that people shouldn't be able to use Exp Share, but it just sorta sucks for those of us who don't like its impact on the game.
In the old games only Pokemon that participate in a battle get EXP. trainer encounters are battling Pokemon one at a time. You beat a Pokemon, all your Pokemon who fought get EXP, the trainer sends out a new Pokemon, repeat.Wait so I’m confused on what the mechanic is then (I’m not a Pokémon fan just always been curious). How does it make you above the level curve? I always thought it was something like, if I were using FF7 as an example with a team of only cloud Barrett and Tifa. Fighting battles with them only means Aerith doesn’t level up, which I remember people disliking and now modern RPGs have everyone level up regardless if they’re in the party. there’s no change to the level curve, everyone just becomes even so that you don’t have underlevelled characters you have to grind simply because you didn’t use them and is more encouraging to try switching your team out because no one is at a disadvantage. Is that not how it works in Pokémon?
Either way if it was a toggle in previous games then yeah taking away options in general sucks.
Is EXP share basically the massive QOL feature that JRPGs got like 20 years ago where the entire party levels up so you don’t have to grind as different characters? If so why is it a bad thing for Pokemon?
The problem is balance. The problem that's generally occurred is that you get too much experience too quickly with all 6 of your Pokémon getting experience every time, which breaks the difficulty curve.Wait so I’m confused on what the mechanic is then (I’m not a Pokémon fan just always been curious). How does it make you above the level curve? I always thought it was something like, if I were using FF7 as an example with a team of only cloud Barrett and Tifa. Fighting battles with them only means Aerith doesn’t level up, which I remember people disliking and now modern RPGs have everyone level up regardless if they’re in the party. there’s no change to the level curve, everyone just becomes even so that you don’t have underlevelled characters you have to grind simply because you didn’t use them and is more encouraging to try switching your team out because no one is at a disadvantage. Is that not how it works in Pokémon?
Either way if it was a toggle in previous games then yeah taking away options in general sucks.
The Exp. from defeating an enemy is duplicated across your party, not split.Wait so I’m confused on what the mechanic is then (I’m not a Pokémon fan just always been curious). How does it make you above the level curve? I always thought it was something like, if I were using FF7 as an example with a team of only cloud Barrett and Tifa. Fighting battles with them only means Aerith doesn’t level up, which I remember people disliking and now modern RPGs have everyone level up regardless if they’re in the party. there’s no change to the level curve, everyone just becomes even so that you don’t have underlevelled characters you have to grind simply because you didn’t use them and is more encouraging to try switching your team out because no one is at a disadvantage. Is that not how it works in Pokémon?
Either way if it was a toggle in previous games then yeah taking away options in general sucks.
Difference is that you dont constantly have the whole party in battle participating. The whole party partakes in final fantasy. If pokemon was a 6 on 6 battle game then no one would ba talking obviously. The one that fights, the one you use gets the exp. Im of course not counting the fact that the characters outside of the party level along as well in final fantasy which pokemon doesnt have. Thats the point really. Different games.Wait so I’m confused on what the mechanic is then (I’m not a Pokémon fan just always been curious). How does it make you above the level curve? I always thought it was something like, if I were using FF7 as an example with a team of only cloud Barrett and Tifa. Fighting battles with them only means Aerith doesn’t level up, which I remember people disliking and now modern RPGs have everyone level up regardless if they’re in the party. there’s no change to the level curve, everyone just becomes even so that you don’t have underlevelled characters you have to grind simply because you didn’t use them and is more encouraging to try switching your team out because no one is at a disadvantage. Is that not how it works in Pokémon?
Either way if it was a toggle in previous games then yeah taking away options in general sucks.
This is probably my biggest pet peeve with it so far, it seems like they overcorrected from the ultra-saturated colors of the initial showing but now some parts look very dull. I'm also not a big fan of the cheap-looking DoF in some parts but it's rare that Switch games include it at all so it's fine.- Game still looks kinda ugly and not very colorful. Or rather, the colors they chose leave a lot to be desired
Yes! Though maybe not on the routes. It seems like they may have put the expanded Platinum Dex in the new Underground Hideaways.Will there be more than 2 fire-types?
That's what I'm most excited about it'll be fun to use pokemon outside of even the platinum dex main game from the underground. I wonder how early we get access?At least I know for sure it's a "maybe if I somehow find it for $20" type of deal for me now.
Yes! Though maybe not on the routes. It seems like they may have put the expanded Platinum Dex in the new Underground Hideaways.
Have we seen mons in the Underground that weren't already in D/P/Pt's main game?That's what I'm most excited about it'll be fun to use pokemon outside of even the platinum dex main game from the underground. I wonder how early we get access?
really like this shot