So, after thinking it over and watching the trailer a couple of times, I think i'm on board now. I don't think i'll miss wild/random battles much and I like gen 1. I will miss not being able to get Blissey but I can deal with it.

You know why multiple save slots would break the game?

Because of trading pokemon.  I catch the legendary pokemon and then I make multiple saves. I trade away the legendary on my multiple saves, and on my main save I still have the legendary. It would break the trading economy. Everyone could have infinite pokemon basically. Just make a duplicate save, trade your pokemon away, transfer those trades to bank and then back onto your main save. Then rinse and repeat.

Back to your original post. You remind me of that editor of a huge gaming website who freaked out about deleting his Zelda save. He actually didn't, but the point is you are complaining about something you did yourself. You accidently turned off your console and your bitching about Nintendo not having autosave.

Autosave is freaking stupid in pokemon. It would suck. I would hate it. All my legendaries would have shitty natures and so on cause the game would "autosave" after I caught it before I could check its nature and reset. Or how about people trying to soft-reset a shiny gift/starter pokemon. Impossible with Autosave. Could there be two saves like Zelda, an autosave and a hard save? Again no, because it would again break the trading economy.

I vote for multiple save slots everyday.

I don't think it's the same thing as having multiple save slots in your own gaming session.

Although it's a different style, it's still looks like an iPad game. I'd say that overall it looks like a cheap RPG.

Why would you need multiple save slots in pokemon?

To have multiple saves.

One reason to have multiple saves is to have multiple versions of your saves. I do this all the time in RPGs so I can go back many steps in my game if I need.

But why would you need to in pokemon? Pokémon has no missables. There is no 'options' that one would want to go back and choose this instead of that, beyond maybe a pokemon like a fossil or something. But for any of those "options" the trade market will have hundreds of them up there where people want to trade what they picked for the other option.  If you accidently kill a legendary you wanted to catch, you don't save and reload. The stories are always the same. You leave home to become league champ. On the way you fight evil organization and get the exclusive to that games legendary. There is no reason to ever have to reload an old save. You can't screw anything up in pokemon, besides as I said making a static pokemon like a legendary faint instead of catching it. But either way, you can always get any pokemon in a trade if you accidently save after a one time static encounter.

All multiple saves would do would allow people to exploit trading pokemon. It serves zero purpose beyond that.

People have wanted for years for multiple saves files on pokemon, not to save the same story in multiple files, but to be able to have multiple characters. You know do the adventure with each different starter or something. No one is ever clamoring for multiple save files on the same adventure. There is no purpose in pokemon.

I agree, this looks like an Ipad game. And no, "art style" is not an excuse, since many cartoony and cel-shaded games have much more detail running on equal or weaker hardware. Combined with the return of the grid (like, wtf!) and the return of the stupid chibi bobblehead style of X/Y, this looks like a cheap mobile game.

i see no need for multiple save slots now as you can just create another profile and start a new game on that profile