Your "real reason" is not only just your made up idea and nothing officially said from Game Freak, it's also contradictory to reasoning Game Freak gave which acknowledged the Switch's superior hardware and that they need to increase quality. "could this have been a massive oversight on console gamer's part?" Perhaps I misunderstood but this sounds like it's our fault for expecting a $60 Switch game to look like a $60 Switch game.

There is such a thing as objective value and standards, consumers can of course choose to buy products regardless of such in favor of personal preference, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. That Pokemon Sw/Sh has 435 Pokemon at $60 while Pokemon Su/Mo has 800 for $40 is real. That the game has textures and animations you'd commonly find on the N64 is truth. That the developers lied about their reasons behind cutting content is proven. You can buy the game despite it's issues and that's fine, I only look down on those who defend the game by denying such facts about it while insulting people.

First the complete version (the one Switch) has 350 and digimon, but no I wasnt talking about available monsters. Both games are Visually more impressive than Sword/Shield. I cant speak for Yokai but Digimon is not a battery killer by any means.

Sorry for derailing the thread a bit, bit the ”the game should be $40 not $60” argument is so tired and wrong in so many ways so please stop using it.

Nope, not gonna stop speaking about relevant to the topic information just because you don't like it. At least you admit to thread derailing, I'll give you that.

I came into this thread expecting the same old tired hate and I was not let down.

How so?  I am at work eating lunch at my computer.  So I am confused by your (attempt) at a point.

Never said issues do not exist, I was talking about the graphical aspects alone and how battery life seems to be much higher because of it.  You have a right to be upset about something and not buy it for whatever reason, but despite your claims you seem to look down on anyone who buys the game and enjoys it TBH.  I have never insulted anyone here, so try reading it again.  Hell I even said this thread had nothing to do with other flaws, but you insist on trying to insert them in every discussion you can.

The point I am making is that maybe developers who have always made handheld titles will bring the SAME SCALE products over to the Switch because the Switch is both a Handheld and a console.  Just because it is on Switch does not mean that they will all of a sudden make the games console scale experiences.  Will they make improvements here and there?  Sure they will, but I would not get my hopes up too high.

As for your pricing complaint, talk to the publisher Nintendo.  Game Freak had nothing to do with the pricing.  Last I checked, that was a publisher thing.

lol I was saying I don't look down on you because you weren't doing that. If you're gonna assert that you know what I think better than I do then I'm gonna have to ask you provide evidence of me looking down on people for simply liking the game. Now you said the game isn't worth $60 to me as if it's just my opinion that the game is of lesser value, so yeah I'm gonna highlight how it is indeed a fact to show there's objective value.

And the point I made which you completely ignored is that your "real reason" is just your made up excuse while Game Freak explicitly said they were focusing on quality. Speaking generally, small scale is fine, plenty of great games on Switch like Slay the Spire, Hollow Knight, Stardew Valley, etc. fit that bill. However they do so while still looking good and competently made and don't ask for $60.

I think Game Freak obviously knows and is complicit with what the game is priced at. Doesn't make a difference who's specifically responsible though, the game is $60 so it will be viewed as such.

Pricing is subjective, not objective. People not being able to understand the difference between fact and opinion is ridiculous. I wouldn't pay $20 for Death Stranding, but I would easily pay $60 for Ori (it is that good). Pricing all has to do with perceived value which is dictated by personal preference.

*yes I realize Ori isn't priced at $60, I am saying I wouldn't be bothered if they charged $60, given it is one of the best games I have ever played

435 is a lower number than 800, that's simply a fact that wont change regardless of perception or preference.