So, you guys can think that the DLC will give you tons of hours based on... nothing I guess, but I can't think the DLC will give far less based on the fact that third versions gave us a crap ton of new content, not only from a post game perspective, but for the entire game... plus thousands of visual, technical and gameplay improvements. Interesting.

I never said that Emerald and Platinum were the same with little tweaks. Never. I said they were similar. But if you don't remember well how different they were, I put a link with all the changes and improvements of those games. If ALL of that are "small tweaks", then I guess I can't convince you of anything. Stick to your beliefs.

The differences between the base versions in the older games were essentially just different pokemon you could catch. But you could just trade for those pokemon.

This is what I responded to yeah you said you didn't like it but alluded to it not being done before which as pointed out isn't true regardless of what games you're familiar with.

Except look at the context of your post you knock the DLC for not changing the game and only adding 2 hours yet what would the changes you cite add in game time as dlc? Not even the two hours you cited for the DLC and you're paying more for it this is why people see the DLC as a better route to go.

I was just giving my thoughts an aproximate number. It could be more, it could be less. Of course, I believe it will be significantly less than what Emerald gave compared to Ruby and Sapphire. Or Platinum compared to Diamond and Pearl.

I don't know if I'm understanding you. Do you think the entire new content of Emerald is just two hours over Ruby and Sapphire? Hmm... I don't know. I think the Battle Frontier alone (there's more than that, obviously) is like tens of hours. Easily. Also, Emerald has many differences compared to Ruby and Sapphire that make it worth playing it again.

But you only talk about hours. I also talk about improvements. Emerald created animations for every Pokémon available back then, making them less static. Platinum modified the DS engine because Diamond and Pearl were extremely slow games for some reason both in battle and outside. Platinum was much more fluid and faster (thank God). Do you think the DLC will fix or improve any of the areas where Sword and Shield are very clearly flawed (animations for both Pokémon and NPCs, popping, online errors, balance Dynamax... and a large etc)? They didn't say anything about that at the Direct. It's been almost two months since the games released and it still stands at version 1.0. Personally, I don't think they will...

My point still stands: I prefer a new game than paying 30 dolars for (in my opinion based on everything I stated in my posts) far less content.

Your point is based on an assumption and presented as an objective that's the problem it never really had anything to stand on to begin with the changes in Emerald for start were mostly tweaks which is why the whole third version argument hinges on whether someone bought the initial versions you may not have an issue with a remix but it's clear it's a key point in people preferring DLC secondly if these tweaks and changes were DLC going by the very link you posted it would have been less content added to play than the DLC for Sw/Sh which costs less as you're essentially playing the base game again with tweaks.

You also neglect to factor in Emerald came 2 years after the base games the DLC arrives 7 months after the game's release with the first area and 11 months with the second area, we get two areas, new features, continuation with the story and such we're getting comparable content in 11 months for less as well.

This has been going on since the original version of R/S as well so what games are you referring to then as these two released back in 2002 that's why I replied to that part as it was in older games going back 18 years now have you've only played Gold/Silver? Hence why I pointed it out as original R/S fall into the older games category.

Ok first, I want to tell you something: it's really confusing that you don't answer any of my arguments or questions and you just throw more questions at me. It's quite difficult to have a conversation like this. I asked you If you thought the content added in Emerald was 2 hours long, because you explicitly said something along those lines and it's a plain lie. You didn't answer. I asked you if you thought that the DLC will fix the technical errors and flaws Sword and Shield have just as Emerald and Platinum fixed/improved what could be better from R/S and D/P, because it's been two months since the games launched and they are still at version 1.0 and in the Direct they didn't mention any measures on those fronts. You didn't answer. I would like you to adress these questions, please.

My point is... my point, I guess. I'm not trying to present you an objective truth. I told you my opinion. You are trying to debunk it. I think I'm right. You think I'm not. Maybe if you say something new and answer my arguments with something that very clearly beats them, I will change my opinion. But that hasn't happend yet.

The changes on Emerald were very numerous and with different variations of importance. I think giving each Pokémon an animation, creating the Battle Frontier and all the changes made to the main adventure from both story and gameplay perspectives are not "tweaks". And those are just the major changes. Most of the list I gave you might be "minor" changes, but together they create something far bigger. I think that's more than what we will get with the Expansion Pack. Basically because the expansion pack is essentially a post game and Emerald is more than just a new post game. I rather play a new better game with more content that continue the same game for another X hours (don't worry, this time I won't put an actual number. I see you don't like that...).

Sword and Shield will not change their "core game", if that makes any sense. If you decide to start a new save file after the DLC, you'll play the exact same game you played before with the exact same flaws, errors and absences it had before. Only that now you have a post game. For everyone who found Sword and Shield lacking in many aspects (and there is a lot of people like that), the DLC won't do them any good. It will give them more of something flawed. To me, that's enough... opinion based evidence? I don't know how to call it at this point in order to not trigger you. Whathever: it's enough for me to believe the Expansion Pack will, in no way or form be close to a third version in terms of content, improvements and changes. Even if it costs half the price, I think you are still getting less than half of what you could potentially get.

As for the development time... it's not relevant to my point. You say we're getting more or less the same in less time. I'm saying you we are getting less and worse content. In less time. Also I repeat: we're getting a post game. In a third version, we get that and a (very) improved base game. No matter how much time they spend on the DLC: the base game will remain the same. That's something that wouldn't happen with a third version.

It's late here in Spain. Have a good night.

It must be late there because you're not reading my post at all I asked you two specific questions in my initial response to your first reply one in how much actual game time would be added if the tweaks you cited were dlc instead and the second was where you got the 2 hours figure from. After that I didn't ask you a question I just addressed the overall point even the post you quoted has no question in it so what are these more questions you're referring to exactly outside of this one I ask now?

This is what makes little sense in your view here you're going on about Sw/Sh being the same game at its core yet that's exactly what everyone is pointing out about the third version especially the likes of Emerald so it just comes across as double standards as Emerald is still the same base game even if you choose to not see it that way. The second paragraph highlights my point you say it'll give them more of something flawed making an assumption no issue people may have had is addressed ironically it comes in a part when you're arguing about lack of content that the DLC just existing is addressing this is why your opinion as you put it is wtf as the double standards in ignoring the same basic issue in third versions combined with the assumption of everything in the DLC like thinking you're getting less than half people could get or the 2 hours comment I inquired about.

Development time is relevant because for the content in the third version having more time you'd think they should have more than DLC that will be fully out 11 months later instead they're looking very comparable with one being cheaper. As for your question it's possible they can sort out issues they don't need to mention optimizations to the engine in a direct as that's what developers are normally doing anyway the fact you're expecting that to be announced in a direct is bizarre to begin with.

Or maybe is because of your text lack of comas. It's quite difficult trying to decipher a chunk of text without them.

I'll repeat it again: I asked you two questions: If you thought the DLC was gonna fix the technical and design flaws of Sword and Shield and if you actually thought the additions to Emerald would only add two hours to Ruby and Sapphire. In this last reply, you answered the first one. You think they may fix the issues. Good for you. Now, answer the second one.

No, the problem is that you don't want to see the full picture. You think you can compare Emerald (or Platinum) to Sword and Shield + Expansion Pass. You still think that what Emerald/Platinum added was just the Battle Frontier and the main story is almost intact, which you are comparing to whathever we are getting with the expansion pack. That's very questionable the moment we realize the Expansion Pack IS A POST GAME ADD ON TO THE MAIN GAME. The main game won't recieve any major updates, because the DLC is made for people who already beat the story. It's a continuation. While Emerald is a modified and improved version of Ruby and Sapphire main game + A POST GAME. That's why I would enjoy far more a third version: I get to play a better and somehow different version of the base games and, in addition to that, I get a VERY beefy post game. I get an update on two fronts rather than just one. They (The Pokémon Company) said the Expansion Pass will continue from your original save file. Implying that the main game will remain entirely or mostly, untouched.

Development time is relevant to you because you're convinced we're getting a comparable amount of changes and content to a third version in less time and by less money. But I don't think we are (I already explained why: Changed, improved and expanded main story and core gameplay/technical experience + post game is more and better than just a post game). So, it doesn't matter to me that we are getting this early, because it doesn't have the content I expect. I rather wait and pay more for a better and more fulfilling experience.

As for fixing issues: I remind you again that it's been almost 2 months since the game released and they haven't touched anything. People are constantly complaining about the issues. And Game Freak hasn't said a thing. To me that's more evidence they are not gonna do anything than evidence that they MAY fix something.

I think I already said everything I wanted to say to you. To me this conversation is over. Have a nice day.

I will be very brief, because I already have a very extense explanation on the topic in this thread. If you want to know more, please read my previous comments. But essentially: The expansion pass is just a post game. Emerald/Platinum is a post game + a crap ton of changes, fixes, additions and improvements to the main story/game. To me, that sounds better and more than what we could potentially get from the DLC. Especially when you look at the Direct and realize that they seem to be creating mostly a story based DLC. That kind of thing has a very limited duration. You go through it, you beat it, you are done. The famous "two hours" I said and that the other user keeps throwing at me was just a random number I came up with, but what I wanted to say with that is that a story content (especially a Pokémon story) has a limited duration. Maybe they will add a new Battle Tower with different rules based on what the art they shown, but nothing compared to the Battle Frontier 7 different buildings.

The problem is that if I see the main game... I can't have hope for new towns and dungeons. Because the base game has NO dungeons at all and towns are a window-dressing: they seem big, but they are empty and you can't access most of the buildings. Do you think they are gonna make actual towns and dungeons when the base game had none of those? Wouldn't it feel weird for a new player to go through the entire main story without finding a single dungeon and encountering empty towns... and then they jump to the DLC and is filled with those? I don't know, I think the DLC is gonna be more of what we already got.

Let's put it this way: With Emerald and Platinum, Game Freak fixed most of the issues that R/S and D/P had, being of design or technical. Granted, those generations were better than Sword and Shield and didn't have that many things to fix. But let's imagine we had a third version of Sword and Shield. We may have hope for new and better animations, adding dungeons to the main story, fixing the mess that is the Wild Area when connected to the internet, improved and expanded main story (not refering to the post game), etc... All of that would be almost granted, because that's what third versions do. But with a DLC that takes place after completing the main game... well, you know what I think.

But, really, I'm tired of this topic. When the DLC comes out, we'll see how it is. If it ends up being as good as a third version, I'll eat my words.