By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Be Honest With Me: How Bad is Sword & Shield?

 

What would you rate Sword & Shield?

1 5 7.46%
 
2 0 0%
 
3 1 1.49%
 
4 3 4.48%
 
5 6 8.96%
 
6 8 11.94%
 
7 10 14.93%
 
8 25 37.31%
 
9 6 8.96%
 
10 3 4.48%
 
Total:67
MasonADC said:
It is not bad at all, just like all the other mainline Pokémon games. Not stellar, but still a solid 8.

Probably this. Though granted I have no idea how the other games were outside of the originals. I had Red back in the day, and Sword is my second Pokemon game. Red was very cool cuz Pokemon was brand new, but I imagine I would have roughly the above view (not stellar, but a solid 8) about the other gens cuz Pokemon seems to stick with what has always worked and not go outside the box too much.

So Sword has been fun, but I'd put most of the really good single player games on Switch that I've played through like Odyssey, Mario+Rabbids, Axiom Verge, and Celeste above Pokemon. It's a solid 8. It does offer plenty of play though. I'm not even half way into the game yet (have 3 gym badges) after almost 25 hours and I don't even feel like I've been trying to go slow or grind or anything (also certainly haven't been trying to go fast at all, just been taking my time as feels natural to the game). It'll probably be 60 hours before I beat it without going out of my way to "catch 'em all" and the like.

My main gripe would be that trainers and the gym battles should be harder, mostly they just don't have enough pokemon to fight with and they could easily be harder by giving them more than just the 1, 2, or 3 pokemon I've encountered in battles so far. Challenge makes games fun and rewarding and its really not challenging at all to beat the trainers or even gym leaders because you're fighting 6 pokemon against far fewer, and even if that changes later in the game, I would have expected by now to at least be facing people with like 5 pokemon instead of 3 at most.

So yeah, not stellar, but a solid 8 that offers plenty of play time.

Also, not being someone who has played every generation, I don't give a crap about the whole dex issue. Had no idea the other games even allowed that before I heard people were complaining about it. Though it is nice to hear they are adding in more pokemon now I guess. Graphics are fine, gameplay is fine, it's a fine game and I am enjoying it but I am in no way blown away by it. They didn't BotW or Odyssey it and really blow things away for the first console Pokemon game, they seem to have just stuck with the normal formula and given another solid Pokemon experience that Pokemon fans will enjoy as long as they aren't super nitpicky.



Around the Network
garretslarrity said:

So I've played nearly every main series Pokemon game. But I haven't picked up Sword or Shield. I'm among those who were pissed off about Dexit, and I got the impression that S&S were rushed, low-quality games with little effort put into them (OoT tree comes to mind here). Plus, I felt that buying the game would just be rewarding the anti-consumer behavior Game Freak is known for. Well it seems like I was voted out on that last point (though I'm curious to see the Q4 sales when they get released), and I've lately become less concerned about the National Dex.

Then today's Pokemon Direct made me feel better about the games. I'm thrilled that they're finally abandoning the third version in favor of DLC (and I especially appreciate that they were quite direct about it). So then the only question that remains is how good are they? Are they good enough to warrant a $60 price? Or are they only worth it if you can get it for less? $40? $30? Would most appreciate comments from those who, like me, have played most games in the series, and have had time to digest Sword and Shield. Thanks!

It really depends on what you're looking for in the game.  I found the single player to be lackluster.  If you play mainly for the single player campaign its a bit short, and honestly feels more like an primer for the multiplayer than a full fledged campaign.

I like the multiplayer a lot better than previous games.  The wild area serves as a fun way to get a lot of the rarer Pokemon you might want, and there are a bunch of qol changes to make it less grindy to raise new mon. 

So if you're mainly a single player player, then I think it's worse than the other games, but for multiplayer gamers you may like it better.

Cerebralbore101 said:
Main game is an 8/10. Post game is a 7/10. I voted 7/10. The competitive aspect is crap compared to previous games. This is because Dynamaxing breaks the game, and too many OU staples got cut in Dexit. Dynamaxing doubles a poke'mon's HP, and let's them do 120 power STAB moves that massively buff their stats. Way too many OU staples were cut from the game, which effectively cut the meta in half. What new poke'mon they brought into the game either couldn't fill the vacuum or were seriously overpowered to the point of being Ubers tier.

Anyway the result is that most teams just consist of abusing Dynamaxed Hawlucha, or Dynamaxed Gyrados. And if they aren't running that they are running the OP fossils that hit you for over 300 power stab moves.

I really haven't had much problems with those strats.  I see Gyarados a lot more than I see Hawlucha but there's lots of ways to counter it.  One of my favorites is Mimikyu.  Since they're expecting your basic swords dance set, they're probably not going to Dragondance on you, which slows their set up or forces them to Dynamax.  Instead, use trick with either Iron ball (or flame orb if you like).  Mimikyu's likely going to die in the process, but it will leave them as easy pickings for the electric Pokemon I assume you have on your team.  Could also just as easily be deployed against either of the fossil Pokemon.  And as an added bonus it also takes away cursola's eviolite which makes it much easier to deal with.  

Just one example.  I kind of like Dynamaxing because it eliminates a lot of stall strategies.  And I like it better than mega evolutions, since I find a lot of those more broken, and with dynamax they're at least limited to three turns, and a limited set of offensive options.  The jury is still out on whether it's good overall cause the meta is still young.  You can download different rulesets, so hopefully a non-dynamax option will be made available for those who are more traditional.



Slownenberg said:
MasonADC said:
It is not bad at all, just like all the other mainline Pokémon games. Not stellar, but still a solid 8.

Probably this. Though granted I have no idea how the other games were outside of the originals. I had Red back in the day, and Sword is my second Pokemon game. Red was very cool cuz Pokemon was brand new, but I imagine I would have roughly the above view (not stellar, but a solid 8) about the other gens cuz Pokemon seems to stick with what has always worked and not go outside the box too much.

So Sword has been fun, but I'd put most of the really good single player games on Switch that I've played through like Odyssey, Mario+Rabbids, Axiom Verge, and Celeste above Pokemon. It's a solid 8. It does offer plenty of play though. I'm not even half way into the game yet (have 3 gym badges) after almost 25 hours and I don't even feel like I've been trying to go slow or grind or anything (also certainly haven't been trying to go fast at all, just been taking my time as feels natural to the game). It'll probably be 60 hours before I beat it without going out of my way to "catch 'em all" and the like.

My main gripe would be that trainers and the gym battles should be harder, mostly they just don't have enough pokemon to fight with and they could easily be harder by giving them more than just the 1, 2, or 3 pokemon I've encountered in battles so far. Challenge makes games fun and rewarding and its really not challenging at all to beat the trainers or even gym leaders because you're fighting 6 pokemon against far fewer, and even if that changes later in the game, I would have expected by now to at least be facing people with like 5 pokemon instead of 3 at most.

So yeah, not stellar, but a solid 8 that offers plenty of play time.

Also, not being someone who has played every generation, I don't give a crap about the whole dex issue. Had no idea the other games even allowed that before I heard people were complaining about it. Though it is nice to hear they are adding in more pokemon now I guess. Graphics are fine, gameplay is fine, it's a fine game and I am enjoying it but I am in no way blown away by it. They didn't BotW or Odyssey it and really blow things away for the first console Pokemon game, they seem to have just stuck with the normal formula and given another solid Pokemon experience that Pokemon fans will enjoy as long as they aren't super nitpicky.

25 hours and you're three gyms in?  Pretty sure I was done at that point.  Guess that's why they call you SLOWnenberg :p



Pretty bad, it's Pokemon for toddlers. Not one bit challenging, i was mostly using 1 or 2 pokemon max for the duration of the play time



Sticking with my review I wrote for the site, I'd give it a 7/10 :P

Not bad but very very average. Has that same fun feel of Pokemon for the most part, but doesn't do a ton to excel outside of the Wild Areas and somewhat more robust online. Just feels like a marginal step up rather than the major one I was hoping for.



 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident - all men and women created by the, go-you know.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden

Around the Network

I find the "It sucks there's not 700-7000 different Pokemon in it" sort of arguments to be hilarious.

That's as bad as the "too much water" complaint you guys have.

Last edited by Jumpin - on 10 January 2020

I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

8/10

Don't believe the hate. It's not the best Pokemon ever, but a lot of quality of life adjustments have made it a better experience. Camps are fun to interact with Pokemon, experience share makes leveling up a lot more enjoyable, some non traditional plot structures take place, and this game has pretty good designs for the new Pokemon. Seeing Pokemon roam around the world makes it more enjoyable as well as I could pick and choose which I wanted to battle. I don't get people complaining about them not having all the Pokemon for a few of reasons.

1) The power jump between Gameboy -- GB Color -- GBA -- DS -- 3DS is a joke compared to 3DS -- Switch.

2) There is a LOT of Pokemon with terrible ugly designs out there. They needed to cut the fat.

3) It actually makes you use and enjoy the new Pokemon more since you don't have as much of the temptation to simply build a roster you used in past ges.

Dynamax is fun and very pretty. I still like Mega Evolution better but it is far better than Z move nonsense from Sun/Moon.



think-man said:
Pretty bad, it's Pokemon for toddlers. Not one bit challenging, i was mostly using 1 or 2 pokemon max for the duration of the play time

If we are judging Pokémon quality based on how difficult it is, what Pokémon game IS good? They all are so easy



garretslarrity said:

Then today's Pokemon Direct made me feel better about the games. I'm thrilled that they're finally abandoning the third version in favor of DLC (and I especially appreciate that they were quite direct about it).

But, why? You don't have Sw/Sh yet, so if they did a typical 3rd version, you'd only have to pay $60 for a more complete game rather than $90.



JWeinCom said:
Slownenberg said:

Probably this. Though granted I have no idea how the other games were outside of the originals. I had Red back in the day, and Sword is my second Pokemon game. Red was very cool cuz Pokemon was brand new, but I imagine I would have roughly the above view (not stellar, but a solid 8) about the other gens cuz Pokemon seems to stick with what has always worked and not go outside the box too much.

So Sword has been fun, but I'd put most of the really good single player games on Switch that I've played through like Odyssey, Mario+Rabbids, Axiom Verge, and Celeste above Pokemon. It's a solid 8. It does offer plenty of play though. I'm not even half way into the game yet (have 3 gym badges) after almost 25 hours and I don't even feel like I've been trying to go slow or grind or anything (also certainly haven't been trying to go fast at all, just been taking my time as feels natural to the game). It'll probably be 60 hours before I beat it without going out of my way to "catch 'em all" and the like.

My main gripe would be that trainers and the gym battles should be harder, mostly they just don't have enough pokemon to fight with and they could easily be harder by giving them more than just the 1, 2, or 3 pokemon I've encountered in battles so far. Challenge makes games fun and rewarding and its really not challenging at all to beat the trainers or even gym leaders because you're fighting 6 pokemon against far fewer, and even if that changes later in the game, I would have expected by now to at least be facing people with like 5 pokemon instead of 3 at most.

So yeah, not stellar, but a solid 8 that offers plenty of play time.

Also, not being someone who has played every generation, I don't give a crap about the whole dex issue. Had no idea the other games even allowed that before I heard people were complaining about it. Though it is nice to hear they are adding in more pokemon now I guess. Graphics are fine, gameplay is fine, it's a fine game and I am enjoying it but I am in no way blown away by it. They didn't BotW or Odyssey it and really blow things away for the first console Pokemon game, they seem to have just stuck with the normal formula and given another solid Pokemon experience that Pokemon fans will enjoy as long as they aren't super nitpicky.

25 hours and you're three gyms in?  Pretty sure I was done at that point.  Guess that's why they call you SLOWnenberg :p

I don't get why people somewhat race through games. Seems like there is a competition to say how quickly you beat a game and then complain it wasn't very long. Like I said I'm not trying to play slow, just taking the game as is. I can easily see how I could play through the game way faster. For example, one small area I spent 2 hours in and afterwards I was like man if it just walked through it, fought a couple pokemon but mostly ignored them, and beat the trainers that woulda been like 30 minutes at most, but there were a bunch of new pokemon readily available in that area so I tried to capture them (doing my best to not fight the same ones over and over) and then would have to run back to the nearby town a few times to restore my pokemon since I'm out there battling pokemon and trainers, so just playing the game like it is meant to be played and not just quickly walking through takes a lot longer than 25 hours.

So I can absolutely tell its very possible to beat the game in 25 hours or less like you did, but that'd require me to just walk through the game and not explore things or talk to everyone or try to catch the pokemon I see. Racing through the game in 25 hours I'd feel like I barely got the experience. Even at this rate it feels like I am not properly experiencing parts of the game and I would have to slow down a bit to get the full experience. Like I've only bothered to go into one of the little energy dynamax things whatever they're called in the wild area - that's one in almost 25 hours, so I've basically completely ignored those so far. And I haven't done any online features, I don't even know what online multiplayer features there are. It just seems like a misrepresentation of the game when people say oh it only lasted 20-25 hours or whatever when that is only if you want to beat it fast and don't take your time to settle into the game. It's like saying BotW isn't a long game cuz you don't HAVE to explore most of the map. Or like Mario Odyssey I think I beat it in 25-30 hours, and I could have totally beat it faster, but there was no reason to do the bare minimum to get to the end, and I doubled my play length in Odyssey so far its at over 55 hours and there's still stuff I want to do in the game.

Basically you get what you put into Pokemon Sw/Sh in terms of game length. If you want to get through the game, sure its totally beatable in 25 hours or less, but if you want to get the full experience that is offered that could easily be 40, 50, 60, 70 hours or more. To me its looking like it'll be 50-60 hours to beat the game, knowing that I ignored some parts of the experience, which is fine cuz its not my favorite game ever and I've got lots of other games I want to play.