DélioPT said:
I don't play RPGs, so, that's something i'm not used to deal with. Btw, going to buy the game tomorrow, if all goes well. Hope i don't regret it! :D |
(I would say even if you regret it after beating it, nintendo generally has good resale value, so if you do regret it, at most it should cost you 10+20 bucks if you are smart enough about it).
| Lonely_Dolphin said:
Of course I mean that they're in the game even if not available in the wild. GTS gives you access to all Pokemon even if you don't have any other games. Are you saying how much content there is isn't a good indicator for how much content there is? Whut lol? Playtime isn't a good indicator as it's completely variable, dependent on the player and not necessarily on how much content there is. One person might play a game for 10 hours while another plays the same game for 1000. Only thing that can be said here is that more content means the game is more likely to hold the player's attention. |
Not sure if I should even get into this, since I don't entirely disagree...just think you're oversimplifying the content argument.
Of course playtime is subjective, but you can look at average times to get an idea at least. I just checked HowLongtoBeat, and it looks like the ratio of average completion time for all styles is 2:1 for Sun/Moon:Let's Go (46 hours: 24 hours). So yes, even ignoring the new features and other factors that I don't plan to get into, I would say the gen 7 games have more content, albeit not quite as much as you originally present it. Sure it might not be linear, but it begs the question that, if added content isn't a draw to play longer, is it really meaningful content to begin with?
That being said, the only real disagreement I have is with the idea that you get 800+ pokemon for $40 vs. 150 pokemon for $60, as if I'll ever get even close to seeing most of those Pokemon on an average playthrough. I can see why people more involved in the meta would see it this way, but to me, it looks like you're claiming that over 80% of the content of the game is locked into the online component, which many of us have very little interest in. And to be honest, having 80% of your content require you to access the online component (either by trading one by one or owning several past games), I'd say that introduces several other issues into the content equation.
NNID: Zephyr25 / PSN: Zephyr--25 / Switch: SW-4450-3680-7334
Acevil said:
(I would say even if you regret it after beating it, nintendo generally has good resale value, so if you do regret it, at most it should cost you 10+20 bucks if you are smart enough about it). |
I bought a new copy for 40€.
If i regret buying it, i'll certainly sell it for at least the same price or a little less. So, all is good! :)
405,546 
Does VGChartz track bundles? I mean, as well as digital, I imagine a significant portion of this 3 million figure will have come from the Let's Go Special Edition Switch, will that be tallied in software sales when VGC covers the week ending 18th November? I'm assuming not?
Lonely_Dolphin said:
It is, this is a case where the difference in quality is based on quantity, i.e. a 2lb bag of Twix is simply superior to a 1lb bag for the same price. |
Does the game having more Pokemon necessarily mean that someone will enjoy the game more?
Lonely_Dolphin said:
It is, this is a case where the difference in quality is based on quantity, i.e. a 2lb bag of Twix is simply superior to a 1lb bag for the same price. |
That's a lot of Twix
JWeinCom said:
Does the game having more Pokemon necessarily mean that someone will enjoy the game more? |
Not really tbh most of the content in the games only ever revolves around the 200 or so you can catch naturally in the game while the remaining pokemon either have to be traded in or have one designated area where you just grind to catch them like a safari zone. This ironically means that having those extra pokemon isn't adding as much more content as one would think it does on paper and it doesn't makes as big a difference for the player's experience as one would think.
BraLoD said:
In Pokemon Yellow, a game I played to no end, as in every singlw other mainline of mainline remake, you could, you know, battle fucking wild pokemon. The fact you had to single out "proper trainer batlles" is pretty telling on what this game is, it is find a pokemon and throw a ball on it, Pokemon Go. I've played way too much Pokemon, which has been my favorite Nintendo franchise ever since I touched a gameboy (though Zelda might be better nowdays) to be told to accept this shit as it is. In fact Pokemon has been, after Sonic, the only games that had always topped my favorite list, before I crossed ways with LoD. |
Pokemon Let's Go needs to add a few things. Bring back abilities, more than just gen 1 pokemon, breeding, ect.
What it doesn't need to bring back is as you say battling fucking wild pokemon.
It's boring as shit. You just mindlessly kill, swap pokemon to level and no skill involved. Catching pokemon is just as easy and time wasting. No skill involved. Bring along your new HM slave (sleep/para/falseswipe/ect) you know the catching skills. Not like everyone is super pumped when they get quick balls so they can use them immediately in battle so they dont' have to do the boring ass shit catching mechanic.
All Go needs to do is get rid of the motion aiming being a requirement and its fine.
irstupid said:
Pokemon Let's Go needs to add a few things. Bring back abilities, more than just gen 1 pokemon, breeding, ect. What it doesn't need to bring back is as you say battling fucking wild pokemon.
It's boring as shit. You just mindlessly kill, swap pokemon to level and no skill involved. Catching pokemon is just as easy and time wasting. No skill involved. Bring along your new HM slave (sleep/para/falseswipe/ect) you know the catching skills. Not like everyone is super pumped when they get quick balls so they can use them immediately in battle so they dont' have to do the boring ass shit catching mechanic. All Go needs to do is get rid of the motion aiming being a requirement and its fine. |
Yeah... the random battles can be a drag. Using false swipe and then clicking the Pokeball button isn't really that much more engaging than just throwing the Pokeball right away. Still, I think there can be some happy medium where they can make the battle mechanics better rather than eliminating that aspect entirely.
JWeinCom said:
Yeah... the random battles can be a drag. Using false swipe and then clicking the Pokeball button isn't really that much more engaging than just throwing the Pokeball right away. Still, I think there can be some happy medium where they can make the battle mechanics better rather than eliminating that aspect entirely. |
I'd say they have it good with Let's Go. Any pokemon in the wild you run into you can catch with pokeballs. No need to fight. The legendaries you still need to fight first.
As for the people who say that woudl get rid of fighting in game, the solutino would be to increase trainers pokemon. Have them have more. You know before first gym, all trainers have 2 pokemon. Before 2nd gym, 3 pokemon, and so on. The later half of the game all trainers would have 6 pokemon. Tons of battling for those that want to. Those that don't can still skip around trainers.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Currently Online 
