Why do Pokemon fans hate QoL improvements? Seriously, this is the only community I know of that complains about having to grind LESS.
Why do Pokemon fans hate QoL improvements?
Why do Pokemon fans hate QoL improvements? Seriously, this is the only community I know of that complains about having to grind LESS.
grinding never existed in pokemon. unless you're 7 years old, but even then, grinding for only 10 minutes is enough
what if you're playing a nuzlocke tho
Then you're purposely putting on yourself restrains on how you play Pokemon game and the issue is your autism and not game design. If you want to play a Pokemon game but don't want grinding just don't be a moronic sheepling and don't do Nuzlockes just because popular e-celebrite number 49023920 said so.
Modern experience share mechanics are okay... if they could be turned off as it was in 3DS era. Fact that between removing this option and SET mode is not QoL, it's Gamefreak REMOVING options from players which is REVERSE of QoL.
>what if I go out of my way to make the game as unenjoyable as possible
Skill issue
FPBP
Nice strawman. Party exp works differently in the above.
Nobody says that.
>Nobody says that
They do, when you say "the exp share makes me overleveled" you are comparing the game to another game with an entirely different curve.
Thread should have ended here.
Fr
The fanbase is full of morons who deluded themselves the DS games are hard so when GF adds any QoL even though it's completely irrelevant to the game's difficulty they start b***hing and moaning
>GF adds any QoL even though it's completely irrelevant to the game's difficulty
You're moronic. Being overleveled makes the game easier.
Pokemon players because of cross gen compatibility think of games like expansion packs so it's not possible for them to think about it beyond
>I'm getting more total xp than if it didn't exist
>Therefore it's making me overleveled
You can't argue this ever again after the dex cut
Well you see, Pokemon is a series made for Japanese 10 year olds. They are made to be beaten by children. They offer 0 difficulty. You are supposed to mash A to blast through the game
Poketurds on here think grinding more adds more depth to their children's video game. They think wasting time on menial bullshit is where the difficulty comes from.
Anon you should re-read your meme, it makes zero sense
Its simple, If they want to play like other RPGs, then actually play like other RPGs. Have roles matter/make doubles default, or hell, bring back triples.
As is, and as always been (unless you skip trainers), pokemon is a sweeping game. There's no reason to switch off your starter/fav unless its to get your backups up to speed. Now that they're always up by default, why bother? Go back to your early years and mindlessly steamroll with a single mon.
You only used one pokemon when you were a kid?
nta but yeah I did so did most kids
Really? You must a zoomer then because everyone I knew as a kid had a full team of 6 when I was playing blue version as a kid
You had a full team of 6 after you beat the game to fight your friends, when you were going through the actual game your team was typically
>CHARIZARD (He has cut and strength)
>Flight slave
>Surf slave
>Filler guys you think are cool
No I had a full team of 6 going into the elite 4.
Every time it ends in just outright denial
Even normies meme about this shit dude I don't care what your personal experience was
Again zoomer shit
>Even normies meme about this shit
To be fair they will also tell you everyone always uses the same team when it's clearly not true
It's true about Sinnoh.
It isn't true about any old game and Sinnoh isn't the region that suffers the most from this
Most did. The rest of the party were either neat stamps you collected along the way or meat shields to get your starter/fav back up to speed if they went down.
You guys didnt take cues from the anime?
Imitating the anime is purely a /vp/ thing I just did what worked
Grinding is part of the fun and its a special experience in Pokemon. The quality time spent with each Pokemon makes you feel closer to them in a way that just getting passive XP can't
>The quality time spent with each Pokemon makes you feel closer to them
Then why the frick would I want to play games that punish me for using more than one Pokemon?
Which ones do that?
Every game that doesn't have party wide shared EXP.
>The exp share breaks the game.
No. GF's shitty balance breaks the game. Which is why Gen 5 is so ridiculously easy even though there's no party wide EXP.
>GF's shitty balance breaks the game
You just don't get it. GF's solution to some players not wanting the exp share 'on' all the time was not to give you the option to turn it off, but to make it so your can access your boxes at all time. In other words, you have a fully healed army at your disposal at all times.
>Gen 5 is so ridiculously easy
Not even close. Gen 6, 7, 8, and 9 are way easier.
>GF's solution to some players not wanting the exp share 'on' all the time was not to give you the option to turn it off
Which is fine because there's literally no reason to ever turn it off. It being an item instead of an inherit mechanic like 99% of other RPGs is moronic.
>you have a fully healed army at your disposal at all times.
No, you don't. Play the games.
>uhh gen 5 isn't easy because I say so just ignore the gym leaders only having 3 pokemon with 0 fricking EVs that they send out one at a time with zero disadvantage to the player
Please get an actual argument instead of just "gen I like good gen I don't like bad"
>It being an item instead of an inherit mechanic like 99% of other RPGs is moronic.
99% of other RPGs are balanced around teenagers and adults. Pokemon is balanced around toddlers. This is why there need to be options for non-toddler fans.
>Pokemon is balanced around toddlers. This is why there need to be options for non-toddler fans.
Cool! What does this have to do with EXP Share again?
Enforced EXP Share makes the gameplay easy and boring. It wasn't like this in XYORAS where party wide EXP sharing was still possible.
>Enforced EXP Share makes the gameplay easy and boring
It being a Pokemon game makes the gameplay easy and boring. What does this have to do with EXP Share again?
>It being a Pokemon game makes the gameplay easy and boring
No, it's because the game is balanced around toddlers. And you seem to be fine with toddler gameplay, when there could be options to make it a tad more interesting for non-toddlers like you and me.
Every other JRPG since the 2000's at least have had party wide exp
And none of them ever reached Pokemon levels of success.
FE? Units get xp by participating.
>Which is fine because there's literally no reason to ever turn it off. It being an item instead of an inherit mechanic like 99% of other RPGs is moronic.
Wrong. Unlike other RPGs, the exp is not balanced. In other games you can frick around, grind, do side missions, then get to the main story and be, at most, a level above. If you did the same in Pokemon, you would be at least 10 levels higher than everything else.
>No, you don't. Play the games.
Wrong again. There's no more, "oh crap, my team's health is down, better use up my items or go back to town," instead you can just open the menu and pick out a new team.
>Please get an actual argument instead of just "gen I like good gen I don't like bad"
When did I say what I liked. I just told you gen 5 is harder than every gen since.
There's no overpowered gimmick to bail you out, no candies to make everything overleveld, no broken exp share that overlevels your team, no access to a PC at every moment, etc.
The other RPGs use this inherint mechanic better. Try actually playing them for once.
nta
There is no reason for Pokemon not to have an exp share, it's necessary for using multiple Pokemon to be useful beyond something you're forcing yourself to do.
Then they shouldn't have made it so shit.
Maybe the level curve is bad, but that has nothing to do with exp share.
It's exp share or both. Without it, the games are fine. With it, they need to adjust it or increase the difficulty. So there's a flaw in it either way.
>Without it, the games are fine
If you removed exp share from Gen 8 or 9 there would not be enough exp to reasonably level a full team to the level curve the game is built around.
No, there's definitely enough trainers to level up just fine without it. I needed a 2nd team to not be OP in SV, and it's worse in SS.
>The game's level curve was designed around a feature that doesn't exist, trust me bro!
What doesn't exist? A lack of exp share? Because they'd be serviceable games without them.
Autism+not even engaging anymore
>get btfo
>y-yuh not engaging...
Thanks for playing, come back soon!
>implying gens 8 and 9 have a level curve designed around the exp share
frick off, I actively avoided battles after a point in SV and my team (which had 10 members after I rotated some out) was still overlevelled compared to everyone I battled. Sword and shield was even worse, the only time I ever felt underlevelled was in the wild area at the start. GF could actively make the level curve significantly steeper if they wanted a normal team of 6 to stay levelled on par with the enemy trainers towards the end of the game.
I ended the game at the same level as the Ai professor so whatever you say man
I played Sword and Shield, battled every trainer, had to use exp candies on my Dreepy just to evolve it, and I was STILL underleveled for Leon
I played Scarlet and Violet and I was underleveled the entire endgame where I had to battle lv55+ Pokemon with my party not even at lv50 yet.
I don't believe you.
No one is against the concept of the exp share. They want the option to occasionally turn it off. Your fear of menu options has forced you to create a strawman that you think hates the exp share. No one hates the exp share and everyone wants it in game.
>They want the option to occasionally turn it off
There is no reason for Pokemon not to have an exp share
Yes there is, if the Pokemon on your team are leveling too fast and you want to slow them down.
>Let people turn it off
>People turn it off immediately at the start of the game and declare themselves to be playing on "hard mode"
It had to go, it's too entrenched in the community that "gen wun got it right" despite it being horribly broken.
>declare themselves to be playing on "hard mode"
This affects how how?
He's on the spectrum and is worried he might pick the wrong options. In the other thread he also said he was against having volume sliders for sound effects and music because he was worried it would change the balance of them compared to the designer's vision and people would "hear the sounds wrong". I actually feel bad for the guy. I've worked with mentally ill children and it isn't something I'd wish on anymore. They just can't see the world from someone else's perspective.
#1 I'm not yawngay
#2 You think "I should be able to change anything I want in the settings because it doesn't effect anyone else's experience" and I don't, it's just an impasse. I value the community element of this game, hard mode in the form of an inferior exp system is going to harm that and hamstring the developers if they are constantly thinking about it.
So should parties be predetermined so I can't pick the hard mode by not evolving and only catching shitmons?
>Exploring multiple party member options and using the ones you want
Good, intended part of the game people want to do.
>Discovering using only one Pokemon is the best strategy in casual gameplay
Bad
But I might catch something that sucks and have a bad time. Think of the children!
>But I might catch something that sucks and have a bad time
Yes. The point of the gameplay loop is to find a good team strategically. What isn't a part of the gameplay loop is messing with the balance that loop is built around. Being able to choose a route in a Sonic Zone doesn't mean you should be able to adjust Sonic's run speed or jump distance because ideally the zone itself should be balanced around those mechanics.
>The point of the gameplay loop is to find a good team strategically.
But you never have to do that in Pokemon. You can solo it with a starter.
You can also solo FFT with Ramza, that doesn't mean most people are going to not play around with a full squad.
>most people
Why does it matter what most people do?
Because that is what will define discussion of the game refer to
But if you play it with a really strong Pokemon you're going to have a totally different experience to someone who used shitty Pokemon, no items, and no mid-battle switching.
WOW DUDE IT'S ALMOST LIKE
THAT'S INTENTIONAL????
Then why are you being such an autist over someone wanting another set of options? When Pokemon is nothing but options.
So in other words the "community element" you mentioned doesn't exist and the Pokemon experience is meant to be individualistic.
Some parts of the game are meant to be individualistic
Intentionally breaking the game design is not one of them
>Intentionally breaking the game design
Then why are affection-raising mechanics optional?
The way you choose to level up your team has always been individualistic, the core gameplay was built around that.
Being able to turn on or off the exp. share to be able to focus on specific members of your team is perfectly in line with Pokemon.
>Being able to turn on or off the exp. share to be able to focus on specific members of your team is perfectly in line with Pokemon.
You weren't supposed to use only the starter to win, but that's what the game funnels you toward. The game did that, it wasn't intentional which is why they changed it.
Affection just makes the game easier.
>Affection just makes the game easier.
So does exp share.
>The game did that, it wasn't intentional which is why they changed it.
Then why is the gameplay exactly the same regardless? You can just as easily use your starter to solo the game with or without it. There's literally no functional difference.
>Affection just makes the game easier.
Then why is it mandatory in BDSP?
I never said anything about only using your starter.
Sometimes you just want to make one of your Pokemon evolve early without overlevelling the entire team, or you want to make it catch up with the others. Having to put the rest of your team in a box to do that is asinine and backwards when the game could just give you the option to turn off the fricking exp device.
Catching a weak Pokemon in SV sucks because just the simple act of trying to train it puts the rest of your team ahead even further.
>I never said anything about only using your starter.
That is what not having the exp share encourages
>Sometimes you just want to make one of your Pokemon evolve early without overlevelling the entire team
Exp candies
>You can just as easily use your starter to solo the game with or without it.
No it isn't, literal toddlers solo'd the games with their starters back in the day because that's the easiest.
They still do that today because the games have remained unchanged.
>That is what not having the exp share encourages
Good thing I never said that the exp share should be straight up removed. If you feel the need to argue against points I never made you already lost.
Besides, you can still only use your starter, with or without exp share.
>Exp candies
No EVs.
>No it isn't, literal toddlers solo'd the games with their starters back in the day because that's the easiest.
I'm glad we agree that you can do the same in SS and SV, where EXP share is mandatory, meaning that their intent to change it didn't fix the problem, which was what I said. What's the solution to the problem then?
Dragon Quest 9
>Their intent
Make it so people aren't punished for using more Pokemon than the starter
>Your strawman
Make it so people cannot win the game if they spam items into the starter
If you consider tending to your team a form of punishment maybe Pokemon just isn't for you.
If you want to train up a magikarp you LITERALLY are punished with taking extra damage and status effects whenever you lose a turn to switch.
That's called risk:reward. You put in that effort and get a strong Pokemon out of it. In the new games, you just lose a party slot for a little bit.
>Risk
I maybe have to walk back to the Pokemon center a few more times
>Reward
My starter has less xp
>I maybe have to walk back to the Pokemon center a few more times
So it's like you lose and have to restart.
>Reward
>My starter has less xp
The reward is a fricking Gyarados in the early game.
>The reward is a fricking Gyarados in the early game.
IT DOES NOT MATTER
BECAUSE IT'S WORSE THAN JUST PUTTING ALL THE XP INTO THE FRICKING STARTER
THERE IS NO REWARD
Not really, a balanced team is better in the long run. Also Gyarados at level 20 is better than any starter.
Getting Magikarp from level 5 to 20 is 9500 exp. That's exp you could put straight into your starter.
You will also always be switch-training Karp, so in reality, it gets half as much every fight as the starters do. So not using Magikarp basically frees up 19000 exp for your starter.
That's enough to get your starter from level 5 all the way to 29. Level 29 Wartortle beats Gyarados in every stat except physical attack. And thanks to EXP groups, the divide widens over the course of the game.
>You will also always be switch-training Karp, so in reality, it gets half as much every fight as the starters do. So not using Magikarp basically frees up 19000 exp for your starter.
I don't think you understand how math works. That's still only 9500 extra exp for your starter. The exp yield doesn't double just because it's no longer being split.
>it's not a reward because i don't like it
You haven't been on the ball today, yawnie.
I'm not him
If we're judging everything on infinite time and xp investment then whatever you can do whatever grind to level 100 on caterpies and then talk about how the game is easy because it doesn't level cap you..
>getting a new strong Pokemon in the Pokemon game is not a reward
What do you enjoy about Pokemon?
Magikarp is meant to be hard to train in the early game, like in the legend of the carp becoming a dragon once it manages to climb a waterfall. If you take this extra challenge you're rewarded with an extremely powerful Pokemon at level 20.
This is another fine detail that mandatory exp share completely trivializes, thanks for reminding me.
Dragon quest is known for having old/dated mechanics
People break GF's design all the time because they don't actually know what they're doing. Reminder they thought Aegislash would be used physically, even though it has the exact same special stat and a reasonable pool of special moves. I could go back to a lot of examples, GS's weird Pokemon pool is partially the fault of them not really knowing what the Pokemon were like because they were finishing them last minute. If you think they've changed since either example, in SM they had to make the Island Trials during the debugging phase. Hell, even outside of GF, you've got the Masuda directed BDSP, which was a mess when it went gold and the day one patch only did so much.
>You can solo it with a starter.
Yes. Because the games are poorly balanced. This doesn't change my point.
>The reason this came about is because people complained about being too overleveled
Then balance your fricking game instead of being a shitty developer and making the players do it themsevles.
You have no point, because you can solo every game. Exp share or not, there's nothing stopping you from blasting through with a single overpowered Pokemon.
>Being able to choose a route in a Sonic Zone doesn't mean you should be able to adjust Sonic's run speed or jump distance
The newest Sonic game actually lets you do that. It was also universally praised. It makes the game a lot more fun.
>The newest Sonic game actually lets you do that
Yeah, because it's a poorly designed POS that the developers had no clue what to do with so they had to patch it to make players design the game for them.
>my chances of winning go from 100% to 99.99999% I'm being heckin punished ACK!
This is why I only grind on Route 1 in my Hardcore Nuzlockes. It's all about the emotional bond you form with your Pokemon and it feels that much more devastating when you lose them.
>Running through grass spamming A
>Fun, special experience, quality time
Congrats, you stopped seeing it as fun bonding experience you once had as a kid
How can I now have to grind less when I never had to grind at all?
This guy gets it. Its incredibly unimmersive the way exp works now.
It wouldn't be as critically panned if we could simply allot EVs wherever we wanted. But then again, I could just play another game if I wanted that.
>QoL improvements
The exp share breaks the game. Maybe if they stopped giving out exp for catching pokemon it would be better, but as of now it makes it so you're always at least a few levels above everything.
What if you don't want all your team to get the same EVs? Or if you don't want to over level?
>What if you don't want all your team to get the same EVs?
This is my only true complaint about the forced EXP Share too. Casualshitters like OP will never understand
Forced EXP share just makes it harder to make the EXP go where I want it to and if I want to use all of my team members regularly they all have to have the same growth rates
No one dislikes the exp share. They dislike not being able to disable it should they want to. There are times you want more experience. There are times you want to go slow and savor the experience. Always on exp share prevents that.
>No one dislikes the exp share. They dislike not being able to disable it
FRICKING THIS
Making it mandatory isn't a QoL improvement, it's making it worse.
In what scenario is it worse?
If I don't want other Pokemon in my team to level up, or gain EVs.
Yes, I can put them into the PC. But that's objectively less efficient that just turning the thing off.
There is no good reason for it to not be a toggle.
>If I don't want other Pokemon in my team to level up
In what scenario would I not want Pokemon in my team to level up?
>or gain EVs.
In what scenario would I not want Pokemon in my team to gain EVs?
>There is no good reason for it to not be a toggle.
Yes there is.
What is the reason?
Watch him post the Sonic bait image lol
Looks like you already know what the reason is. Why bother asking?
Hi, I'm the anon who asked the question, what's the reason?
>In what scenario would I not want Pokemon in my team to level up?
If I wanted them to be a certain level (saying trying to get a Hitmontop and needing to change Tyrogue's stats before it levels).
>In what scenario would I not want Pokemon in my team to gain EVs?
If I wanted a specific EV build.
>If I wanted them to be a certain level
Why would you need your Pokemon to be a certain level?
>saying trying to get a Hitmontop and needing to change Tyrogue's stats before it levels
You don't need it to be a specific level to do this.
>If I wanted a specific EV build.
EXP Share doesn't prevent you from having a specific EV build.
>Who cares?
I do.
>Could be that you want to play with a friend with a teams that's at a certain level.
The game already has rules that do that.
>Any number of things
Evidently not.
>Unlike other RPGs, the exp is not balanced
What does this have to do with EXP Share?
>There's no more,
"No more" implies it ever existed in the first place.
>instead you can just open the menu and pick out a new team
How do I pick up a new team in a gym in SS?
> I just told you gen 5 is harder than every gen since.
Which is completely wrong, but I think you know this considering you keep avoiding giving actual references to prove your point.
>No, it's because it's a Pokemon game
That's what I said.
>I do.
It doesn't matter what the reason is. Just because you don't see the validity is irrelevant.
>The game already has rules that do that.
Not in large enough scope.
>EXP Share doesn't prevent you from having a specific EV build.
MAkes it more cumbersome to do that, therefore it's bad.
>Just because you don't see the validity
I don't see the validity because it literally doesn't exist.
>Not in large enough scope.
Yes it does.
>:MAkes it more cumbersome to do that
No it doesn't. If anything it makes it even easier to have a specific EV build because I don't need to constantly switch around my Pokemon like a fricking moron just so it can gain EVs faster.
>revisionism
lmao
>I don't see the validity because it literally doesn't exist.
It exists because I've already told you how it exists.
>Yes it does.
Of course you'd say that, you love having less options for QoL.
>No it doesn't. If anything it makes it even easier to have a specific EV build because I don't need to constantly switch around my Pokemon like a fricking moron just so it can gain EVs faster.
It does. Yes, you can use it to speed up EV training in certain scenarios. But in certain scenarios, you're now wasting time fricking about with your PC instead.
Less efficient, therefore bad.
>lmao
Anyone can go and check the thread to see who's really trying to rewrite history.
>No it doesn't.
Yes, it does. Not everyone is interested in raising the same 6 fast frail special attackers in one go.
>Which is completely wrong, but I think you know this considering you keep avoiding giving actual references to prove your point.
If you think any of the games from Gen 6,7,8,9 are more difficult than Gen 5, you're a moron.
Pokemon has gotten more and more easy ever since.
XY was a complete joke in comparison and they've been getting easier
There's an argument to make for Gen 7 (USUM specifically), but that's with the caveat that you don't use the Exp. Share.
Which is, luckily, a toggle, as it should be.
>If you think any of the games from Gen 6,7,8,9 are more difficult than Gen 5, you're a moron
Not an argument.
>It exists because I've already told you how it exists.
No, you haven't.
> you love having less options for QoL.
When it makes sense, yes. Why do you think so many people don't care about Deposit/Withdraw getting removed from the PC?
>But in certain scenarios, you're now wasting time fricking about with your PC
And yet you haven't named a single scenario where this would be the case.
>Anyone can go and check the thread to see who's really trying to rewrite history.
You're right. They can.
>If it was getting to be a different level than the rest of my team.
How does it matter?
>You do.
No you don't. You can make Tyrogue's stats equal at literally any level.
>you gain evs
Which you can use to get a specific EV build. What does this have to do with EXP Share?
How is this even remotely relevant to what I said?
>In a case where it takes experience away from other Pokemon
That's not how experience works.
>EV training is limited,
What? No it isn't.
>Why would you need your Pokemon to be a certain level?
If it was getting to be a different level than the rest of my team.
>You don't need it to be a specific level to do this.
You do. Tyrogue evolves at 20. If at level 19 one of its stats were too high, you'd need to EV train it without leveling it up to correct it.
>EXP Share doesn't prevent you from having a specific EV build.
It does. If you gain experience, you gain evs. If you care about where evs are going, unwanted experience gets in the way.
>Tyrogue evolves at 20. If at level 19 one of its stats were too high, you'd need to EV train it without leveling it up to correct it.
there's this obscure trick called "pressing B to cancel evolution"
>pressing B every few minutes on a gameplay-halting cutscene is better than having the OPTION to turn exp share off
either give the option back or do like PLA where you evolve the pokemon when you want to, and everstones were made to fix a preventable issue because gamefreak is incompetent
>What does this have to do with EXP Share?
It's not balanced, like I wrote.
>"No more" implies it ever existed in the first place.
Yes. You could not access boxes before. Good job reading.
>How do I pick up a new team in a gym in SS?
Go to the lobby. Though why would you? Your team is likely overleveled already.
>Which is completely wrong, but I think you know this considering you keep avoiding giving actual references to prove your point.
Woops, looks like you missed the last sentence of my post. Read it again. I know it's more words, but I'm sure you'll be able to read them!
>redditspacing
>In what scenario would I not want Pokemon in my team to level up?
Who cares? Could be that you want to play with a friend with a teams that's at a certain level.
>In what scenario would I not want Pokemon in my team to gain EVs?
Any number of things, just like above.
Like, I don't know. EV training.
>In what scenario would I not want Pokemon in my team to level up?
In a case where it takes experience away from other Pokemon
>In what scenario would I not want Pokemon in my team to gain EVs?
EV training is limited, gaining the wrong EVs can ruin a build
>having enough autism to EV train a (I'll assume new or fresh) Pokemon run
>also
>wanting to slow grind the story mode when the cool things are in postgame
Absolutely disgusting
>when the cool things are in postgame
in modern pokemon games? lol
What cool postgame things? Endless raid battles where most of my Pokemon aren't being used because there's a select few <10 Pokemon who are infinitely more viable for clearing raids on their own? Battling the same few npcs over and over again with mediocre teams and dogshit AI?
Shiny Hunting
Why would I do that? I can't imagine a bigger waste of time than shiny hunting, jesus christ.
Good thing they're next on the chopping block for being too much effort.
How the frick are shinnies too much effort to make?
Exp share is a pretty interesting mechanic in BDSP speedrunning. If you only keep Kazza in your party before Wake, it levels up too fast and will disobey you. You have to keep at least one other mon in your party to leech exp away from it.
The issue has always being a bad level curve. Most games have the opposite issue where you don't gain enough exp to keep up. Pokemon gives you TOO much exp. Also we LOST control over it, people don't like it when what used to under their controls escapes from their grip.
Complaining about the exp share in BDSP is so reddit and cringe. You can fight every trainer and get into wild pokemon fights and you'll never be overleveled for all major battles and most regular trainers in general unless you're purposely grinding
Wrong, because I did exactly that and had to rotate 12 Pokemon to stay even. (With the exception of the E4)
I only did mandatory fights with some optionals on accident with Kazza + 2 Pokemon and my levels were on par with my opponents'. If I had a larger team without traded mons, I would get less exp on the mon I used and it would've distributed the exp more, making the team a lower level on average. Anyone complaining about overleveling with a team of 6 is 100% grinding on purpose whether they think they're doing it or not.
Apparently doing all trainers is grinding now.
It actually is.
>whether they think they're doing it or not
is what I was referring to.
Okay, so playing the game normally is grinding, got it.
Of course,
this thread here was built entirely on the foundation that you do every trainer and then some.
I never played that way. It's way more interesting to see what you can do with minimum resources.
Some people would even say battling every wild they find is "normal." It's not hard to understand why difficulty discussions don't make sense and never go anywhere.
Well yeah, but there's always a middle ground to things.
And having that variance is exactly why the toggle is a good thing.
I could not find any kind of enjoyment out of SwSh because of how it's set up, and it would be a completely different story if the option to not have the Exp. Share on wasn't there.
It'd make min resources much harder too.
Normal to me is hunting for at least a majority of new spawns in each area, ruling out stuff like 5% spawns unless they just happen to pop up. That alone will usually overlevel you.
Okay, I do judge other for running from encounters or especially using repels, but I get it. Not fighting every trainer is deranged though.
Minimum fights is fun, always has you on the backfoot on EXP compared to bosses
Fanbase full of morons who think mindlessly killing wild pokemon is interesting and skill based.
Grinding is boring as shit
>hurr you never need to grind
ya dude, I'm totally gonna bring the new Pokemon I wanted to catch to a level 40 trainer area/Gym that I caught at level 20
>ya dude, I'm totally gonna bring the new Pokemon I wanted to catch to a level 40 trainer area/Gym that I caught at level 20
Yes? You're supposed to switch the Pokemon
>it's going to be another 300 post thread where toggletards humiliate themselves again
lol
>I posted the thread where I got btfo'd by several people again
You love those Ls, don't you.
exp share good
removing options bad
is that clear so far?
>removing options bad
Please never become a game designer.
>the game design argument
It's not 2005 anymore. Modern game design has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that accessibility options improve a game, not make it worse.
anyone who uses accessibility to justify more options is an automatic falseflagger.
This post does NOT want the EXP share toggle in the games. If they did they would not have said this.
He's right though.
Pre-planning does not increase the EXP you get.
Accessibility is one of the many grifts in the video game industry. All it serves is to make a few headliners for journo-shills to praise it and maybe one resetera thread that's gonna suck the game's dick. Oh yeah, and the awards. There's an award category for accessibility.
It doesn't actually make the game any better. All it does is make some "accessibility experts" that limit creativity because people with xyz locomotive disability can't press buttons quick enough. That or it does literally nothing sitting in a menu.
If you want to make actual good arguments for the EXP share, use settings that enhance the game's richness and replayability and make a game more open to different players and playstyles. Like Rimworld's storyteller settings or Xenoblade's Expert mode. Hell, Dark Souls Phantoms are basically a difficulty setting that also changes how the game plays in a major way. The EXP share would be among this list if it was in the fricking game.
Anyway, that guy is falseflagging and wrong and so are you.
Quake 3 is a better game because I can make everyone bright green and force a single model for the best visibility.
Accessibility options != options that frick up the game's balance
>It's not balanced
What does this have to do with EXP Share?
>You could not access boxes before.
You could access boxes before. That's my point, moron.
>Go to the lobby
Oh...so I can't pick up a new team anywhere I want?
>Woops, looks like you missed the last sentence of my post
The sentence of your post that avoided giving actual references to prove your point? What about it?
>Then disable EXP Share
Why would I do that?
>Party exp works differently
No it doesn't.
>The other RPGs use this inherint mechanic better
No they don't.
>last 2 quotes
Yes to both. Play the games.
Why didn't you train the Clefairy?
I remember that thread. You never explained why your Clefairy was so low.
Of course he did.
He caught it and never trained it to prove a point that doesn't actually exist.
I remember that thread.
You caught the lowest level Clefairy you could find in Mt. Moon, never trained it in Mt. Moon or any of the other places you could have used it.
It was hilarious watching you get BTFO.
You were the one getting BTFO in that thread, people basically got you to admit that you cant even train a level 10 clefairy on level 10-15 trainer mons cause that’s “too hard”
Qol hacks like Shin Red and Sour Crystal are all I play, actually.
>no you need to heckin grind levels on Pokemon even if they're actually doing nothing in battle at all
If a game doesn't have party EXP share I just cheat in a max stack of these bad boys
I can spend time playing the game instead of killing shit in the wild or wasting my time by switching pokemon away from battle constantly
I just want to turn it on and off. I don't mind exp share to help get my team around the same level, I just would like to turn it off like in gen 6 and 7, so they don't get too overleveled.
because youre gay and a zoomer, you dont like to try hard, you like easy stuff, go on and try to figure out your gender you fricking b***h
Pokemon, famously hard
There literally just needs to be a toggle option and we are both happy, why are you being a moron?
I had to change my scarlet team four times because they kept becoming overleveled while I played the game. It's hard to get attached to the monsters when you never actually get to use them
> It's hard to get attached to the monsters when you never actually get to use them
I know, right? I wish anon actually got to use his Clefairy.
Anon should have enabled EXP Share and carried Clefairy around for a few fights to get it to a usable level. Then disable EXP Share to not overlevel the other monsters.
Oh right... Options like that only exist in Gen 6 and 7. It was dropped for later Gens because you will buy it anyway.
no frick you
you aren't allowed to have the option to turn it off because I- I mean the children don't want to feel like they're playing on easymode
This, I had like close to 16 Pokemon raised because i had the audacity to want to also catch Pokemon and work on the dex during the main story, I barely got to use my starter until fricking postgame because there was far too much exp being handed out and I had to box it constantly so the main story would give me any pushback.
I don't understand why anyone would defend the removal of the option to turn exp share off, I just want to use my actual team without stomping the entire game.
>I don't understand why anyone would defend the removal of the option to turn exp share off, I just want to use my actual team without stomping the entire game.
It's just autism and nostalgia-rooted brand loyalty.
They cannot comprehend that Gamefreak is just another company ran by ordinary people and are thus capable of making negative changes and decisions, so they have to leap through miles of mental gymnastics to reassure themselves that every choice they make is entirely deliberate and thoughtfully planned out.
It's the same general flavor of cope as "There is no such thing as a Fakemon that could pass as official, only official Gamefreak employees can design anything that looks like a Pokemon." as if the series has ever had a truly consistent design philosophy and we don't have shit like Eiscue and Piplup existing in the same universe
THIS
I had to use about THIRTY different fricking mons on rotation just to avoid surpassing the level curve when I was playing Violet. I'll admit I was being incredibly thorough, catching every pokemon and battling every trainer I came across, but I've done that for every pokemon game I've played in the past as well and only NOW, after all of these """QoL""" """Improvements""" like exp-share and catch exp were added, do I have a problem with overleveling way too easily.
For grinding teams for multiplayer modes or something like Battle Tower, I get it. But for single player, it feels like a lazy way to try to solve the issue with overleveling a single Pokemon at the expense of the rest of your team. Except now you can play the same way while the rest of your team stays up to par at no cost.
>pre plans entire team before booting up game
>complains about being overleveld
I don't get it
Because it fricks up the IVs.
XY didn't use the exp yield system of gen 5 so it soured a lot people on the concept . Before you knew a new party member you never used evolved
Put level cap.
Problem solved.
Remove exp share, replace with exp candies.
This would be the best option. Xenoblade already does this with bonus experience. Let players level at the rate they want and give out the experience to the Pokemon that need it.
>Let players level at the rate they want
It's not my job to balance the game for the developers.
This is a monster raising game. It is, in fact, the whole point of the game to raise monsters. Choosing which to level and which to not level is the entire game. You sound like you just want to skip the entire single player game and jump right to postgame. That exists; it's called Pokemon Showdown.
>Choosing which to level and which to not level is the entire game
There is never a reason for me to not just level up my Pokemon as fast as possible.
>Yes there is, if the Pokemon on your team are leveling too fast
Why would I want to cripple my team on purpose?
>There is never a reason for me to not just level up my Pokemon as fast as possible
Yes there is. If you're having fun using a particular Pokemon and want to keep playing with it, but don't want it to get so strong it can't be used to catch wild Pokemon in the area.
>but don't want it to get so strong it can't be used to catch wild Pokemon in the area
But I can catch wild Pokemon with high level Pokemon. Why do DSgays have such a poor understanding of how the game works?
>Why would I want to cripple my team on purpose?
Do you only think of yourself?
I want to cripple my team on purpose, and I did it in the 3ds games I just want to do it again.
>There is never a reason for me to not just level up my Pokemon as fast as possible.
That's also basically true, but the games have had a reserve EXP system since 2 anyway. The reason this came about is because people complained about being too overleveled. And Xenoblade isn't even a game with multiple party members that could be severely underleveled or overleveled at any point, unlike Pokemon. Hell, Pokemon has more of a reason to use EXP candies. If it were a resource instead of what it is now, it may be better to use it on a Pokemon that is significantly underleveled, or if it were about to get a new move or evolve, or if you could already beat the game trivially without leveling your current party but want to save time leveling Pokemon in the post-game. Right now, you can only use EXP on every Pokemon currently in your party evenly, which is really the worst of every world. Hell, it doesn't even have to be EXP candies, it can be a text box where it asks you if you want to use it on your current Pokemon.
>But that's just a time waster
Yes it is, exactly the same way Switch is, but they made it mandatory anyway even if you don't ever want to switch. It's the same fricking thing.
How exactly is forcing a mechanic that used to be optional a QOL improvement? Everyone has their own idea of QOL. My idea of QOL is giving players the options to chose how they want to play the game, so forced EXP share just reduced my QOL in these games.
Because it undercuts one of the main themes of the series, battling alongside your Pokémon to get stronger and form a connection with them. Mandatory exp gain means that your Pokémon are getting stronger without any interactions with you.
Don’t pretend you are actually using the Pokemon when you switch train it
I don't usually switch train, wild mons are usually only just barely below the nearby trainers, and fighting at slight level disadvantages isn't that hard.
Wow amazing bazinga whole 10 members from the 400?? this guy is a master collector wowzers used frickign TEN MONS??? EVERYONE GIVE A BIG APPLAUSETO THIS GUY HE USED 10 MONS
>it's another "DSgays have to pretend their games were hard so they can have an argument" episode
If you have to fricking grind to beat Pokemon regularly, then there is something mentally defective about you.
Meanwhile, forced EXP share hinders the actual grind. One for PvP. Instead of being able to turn it off so you don’t give your Pokemon the wrong EVs, you have to box them while you grind each Pokemon, then swap them in the box when you want to train them.
But hey, at least the already incredibly easy single player is made even easier (which it already is with a toggle, just don’t fricking turn it off).
Adding it in Sun/Moon as a key item you can turn off was good QoL, it gave you an option to control EV growth or increase game difficulty.
Removing the option to disable it wasn't so great, but I ultimately prefer not having to grind individual Pokémon up.
I'd be fine if you could turn it off. I like having to raise each Pokemon personally because it makes me feel more attached to them since I'm investing effort into each of them individually.
This, I just like to train every single pokemon by myself. I'm fine with exp share as a post game grind item. I was happy when it was an option.
Pokémon forgot it was an RPG first and foremost. Online ruined Pokémon, turn single player into an afterthought for totally broken pseudo MMO multiplayer.
Maybe they should change it so the amount of xp increases as you get more gym badges or some kind of xp multiplier that goes up the more pokemon you knock out in a row or something. Because as things are it's frustrating when a monster goes up ten levels without you ever actually using it.
It makes the monsters seem so disposable which is unfortunate considering how much good work they've done making it so you can buff your singleplayer team into actually being viable for multiplayer
Or they could just give you a button to turn on and off the exp share.
Yeah dude the level 5 magikarp that literally cannot get xp without switch training is going to be the same level as the starter you used up to that point xD
I don't think you realize how much shit can a level 20 Gyarados bury an overleveled Wartortle into. I don't think you ever used one.
You gotta get Wartortle 10 levels up just to match Gyarados' special attack. With Wartortle not getting Dragon Rage.
I literally used it the last time I played Blue, of course I'm not going to use only the starer because it's fricking boring I kicked it out of my party. But that's because I chose to use 6 Pokemon, not because the game actually pushes you to do it. When I was a kid my team was Charizard and HM slaves/revive fodder.
The game shouldn't push you towards using good Pokemon, you should discover them yourself.
Gyarados is hidden behind the weakest Pokemon ever made specifically because it should be for a selected few (before they decided to make it a common spawn in every stream and pond).
Children only use one Pokemon because they don't understand how the game works and how teambuilding helps them, not because one is better than six.
I didn't use just one Pokemon as a kid. I caught anything I saw and tried to make it work. Be it an Onix or Ledyba.
>Children only use one Pokemon because they don't understand how the game works and how teambuilding helps them, not because one is better than six.
In games without the xp share and if you aren't doing a self imposed challenge it absolutely is easiest to use one Pokemon, as a kid I had the exact same reaction as the post about trying to use Clefairy..
>In games without the xp share
In all games.
Exp share doesn't teach children the basics of teambuilding, it just gives them one overlevelled starter and five other lower level shitmons that they don't really use.
>if you aren't doing a self imposed challenge it absolutely is easiest to use one Pokemon
Six strong Pokemon are better than one.
>as a kid I had the exact same reaction as the post about trying to use Clefairy
That Clefairy was straight out of the box. If the guy who made that video used Clefairy from the moment he caught it it could have been a reliable sponge to switch into.
>Six strong Pokemon are better than one.
No shit sherlock. One strong Pokemon is better than 6 medium ones as far as the story is concerned because you only battle with one at a time and level is directly called in the damage formula.
No, using only one Pokemon to battle with objectively is the best strategy in every single game pre-gen 7. The only reason there are morons who think any of the shit like the DS or GCN games were challenging is because they wasted exp leveling 6 pokemon simultaneously the entire game like a moron. These are the same people whining about there being no exp share toggle. They’re low IQ.
Using one Pokemon is the optimal strategy in any Pokemon singleplayer. But it's more fun to raise a full team.
Without exp share it isn’t. It just feels incredibly tedious and boring to mash A for 10 turns on Oddish spamming Absorb when I know my Charmeleon that’s 15 levels higher can just 1HKO and get it over with. The only games I actually have fun using multiple Pokemon is gen 6+.
And no one is saying you have to play that way, we just want the option to.
There doesn't need to be an option to. What they need to do is actually balance the game.
Adding a toggle(that was already there in the past) is far easier than assuming Game Freak will suddenly discover how to design a game.
>Adding a toggle(that was already there in the past) is far easier
It also accomplishes literally nothing.
It accomplishes the goal of me being able to turn it off and train my Pokemon on my own instead of having the game automatically do it for me.
>and train my Pokemon on my own
You can already do that.
Pure contrarianism. Having to mash A on oddish 500000000 times is objectively, factually worse than EXP share always being on because you are wasting the single most valuable, finite resource in the universe: time. Anything - and I mean anything - that wastes time when it could be streamlined and optimized to use less time is objectively bad.
>Anything - and I mean anything - that wastes time when it could be streamlined and optimized to use less time is objectively bad.
Says the person who spends every day baiting on /vp/.
>Everything I don't like is bait: a child's guide to posting on Ganker
have a nice day you subhuman.
>Anything - and I mean anything - that wastes time when it could be streamlined and optimized to use less time is objectively bad.
So, when buying a Pokémon game, the player should just be given every Pokémon that exists in every possible combination out of the gate and awarded every item, as well as every accomplishment in the game. Are you moronic? Games are meant to waste time. The game giving you more things to do is a good thing, not a bad thing. This is an RPG you schizoid.
yeah but that doesn't go with the narrative
>So, when buying a Pokémon game, the player should just be given every Pokémon that exists in every possible combination out of the gate and awarded every item, as well as every accomplishment in the game
You're comparing senseless, mind-numbing, time-wasting grinding to actually working towards a real goal. The challenge shouldn't come from "have I killed enough rattata to just brute force this gym" it should be "am I skilled enough to beat this enemy?". I shouldn't have to waste my time grinding levels just to fight the next obstacle in my way, the obstacle itself should be enough to test me.
>Games are meant to waste time.
BAD games are meant to waste time. Good games will give you a sense of achievement, a goal to work towards, or a way to form and grow friendships with other humans.
>The game giving you more things to do is a good thing, not a bad thing.
As long as those things are meaningful and not busywork, yes. Grinding is busywork and is not a meaningful contribution to a game. In fact, it's a detriment and a sign of shitty game design. Every good game has a way to mitigate the grind.
>This is an RPG you schizoid.
Funny, TTRPGs don't require you to grind. In fact, because people realized 20+ years ago that grinding sucks dick and XP is a garbage method of advancement, almost all modern games have moved to a milestone system.
You're the kind of consoomer Black person who defends set mode being removed becuase "LE JUST PRESS B, BOOM BOOM!!!"
A lack of toggle doesn't accomplish anything.
>it's bad game design to have options
isn't a thing. Games with more options are BETTER, not worse. Games are meant to be played for fun. Giving the players more options gives them more ways to customize the game and have more fun.
On the contrary, a toggle accomplishes nothing. A lack of one means nobody is wasting time and it also spits in the face of moronic contrarians like (you).
>Games with more options are BETTER
Only if the options are meaningful. Turning off EXP share is not meaningful, it is the opposite, it's pointless because all it does is appeal to moronic contrarians who refuse to accept pokemon has been a baby easy franchise since its inception and all always-on EXP share does is cut out the worst part of the game, leveling up your pokemon.
>Games are meant to be played for fun
Grinding is not playing the game, it is wasting your time, the most precious resource in the universe. And if you're content with wasting your time, then you might as well have a nice day because you are a failure as a human being.
>Giving the players more options gives them more ways to customize the game and have more fun.
If you finding grinding fun, you probably also find watching paint dry fun and working a boring 9-5 office job fun, and if that's the case, again, have a nice day. You are actively being detrimental to humanity as a whole, not that I'd call you human.
>A lack of toggle doesn't accomplish anything.
Yes it does.
>isn't a thing
It's absolutely a thing. If a game lets the player toggle and slide around its own mechanics it's not a well designed game.
>Games with more options are BETTER
You're right. Rock-Paper-Scissors would be a better game if you added Dynamite as an option. You should become a game designer anon! You clearly have a talent for it.
Using one Pokemon is objectively the best in a mapped out speedrun, but if you’re playing blind for your first time in the new games you’re going to use all 6 Pokemon because there’s no reason not to. Without the exp share there WAS a reason not to, and that isn’t what anyone wants (hence everyone here agreeing using a full team is more fun)
There is nothing inherently different about speedruns to make single-Pokemon runs less optimal in a regular playthrough. If something is a powerful steamroller, it's a powerful steamroller.
Speedrunners have to use few Pokemon because of time constraints.
If training and switching multiple Pokemon didn't cost them time they would do it.
In a speedrun you know every enemy and the optimal movesets to deal with them and are concerned with wasting time on ball shake etc animations, it’s not relevant. We’ve reached the point of “w-well I can win with one Pokemon if I want” though so this will go nowhere now since you need to deny how players play in order to pretend you have a point
>We’ve reached the point of “w-well I can win with one Pokemon if I want”
It was always at that point because you keep bringing it up first, homosexual.
There is a difference between something the games design pushes you to do vs something you can do in active defiance of the game; soloing with the starter in R/B is the former, soloing with the starter in S/V is the latter
The game doesn't ever push me to use other Pokemon because my starter is always going to be the strongest of the bunch. Rivals don't even take the type advantage over you anymore.
>don't use other pokemon in usum
>die to the school teacher
>die to ilima
>die to totem araquanid
damn is this what it's like to play well designed pokemon games instead of DS slop?
And it has better stats than every starter when it does evolve, and has Dragon Rage early on to carry it for a while against literally anything.
Because /vp/ is full of autistic spergs who hate change and insist that everything was better in the past (it wasn't).
>QoL
Whichever autist overheard this in the nursing home while his grandparent breathed their last really fricked up discussion in this community. The obsession with "quality of life" like the way a videogame is played, voiced as though it's an imperative a player is owed, is just fricking nonsense.
>the game requires I play a different way
Okay so that game requires you change your playstyle. Why does that equate to "lower quality of life"? Because the game doesn't EXACTLY fit what you want?
>They're taking away options!
Okay? Then play any of the previous games where it is an option? Literally every game series has at least one game that you consider skipping on the return visit, just skip the gens with these changes
>[Product] has fallen from grace!
I love Pokemon, but the consumerist trash of this world disappoint me. Who fricking cares, dude. In the whole wide world, you have gone from complaining about a flaw (normal) to outright demanding all aspects of the game kowtow to your beliefs (deranged).
If you can only say "Just skip the game!" you are admitting that it's a bad thing.
Correct. Mandatory experience share is a bad thing. Look, in seven words I've described one of the reasons I haven't bought a game since X. And I haven't spent a fricking decade whining about it.
>You are admitting it's a bad thing!
I don't know what level of "right" you're trying to be on the Internet, but I feel it's my obligation to inform you it doesn't fricking matter at all. Take control of your life, instead of doing whatever this is.
Grinding isn't a requirement in any pokemon games except maybe the Johto ones.
The problem isn't the global exp share, it's the fact that the games aren't balanced around it.
Which is only a issue for bdsp. SwSh and SV are balanced around always having the exp share on
No they're not. Especially not SV where you can do gyms out of order with no scaling.
nta
Yes they are, it requires you to be actively lying to yourself to think the games are balanced around exp share off when it's not even an option.
No, they're not. You become so ridiculously powerful just by sticking with a team, you have to be shuffling around a dozen Pokemon in both Switch gens just to not completely obliterate the AI.
And in older games I become even more ridiculously powerful just by sticking with one Pokemon. What’s your point?
Source? Have you done a playthrough of Sword with just 1 Pokemon? It's really easy.
>Source
Exp toggle people confirmed homosexuals
So you can't support your claims?
How would i go about "proving" that Swsh with one Pokemon is easier than R/B with one Pokemon and more importantly why would I care when it's not important to the overall discussion?
The important thing is that R/B is easier with one Pokemon than 6, while Swsh is easier with 6 Pokemon than 1.
You would prove that it isn't easier. Which is not easily proven because you can make your Pokemon level 100 before the first gym lol
>I'm higher level than the enemy
>This means the game is balanced around a feature that wasn't implemented
It doesn't matter which is easier.
Then why do you get so defensive over it?
What do you mean defensive dude? I’m annoyed because you keep talking past me to hammer over and over
>the game would be harder if I got less xp via making only the active Pokemon get it
I know that. But that is bad design because it encourages you to use only one Pokemon. If you wanted an actual “hard mode” you’d want stronger opponents or a global exp reduction but with the same exp system, you guys never succeed at defending the actual exp system of the old games you just b***h about the numbers
>But that is bad design because it encourages you to use only one Pokemon.
My strongest Pokemon is going to continue being the best Pokemon regardless of how much experience the rest of my party gets. There is nothing that stops you from soloing any Pokemon game, and no number of reposted gifs will disprove that.
Bro why do you just go in circles forever? The goal is not to make it impossible to solo, it’s to make players not feel like they’re being punished for trying to use more Pokemon
I already told you yesterday you can solo FFT with Ramza, that doesn’t mean the exp systems don’t work.
Only you feel like you're "punished" for using something new, and cite time as your main argument when you've been in this thread for nearly a day. You'll get more effort in responses when you stop being so disingenuous.
You ARE punished for using something new. Your fights will be slower, you will have to heal more, and you'll be overall less effective compared to just stomping the game with one Pokemon.
You can't claim I'M the one being disingenuous when you're sitting here saying "well none of this is a punishment because it's more fun to play that way"
>You ARE punished for using something new.
No, you just equate not beating the game in the most overwhelming and quick way possible as punishment. You don't want to play a game, you just want your experience number to be really high so you can reach the end more quickly. You don't want to play an RPG, you don't want to raise any Pokemon, you just want to win ASAP.
Raising multiple Pokemon shouldn't be mutually exclusive with the best strategy, that is what makes it bad design. Good god dude.
They're games for 6-year-olds, why do you need to play them in the most brutally overwhelming way possible?
There's a very obvious intended order in SV. The game is absolutely balanced around exp share unless you are doing dinner kind of meme run where you save the bug gym for last
>dinner kind
how the FRICK did you turn “some” into “dinner”
Phone posting on toliet
*Some kind
It's also an issue in gens 6 and 7
I can't tell for 8 and 9 because i haven't played them
None of those games have an issue because the games are balanced around the exp share always being on at least in gen 7. It's been awhile since I played gen 6.
He will just retreat to the eternal safe refuge of
>the game isn’t balanced at all xDDD
I mean it's extremely obvious that the people complaining either don't play other games or are extremely autistic and love grinding
>needing to grind in pokemon
>ever
In the older games you need to grind a little bit if you want to raise more than one pokemon
No you don't, not at all. You don't even have to battle every trainer to use a whole party of 6.
Yeah you do especially if your like 6 or 7 badges in sand catch a lower level mon.
I think the only pokemon game ever I needed to grind was pokemon gold to battle against Red. The same games had the cloning glitch so I just cloned rare candies instead lol.
That really is the only time it's necessary, and that's just if you don't cheese him with items.
Pokemon games are already piss easy and there's very little substance to them so normal QoL features in real games become trivializing in Pokemon
>so did most kids
[citation needed]
>You must be a zoomer because all my 3 friends caught 6 rattatas
Make a real argument.