The Pokémon series is loved by many gamers around the world. Ever since Red and Blue asked us to choose between Squirtle, Bulbasaur, and Charmander on the Game Boy in 1996, pocket monsters have attracted countless fans. But with around 20 entries left in the main series, and with some previous titles generating heated debate, fans are starting to ask questions and consider what it would take for them to reconsider their commitment.
One fan put it succinctly: “What does it take to make a Pokémon game objectively bad?” They then proceeded to break down a list of titles that have sunk the reputation of video game series. “Sonic 2006. Modern Madden. Fallout 76. Mighty No. 9. Mass Effect: Andromeda. Marvel vs. Capcom Infinite,” they wrote.
“Names that strike fear into the hearts of game developers. No one wants a game to end as a disaster,” he continued, before summing up his question: “What does it take for a Pokémon game to be objectively bad? Something as bad that it is synonymous with failure and barely playable or enjoyable, and would its complete collapse force Gamefreak/The Pokémon Company to change?
Of course, “objectively bad” could be a loaded term in itself. For example, there was a big debate sparked by Pokemon Legends: Arceus about its graphics. On the one hand, many thought that Game Freak could have done more instead of making the visuals look so weird, while on the other hand, many defended the developer on the grounds that the graphics don’t matter (to simplify the whole thing).
But Arceus’ sub-par visuals didn’t seem to affect its sales, and as we head into Gen 9 with Pokémon Scarlet and Violet, due for release later this year, the question posed above has piqued fan interest. about how gaming has evolved and will continue to evolve.
“The main series formula is so simple yet effective, that simply following it to T is a guaranteed hit. So the only way for a main series game to reach Sonic 06’s levels of evil is for it to have So many bugs that it’s literally unplayable,” argued a nousername191.
But a Clown Prince of Lima replied, “I think that’s part of the problem with Pokémon. The formula means that any Pokémon game that comes out and goes on will always be good enough. But 9 generations from now, if they just follow that formula, they’ll only be good enough.”
A SwissyVictory claimed that even a bad Pokémon game is a good game and that the developers would have to make a serious mistake to ruin it for most players. They then proceeded to list the conditions for such a ruin:
- Forced nuzlocks would ruin the experience for many people.
- Making the game too grueling where even the best players can’t get through a gym without grinding for a few hours beforehand.
- Uninspired new Pokemon and/or just adding the Pokemon people don’t like.
- An extremely long and confusing cave that you have to memorize to get through. Bonus if it’s full of pesky Pokemon that won’t let you escape and use moves like self-destruct. This stacks well with Forced Nuzlock.
- A scene where your initiator has cancer and you have to quit.
- All the characters are extremely annoying. Imagine that everyone is as bad as Hop and the Royal Twins.
Another commenter added that maybe microtransactions would make a Pokemon game objectively bad, if players needed real money to buy mons or Pokeballs. Now that would be horrible.
The question certainly generated an interesting and lively discussion, and you can read the full thread here. In other Pokemon discussions, fans discussed what features would make or break Scarlet & Violet for them.
Cyberpunk 2077 Is Getting A Bombed Review On Steam After CDPR’s Stance On The Ukraine War
About the Author