• Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon Sword
  3. Galar Regional Variants?

User Info: Desparae

Desparae
4 weeks ago#11
Don’t mind me just drunkposting

User Info: Andrex_93

Andrex_93
4 weeks ago#12
Desparae posted...
There hasn’t been a drop in quality necessarily, but they are releasing less new pokemon in recent generations. As much as people think this is due to “laziness”, I think it is more that they want each released pokemon to actually be designed well. They don’t want to release half good designs and half roster-stuffing.

For how Pokémon has done things, so far, there's no real correlation between quality and quantity: the design team that designs new Pokémon can and should have enough time to design whichever amount is needed for the game, without 20 designs more or less significantly affecting everything else. There has been no difference in "quality" between Gen 5 and 6; if anything, it's simply a matter of the overall design philosophy shifting, where, in the first few Gens, Pokémon were arguably less thought-out.

This also comes with me thinking they should take more time between releases, so obviously the higher amount of designs (I'd make around 125 per Gen) would be even less of a factor regardless of your stance in "quality V quantity".

"Roster-stuffing" technically both never existed and has always existed: they make new designs for specific in-game archetypes/roles, but that doesn't mean that those designs are necessarily uninspired; of course, they can, as they have often done, use old designs to fill in those roles, but that that is less believable, world-building-wise, if the Regions are far apart from them, makes the Region feel more boring and repetitive and brings up the fact that the new Pokémon are then relegated to rare and specific roles, because, from a collectathon perspective, the common ones are already taken by old Pokémon.

Desparae posted...
I don’t really care that they are reusing an old pokemon because people would complain anyway that they are just copying old pokemon, if we got something like an arctic fox.

Which is one of the dumbest takes this fanbase has, and it's even more absurd that an effective counter from GF to that would be outright re-using old designs in a different color and with one or two details added, you know what I mean?

I'm not trying to offend you in case that is your exact take, I'm just trying to explain that the "they're just copying old Pokémon" was always an absurd concept mostly moved from people who don't understand game design, as they're simply relying on common archetypes and roles to design their roster, moreso than actively copying the specific designs they already did. Ironically, now they're actually re-using old designs, so I don't really see why people who whined before should now find this acceptable.

Desparae posted...
Also, that’s just one example. I don’t see them designing a pokemon like Alolan Marowak or Alolan Sandslash as a new pokemon. Most of the regional variants are just different enough that they are new and interesting, but now different enough that they are wasting the design of a new pokemon altogether.

I completely disagree: there are very, very few RV that I could see being harder to implement as completely new Pokémon, but Alolan Marowak most certainly isn't one of them: basing a Pokémon on old, traditional, autochthonous fire dances? I don't see where would the problem be, tbchwy.

Some just require more elaboration from the design team, which, ironically enough, would give us more thought-out mons than just recycling old designs: a creature mixed-in with an igloo that evolves into a more fortified one, with spikes, an air-filtration mon, a creature with a "tall palm" neck for which Exeggutor is envious, and they fight for sun exposure, etc. I have no space left, but hopefully you get my point.
"Actors are agents of change. A film, a piece of theater, a piece of music, or a book can make a difference. It can change the world." - Alan Rickman

User Info: Andrex_93

Andrex_93
4 weeks ago#13
Desparae posted...
Of course, you are free to disagree, but I think regional variants are good to supplement new pokemon. Even if there is not a drop in quality yet, they eventually ARE going to run out of ideas and start making crappy designs. They have to put ideas in the bank for future games if they are to continue release new gens every 4-5 years.

Of course, as I also said, the release rate is a problem: but I'd rather get a new Gen every 5 years with quality and enough designs to supplement the various in-game roles than a tactic to recycle old ones to better support a release schedule that is hurting the games' quality, anyway.

Desparae posted...
Don’t mind me just drunkposting

Lol, no problem. Sort of been there, as well, once or twice.
"Actors are agents of change. A film, a piece of theater, a piece of music, or a book can make a difference. It can change the world." - Alan Rickman

User Info: c0mpu73rguy

c0mpu73rguy
4 weeks ago#14
I want more and I think there will be more.
It's always too soon until it's too late.

User Info: Desparae

Desparae
4 weeks ago#15
Andrex_93 posted...
Stuff and things

I mean, you have good points, but I am kind of operating under the assumption that if we didn’t get the regional variants, we weren't going to be getting anything. So I’m at the “better than nothing” mentality.

So yeah, if we grant them several extra years in between generations to come up with ideas for pokemon, then obviously I would prefer that. But with what we have now? I’ll gladly take some repurposed designs, especially if it gives new uses to pokemon which were never good or have fallen out of favor.

In short, I both agree and disagree with you— if I could, I would make the games release slower and get more ACTUAL new pokemon. But with the tight releases we have now, I am ok with the supplemental variants.

User Info: Andrex_93

Andrex_93
4 weeks ago#16
Desparae posted...
Andrex_93 posted...
Stuff and things

I mean, you have good points, but I am kind of operating under the assumption that if we didn’t get the regional variants, we weren't going to be getting anything. So I’m at the “better than nothing” mentality.

So yeah, if we grant them several extra years in between generations to come up with ideas for pokemon, then obviously I would prefer that. But with what we have now? I’ll gladly take some repurposed designs, especially if it gives new uses to pokemon which were never good or have fallen out of favor.

In short, I both agree and disagree with you— if I could, I would make the games release slower and get more ACTUAL new pokemon. But with the tight releases we have now, I am ok with the supplemental variants.

On one hand, I would tend to agree, and why, again, even though it might not like it here, I am not completely against the concept (I think); on the other, exactly because the point is "to not waste designs and/or concepts", I'd rather them wait and implement them as actual new Pokémon, even if that means getting them Generations later, and get less things now.. Which technically aligns with what you were saying about them not wasting designs and putting in only the necessary ones.

There's also the whole thing of "it's not necessary to give boost to lesser used Pokémon because that's never the only purpose of a mon", etc., and not every RV is a boost compared to the og, but heh
"Actors are agents of change. A film, a piece of theater, a piece of music, or a book can make a difference. It can change the world." - Alan Rickman

User Info: IceCreamOnStero

IceCreamOnStero
4 weeks ago#17
MegaSableye posted...
I don’t like the concept of regional variants. All they do is make the original Pokémon less relevant.
"All true Fire Emblem fans hate Fire Emblem" - The Fir Coat
"Close your acount" - KinoTFS
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon Sword
  3. Galar Regional Variants?
  • Topic Archived