This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

  • 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. Jim Sterling on the Pokemon Business Plan

User Info: GujinKami

GujinKami
1 week ago#11
DryBird posted...
Two versions was/is brilliant from a business standpoint, and it’s really a minor thing to gripe about. Most people don’t buy both versions from what I’ve seen (because you don’t have to, completing the dex doesn’t matter to most players), and the people that do usually clock so many hours in both that it’s well worth the value. I’m a Jim Sterling fan, but comparing this to what some other companies do is pretty disingenuous.
It is a great move for them, yet it's awful for consumers. How much trouble is it to just release a single version and sprinkle in some player choice so everyone's playthrough and experience can be unique.

And if that many people don't buy both versions, why continue both versions? Again it only exists to milk the consumer out of more money, as showcased by all sales reports of the generations counting both games. (Ruby/Sapphire, Diamond/Pearl etc)

If other companies could repackage a game, cut it in half, resell both halves at full price, and get away with it, you bet that would be the industry standard.
~Gujin
http://i.imgur.com/39lX5ve.jpg http://i.imgur.com/9S9glYE.png https://imgur.com/a/Qxo9jXF

User Info: bd43

bd43
1 week ago#12
GujinKami posted...
How much trouble is it to just release a single version and sprinkle in some player choice so everyone's playthrough and experience can be unique.

Do you really want to be pressed to the tune of 20 something choices?
GujinKami posted...
cut it in half
Not dramatic at all.
Thinking is overrated. Like Pants.

User Info: Lum_Yatsura

Lum_Yatsura
1 week ago#13
Wasting time chronically adding and cutting features is a problem too.
We've seen nifty ideas that deserved further refinement disappear at the drop of a hat. Like the Underground.
Shouting "what did you do that for?" at a stationary bucket of water.

User Info: Azardea

Azardea
1 week ago#14
DementedDurian posted...
Skylanders. Need I remind you guys on that? If you go calling version exclusives and DLC scummy, then tell me what Skylanders is.
Even more scummy? It's Activision.
Did you think you were clever here?
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL68FD0D7F63715384

User Info: DementedDurian

DementedDurian
1 week ago#15
Speaking of standards, why do people treat Pokemon like it should be the pinnacle of JRPGs? If you don't like something, go elsewhere. Just don't hang around forums dedicated to games you have problems with and act like an ass. Criticism is one thing, but with all this talk of "lazy" and "scummy" I think people are stuck in a bastard's echo chamber. It's annoying, and trust me, I KNOW ANNOYING. You won't like it if I went to your favorite game's forum and said something like "Yolo, I've created a monster! Purple!" Understand?
You can pick your battles, and you can pick your nose. But you can't pick your battle's nose.

User Info: OutlawJT

OutlawJT
1 week ago#16
Jim's not wrong. Pokémon could've been exactly the same as it is with version exclusives with only one version of the game to buy at least as far back as the GBA. All on one cart with a simple choice when you start the game to differentiate if you wanted to play version A or version B. For most of the games all you're changing is a few encounter tables and swapping out legendaries. In Ruby/Sapphire also swapping villain encounters. Maybe altering a couple of locations here and there a little which is mostly just skin swaps and text changes. All of which is very space light on the cart, comparatively. So really no reason whatsoever there needed to actually be two physically different games to have two different versions. It was indeed a business decision so they could try to sell the same game twice. At least once or twice they actually made some effort to make the double dip worth it (ruby/sapphire and black/white).
NS FC: SW-1014-1963-5814

User Info: MaidKnight404

MaidKnight404
1 week ago#17
OutlawJT posted...
Jim's not wrong. Pokémon could've been exactly the same as it is with version exclusives with only one version of the game to buy at least as far back as the GBA. All on one cart with a simple choice when you start the game to differentiate if you wanted to play version A or version B. For most of the games all you're changing is a few encounter tables and swapping out legendaries. In Ruby/Sapphire also swapping villain encounters. Maybe altering a couple of locations here and there a little which is mostly just skin swaps and text changes. All of which is very space light on the cart, comparatively. So really no reason whatsoever there needed to actually be two physically different games to have two different versions. It was indeed a business decision so they could try to sell the same game twice. At least once or twice they actually made some effort to make the double dip worth it (ruby/sapphire and black/white).

So, old school resident evil. But pokemon.

...I like it.
My Fate/Grand Order (JP) Friend Bind is 484,416,786 (Vasche)

User Info: emagdnE

emagdnE
1 week ago#18
I have never seen franchise fans defend a sequel's lack of features (or cutting of features) along a lack of innovation like I have with Pokemon. It's so weird, people are content with the bare minimum. Most IPs don't get away with this s***.

I take it you haven't seen the Nintendo Defense Force defending the other Nintendo franchises.

BotW and Three Houses did similar regressioniost bulls*** as Sw/Sh. Yet people actually try to call them "innovative". (f*** no. BotW stole every idea from all the other "open world" walking simulators and TH heavily ripped off Persona while watering down the core gameplay yet again.)
I've never seen anything this beautiful in the entire galaxy... All right, give me the bomb. -Ultra Magnus

User Info: DementedDurian

DementedDurian
1 week ago#19
emagdnE posted...
I take it you haven't seen the Nintendo Defense Force defending the other Nintendo franchises.

BotW and Three Houses did similar regressioniost bulls*** as Sw/Sh. Yet people actually try to call them "innovative". (f*** no. BotW stole every idea from all the other "open world" walking simulators and TH heavily ripped off Persona while watering down the core gameplay yet again.)
Early to tell.
Nothing is impossible.
Don't care, losing my hair.
Gee, I really like you, too.
Are we there, yet?
Me thinks that's too much sodium.
Earl is NOT a girl's name.

And that's what Endgame stands for.
You can pick your battles, and you can pick your nose. But you can't pick your battle's nose.

User Info: Baha05

Baha05
1 week ago#20
I am assuming its just a s***ty video making assumptions right?
"He may be Mr. Clean, but his soul will always be dirty!"
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon Sword
  3. Jim Sterling on the Pokemon Business Plan
  • Topic Archived

GameFAQs Answers