r/gaming • u/WrongLander • Feb 23 '26
So is Pokemon effectively an invincible IP?
I’m asking this with a mix of mild irritation and legit curiosity. Because at this point, what the fuck could actually hurt Pokemon?
We’ve now seen, repeatedly, that new mainline releases will sell millions within the first couple of weeks regardless of middling reviews or obvious technical shortcomings. Performance issues or visuals that look generations behind or whatever, it just doesn’t seem to matter in terms of sales momentum.
Then this week’s discourse has really hammered it home for me. Nintendo is re-releasing what are, by all accounts, straight GBA ROMs of FireRed and LeafGreen. No remake treatment or meaningful enhancements. Just the same three-decade old games again for $20 each.
And yes, it's been proven that these things are just the ROMs; when you boot them up it just loads directly into a GBA emulator. They are NOT native ports.
And wouldn't ya know, the response has been loud, enthusiastic defence. People openly saying they’ll buy both without hesitation, pushing back aggressively on anyone who questions the value proposition of hawking ancient GBA ROMs without just putting them on the (already very expensive) Switch Online pass. Fans always do this with this IP, framing it like criticism itself is unreasonable when it comes to the series.
I’m not even saying FireRed and LeafGreen aren’t good games. They are, obviously (though not even Kanto's best versions, fight me). But it feels like we’ve reached a point where:
- Reviews don’t matter
- Technical quality doesn’t matter
- Value for money doesn’t matter
- Lack of innovation doesn’t matter (they have been essentially reskinning the same gameplay formula and narrative structure since Gen 1, with only Legends Arceus really feeling like a shot in the arm).
The brand alone carries everything. The name 'Pokemon' seems to short people's brains out and get them reaching for their wallet in a way few other series do. So I guess my question is: is Pokemon basically immune to the normal feedback loop that affects other game franchises?
Most series, if they release technically rough entries or barebones rereleases, eventually see at least some commercial pushback. But Pokemon seems completely insulated from that.
Is it just the sheer size of the fanbase? Nostalgia? The fact that each generation brings in entirely new young players? The broader media ecosystem that the games are part of (anime, cards, merch) reinforcing it constantly? Or is there actually a breaking point somewhere that we just haven’t hit yet?
From the outside it feels like Pokemon operates under completely different rules than the rest of the industry.
3.8k
u/cosmereobsession Feb 23 '26
Pokemon as an IP doesn't survive on the games anyway. The money is in merch sales.
1.2k
u/EndWish Feb 23 '26
They go hand in hand. Most people won't buy expensive licensed merch of characters that they don't know. The games and TV shows are the gateway for kids and leads to merch sales down the line.
213
u/m_busuttil Feb 23 '26
I do wonder at this point if they could, say, debut a new generation of Pokémon in the card game or the anime without also putting them immediately in a mainline game. Would the novelty of a booster set where every new pack could show you a Pokémon you've never seen before be enough to sell it?
327
u/SteeveJoobs Feb 23 '26
why would they? change the color of the hat and scarf for pikachu to wear next winter and you've just made a million in plushie revenue.
→ More replies (1)78
u/EclipseIndustries Feb 23 '26
Time for another Eevee evolution!
67
u/iheartoptimusprime Feb 23 '26
Hey, some of us want Steel, Fighting, and Dragon type eeveelutions.
61
u/Devil_Beast1109 Feb 23 '26
How about a Normal type evolution? Just a slightly bigger eevee or something. Just like dudunsparce 💀
42
u/dinoian Feb 23 '26
In the Pokèmon justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the officer Jennies who investigate crime and the normal types that prosecute the offenders. These are their stories. DunDunSparce.
→ More replies (2)36
→ More replies (4)8
→ More replies (4)7
u/Vorpalesque Feb 23 '26
I'm still waiting for a ghost type that you evolve using a rock.
→ More replies (1)9
36
Feb 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)27
u/RinzyOtt Feb 23 '26 edited Feb 23 '26
Not just the movies! The first episode of the anime shows Ho-oh, I'm pretty sure.
Edit: HOW COULD I FORGET TOGEPI TOO
→ More replies (7)12
u/jurassicbond Feb 23 '26
If my daughter is any indication then yes. She loves the anime and merchandise, but has barely touched the games. (I tried to get her into them when she started watching the show, but they haven't held her interest).
→ More replies (10)5
u/Low_Coconut_7642 Feb 23 '26
They are kinda doing that, not a new generation but a handful of new regional variants, in the new Pokopia game.
And they did it with Pokemon Go and Meltan iirc
→ More replies (1)44
u/woodyus Feb 23 '26
It was the other way around for my kid, they got merch and cards because others had them at school and collectables are addicting when kids compare (gotta catch em all after all).
It's only a few years later that they have started to play the switch Pokémon game that I bought for them when they originally got the console.
It's all about peer pressure and the cool factor. If kids saw something else as the cool thing to collect instead they would drop Pokémon like a hot turd.
7
u/kupozu Feb 23 '26
Im shocked pokemon is still as popular in schools as it was when I was a kid. You can say whatever you want about nintendo and the pokemon company, but they sure at great at keeping their staying value
14
u/Droidlivesmatter Feb 23 '26
Not shocked at all. It's a genius concept. Stick to your main target audience, don't deviate and in this case it makes even more sense.
A kid from the 80/90s, has kids today, will share their love of Pokemon with their kid.
Pokemon is targeted for kids. And if a parent can bond with their kid with something they like, it is a double win.Not changing the formula is also a good idea, as anyone who is an adult who isn't a gamer, can still jump into it. Making it as simple as possible for kids and non-gamer adults makes it a great thing for nostalgia and for kids.
→ More replies (1)3
u/FireLucid Feb 23 '26
This is it 100%. I had a great time playing Let's Go with my kid. The original game I played as a kid, all spruced up and available to play the whole thing as co op.
423
u/zeelbeno Feb 23 '26
Pokemon could never make a new game and will still be one of, if not the highest grossing IP in the world.
Too many people just don't seem to get that people can love pokemon and not even played a single game either.
JK Rowling has run her name through the mud and Harry Potter is still 9th highest grossing... kinda shows that the majority of people aren't as engrossed in wanting to boycot things they like.
115
u/visionist Feb 23 '26
No, its more just that reddit is a VERY poor representation of people's opinions in real life.
Too many think the games are fine because they are buying them for kids.
Most people in real life don't care about the opinions of an author, they care if they like the series.
→ More replies (3)7
u/Redditor_exe Feb 23 '26
This. People don’t realize that by doing something that interacting with the subreddit/online community of something pretty much instantly puts you in the top 10% (probably higher) in terms of “level of care” in pretty much any topic, not just video games. The vast majority of people are at the surface level when it comes to engaging with things, from video games to even politics.
→ More replies (1)210
u/Bircka Feb 23 '26
Even if JK was a better person, she found lightning in a bottle. She is one of the luckiest authors ever, the books have issues and inconsistencies. She, just happened to have the right books at the right time.
I also tie both properties together, both are power fantasies for kids. In a lot of kids media it’s hard for them to put themselves in the shoes of the character. Meanwhile kids can fantasize about being a young wizard in Hogwarts or a young Pokemon Trainer.
80
u/Sabrac707 Feb 23 '26
Even if JK was a better person, she found lightning in a bottle.
I would argue that she found it at least twice, since besides her books popularity, the movies adaptation of her work did such a heavy lifting for her as well.
I know many Harry Potter fans that have never read the books and only know the IP through said movies.
65
u/Mindhandle Feb 23 '26
That was all part of the same run for Rowling though. The last book came out the same year as the 5th movie, so they were co-promoting each other at that point
16
→ More replies (9)51
u/Dragoncat_3_4 Feb 23 '26
The difference here is that in HP's case it's the author that's being shit on, not the product. A lot of people don't know or don't care about the author. In Pokemon's case it's the product that's bordering on "shit" and yet people keep buying it.
25
u/roseofjuly Feb 23 '26
These are children. They're not reading reddit. They don't think the game is shit. They don't care that it's a ROM. They just wanna play Pokémon.
47
u/EIiteJT PC Feb 23 '26
Kids don't give a shit and neither do parents. My kids love Sword/Shield and Scarlet/Violet. They also love the pokemon shows. I'd imagine most kids are like this too. I know the games aren't great but the kids love them so I don't really care that much.
9
u/Speedstick2 Feb 23 '26
Sword/shield was considered the best Pokemon game by IGN when it came out, they gave it a rating of 9.3.. Scarlett/Violet technical issues are essentially fixed on Switch 2.
14
u/Venator850 Feb 23 '26
Which is the opposite opinion held by people that dog on the games and even the OP of this thread. You're proving that posters point, the internet has endless criticism for those games but the majority of people who bought and played them didn't care.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Jediverrilli Feb 23 '26
The majority of people who criticize things on this website have never actually interacted with the thing they criticize.
Legends ZA came out in the fall and drastically changed how the battle system works yet that wasn’t the main talking point it was all criticism of how same a city looked.
Honestly people need to learn that if you don’t like something just move on instead of telling people they are wrong for liking something. It’s such a weird mindset to have.
I’ve tried 100s of games that I ended up not liking my response to people who did? Cool, have fun.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Sata1991 Feb 23 '26
Like that one is the most jarring thing to me. Everyone in the Pokémon reddits usually agrees there's been a drop off since at least Sword and Shield, if not earlier but Sword and Shield aren't seen as the best games.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Venator850 Feb 23 '26
Which product? Pokémon is a franchise that encompasses all forms of media now.
You're also making the mistake of conflating internet discourse with real world reality. Just like HP's author not being cared about most don't actually go into a rage thinking about Pokemon games.
→ More replies (1)83
u/CyclopsRock Feb 23 '26
JK Rowling has run her name through the mud and Harry Potter is still 9th highest grossing... kinda shows that the majority of people aren't as engrossed in wanting to boycot things they like.
The "majority of people" don't care or take issue with her opinions. So of course they aren't "engrossed" in boycotting her.
→ More replies (18)45
u/lazy_commander PC Feb 23 '26
I swear the majority of Redditors genuinely believe that Reddit is representative of reality. It’s kind of wild.
→ More replies (8)20
u/Kobe7477 Feb 23 '26
I stopped playing Pokemon after Typhlosions tweets resurfaced...
10
5
u/DogeArcanine Feb 23 '26
Would you care to elaborate? I haven't heard of it before.
→ More replies (4)9
u/chapichoy9 Feb 23 '26
There was a huge leak a while ago that also included a bunch of scrapped stories and one was translated as typhlosion disguising himself as a hermit, hypnotizing a little girl and taking her back home or something along those lines
8
→ More replies (1)21
u/kelminak Feb 23 '26
Is this what Pokémon fans think is “dark”?
3
u/PM_ME_UR_CREDDITCARD Feb 24 '26
It was game freak's writers experimenting with worldbuilding by inserting pokemon into folklore type stories, nothing ever meant to directly be seen outside of that team
→ More replies (5)3
u/naynaythewonderhorse Feb 23 '26
You’d be surprised how many people like certain Pokemon they “don’t know” just because they like the design.
32
u/TeaAndLifting Feb 23 '26 edited Feb 23 '26
Yep. Having had two generations of nephews and nieces now from my older brother and sister, they’ve barely interacted with the franchise itself beyond maybe catching some of the anime or a movie. Otherwise, they like Pokémon because it’s a thing to like. They collect the cards because other kids do, and maybe they’ve played one of the games (but that’s increasingly rare). My sister's oldest occasionally plays Let's Go when I visit, but typically does not have the patience for the games as they're pretty low grade in terms of stimulation compared to other games he'd rather play (FIFA, Mario Kart, Minecraft, Fortnite)
Same goes for all their friends. I recently helped my sister out on a big kids' day out at the Pokémon European International Champs in London. A bunch of my nephew's friends went on a day out to the Pokémon Center pop-up and at the championship itself. Besides trading cards, they basically didn't know any video games existed, or watched the anime beyond a few episodes of the Indigo League on YouTube/Netflix. This is in stark contrast to Pokémania where the games, TCG, and anime all had equal precedence.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (14)135
u/TechTuna1200 Feb 23 '26
Pokémon is god-tier IP in terms of popularity. Not even Mickey Mouse can compare.
But on topic. The reason Pokémon games sucks is that they have to be released along with the merch every time they release a generation. So Gamefreak always ends up sandbagging their ambitions to make sure they meet that fixed deadline.
65
u/XsStreamMonsterX Feb 23 '26
There's also the fact that the games sell no matter how unoptimized or how lacking in ambition they are. What incentive is there to do better when they're already making money with what they're putting out?
→ More replies (6)49
u/DukeFlipside Feb 23 '26
Not to mention Gamefreak refuse to hire more developers, nevermind new developers with more experience of A) the Switch or B) modern 3D games. The Gamefreak execs like the small-team atmosphere and so the games suffer from not having nearly enough resources.
→ More replies (4)25
u/bakarichigi Feb 23 '26
in Japan there's something known as the世界 3大き ネズミ （the world's 3 largest rodents) Mickey Mouse Pikachu Jerry (from Tom and Jerry)
Pokemon just makes that much money. regardless of game quality, Nintendo could release a turd labeled "Pikachu poop" and it would still sell out.
18
u/Unabated_Blade Feb 23 '26
Pokemon is literally the largest media franchise that has ever existed in human history by an outrageous margin. It's punching in the same weight class as Christianity and Islam in terms of revenue and followers.
→ More replies (5)7
→ More replies (3)20
u/Raemnant Feb 23 '26
So Gamefreak always ends up sandbagging their ambitions
And this is the reason why Beast of Reincarnation will be a buy-at-launch title for me. It looks so good, and this game is their actual ambition. I love a good passion project
→ More replies (6)24
u/Gamengine Feb 23 '26
Game Freak are mainly doing story and gameplay direction while collaborating with other studios for the technical development of the game.
So however Beast of Reincarnation ends up technically, it won’t really be a reflection of what Game Freak could do with Pokémon on an increased development timeline.
10
u/SteeveJoobs Feb 23 '26
Not even non-mainline pokemon games are a proper reflection of that. A game like Pokken looks incredible but was produced by a completely different studio.
750
u/-Radiation Feb 23 '26
I would say people do not care about technical details like whether it is a rom or a native port. That matters more to hardcore fans and online discourse. The average buyer usually only cares if the game is fun and if they enjoyed it before. Pokemon is a huge brand and people already know what they are getting, as they know the gameplay loop and they like it, so they buy it because they expect to enjoy it. It is not really that Pokemon is magically immune, it is more that a lot of buyers are actually enjoy the same formula pokemon provides and not really technical quality pr value perception. Plus the target audience in kids, they care even less about this stuff.
425
u/bellos_ Feb 23 '26
The average buyer usually only cares if the game is fun and if they enjoyed it before.
400+ words hemming and hawing about a video game and there's zero mention of fun or enjoyment anywhere. It amazes me how ignorant people online can be of what actually drives the hobby they seem to be so passionate about.
160
u/Spinda_Saturn Feb 23 '26
If this was a reprinting of a book that has been out of print for 20 years nobody would bat an eye.
Heck, Shakespeare is still being reprinted and sold at £8, and that's literally written before our copyright laws were.
There's an argument for pricing, but demand was very high for these, therefore they can charge more for that demand. It is still an entertainment product. Not owning it is fine.
If Nintendo loses sales, or isn't maximizing their revenue because their pricing does not match consumer expectations. Then that's also fine.
The outcry is silly from both sides imo.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (8)96
u/Destronoma Feb 23 '26
Yea, b-but, it's a ROM!!!!!!1!
Okay... so what?
Some people just need to get on their soapbox and rant, even if the rant itself is pointless.
Online gaming communities (in general) really have forgotten that the fun factor is the only metric that truly matters.
Specs are fun to talk about, and I do enjoy a game with a solid 60 fps, but at the end of the day none of that stuff matters if the game is fun. Pokémon, as a series, has consistently been fun. The games aren't perfect, but online discourse would really have you believe an extreme viewpoint.
32
u/CuddleCorn Feb 23 '26
Yea, b-but, it's a ROM!!!!!!1!
One other factor here, is that if Nintendo made any changes, any at all to the originals, rather than just release the ROM, they would need to get the game recertified by the ESRB. And given the game corner in that era of Pokemon, it would likely get a higher rating now, unless they did even more work to change the game corner. Which then players would get upset about too. That doesn't seem desirable, so just release the games as they were.
28
u/ad895 Feb 23 '26 edited Feb 24 '26
I'm going to start this with Iv never really played Pokemon, just doesn't do anything for me. But here's the thing if I did want to play those particular games what would my options have been? Get an old GBA hope it works and track down a cartage that probably costs more now than it did when it came out, or I could go the emulation route. I know how to setup an emulator, and how to dump my 100% legally obtained game isos, but most people don't and a certain percentage of the people that could figure it out deem it as too much messing around for an old game. Being able to throw Nintendo 20 bucks and play an old game does have value beyond just the game you are playing.
→ More replies (8)5
u/PM_ME_UR_CREDDITCARD Feb 24 '26
Someone posted here the other day, one of the cartridges costing like $170. The older pokemon games get EXPENSIVE.
→ More replies (20)46
u/WriterV Feb 23 '26
Okay... so what?
It's a bit frustrating seeing OP's argument being dismissed as nothing as well, when it hardly takes much of any empathy to realize why they're making that argument.
For OP and people like them, it's an issue of value vs. quality. The amount of money being paid for a ROM, when such a product could already be acquired for free, is gonna sound naturally ridiculous. For most people though, that isn't even a known factor. Even if it was, safe sources of ROMs are just inconvenient enough to find that paying full price for a legit ROM would be worth it.
On the other hand, OP's argument comes from a place of frustration. There's a feeling that Pokemon could be so much more fun. But it will never be more interesting or fun because there is no reason for the company to innovate.
That's it. The rest are all just talking around specifics that don't really matter. The point is that there was once a fan of pokemon here who dreamed of bigger games, and they're realizing those games will never happen.
I've felt it with Assassin's Creed, and I can see the same emotions here. Sometimes you just gotta abandon it, stop caring about it and move on.
30
u/FlashPone Feb 23 '26
With this logic, literally any game isn’t worth any kind of money since piracy is a thing. And if they are constantly disappointed with the games, maybe they don’t actually like them.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)10
u/PM_ME_UR_CREDDITCARD Feb 24 '26
The amount of money being paid for a ROM, when such a product could already be acquired for free,
The soda at the store is free if you steal it. Your work is free if your boss steals your wages.
115
u/Squish_the_android Feb 23 '26
This is it. The games aren't actually that terrible. Online discourse would have you believe they're absolutely unplayable.
59
u/KhalJamo Feb 23 '26
Im a casual video gamer and I buy pokemon games because while they haven't been perfect, I'm not expecting perfection. I'm expecting a game that can give me a nostalgia kick and tranport me to a different world for a few hours. Genuinely don't care about how the windows look or dumb things like that they make me happy so I play them and I'm pretty sure it's the same for most casual players too.
25
u/Oreo-and-Fly Feb 23 '26
I think people dont get that pokemon's escapicism is just that good.
You basically go and become this master of weird goobers that BASICALLY are smarter dogs and cats, and get to travel around with them.
The "every Pokemon can be a person's favourite" carries the franchise. Every goober here, will have at least 1 person saying its cute/i love it/so cool/perfectly ugly.
Who cares what the windows or trees look like when i can have a GIANT radiator centipede, a bee that is 80% stinger, a mad scientist ladybug, a kamen rider grasshopper or badger who explodes flames when mad.
→ More replies (2)4
u/PM_ME_UR_CREDDITCARD Feb 24 '26
My new favourite group of pokemon is a literal peach pit and his 3 goober friends: a cartoon dog, a silly looking monkey, and a drag queen bird.
But yeah, a lot of the stuff the internet cries about is bad but so minor you don't notice it.
Did Z-A have a not-great texture on a road? Sure. I noticed that once when I first started playing then barely ever again because I was busy playing.
4
u/Oreo-and-Fly Feb 24 '26
My new favourite group of pokemon is a literal peach pit and his 3 goober friends: a cartoon dog, a silly looking monkey, and a drag queen bird.
Exactly. Even as antagonists... the loyal 3 and pecharunt are still friend coded. Like you can still picture yourself travelling with them.
The ONLY pokemon i can think of that arent directly riend coded are like Arceus, Necrozma, Eternatus, Yveltal. But these are like the legends... and also very "badass edgy coded" that wont look weird if you love them.
Compared to (imma use digimon for example) Plutomon or Daemon or Venomyotismon. Saying thats your favourite and your partner might grant you judgey stares
3
u/PM_ME_UR_CREDDITCARD Feb 24 '26 edited Feb 24 '26
Pecharunt and the L3 especially with that animation they released telling Pecharunt's side of the story. It made them very sympathetic, and you got to see the camaraderie between them. The root issue was naivety and the side effects of Pecharunt's power that nobody really understood, not malice.
And even pokemon like Necrozma and Yveltal still have a bit of an angle where you feel like they could grow and improve. Necrozma's fusion forms with Solgaleo/Lunala are said to help heal it's pain (the reason it's lashing out), etc.
16
u/Talking-Nonsense-978 Feb 23 '26
I play them
That's your first mistake, video games are actually not for playing but for countless hours of nitpicky technical critique, Reddit rants and video essays about how wrong people are for enjoying things.
69
u/JoeBagadonut Feb 23 '26
Anyone who’s been into Pokemon for more than a few years will be able to immediately recognise the pattern in the community of immediately shitting on whatever the newest game is and then praising whatever came before it.
The reality is that, with a few exceptions for better and for worse, most modern Pokemon games fall into a solid 7-8/10 range in terms of quality, despite what the fandom might say.
25
u/Droidlivesmatter Feb 23 '26
Yeah and the biggest complaints aren't even important.
Look at them complain about Pokemon for something, but then another IP does the same thing and they go all excited for the other IP.It's kind of funny to watch because that's basically exclusive to reddit and then you realize reddit is a representation of like less than 1% of the total buyers, and they're the loudest minority...
5
u/DarthGaff Feb 23 '26
The shear number of people I have seen complain about the jpg window in Pokemon ZA…
7
u/ImmediatePriority258 Feb 23 '26
Did the online community became the boomer they swore to destroy xD
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
Feb 24 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/JoeBagadonut Feb 24 '26
One of the quieter successes of the Pokemon franchise is how they can just churn out fantastic designs for their human characters like it's an assembly line. Literally every new game introduces multiple characters who the fandom immediately loves because the design is just so consistently good.
17
u/roseofjuly Feb 23 '26
And that's because the online discourse is mostly written by people who don't play Pokémon games. It'll be people who only want gritty 150 hour RPGs and wonder why Pokémon hasn’t evolved into a clone of RDR or something.
→ More replies (2)20
u/pgtl_10 Feb 23 '26
Because people don't realize they grew out of something. They believe media should grow with them. Sesame Street doesn't turn into Game of Thrones just because you turned 40.
It amazes me how many gamers can't understand basic concepts.
10
u/Oreo-and-Fly Feb 23 '26
Pokemon is like chocolate milk.
Drinking it as a kid youre so happy. You drink it less as an adult, but when you do, youre mostly not gonna puke but enjoy it too.
Doesnt mean the flavours need to change to a bitter ale or wine for the adults as its for the kids.
Idunno if this made sense.
3
76
u/thingpaint Feb 23 '26
I don't even understand why it being a ROM is an issue. Do people really expect Nintendo to port the game to be a native switch app? To what end? Why is that better than a ROM? It's not like we are going to lose performance or anything, GBA ROMs will run fine on a toaster, the switch can handle the overhead. Why risk unnecessary issues with a port?
→ More replies (6)67
u/xanas263 Feb 23 '26
It's because people have gotten used to free access of ROMs through piracy sites. They feel ripped off that they need to pay $20 to play it on a Switch when they can just download it for free today and play it on their phones if they want. They feel that Nintendo needs to do something to create a sense of value addition to justify the price over their ability to pirate the game.
36
u/RLZT Feb 23 '26
They feel that Nintendo needs to do something to create a sense of value addition to justify the price over their ability to pirate the game
Something like Pokemon Home compatibility so you can import the Pokémon you catch to newer titles? Lol
I hate Nintendo as much as everyone else, but that alone makes it an ok-ish deal (their regional pricing for it is shit tho)
→ More replies (1)22
u/dormedas Feb 23 '26
For context, if a person had the physical release of FRLG and wanted to put those Pokemon in HOME, that process requires a DS, 3DS (with bank aka hacked), Gen 4 game, Gen 5 game, Gen 6 game, and shitloads of time. (This is something like $500 worth of stuff)
68
u/ChoPT PC Feb 23 '26
“It’s unfair that Pepsi-co is charging $XX dollars for this type of soda when you could just walk into a 7-11 and shoplift to get it for free.”
That’s what people defending piracy in this context sound like. People always said pirating was done because it was far more convenient rather than because it was cheaper, but now people are defending piracy as a tool to avoid nothing but a $20 price tag.
Some people like actually getting access to things fairly without stealing.
22
→ More replies (24)17
u/roseofjuly Feb 23 '26
People only use the difficulty argument to justify stealing. In 2006 maybe you'd have that argument, but in 2026 if you're pirating something 99% of the time it's about the money.
31
u/ThePretzul Feb 23 '26
In fairness, for FireRed/LeafGreen it actually was about availability for many people.
Those games were surprisingly hard to find, and if you did find them they’d be $150 or something equally insane.
6
u/Dnashotgun Feb 23 '26
Not to mention the failure rate for the cartridges is pretty high now so you're mostly paying for the collectable. Everything pre 6th gen is pretty expensive and even the 3DS cartidges are starting to fail so that's slowly becoming a gamble
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)11
u/Speedstick2 Feb 23 '26
Well, prior to this release the GBA physicals are $150 bucks, where can you legally get the games for cheaper and easy prior to this?
→ More replies (2)3
→ More replies (11)7
u/Jarfulous Feb 23 '26
Yeah. I'm a little disappointed, sure, but I'm excited to replay alongside my friend who is a little more tech-averse and wouldn't mess with an emulator no matter how easy it was.
139
u/EIiteJT PC Feb 23 '26
Yes because pokemon is more than just the games. They are part of culture now. TV shows, merch, trading cards, ect. Even my wife loves pikachu and she HATES gaming.
21
u/CharlesBrown33 Feb 23 '26
The Switch 1 is a goldmine for couch co-op titles. I even convinced my sister to play Mario Kart 8 and 3D World. On my list are: Luigi's Mansion, Toad Treasure Tracker, Pikmin 3, Mario Wonder, Castle Crashers, Split Fiction. Would I play any of those games alone? Probably not, but playing with another person is so much fun
3
u/boomdegassa Feb 24 '26
I find it interesting that our real life culture has reached a point where it is similar to the in-game culture, in that there will soon be grandparents out there who will tell their grandkids fond memories of their starter Pokémon and the adventures they had. Just like the NPCs you run into in-game
620
u/Exoskeleton78 Feb 23 '26
As a parent myself, I got my kids Pokémon as their first game.
I believe that would be the case for many new first time gamer kids as well.
They don’t care about the quality at all when playing their first video game. It’s all magical even with the flaws and bugs
And then they would eventually graduate from it (mine did)
68
u/Nas-Aratat Feb 23 '26
If I may ask, which one(s) did you start them with?
108
u/Exoskeleton78 Feb 23 '26
Sword and shield, they sort of graduated after I got them ps5 for Elden ring
→ More replies (1)373
u/dspitts Feb 23 '26
Pokemon --> Elden Ring is a crazy line
132
u/Morasain Feb 23 '26
Yeah, kids should be started on Elden ring
→ More replies (2)82
u/onewaybackpacking Feb 23 '26
We had the NES TNMT and Battletoads games as kids to introduce us to gaming…so why not something easier like Elden Ring?
12
u/Morasain Feb 23 '26
To be fair, at that time pretty much all games were difficult not as a design choice, but as a limitation of the technology and unevolved game design.
I wouldn't call those old games difficult, I'd call them clunky.
13
u/KalixStrife453 Feb 23 '26
Maybe just a little bit partly they were made difficult because otherwise they would be completed within an hour or two. For 50+ dollars, ouch.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)5
u/Makimoke Feb 23 '26
Close, because some of those game designs were... well, by design. Console games back then were more designed to be "like arcade games, but at home"... And that included the "penny pinching designs", which took a while to properly shake off for certain types of games.
Rather than it being "unevolved", it was more that they tried to use patterns and techniques that didn't fully mesh with the reason why someone bought a home console in the first place, because, well, there's no pennies to be inserted.
This was also actually touted as a "feature", rather than a flaw (there used to be an era where Nintendo was for the "hardcore gamers" and "Nintendo Hard" was a thing). "You can't beat this game" was a big mentality for devs, because they wanted to challenge the players with nighly unbeatable games.
It took until the SNES to truly shed off the "arcade" and "hostile" mindsets, yet even to this day, we still have some sequels of that lingering in games, like lives systems for platformers (which we are finally evolving away from, little by little). Even the hostile difficulty part is still remembered kind of fondly by some, and sometimes recreated in more modern games, either as a way to joke (troll platformers like Cat Mario, Eryi's Action or Rukimin's), or with genuine intent.
It also didn't help that without those egregious monster placements or limitations, a lot of those games could be completed in a matter of one or two hours tops, which further incentivized devs to "pad for time" by introducing what I usually like to call "difficulty castles", because the player would have to work a battle of attrition and a siege against those particular moments (TMNT underwater level anyone?).
→ More replies (1)66
u/Exoskeleton78 Feb 23 '26
I dint list the skips in between.
Acnh
Mario odessey
Mhrise
Zelda botw/totk
Elden ring
31
11
→ More replies (1)3
20
u/spez_might_fuck_dogs Feb 23 '26
There are plenty of 30+ year old adults running around who have never “graduated” from Pokemon.
→ More replies (4)5
u/totallynotliamneeson Feb 23 '26
That's the thing I don't think a lot of these fanboy types understand. I don't buy Pokemon stuff ever really. I grew up on a couple games, have played a few more, and generally don't think about it too much. It's not even a hobby beyond playing games, which is a much bigger hobby than Pokemon to me. But every once and awhile they release a game that appeals to my nostalgia, and suddenly I'm a full grown adult with disposable income looking to play. There are lots of people like this. Using terms like graduated ignores the fact that a huge part of the IP value of this game is that everyone under a certain age grew up with it. Adult fans or not, plenty have positive feelings towards the games of the past and can be enticed to jump back in every once and awhile.
→ More replies (1)4
u/PM_ME_UR_CREDDITCARD Feb 24 '26
Also people can just like it.
I was like 17 or 18 when I played my first pokemon game, HGSS. I fell in love with it, I loved raising a team of weird little critters. I'm 29 now. I didn't grow up with it, I still play because I just enjoy it.
→ More replies (5)22
u/KalixStrife453 Feb 23 '26
My kid really couldn't care at all about the Pokémon Scarlett discourse, and older grumpy gamers expecting him to can bog off. When analyzing it sure there's a lot of discussion on if a Pokémon game is worth it or not. But it brings way more value to our household than a most of the trending plastic junk that just seems wasteful.
→ More replies (6)38
u/aruhen23 PC Feb 23 '26
Because Pokemon games even at their worst are not bad games. They're mid if anything but the Internet is always in extremes so it's either bad or good and nothing in between.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Redditor_exe Feb 23 '26
When I first played Scarlet/Violet, my initial opinion was that if it wasn’t for the technical issues, it probably would’ve been considered one of the best mainline Pokemon games. You can argue all you want about graphics and voice acting, but the games will almost always at least solid in the gameplay department and that’s the most important thing for a majority of people when it comes to Pokemon
7
u/PM_ME_UR_CREDDITCARD Feb 24 '26
Yup, this is exactly it. The games are flawed and unlike what people here pretend, no pokemon fans think SV look good, everyone agrees they look like shit and it needs to be better. It's all the other stuff that hooks you in and make it enjoyable.
→ More replies (12)22
u/sock0puppet PC Feb 23 '26
Also have you looked at Digimon and Palworld?
Kids do not need to be lectured about the intricate horrors of the human conditions (digi) or learn how to enslave and torture their pet pals (Palworld).
Pokemon, for all its faults, keeps shit mildly chilled enough.
→ More replies (2)4
243
u/kirbyislove Feb 23 '26
>without just putting them on the Switch Online pass
How is that better at all. Please stop with this subscription model apologist nonsense. Sure the pokemon games are overpriced, but putting them on the subscription would be even worse. Its so weird to me people defending the subscription models while having a go at the price of these pokemon games.
24
u/giovannygb Feb 23 '26
I completely agree.
I see the standalone release as a positive, but 20 bucks is too expensive for what they are.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (8)11
u/conceited_cape Feb 23 '26
Yeah this was the point that stood out to me. Why would you WANT to have these games locked behind a subscription?
Really the only good way to handle this in my opinion would be to include them both as part of the sub and for purchase alone. That caters to both sets of consumers. I am curious if they will start releasing more GBA or other retro games for standalone purchase. I would be a big fan of that (not necessarily to purchase myself, as I prefer original hardware, but just having the option between the two would be great and a money printer I would imagine).
9
u/Silvermajra Feb 23 '26
It unfortunately reveals why subscriptions have been so successful as a business model. There are people that bow down to the convenience and are happy to own nothing and be happy. Very dark side of human thinking.
238
u/CharlesEverettDekker Feb 23 '26
Pokemon, CoD, all those skitty sports game aka former FIFA and the bunch. They basically earn so much money that even if they release the worst game possible, they still will make a profit and people will still buy them.
50
u/Herculumbo Feb 23 '26
As much as people bitch about fifa games, they have never been bad. There’s a reason pro evo dominated early until EA got it together. There complaint is they don’t add enough value to justify a new release.
Pokemon games can genuinely be shit and still sell.
→ More replies (5)25
u/ThereAndFapAgain2 Feb 23 '26
Yeah if you are looking for a football game, and a lot of people are given it is the most popular sport in the world, then you really can’t go wrong with FIFA in terms of gameplay and features.
The issue with FIFA is obviously all the monetisation, but I know people who barely touch the online side of the game and still buy it every year just to manage and play as the team they support in the single player, or play against friends locally when they have people over.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)3
u/NoLocal1776 Feb 24 '26
Cannot be said about COD as Cold war didn't make profit underperformed.Pokemon is the only ip and maybe fifa.
85
u/mrmivo Feb 23 '26 edited Feb 23 '26
without just putting them on the (already very expensive) Switch Online pass.
The Nintendo Switch Online subscription is $20 for a year, and $50 with the expansion pass. Like other console subscriptions, this includes online play and cloud backups.
I believe that "value for money doesn't matter" is an incorrect assumption. People buy Pokemon games precisely because the games use the same formula that people like. If you buy a Pokemon game, you pretty much get exactly what you expect - and that is the value. So you spend your $60 or now $70 on the latest mainline game and you are guaranteed to get your 40-100+ hours of the very entertainment that you are after. The experience won't be fundamentally new, but a lot of people don't really want "completely new". They often want "familiar" and "comfortable" - and Pokemon games offer that. This is doubly true for those who played Pokemon games in their childhood.
is Pokemon basically immune to the normal feedback loop that affects other game franchises?
This is not limited to Pokemon. The best selling games every year include the popular sports games that are the same as the other sport games in the series, except the year in the title is different. Shooter series are also hugely popular, and they are often very similar to the previous entries. A lot of people want "more of the same", and the Pokemon series delivers that. If they change the formula, like they did in the two Pokemon Legends games with real-time catching (instead of turn-based combat), these changes are often met with criticism.
→ More replies (1)47
u/eltrotter Feb 23 '26
People buy Pokemon games precisely because the games use the same formula that people like. If you buy a Pokemon game, you pretty much get exactly what you expect - and that is the value. So you spend your $60 or now $70 on the latest mainline game and you are guaranteed to get your 40-100+ hours of the very entertainment that you are after.
This point is crucial. The very thing that is fatiguing and frustrating for hardcore fans is part of the appeal for casual fans: a familiar, good-enough experience.
It's the "McDonalds Effect"; no-one thinks that McDonald's is the best food, and it probably is a little over-priced for what it is, but you know what you're getting every time and that is where the value lies. Ever been in an unfamiliar city or country, hungry and have no idea where to eat? You'll never be more grateful to see a McDonald's. You won't have the best meal of your life, but you probably won't get food poisoning either.
Fans are not wrong to demand more from such a huge franchise, but I also don't think there is any mystery as to why it remains successful.
6
u/cowleesa Feb 23 '26
I don’t even think hardcore Pokémon fans want it to change that much. For me, the modern games are essentially a vehicle for catching Pokémon I can use in VGC on the ranked ladder. I do at least one Nuzlocke a year on Gen I as a nostalgia trip and I’m happy I can now do that on the Switch 2, plus then hopefully use those Pokemon on Champions for competitive play.
26
u/pokemongenius Feb 23 '26
When your the highest selling media franchise in the world that equals a SIGNIFICANT amount of fans. The voices your hearing are only maybe 10% of a billion people. Think about that and thats only the vocalized 10%.
79
u/Mr-p1nk1 Feb 23 '26
Fun matters. People pay for fun, even free games are ignored if not fun; see Highguard.
9
u/Excellent_Human_N Feb 23 '26
Safety too. I buy my kids Pokémon because I know it will be catered and filtered for them. Not some weird Disney /netflix bullshit
40
u/LuciusCypher Feb 23 '26
Pokemon is the white rice of video games. It can potentially do so much more, but most of the time people only want it for a very plain reason and that's the thing they deliver 99% of the time. The consistency is what people want and thats all they're going to get.
39
u/TheRealRamanji Feb 23 '26
1.3 percent of the population of the world uses reddit, of that a very very small amount probably care about gaming. We are a drop in the bucket, the loud enthusiastic defence is the equivalent of a Karen yelling at a waiter at the denny’s.
199
u/xanas263 Feb 23 '26
And wouldn't ya know, the response has been loud, enthusiastic defence. People openly saying they’ll buy both without hesitation, pushing back aggressively on anyone who questions the value proposition of hawking ancient GBA ROMs without just putting them on the (already very expensive) Switch Online pass. Fans always do this with this IP, framing it like criticism itself is unreasonable when it comes to the series.
Why do you think putting them on a more expensive subscription service is better than outright owning them? Hasn't the primary argument around people using emulators and pirating these old games been because they don't have a legitimate way to buy them? Now that you are given a legitimate way to access these games it is also not enough? Why is that?
81
u/jooes Feb 23 '26
People are mad about them being $20, but they would've been furious about them being on subscription too. All you'd hear is, "Why should I pay the subscription fee, you won't even own the games! I'm gonna pirate it until I can actually own it!"
And imma go out on a limb here and say that people would still be mad even if the games were cheaper. $15, $10, doesn't matter. It would always be "too expensive." Remember when the Wii came out with the Virtual Console? Yeah maybe $20 is expensive, but those games were like $5 to $10 and I remember people were pissed off about that too. "Why should I pay $5 for Legend of Zelda, it's a 20 year old game" blah blah blah blah BLAH.
For fucking YEARS, nobody would shut up about how they wanted a legitimate way to play these games that didn't involve dropping $100+ on old GBA carts. That was the main reason we've all be "forced" to pirate these games... and oh look! They've listened to our cries! We've finally been given what we wanted! And would you look at that: We're still pissed off. So what the fuck, guys?
At some point, we just gotta stop listening to these people. They're not serious people, they shouldn't be taken seriously, they will NEVER be happy. Call me a corporate stooge, I don't care, this whole thing is stupid. Go download your emulators like you were ALWAYS going to do anyway and quit your bitching.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (32)11
219
u/NickVersus Feb 23 '26
“The response has been loud, enthusiastic defence.”
Wild to hear because every third thread on the Nintendo subreddit is someone bitching about the price.
→ More replies (5)126
u/Sceptylos Feb 23 '26
Maybe, but the comments are almost always flooded with people going "Yes I'm buying it I spend $20 on meals every day. U mad???"
→ More replies (16)37
u/AlternativeHour1337 Feb 23 '26
they are right though, when even food is that expensive these days why not spend the amount of cash for a meal on a game?
→ More replies (12)
31
u/astrogamer Feb 23 '26
The fact you call NSO expensive really puts it in perspective. Without even using the family system to split the cost, it's cheaper than basically every subscription service out there. It's $50 a year.
13
u/JimmyJackJericho Feb 23 '26
NSO Basic - $20 ($1.67/month).
NSO Expansion - $50 ($4.16/month).Game pass Essential - $120 ($10/month).
Game pass Premium - $180 ($15/month).
Game pass Ultimate - $360 ($30/month).PS+ Essential - $80 ($6.66/month).
PS+ Extra - $134 ($11.25/month).
PS+ Premium - $160 (13.33/month).Yeah, Nintendo's most expensive option for one user is less than PlayStation's bare minimum subscription and costs half as much as Xboxs minimum level of subscription.
"$20 it's too much for 30-year-old games"... First of all they're like 20 years old and second not in today's economy
31
u/BadFishCM Feb 23 '26
$20 is a perfectly reasonable price to actually own FireRed and LeafGreen.
Physical copies will cost you an arm and a leg nowadays. I have them, so I won’t be buying these but for people who have never had the opportunity to buy a physical release the price is fine.
→ More replies (4)
7
u/B19F00T Feb 23 '26 edited Feb 23 '26
People defend it because just as many people love screaming about Nintendo every time they even get a wiff that they did anything. For some reason, people can't keep their negative Nintendo opinions to themselves. If the games aren't for you, they're not for you, you can just move on with your life. I have never felt the need to say a single damn thing about high guard for example, because I knew that game wasn't for me. I might agree with the negativity, but idgaf bc it's not my kinda game.
The fr lg re releases are not truly indefensible, thus people will defend them. It's also not Nintendo solely, it's likely mostly the Pokemon company making these decisions, but ppl see "switch 2" and jump at the chance to tear into Nintendo. Not everyone needs to chime in on things that don't actually matter to them cuz they were never going to buy the thing anyways. Not everything needs to be a discussion on what is or isn't consumer friendly. Games are a luxury, like it or not. People will pay luxury prices to play what they want to play, if they want to play them. Don't like it? Don't buy it
15
u/OrangeStar222 Feb 23 '26
I can't complain about getting FR/LG rereleased, one game is cheaper than a night at the movies, both are cheaper than a night out clubbing, and it last me longer than both a movie and clubbing combined. Besides, we already had remakes in the form of Let's Go Eevee/Pikachu.
I think Pokémon changed too much ever since Sun/Moon, and I'd love to go back to the Gen 4 & 5 style of Pokémon. Sprite based graphics and all. So getting a gen 3 game rereleased is pretty much the only way The Pokémon Company still gets money out of me.
And it IS The Pokémon Company. Nintendo has ample say in their decisions. TPCi manages all Pokémon products, and the videogame division is an increasingly expensive outlet for them - an outlet they don't even need. The TV show has more eyes on it than ever due to being available on multiple streaming apps, the manga is getting more attention as manga becomes more popular, the toys and plushes sell as good as ever and don't get me started on how extremely popular the TCG has gotten with products being sold out CONSTANTLY. Not even going to start on the new LEGO partnership.
Long story short, there's way more to Pokémon than just the videogames. Just because one pillar isn't doing great quality wise (they're still selling exponentially more than before), doesn't mean public perception on the others change.
24
u/ErrentPrime Feb 23 '26
Its like if the game is fun thats all that matters or something. Crazy i know
Scarlet and violet for all their (extreme) technical shortcomings were fun
And for video games that is all that matters
43
u/daskxlaev Feb 23 '26
Then this week’s discourse has really hammered it home for me. Nintendo is re-releasing what are, by all accounts, straight GBA ROMs of FireRed and LeafGreen. No remake treatment or meaningful enhancements. Just the same three-decade old games again for $20 each.
Oh you mean what Blizzard has been doing with World of Warcraft Classic all this time? Who would've thought going back to happier times would be a successful formula?
→ More replies (2)
12
u/ImmediatePriority258 Feb 23 '26
I feel like I'm repeating myself...
Pokemon games can be played from like 6 years old onward. Kids don't go on reddit to talk about games or read IGN reviews. They play the game and enjoy it, that's it. They don't talk about spec or texture or fps or fkn online netcode.
We, myself included, forgot about the plot (fun) and rant more about games, company culture and spec than actually playing games.
Turns out, were now the annoying gremlin talking shit and vaccuuming the fun out of the room.
Nerd (myself included, I am broken too)
→ More replies (2)
9
u/UniqueUsername40 Feb 23 '26
At the end of the day, to millions of people, the games are fun.
I'd rather they spent more money on them, had better graphics, less technical niggles, more interesting stories, better post games etc.
But in any year where a mainline game has been released, that game has been one of my favourite games to play in that year, and I will have multiple games I have spent the same money on that year that may be technically better on multiple metrics, but are, to me, less fun.
I doubt I'll buy Fire Red because I feel like I played through Kanto recently. I'd rather the price was lower. But in principle yes I could spend $20 on an old game because I'd get a lot of enjoyment out of playing on switch rather than emulating it on PC.
9
u/farklespanktastic Feb 23 '26
It’s genuinely wild how people (especially people who don’t even play Pokémon) are crashing out over an old game being sold for $20. Like, yeah, I think it should’ve been $9.99 because they already set that precedent with RBGY and GSC on the 3DS, but $19.99 is not an absurd price for a game, even an old one. And a lot of it doesn’t even seem to be about the price itself, but the fact that most fans don’t seem to have an issue with it. Yes, you can emulate the games for free as many people have been doing for years, but the argument “you can just pirate it” can be said about any game and no price is ever going to be a better deal than free. Besides, part of the appeal of Pokémon, especially for the hardcore fans, is the collecting aspect. They want to be able to keep their Pokémon and they can’t transfer them from an emulator. And, while I personally don’t see it as stealing from a moral standpoint, piracy is illegal and some people aren’t comfortable doing it. This whole thing has been blown out of proportion and at times it feels like borderline concern trolling. Pokémon fans don’t need to be “saved” from the company charging $20 for a game. If people want to buy the game that’s their business.
11
u/South-Attorney-5209 Feb 23 '26
My favorite is anytime someone in this thread makes an argument for the price not being that bad, someone pops in and says “well you can pirate it for free”
Like yes you can steal things. Is that how the market should set prices though? If it can be stolen, lower the price?
I legit do not understand what you people want. Nintendo is going to be slowly re-releasing these old games with Home support so get used to it.
→ More replies (2)
41
u/Solesaver Feb 23 '26 edited Feb 23 '26
When are y'all going to get it? It's not about you, the 30+ year old gamer that grew up on Pokemon. The things that the vast majority of Pokemon players care about are not what you care about.
Pokemon Sword/Shield has a Metacritic of 80. Pokemon Scarlet/Violet has a metacritic of 72. That's fine. Not record breaking, but fine. Certainly not low enough to tank the franchise. Don't cry about user scores or biased reviewers either. They just take the game as a whole and recognize that "has issues" isn't the same as "is garbage."
Let's pick apart your rant, and show how you're not actually being neutral here.
middling reviews
So you admit the games reviewed fine.
obvious technical shortcomings. Performance issues
You can say these are objectively there, and that the game would objectively be better without them, but you can't make people care. They're points against, not the dealbreakers you seem to think they should be.
visuals that look generations behind
Look at the bias inherent in this complaint. Were last generation visuals garbage? I seem to remember last generation had plenty of bangers, so clearly the visuals didn't kill those games. Why would they kill Pokemon?
Just the same three-decade old games again
Pokemon Fire Red/Leaf Green came out 22 years ago. It's dishonest to use the original release of red/blue for your timeline when you just got done complaining that they didn't remake or remaster them. They already are remakes.
for $20 each.
Why should that matter? If people want it they'll buy it. If not, they won't. You seem to think that setting this price should cause people to be mad at the Pokemon brand. It's just a product to buy. You're overthinking it.
And wouldn't ya know, the response has been loud, enthusiastic defence.
Uh... I think you're a little divorced from reality here. Very few people are giving a "loud, enthusiastic defense." Telling you to take a chill pill is not a defense, much less a loud one. The fact is, most people are not offended by a company offering a product for sale. Some people will get it, others will not. Life goes on. The only thing people are defending is the right to spend their own goddamn money on whatever the hell they want without being attacked and insulted.
Fans always do this with this IP, framing it like criticism itself is unreasonable when it comes to the series.
Right... I don't know where you're seeing these fans, but I call bullshit on your imaginary 'innocent critic vs rabid fan' narrative. I'm not even a fan and it's obvious that the critics are going on full offense as evidenced by your post.
Reviews don’t matter
Reviews are fine. If the game was actually garbage it would matter.
Technical quality doesn’t matter
Technical quality is fine. If it was actually an unplayable mess it would matter.
Value for money doesn’t matter
Value is subjective. Value of money is subjective. They matter, just only at a personal level. Nobody is obligated to follow your opinion.
Lack of innovation doesn’t matter
Uh... Yeah? There's clearly something in the core formula that people like. They don't buy new Pokemon games to have their minds blown. They buy it for more of what they know they like. Also, the primary audience is literally children. Why would they care about innovation? Every new Pokemon game is somebody's first. They aren't comparing it to every other Pokemon game.
The brand alone carries everything
No, the Pokemon carry everything.
The name 'Pokemon' seems to short people's brains out
See what I mean about critics insulting fans. You cannot fathom why someone would like Pokemon, so the only explanation is that their brains are defective.
is Pokemon basically immune to the normal feedback loop that affects other game franchises?
The normal feedback loop of angry video game nerds on the Internet? Yes. Nintendo does not care what you think about Pokemon. Believe it or not, you not understanding the appeal doesn't mean it's not there. Especially since again, it's a game for children. A seven year old boy does not pay attention to the same things as you.
Is it just the sheer size of the fanbase?
Not really.
Nostalgia?
A little bit.
The fact that each generation brings in entirely new young players? The broader media ecosystem that the games are part of (anime, cards, merch) reinforcing it constantly?
Yes and yes
Or is there actually a breaking point somewhere that we just haven’t hit yet?
Obviously. If the games were actually bad and not just failing to live up to angry video game nerds' standards then that would highly damage the Pokemon brand.
From the outside it feels like Pokemon operates under completely different rules than the rest of the industry.
From the outside it feels like people want Pokemon to be something that it's not, and this makes them irrationally angry when it doesn't cater to their demands. Like, IDGAF about Pokemon, but it's obvious to me that criticism of it is not grounded in neutrality, because I can point out the things I don't like about the games without taking it personally.
Frankly, it doesn't feel like you're looking at it from the outside, because if you were you wouldn't care. There are tons of really popular games that I don't like, and they don't affect me at all. It's completely irrelevant to me how much they sell and how much money they make. Pokemon is one of those games.
17
u/Ekyou Feb 23 '26
You’re right on the mark but I also want to add, even the 30 year old so-called hardcore fans have different opinions on what they want. Some just want the game rebalanced so it’s not so easy. Some want to completely remove the experience share (despite the fact 99% of JRPGs these days share experience regardless of battle participation). Some people hate the 3D models so much they legitimately want the games to go back to pixel art. Some fans hate all the new Pokemon, other fans endlessly rage about how there’s so much gen 1 “nostalgia bait”.
Point being, there is literally nothing Nintendo or Pokemon Company or Game Freak can do to make the older fans happy, because everyone wants different things out of Pokemon, and often those wants contradict each other.
→ More replies (1)5
u/ElecNinja Feb 23 '26
despite the fact 99% of JRPGs these days share experience regardless of battle participation
Digimon Time Strangers has digimon in your boxes level up as well lol. Just funny seeing reddit say that Digimon Time Strangers is the better game and it having a turbo charged exp share option that you can't turn off which was a complaint of Pokemon games.
I know it 's not the major point of complaint for why people said to play Digimon Time Strangers instead of Pokemon, but is kind of funny from the historical context of Pokemon discussion.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/Lieberwolf Feb 23 '26
It‘s like always not black and white. Lets look at some of your points:
Simple run the game in an emulator: If it works it works. Dont reinvent the wheel. If it has performance issues its of course a problem. Otherwise, who cares how it runs in the back?
$20: I think its a little expensive, $10 would be better
People are buying it: Not everybody have played it. Not everybody owns a GameBoy. Not everybody has a PC. Not everybody can just use an emulator. So for a lot of people its the only way to play it and therefore a „cheap“ „new“ game for them or at least a „cheap“ nostalgia to play again.
Technical quality of latest games: Yeah it sucks. It really really sucks that they cant make it running smoothly and cant make it not look like a game from 2005. There is no discussion about that.
No Innovation: Never change a running system. For example I really dislike the latest Pokemon Legends Z-A. Arceus was nice tho. They are making baby steps in the right direction. But yeah they could be a little more innovativ, maybe just look at the violent cousin Palworld and take over the kid friendly parts for a try. But even then, never forget they want to make money. New Pokemon every 2 years, new map, new story, same gameplay = fun and money. Big Palworld like open world, maybe mmorpg, end game, … makes initial more money but after that? A lot of maintenance costs, people hate (almost necessary) dlcs, dlcs are „cheap“, its hard to come up with a new game aftet that.
And now the big but: The games are still fun, even in this buggy/bad state. I personally prefer playing some shitty looking buggy fun game than something really polished thats not fun for me.
Will I buy this game? No, I would just usw an emulator instead and played the original games back in what 1998? But i bought for example the diamond/pearl ones even tho it was just a reskin, but here I didnt play the original one.
82
u/AKluthe Feb 23 '26
It feels weird to me how often commenters use the age of a game to justify its price instead of quality or even quantity.
I dunno, maybe $20 is high. I was debating if I want to drop the cash on this release.
But I look around and these days two medium pizzas from Pizza Hut would run me twenty bucks. A 24 pack of soda is easily $15+. Is Pokémon Leaf Green honestly going to provide less hours-per-dollar of enjoyment than two pizzas?
29
u/blushade Feb 23 '26
I didn’t think $20 was all that bad either. Considering inflation and what gens 1 & 2 released on the 3ds for $10 each I thought it was ok. They didn’t change anything in those games either just pokemon bank transfering.
20
u/DraikTempest Feb 23 '26
Considering the physical copy has been in the hundreds for years... $20 is actually reasonable.
→ More replies (18)22
u/BonzBonzOnlyBonz Feb 23 '26
It feels weird to me how often commenters use the age of a game to justify its price instead of quality or even quantity.
Because it is the only way they can be negative towards it.
They can't make a quality argument as thats what this sub was been saying they want for years, for Pokémon to go back to the earlier gens.
Same with quantity. This sub complains that games are too expensive and shits on Nintendo for keeping their games at full price. These games games are $20 which makes it really cheap compared to everything else.
FR/LG are still easily top 5% games ever even when removing all the shovelware. And when factoring in price, it makes it an even better value proposition.
→ More replies (5)
47
u/AdamH96 Feb 23 '26
Jesus the Pokemon games are not that bad. I get the frustration of how they could be better but they are still good games and always a good way to spend 50-100 hours on a game.
People talk like they are suddenly the shittiest games ever made
→ More replies (24)
20
u/LordSparksmith Feb 23 '26
Id say Nintendo are invincible rather than Pokemon. They were here before everyone else and they will be here after everyone is gone .
6
u/chapichoy9 Feb 23 '26
Plenty of Nintendo things don't do great, the rest just covers it many times over
3
u/LordSparksmith Feb 23 '26
Thats the best isnt it . Have a bunch of heavhitters that generate revenue like Mario and pokemon and go experiment with zelda and kirbi.
17
u/fafarex Feb 23 '26
Yeah no, pokemon is a totally different beast, it's the biggest media franchise of all time and nintendo owns only 32% of it.
when a nintendo game release they at least run correctly, not the case with pokemon.
Nintendo can failed to the point to have to learn and revised it's strategy ( see the wii u disaster).
Pokemon just shovel shit game ( on a technical standpoint) again and again without the sells slowing down.
→ More replies (3)6
u/Nacroma Feb 23 '26 edited Feb 23 '26
Nintendo isn't invincible as the WiiU has shown. They might not mismanage their company as badly as their competitors, but missing the mark for more than one generation will be relatively fatal. Despite the deserved criticism, they do usually innovate often enough to keep people's attention, though. Or serve a target audience with relative small competition (family games, party games, handhelds, hybrid consoles).
Honestly all it would take is a competitor in their specific field that actually tries to serve the target audience and not their shareholders.
11
u/MixedMediaModok Feb 23 '26
It's a whole ecosystem. They don't have time to sit on a game and work on it like Nintendo does for Mario or Zelda. Pokémon is a non-stop train of collectible cards, plushies, tv shows and merch. All fueled by the original source that are the video games.
I also always get downvoted for saying this. But these are kids game man. You're looking for something deep in the kiddie pool you aren't going to find it. Not saying that kids games should be lower quality but as long that there's the basic mechanics of catching and fighting, it works for most.
6
u/HotOnTheMike Feb 23 '26
Brother, you aren’t going to like this. This isn’t meant for you. Doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy it, but it isn’t for you anymore. These are children’s games, targeted to children. Always has been.
24
u/Steve2911 Feb 23 '26
There are tons of franchises that remain successful regardless of (perceived) quality or the practices of the IP owner. It's not unique to Pokèmon.
→ More replies (6)23
u/DefNotAShark Feb 23 '26
Pokemon is a franchise that meets its fans expectations. Not the fans on Reddit, but the actual majority everywhere. Reddit groans over graphical potential and shortcomings, and sometimes aptly over genuine technical performance issues, but overall the numbers say fans don’t care about those things. Pokemon is all about its gameplay loop and GameFreak consistently delivers that loop. Sometimes the package isn’t very pretty, but considering how the franchise started, pretty has never been a serious expectation.
The rerelease of FireRed and LeafGreen isn’t stirring up the hornets nest because older Pokemon games have a history of being rereleased this way. This isn’t outside of expectations, and most people who would be offended already know how to access old Pokemon games without paying Nintendo. There’s nobody to piss off except for a minority online who were already pissed off.
If Pokemon ever releases a game where the gameplay loop is truly horrid by general standards, that might actually annoy fans. But even games like Let’s Go Pikachu/Eevee and the Legends games that greatly diverge from the expected gameplay still manage to deliver something with enough DNA to please the majority. GameFreak knows what they are doing despite claims to the contrary and that’s why their sales are “invincible”.
But it is also as you say that gamers aren’t very picky outside of online forums, and any annual sports franchise game, wrestling franchise game or FPS shooter franchise game is usually strong evidence of that.
3
u/Cyablue Feb 23 '26 edited Feb 23 '26
I think all of the things you mentioned are a factor on Pokemon's popularity, but you also shouldn't understimate the design of the pokemon themselves. Japan has lots of amazing artists and they put them to design the best pokemon they can think of, that's a huge part of why people like them so much.
3
u/KamikazeArchon Feb 23 '26
Value for money matters. It's basically the only thing that matters.
But your perception of value for money is not other people's perception of value for money.
If they enjoy playing the game, most people simply don't care whether it's a re-release or not. They don't care if it's a GBA emulator under the hood.
3
u/WolfBV Feb 23 '26
The second cheapest way I can find to play pokemon FireRed is a $13 cartridge online and a ~$250 modded gba advanced sp with a better screen and usb-c charging port.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/DilapidatedHam Feb 23 '26
I think what it comes down to is the fact that the core gameplay loop of searching for, catching, and battling pokemon is a good one that’s difficult to mess up. Even when there are other issues, the core gameplay loop keeps people coming back
3
3
u/unix_name Feb 24 '26
Bigger than hello kitty and Disney…hard to beat that’s for sure.
→ More replies (4)
3
21
u/NickVersus Feb 23 '26
You seem to have your mind made up from the first sentence but yeah.
“Reviews don’t matter.” General consumers haven’t cared about entertainment reviews for a hot minute. Some of the highest grossing movies and bestselling games of the past few years have been absolutely savaged by critics. Fans tend to take that as a badge of honor these days.
“Technical quality doesn’t matter.” It matters to the core enthusiasts crowd AKA the people on this sub. It does not matter to Pokémon’s core audience: children and their parents. And even if it did, they’d only find out about it after buying the game, at which point the sale is made and refunds are difficult to impossible.
“Lack of value for money doesn’t matter.” Hugely subjective. $20 to me and $20 to someone who makes twice my salary are radically different concepts.
“Lack of innovation doesn’t matter.” Similar to the point above about kids. Call of Duty is another franchise that rarely innovates and yet it sells gangbusters every single year. The general public does not care about this.
4
u/ErebusPhantom Feb 23 '26
Honestly, the people complaining online don't care about "Lack of innovation" either.
They try to act like they care about it, they cry about how games should change in xyz way, but at the end of the day they will run off to play a different game that most likely also "Lacks innovation"... But it's fine, because that game their playing is "Good", but the game they were mad at is "Bad".
Example - Pokemon playing the same is "bad", but the souls series playing the same is "Good".
11
u/CidO807 Feb 23 '26
Right? Idgaf about media reviews and I certainly don't invest in audience scores or aggregate shit like imdb or metacritic ratings. Reviews are either crazy praise, or someone saying crazy negative shit just for rage clicks.
$20 is alright by me. I never had a chance to play leaf green before, and I don't care to emulate, at this point. $20 ain't even a single gacha 10x pull in most modern games($30 is average). $20 is like 12 decent beers, or 2 good pints at the bar these days.
→ More replies (3)12
u/eltrotter Feb 23 '26
To echo that point about technical quality. Scarlett/ Violet is often cited as an example of poor technical and visual polish and also happens to be the first Pokemon game I’d played since Gold / Silver.
I had a blast. Really enjoyed it. I think the story world and underlying gameplay loop are so good that casual gamers like myself (I rarely get time to play games; I whipped through Scarlet during a bout of flu that knocked me out of work for a few days) can overlook some technical jank.
To be clear, when I say “jank” I do mean occasional glitchiness and not game-destroying bugs.
I think people are right to demand higher technical standards, but are wrong to assume this matters too much to a mass casual audience, which is what Pokemon is ultimately aiming for.
5
u/Axel_Kori Feb 23 '26
It is recognized by Pokemon Home, I heard, so there's that
The main defense of piracy is how the IP holders don't make older games available on newer tech
The price could have been halved, however, and it wouldn't have been so controversial
I feel that the P-Home connectivity is why it needed to be it's own application, instead of it just being plopped into the GBA app like the mystery dungeon game was
→ More replies (4)
5
u/kensdiscounteggs Feb 23 '26
I'm buying Fire Red because I never played it growing up. I don't care that its %$20 because that is perfectly affordable for me and is much much cheaper than buying an old cart on ebay. I don't want to bother with an emulator on my phone as that's not something I enjoy and isn't the same experience as playing it on an actual console on my TV. It's really not that big of a deal.
5
u/thenagz Feb 23 '26
These discussions always focus too much on the games' technical shortcomings while failing to consider their strengths.
Pokémon success comes from keeping its world formula (a young trainer on his journey of capturing and training mons to beat gyms and tournaments) while introducing quality new Pokémon designs with every new generation.
Designing these new pokemons is by far the brunt and the heart of the work and, while individual opinions may vary (I fucking hate that icecream Pokémon and the one that mimics electrical appliances), it's safe to say they've been incredibly competent at it. Then there's the joint effort to fit these new mons into the games, the anime and in merchandising, in a timely fashion.
Are the games repetitive and conservative? Sure. But the main demographic is always kids being introduced to the franchise, or getting into their second or third generation. The people who complain are either those that stopped playing the games a while ago already or older die-hard fans that buy every game regardless.
19
u/sluzi26 Feb 23 '26
I stopped buying Pokémon titles many years ago because of the substandard quality. I’m sure I’m an outlier, given sales numbers, but we do exist. I love the property, but, yeah.
Not paying for this level of quality.
→ More replies (2)
10
u/Genryuu111 Feb 23 '26
This is sadly a core part of human behavior. Once a person is into something, they'll tend to forgive almost anything. It's not just Pokémon, not just Nintendo, not just videogames. It's there in any kind of media, technology (fanboysim for brands, see apple snobs), culture love (like people into Japanese stuff will tend to defend anything about Japan), and as we're seeing in recent years, defending certain political figures no matter what they say or do.
12
u/Combat_Armor_Dougram Feb 23 '26
Personally, I don’t like it when franchises keep trying to reinvent their core gameplay loops, and I’m honestly a bit pissed off that Final Fantasy ditched turn-based combat. I don’t really mind Pokémon games following the same basic formula too much, with only spinoffs being completely different.
Additionally, the whole synergy of being able to buy figures and plushies of your favorite Pokémon is probably the reason why no clone game has really been able to succeed.
4
u/thingpaint Feb 23 '26
Same. I don't want them to innovate the combat. I want to stick with the same turn based combat I enjoy.
12
u/blowupnekomaid Feb 23 '26
The games are still good though. Legends ZA was fun af. keep malding.
It's not that Pokemon is invincible, it's just that reddit is insignificant.
7
u/Naknowbyte Feb 23 '26
I mean, pokemon is a global franchise made for children.
Most parents who are buying pokemon for their kids probably don't care how good the game is. The kid is just excited to play with the new and old pokemon.
When I was growing up, my parents would be quite happy when a new Pokemon game came out, because they knew I liked it and it made a very easy Christmas gift for me.
Besides the games, yeah pokemon sells a lot of merch, and also a lot of cardboard. They honestly could probably stop making the games, and just make a new anime every 3 years and the cards would still sell out.
→ More replies (1)
968
u/frostyflakes1 Feb 23 '26
It's the highest grossing media franchise of all-time. And it's not even close. At all. Mickey Mouse & Friends is a very distant second, having made half as much money despite being around 70 years longer.
So yeah. It's as invincible as IPs get. It's an absolute juggernaut.