I have a question about the Pokemon games.

Mattie G Indahouse · November 04, 2014, 07:01:27 AM

So why is it wrong for Oblivion to have the horse armor DLC, Destiny to have cut content DLC or Activision to have the zombie mod as DLC. But it's completely fine and acceptable for the Pokemon developers to cut Pokemon from one game and have them in the other version which is the same thing? Why is that OK, but the other things I listed is wrong? Bungie cutting content and selling it as DLC is no different than Pokemon Silver having Pokemon that Gold doesn't and vice versa.

The Lord Ruler · November 04, 2014, 07:33:05 AM

Because it's more than simple to find someone to trade with to get those "cut" Pokemon.

Mattie G Indahouse · November 04, 2014, 07:39:13 AM

Quote from: Lord Ruler on November 04, 2014, 07:33:05 AM

Because it's more than simple to find someone to trade with to get those "cut" Pokemon.

But they're still cutting Pokemon to be sold in another version of the same game just like Bungie or whoever cutting content to be sold as DLC.

Mat Cauthon · November 04, 2014, 07:55:12 AM

Quote from: BerzerkCommando on November 04, 2014, 07:39:13 AM

Quote from: Lord Ruler on November 04, 2014, 07:33:05 AM
Because it's more than simple to find someone to trade with to get those "cut" Pokemon.
But they're still cutting Pokemon to be sold in another version of the same game just like Bungie or whoever cutting content to be sold as DLC.

Why is it acceptable for Yu-Gi-Oh cards to come in random packs?

It's to encourage trading and interaction.
I see where you're coming from, but aside from a rather small number of Pokemon each game, the versions have the same content.

Plus, because of the trading focus, you don't (usually) pay for those extra Pokemon when you do get them.

gats · November 04, 2014, 08:29:40 AM

Cut Pokemon from the games is completely different. One game has a selection of pokemon whilst the other has a different selection.

Think of it as there being a gun avaliable on the Xbox version of Destiny which isn't available on the PlayStation version, however the PlayStation version also has a gun exclusively to its platform.

Tyger · November 04, 2014, 08:33:06 AM

Because the game has systems in place to trade with other versions

Korra · November 04, 2014, 08:54:12 AM

Pokemon a shit

velox · November 04, 2014, 09:20:13 AM

Because trading. As long as you can find someone to trade with, it's free.

Luis · November 05, 2014, 05:00:18 PM

It's to encourage trading, and it's only like 6 Pokemon exclusive to each game.

Azumarill · November 05, 2014, 05:03:28 PM

because you dont have to pay any more money to get that content. its to encourage interaction with other players so you can trade with them/battle them

clum clum · November 05, 2014, 05:15:17 PM

Quote from: Luis on November 05, 2014, 05:00:18 PM

It's to encourage trading, and it's only like 6 Pokemon exclusive to each game.

Yep. They aren't locking anything away from other people.

Luis · November 05, 2014, 05:31:36 PM

Quote from: Numb Digger on November 05, 2014, 05:15:17 PM

Quote from: Luis on November 05, 2014, 05:00:18 PM
It's to encourage trading, and it's only like 6 Pokemon exclusive to each game.

Yep. They aren't locking anything away from other people.

Plus if you have them in one of the previous game you can always transfer them.

Hahahaha very funny Zonda · November 05, 2014, 08:09:25 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Naoto · November 05, 2014, 08:25:28 PM

（。_°☆＼(- – )
It's not cut content or DLC. Its meant to encourage trading between different versions of the game. The pokemon are never game breaking or affect your ability to complete the game, and they almost always have a counterpart on your version.

It's more about collecting / interacting with other players.

KingWhovian · November 06, 2014, 01:59:31 AM

Because any Pokemon not in the version you own can still be obtained via trading, and therefore are free.

Isara · November 06, 2014, 04:54:45 AM

I think that's because not only as other people have mentioned that you can get the same Pokémon through trading, or exchanging with other players, and therefore free-of-charge, but also perhaps, it's because Pokémon games offer a more meaningful gameplay of a certain quality that has plenty of content.

There's also to note that each time they put the same Pokémon, those Pokémon do receive a new version of models, or sprites and are also able to be used with the new features introduced in the title. Realistically, someone could take their loved Pokémon from all the way back to Pokémon Red, and actually bring it all the way to the new generation with the right hardware.

Just the ability to take your most beloved companion through so many titles is something that you will not find in Destiny, or most of the games out there.

Lemy the Lizerd · November 06, 2014, 08:01:30 AM

Having version-exclusive pokemon is no problem. They can be bred, traded, and shared.

The PROBLEM is version-exclusive items, like Mega Stones, that you can only obtain one of. People usually aren't willing to trade their Mega Stones, so you have to buy multiple games, or hope to find someone who can clone.

Statefarm · November 06, 2014, 07:02:47 PM

Trading is free and they both have their own exclusives.