Pokémon Scarlet & Violet - PLEASE TAG SPOILERS/LEAKS

[Diogenes]

So we'll be able to ride those legendaries, right? A motorcycle and some kind of jet bike, with "ride on" in their names, in a big open world that can justify having a mount/vehicle to get around faster?

[mayday2592]

I remember a leak saying that would be the case.

[Sega DogTagz]

Huh. I was expecting a Woolloo or Rockruff level looker to get people interested, but I guess that's not the case. Rare miss. 

 

[Sonicka]

Gotta say, I’m really super excited for this (and were those trees actually upscaled and detailed this time? Jk)

This is now beginning to look like the Pokemon open world adventure I’ve craved for for so long. 

It looks like they took the best of Legends and added it into the mainline series (and I genuinely got the impression Legends was to be the future of the series rather than an experimental spin-off).

Regardless, this looks like a proper step forward after the baby steps that Sw/Sh took towards the idea. 

The 4 player co-op is also an interesting evolution of what’s come from let’s go and Sw/sh - so I’m interesting to hear more about how this will function on the open world (although honestly I’m going to likely be playing this single player for 97% of the time) 

I also really like the bright vibrant colours and general art design of Sc/Vio - so far this is far more appealing and tolerable than legends washed out janky PS2 vibes. 

2 hours ago, Diogenes said:

So we'll be able to ride those legendaries, right? A motorcycle and some kind of jet bike, with "ride on" in their names, in a big open world that can justify having a mount/vehicle to get around faster?

I hope so, it needs to take the best of what worked and was most the convenient traversal in Sw/Sh, Let’s Go and Legends - weather that’s a Bike, flight taxi, rideable mon’s… or just everything for choice. 

[NegaMix]

I like the idea of 4-player co-op, I think that'll be good fun. The fact it's trimmed down to just 4 instead of however many could show up when you went online on Sw/Sh, may help to improve performance too. Plus, it'll be nice to be able to play the game alongside my friends and siblings.

It also looks like pretty much everything is open-world in the game, and visually (in terms of graphics and performance) it looks to be an improvement over Legends, so that's good...

...With that said, though, it looks like wild Pokemon mechanics may be back to the more traditional (I.e. Sw/Sh) style. I don't recall seeing the trainers getting attacked at all, nor them throwing a ball outside of battles. Kind of a shame if so, but it gives any possible future Legends games something unique. (It also gives me more of a reason to get Legends, so there's that too, I guess).

I'm... not sure how I feel about the character artstyle yet. It's clearly aping Pokemon Go this time around, so it'll take some getting used to. It's definitely gonna clash HARD if/when characters here pop up in Masters EX.

Also the continued lack of voice acting hurts.

[SupahBerry]

Guess who!

[Celestia]

Not too much new information but more or less expected for a Pokemon game's trailer 2. The multiplayer surprised me more than anything, I'm curious how exactly that's going to work if, say, gyms exist. I think it'd be funny if you could get your buddies to do stuff like that, lol.

...I can't tell if they fixed up the human faces or if I just remember them being worse than they actually are. Speaking of:

2 hours ago, NegaMix said:

I'm... not sure how I feel about the character artstyle yet. It's clearly aping Pokemon Go this time around, so it'll take some getting used to. It's definitely gonna clash HARD if/when characters here pop up in Masters EX.

They could probably be adapted to the more usual style. Plenty of in-series crossovers (I'm not sure if there's a better term for it) do that kind of thing.

[NegaMix]

3 minutes ago, Celestia said:

They could probably be adapted to the more usual style. Plenty of in-series crossovers (I'm not sure if there's a better term for it) do that kind of thing.

I could see that possibly happening for the inevitable anime adaptation, but Masters might not do so, since that game tends to keep everyone in the style of their original artwork (or their remake artwork, for the first three generations of characters minus Kris).

I guess it'll be interesting to see what they ultimately do, either way.

[Perkilator]

I do kinda feel like the Professor names, while good, missed an opportunity here.

• "Altamira" for the cave paintings, or "Palea" (as in Paleolithic or Stone)
• "Gaudi" for the modern architect or "Silic" (as in Silicon)

[Red Hot Jack]

Oh yeah, now that's more like it. I love the new designs, yeah professors are hot whatever, I love the new Pokemon designs. The theme is sure interesting...

So really, this fixes most issues I had with Legends Arceus: generic environments, not enough strong colors, lack of multiplayer functions, and me missing the Pokemon formula. This has open world, multiplayer and the classic formula, I like mostly everything.

That said, I finished Arceus months ago, including the post-game, just so you know I loved the game, I really did for 30 hours, and I plan on keep coming back to it  

[KHCast]

Still not a huge fan of going back to the two games formula, but the game is shaping up to be pretty interesting so far to me, and I may actually end up getting it at launch. The 4 player co-op ngl is the big thing that pushed it for me, as multiplayer co-op always tends to make an experience uniquely special for me. And as a streamer especially, stuff like this is just loads of fun to stream for people lol. So yeah, probably gonna pick up Violet around launch.

[Sonicka]

Two games is completely unnecessary now… actually it was an unnecessary farce even back in Gen 1 and just used to promote the trading idea mechanic. 

I feel that unless there are distinct enough differences (say, like the how the GBC Zelda Oracle games were handed - which are essentially two separate titles yet linked) then they shouldn’t be doing this sort of nonsense anymore. Or just focus efforts into a single title.

But they will keep doing it, because people will buy them. And money.

However they appear to have at least evolved beyond the third slightly-upgraded-Iteration-of-the-base-game-but-released-a-year-later idea. If they continue to do what was achieved in Sw/Sh with new DLC areas as a pass then great - that was faaaar more value for my money than a retread (and cheaper).

[Salamander]

If I'm honest, I think the number of people who actually buy both games for themselves is probably negligible; I would imagine that most of the double-pack sales and sales of both editions in general are from families where two members want to play the game at the same time.  The two versions survive not because they rake it in in terms of direct cash, but as a marketing gimmick.  (Conversely, I think you'd have a very difficult time releasing a duology like the Oracles games now, each at eye-watering full price - but we'll see if they get remade and how they're handled if so.)

I do agree, though, that more differences between versions are to be celebrated.  The past/future theme offers a number of opportunities in that regard - but will GameFreak go for it?  I think the version-exclusive professors and aesthetic differences here and there are a promising start, but I also think there's an interesting discussion to be had about where the sweet spot falls for exclusive content before it starts to feel like you're missing out on the other title.

[Sonicka]

I do have a friend that buys both - but it’s because he feels he “has too” rather than “wants to” - and it’s become a bit of a necessity for him. But yeah - it is a much less regular occurrence to see customers go and pay for both games at the same time. 

The fine line of what should constitute version differences is an interesting debate. You are right about the oracle games - releasing 2 separate titles (which were nearly 3 at one point I think) would probably be seen less as a novelty and more of a minor annoyance for consumers wallets these days.

But then I dunno how I’d feel if the two games were the same… but just different enough to warrant both purchases. 

Whilst I felt Sun and Moon Had a good balance for just doing a swap on the clock cycle + the usual different mon’s,  Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon then appeared as their usual “definitive” 3rd title …but then with 2 versions which I imagine created tough purchase decisions that were a pain in the arse.

This past and future thing is an interesting idea for Sc/Vi if true, but also something I would expect more from a followup (or DLC, hopefully in this case). If for example, Scarlet was set like… 100 years before Violet, then I personally would feel the need to own both as that’s a pretty big change up to the entire world dynamic. 10 years however, maybe not so much. It depends where they push it. 

Tricky one overall, I don’t know where I’d fall down on this argument besides just going with “just release one game”

[Salamander]

Yeah, to be clear, I don't think "just make one version!" is a bad take or anything, it's perfectly reasonable and eventually maybe they'll do it, I think it's possible to imagine a world where Legends: Arceus came in two flavours but it didn't (were it not for BDSP, maybe).  The other side of the coin is that I've also seen people saying "but if they make the versions too different, I'll feel like I have to buy both", and I'm not sure if "giving people a reason to buy the game twice" is a road I want to go down.

Honestly, I think Ruby and Sapphire had a good approach.  The differences between those games in terms of narrative were essentially just aesthetic, but the way they were presented felt meaningful (especially when reworked for ORAS).  They also set up a killer premise for a third version - but of course they can't do that anymore!

[Sonictrainer]

4 hours ago, Salamander said:

If I'm honest, I think the number of people who actually buy both games for themselves is probably negligible;

...I buy the Dual Packs for myself...

[Sonicka]

3 hours ago, Salamander said:

Yeah, to be clear, I don't think "just make one version!" is a bad take or anything, it's perfectly reasonable and eventually maybe they'll do it, I think it's possible to imagine a world where Legends: Arceus came in two flavours but it didn't (were it not for BDSP, maybe).  The other side of the coin is that I've also seen people saying "but if they make the versions too different, I'll feel like I have to buy both", and I'm not sure if "giving people a reason to buy the game twice" is a road I want to go down.

Honestly, I think Ruby and Sapphire had a good approach.  The differences between those games in terms of narrative were essentially just aesthetic, but the way they were presented felt meaningful (especially when reworked for ORAS).  They also set up a killer premise for a third version - but of course they can't do that anymore!

It’s a funny one - I’m not against dual releases, it just feels a bit scummy in light of todays market to me. But I suppose if it isn’t broke then why fix it now? So tackling how to deal with two versions of the same game is what intrigues me. Can’t push it too far one way or or the other for the reasons we’ve mentioned.

Actually, I’ve begun a first time run on the OR remake recently (I fell out of purchasing the mainline Pokémon games after the original Ruby oddly - so I’m working my way backwards through them now) and I totally forgot the team Magma / Aqua application to the story. That’s a real good shout on how to approach it. 

I’m not too up on how the other generations really worked it for differences (I think the first two generations literally where just a change in Pokemon’s?) but I am aware Sword and Shield just presented a few different Gym leaders in each version - Which is fine enough (except perhaps that some of the leader types felt at odds with the areas designed). But alas - they gave it a go without breaking too much there.

 

[Salamander]

Mostly the difference, aside from Pokedex variations, exists in exactly which legendary Pokemon shows up at the end of the game; Ruby/Sapphire developed that a little further than subsequent games.  Black/White and B2/W2 gave some areas aesthetic differences between titles, with contrasting traditional and modern designs - the sort of thing people suspect Scarlet/Violet may do.  And Sword and Shield was mostly just the exclusive gym leaders, I'm not sure how the endgame storyline differed and to be honest I can't see how the two versions can have differed particularly on that at all.

Honestly, for me, I'd probably throw them all in.  Each version would very much have its own vibe whilst still being the same core experience.  But... separate from this whole discussion, after Sword/Shield I'm very suspicious as to how much content we can actually expect the single-player storyline to have.  For all we know, early-game aesthetics, version-exclusive professors and the endgame legendary might be all we're getting!

[Sonicka]

Additionally, if the game is as open and free flowing that you can do anything in any order you like (as it’s been suggested) then I can’t imagine much story is going to be injected into this anyway in the traditional / linear sense. 

Not that this matters overly much to me anyway - the mysteries and lore are mostly what drive these games in general rather than heavy role playing character adventures. 

[Celestia]

Yeah, the way they describe it makes me think it's going to have a standalone story in each town/location rather than necessarily having a "main arc," at least beyond the usual League challenge. Even if this game hadn't been open world I would have preferred that over the weird half-measure we saw in SwSh.

[Salamander]

Aye, I figure that it'll be the traditional structure of other RPGs where every town has its own quest and there's really no reason why it couldn't be before or after any other.  With that said, given that PokéRide is almost certainly back, I wouldn't be surprised to see some light Metroidvania gating of particular paths and directions.  I don't really care about open worlds, but if it were more like "slightly more open than Kanto" (which could be surprisingly non-linear if you wanted!), then I'd be up for that.  Probably going to be a while yet before they explain exactly how progression works, though.

Honestly, one thing I have long wanted the third versions to be, and which they never really were, was more like a remix version?  Platinum and B2W2 changed the gym order slightly and that concept really hooked me, I think the idea of being able to replay the game and go through it in a completely different order encountering Pokemon in a different sequence sounds awesome.  In theory, with an open-world Pokemon game then every playthrough can be like that.

[KHCast]

Spoiler

So uhh…the leaks coming out. 

Sprigatito Evo stands up apparently also. Pokémon fans collectively crying now 

Potential Leaks above 

[Sonictrainer]

7 hours ago, KHCast said:

  Hide contents

So uhh…the leaks coming out. 

Sprigatito Evo stands up apparently also. Pokémon fans collectively crying now 

Potential Leaks above 

Spoiler

Honestly, most fans called Tauros getting a regional variant here

 

[KHCast]

Spoiler

“Sprigatito's final evolution has a
"god-tier" Hidden
Ability, will be bipedal and seems like will be humanoid/
waifu-like”
 

OH HELL NAH. THEY KNOW THIS FANBASE RIGHT?

 

[Zaysho]

57 minutes ago, KHCast said:

  Hide contents

“Sprigatito's final evolution has a
"god-tier" Hidden
Ability, will be bipedal and seems like will be humanoid/
waifu-like”
 

OH HELL NAH. THEY KNOW THIS FANBASE RIGHT?

 

Spoiler

As an Incineroar fan who's extremely tired of Pokémon fans' whining, I need this to be real.