>>35072462OP, I think I see what you're saying and trying to communicate but the fact of the matter is you're putting way too much stock in Gamefreak and Pokemon. I will say the type matchup chart is a ton of fun and the variety of monsters available are also nice, but when you break it down, the cracks begin to appear.
>>Pokemon has 728 spells and 802 monsYes, but of those 728 moves, a large number of them do the same thing, but of a different type (Vine Whip, Water Gun), do the same thing with varying levels of power/accuracy (Return, Strength, Super Fang), or are extremely niche to the point that they're worthless (Mud Sport, Rototiller, Vacuum Cut, Sky Attack), and due to the way moves work there will always be a best option, there's absolutely no reason to run Strength when Return does the same thing but better.
As for the huge amount of Pokemon, it's an impressive number on paper, and makes ingame team building a delight, but in the PvP sense, Gamefreak has done such a horrendous job at balancing these Pokemon, that out of these 800+ monsters you can choose from, maybe, MAYBE ~20-40 of them see use.
Pokemon has the POTENTIAL to be this endlessly complex, deep, riveting game that calls upon extreme strategy and rewards you with fulfilling victories, but ingame it's just "click the Super Effective move to win", and in PvP it's just "click Mega Evolve, then your strongest STAB to win".
I'm not even getting into how handholdy the games are and how non engaging everything is what with handing you the EXP share really early or telling you what a Pokemon is weak to, that's just another can of worms.
If you're looking at Pokemon for a deep and complex RPG, OP, you're going to be let down. Try something like, uh, Romancing SaGa 2, Phantom Brave, or Disgaea, they're fun.
