>>46477883(2/2)
Majority of the fandom agrees on a sort of "Renaissance" of Pokemon starting with Platinum and ending at B2/W2. Usually Emerald is thrown in there as well to delineate a specific set of games with high quality and more condensed content than initial versions due to being coveted "3rd" versions. But for the most part, these "Renaissance" games are all DS titles. Remember when I said DS carts are extremely faulty? Yeah, when you get that plus prestige, you get this:
>Platinum = $100>HG/SS = $100>B/W = $65>B2/W2 = $100Despite emulation being extremely easy, these older physical games command warranted worth. Clearly, there is a correlation between quality and market price, and this timeline matches up with a general decline of Pokemon popularity among norms. Yes I know this is simple supply and demand, so what am I doing talking about the obvious? What comes after.
Ergo, what is considered the "Dark Ages" of Pokémon. Starting with Gen 6 and X/Y, a majority (Keyword majority; not everyone, for the shilldren hyperventilating right now) consider this current run of Pokémon to be a bust. Here is the quick estimates:
>XY = $20 (Lol)>ORAS = $30>SM = $10 (Holy fuck lmao)>USUM = $25>LGPE = $35>SWSH = $40The recent batch of Switch games is nothing alarming. They are the latest games and most Switch titles average around 40 anyways. However, Switch carts are not prone to failure like DS carts, and neither are 3DS carts. Save for some critical errors that have been patched out already through updates, these should suffer no diminishing supply for the foreseeable future. And yet, Gen 6 and 7 titles amount to a measly 10-20 dollars? That's damning. X and Y are the oldest of these Dark Age games nearing almost a decade, and they are the cheapest of them all. My question to you now is: What will these Dark Age games even be worth a decade or 2 from now? Will they be even cheaper as time presses on and the series slides further down in quality?
