>>41970117this whole post is a hideously atrocious take and makes competitive pokemon look worse for no fucking reason. imagine if you said there was no reason complaining about dark souls' difficulty because all that matters is the pvp. competing against a human being, with all the capacities that you have, is a fundamentally different experience from being presented with an escalating series of ideally balanced challenges that are designed to force just the right amount of effort and thought from the player while guaranteeing an eventual victory (even if it takes a few tries). if a game isn't difficult enough, none of the setpieces you put into the campaign will have any impact because they don't build up to a challenge, and none of the rewards you're given feel meaningful because you didn't work for them. similarly, if a game is too hard (and particularly a pokemon game or other turn based rpg with levels), the monotony of repeated attempts or grinding dilutes the experience that's being presented. none of this shit is of any consequence whatsoever in a pvp game because the only way to make a pvp game harder or easier is to have better or worse opponents, which are definitionally never guaranteed. the trajectory of experience possible in a singleplayer campaign just can't be compared to pvp, they have no relation to one another whatsoever
