>>33222776That's a nonsense argument anyway.
A.) Even if it were, this thread is asking if they're good. That means people who don't think so are going to talk about why it's not.
B.) Most of the additions are things brought over from X/Y and thus shouldn't be counted in favor of them. To apply such logic thoroughly, you'd have to do obviously stupid fucking things like count EVERY Pokémon as a new one in each game when talking about new species. And no, I can hear someone typing it already... Talking about variety in general is not talking about new ones specifically.
I like the variety in X/Y, for example, but it doesn't get points for 450 new Pokémon which is what you'd do if carrying features forward counted as a positive. When talking about carrying features forward, it simply stops the points from going down assuming nothing was changed to make it worse.
If this is not making sense, imagine a game you think is at 90% perfect. A follow up having the same features with no modifications would still be 90% perfect. It would only change if they removed them or changed them.
To use na in-game example, having the PSS doesn't make OR/AS any better or worse than X/Y on the connectivity front, in other words, because the feature works exactly the same. You don't add PSS points to OR/AS, but to X/Y because that's the game that earned them while OR/AS was a copy paste.
Only if PSS had debuted in OR/AS could you use it as a point above Ru/Sa/E. That's why the Frontier in HG/SS doesn't count for saying how much better it is than the originals. It debuted in Platinum and is thus a point for it alone making HG/SS not any worse on that front.
