>>40194863This doesn't make any sense. They've had multiple opportunities to make gameplay changes and updates in the past, when there were far less Pokemon, and they didn't.
The core mechanics of the games have not changed in 20+ years, we've always just gotten other features and gimmicks that surround it, dress it up to make it look nice. And we've had games with LOTS of different features that have nothing to do with the battling but were fun regardless. But NOW, when the hardware limitations of working on a handheld-only console are nearly gone, data optimization is fairly easy, and you're making tons of money across the games, mobile market, toys, and cards, that SUDDENLY having lots of Pokemon is a problem?
This wouldn't be so bad if they had just said you couldn't catch every Pokemon in the game; there's not one game in Pokemon's entire history where every Pokemon was readily available. But deciding not only that they're not being programmed in AT ALL, but also that this decision will carry forward to future games, comes off as bullshit to me. RPG gimmicks are cool and all, but they shouldn't supersede the core appeal of Pokemon, which is catching, collecting, and battling lots of monsters.
