>>42578456Anon I’m specifically saying the limbo is not better, it’s a piece of shit no one should be paying for and is actively harmful and a trap. it’s the very definition of “consumer hostile”. If for some reason I hit my head on something on occasion and decide to battle literally who’s online, I do like you said.
obviously they’re going to pull the plug on bank eventually. They don’t have to but sooner or later it’s happening. At that time, it’s like a prison sentence will have been handed to all those decade old friends and they’ll have to live on their home cartridges out of GF’s reach, safe from being used as a new profit center. Or else go into the punishment room and hope that some day, some way, GF will let them back out. Imagine paying twice for the honor of being allowed to lock yourself out of access to your Pokemon, then paying indefinitely hoping they’ll allow them into the games. Could be next year, could be 5 years, could be never. Imagine paying snd paying GF that free money for years and them never letting your guys back out in the end, your money set on fire.
I feel a little nauseous because as inexcusable and rage inducing is it wise to cut the game down to its bare bones in such a lazy way, I could still see the benefit of having a small and tight dex for a while. At least I don’t have the humiliation of having been caught publicly defending them because I didn’t. But I did feel like being restricted to that selection would get people to give ones a chance that they wouldn’t have otherwise. that completely fell flat and didn’t work in the competitive scene because everybody went right to the same tiny meta, but at least they can’t just immediately throw away the new content as soon as they can bring in their soulless meta team they’ve used forever. There was SOME good, gameplay-based design intent, r-right?
