Quoted By:
>people ITT right now are claiming that the games were always focused on multiplayer.
Yea, I sure did love me that good old gen 1-2 multiplayer, I can battle my friends over and over and trade with my friends and... oh.
Seriously speaking tho, look no further than the mechanics to see why that argument makes no sense. The only multiplayer shit you can do is battle and that was never fucking balanced. Even with their best effort to retcon and balance the games as much as possible in the last few gens the game is STILL horribly balanced, and that's because at it's core pokemon is a horrendous multiplayer experience. Seriously the sheer amount of RNG that's baked into the games mean that after a certain threshold the winner is always just the lucky player. I never got why people on this board pride themselves with "Being good at pokemon" like, damn man, you mastered the mechanics of a children's RPG and pit yourself against other grown men who did the same in a battle to see who lands the lucky crit, misses that high accuracy move, or get's that lucky status, congrats bro, you did it...
I, like any sane person, play pokemon because the single player provides a relaxing fantasy that I can immerse myself in. People who say that the single player sucks because it's easy are retarded, games exist for reasons other than challenge and pokemon is one of them. The games, with some exceptions hit that sweet spot in challenge that keeps you engaged in the fantasy of being a pokemon trainer without ever actaually being much of a challenge, because it's all about atmosphere. If all you want is challenge then go play something else, pokemon isn't for you
