>>46540586First of, your previously question was
>By this logic should it be above gen 1-5 since it has more content?No. Firstly because it wasn't cut back then. Secondly, even if it had all Pokémon, SwSh would still have less content than games like BW or GS. Thirdly, content is not the only thing to be judged to rate the quality of a game.
About this
>So? There's still more Pokemon.>>Also, SwSh has not only cut Pokémon, but also movesThere is a clear and simple difference between cutting something so basic and important and just not doing it.
Secondly, for a collection game like Pokémon, that was a very bad thing.
Do you know why Ash doesn't develop much and why that doesn't matter much? Because the series is mostly about Pokémon. Pokémon are the most important thing in the franchise, and consequently the most important aspect of games as well.
One of the aspects that most differentiated and highlighted the Pokémon games in relation to other monster collecting games out there was precisely the possibility to transfer them all onwards and to being able to collect them all within the game.
The game loses not only because monsters are the main most important aspect of it, but also because it adds to the worldbuilding of the series, improves the replay factor, opens up new possibilities not only in both competitive and in game battles (in both strategies and team themes you can make) but also n others interaction features, and adds a substantial new layer of challenge by completing the National Dex or just collecting them all.
"What if they had then stopped adding new Pokémon from a certain point instead of cutting them off then?"
Well, then SwSh would lose points for not adding new monsters like previous generations did.
Again, Pokémon are the most important thing in the game, cutting them was bad and it was an unprecedented cut of content.
And I'll not even go into the matter of the reasons for doing so turning out to be fake.
