>>48581827>No it wasn't. You're just defending objectively lower quality.It was good for it's time you retard
>Yes really.Not really
>What do you mean "just because"? What makes putting an old Pokemon on a route not "just because"?They need to make sense in the context of the region, the gameplay and overall in regards to the new pokemon. What's the reason for Dedenne having 5% encounter in a route or Litleo being shoved into a random route that you most likely won't even visit doesn't even fit?
>You mean like Sinnoh leaving a bunch of Pokemon as honey encounters you need to wait hours forIt was retarded, but at least it was tied to a gameplay feature
>Hippopotas as a retarded Unown sidequestTo make the player learn about Unown.
>Spiritomb as an underground sidequestIt was retarded but it was to encourage people to use the underground
>and all the Great Marsh Pokemon you need to wait specific days for?Or you could just change the DS clock? And the Marsh didn't even have that many wholly original Pokémon especially in DP
>What makes it bad then?Being in a shitty game like XY, for one.
>This isn't an argument. Also interesting how you ran out of arguments for defending DP so now you're trying to change the subject onto Battle Revolution out of nowhere.Because Battle revolution was a game that came out around DP that had 3d animations (the thing that you kalostards praise XY for) and it actually looked good unlike in XY and onwards.
>Yes it was. Those are in XY.But they were introduced in BW. If I wanted to play a game for these QOL changes, I would play BW and at least I'd still be playing a decent game as well as get to use the QOL changes
>How the fuck is making teambuilding for PvP and facilities better not an improvement to the game?Because most players don't care about that? They care about playing an acctually good game, not about what random QoL features are in it. That's why Swsh is still garbage despite all it's QoL features
