[19 / 4 / 16]
Quoted By: >>50067775 >>50070304
Optional exp share supporter logic:
>Exp share is a great tool for letting players train more Pokémon without needing to spend hours grinding, but some players prefer to play like in Gens 1-7
>With the exp share, these players would become vastly overleveled
>Therefore it should've stayed optional, that way both types of players are satisfied
Forced permanent exp share supporter mental gymnastics:
> Exp share is a great tool for letting players train more Pokémon without needing to spend hours grinding, but some players prefer to play like in Gens 1-7
>With the exp share These players would become vastly over leveled
>Thats ok because these players are playing wrong
>It doesn’t matter that the games were designed to be played that way for over a decade because if you played with only 1 Pokémon in the old games you’d become overleveled too
>It doesn’t matter that no one who wants the optional exp share actually ever played that way because it’s the optimal playstyle
>It doesn’t matter that this problem still exists with the exp share but extends to using 6 or less Pokémon instead of just 1, now ruining the games for a significantly larger amount of the player base, because the flaw existing at all in older games somehow means it’s ok to significantly worsen it in newer games
>It doesn’t matter that this makes absolutely 0 sense because…. Reasons?
>Therefore the exp share needs to stay permanent
>Exp share is a great tool for letting players train more Pokémon without needing to spend hours grinding, but some players prefer to play like in Gens 1-7
>With the exp share, these players would become vastly overleveled
>Therefore it should've stayed optional, that way both types of players are satisfied
Forced permanent exp share supporter mental gymnastics:
> Exp share is a great tool for letting players train more Pokémon without needing to spend hours grinding, but some players prefer to play like in Gens 1-7
>With the exp share These players would become vastly over leveled
>Thats ok because these players are playing wrong
>It doesn’t matter that the games were designed to be played that way for over a decade because if you played with only 1 Pokémon in the old games you’d become overleveled too
>It doesn’t matter that no one who wants the optional exp share actually ever played that way because it’s the optimal playstyle
>It doesn’t matter that this problem still exists with the exp share but extends to using 6 or less Pokémon instead of just 1, now ruining the games for a significantly larger amount of the player base, because the flaw existing at all in older games somehow means it’s ok to significantly worsen it in newer games
>It doesn’t matter that this makes absolutely 0 sense because…. Reasons?
>Therefore the exp share needs to stay permanent
