>>53128412I actually do applaud you for not retreading the same ground.
>but if the person truly thinks is bad because they're misinformed about the director then you can prove them wrong, as you sayCorrect, now apply this to the current conversation. The wrong director, in this instance, is the idea that "difficulty = quality is a genuine design principle in the context of Pokemon" when it in fact isn't, and the person dislikes the movie/Pokemon game for reasons that make very little sense.
>Without it ANY game would become completely flat, difficulty is an inherent part of every single gameYou're conflating ideas here, though. Pokemon does obviously have an inherent difficulty, that's not even really a question. What people ask for, though, is harder fights within that paradigm, which doesn't really make any sense. The feelings the games are trying to capture, the intent behind their creation, the design principles which have been there since the beginning don't lend at all to the idea that this super-successful franchise which continues to be super-successful despite barely changing in difficulty could be improved or more appealing by making fights harder.
So, again, you are free to believe, in spite of the numerous advantages players have always been given over AI, Tajiri himself talking about what he wanted to capture with making this series, that difficulty is somehow a major point of contention in deciding the quality of a game, but I am telling you that line of thinking just does not understand the fundamentals of the franchise
