It's not okay. Also, didn't they allow refunds a few days ago or is that a fever dream.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
CONFIRMED: Pokémon Sword/Shield Dropped GTS; Contains Multiplayer Code From Let's Go
- Thread starter Caz
- Start date
The hashtag was originally used to support GF in face of the harassment they had faced online and was after co-opted by other people in a sarcastic manner to illustrate their disappointment with the game. I don't think a warning was unfair in light of its original meaning.
Moreover, I've seen fuck you Game Freak posts that did not receive a warning in line with posts against other companies.
god this is insane, I been having trouble motivating myself buying the game since they cut half the pokemons....
And now they remove the easy simple system to trade with people.......WTF
I was looking forward to play the game from the launch day as the GTS is also more interesting in the beginning as people are trading differently at the start, just catching their pokemons, finally getting that special traits etc.
And now they remove the easy simple system to trade with people.......WTF
I was looking forward to play the game from the launch day as the GTS is also more interesting in the beginning as people are trading differently at the start, just catching their pokemons, finally getting that special traits etc.
Because the #ThankYouGameFreak hashtag wasn't meant to shut down the negative criticism, but rather be supportive in a toxic environment. Using it sarcastically is needlessly making fun of any positive sentiment, which is unnecessary. Just because GF didn't make the changes you wanted, that doesn't mean they are suddenly irredeemable. You can express your negative frustrations without making fun of people trying to be positive and vice versa.
#Thankyougamefreak was created in response to the harassment the Gamefreak developers were receiving all because of a video game so wouldn't you say it's toxic and in poor taste to use the hastag to pile on the developers even more? Cannot believe even a simple thing like this has to be explained.
This thread itself is chock full of people criticising Gamefreak with no issues even dredging up old ass threads to vindictively look for people who posted there before and you're complaining about the moderation? What even.
I personally don't have any stakes in this. I'm one of those people who knew GF would fuck up because I'm aware of their track record with 3D games.
I just think it's weird that mockery of companies is allowed even if by co-opting praise, like the aforementioned "Capcom is Back", but I guess I do understand the context of anti-harassment.
It was in poor taste. I agree.
However, I will not give GF a pass. It's clear the current yearly development model is unsustainable, which is bad for the devs and their work. I wouldn't be surprised if the low morale that sparked #ThankYouGameFreak was caused more by development constraints than the actual harassment, the latter being an unfortunate consequence of the former. This feels like a problem GF itself caused and doesn't want to fix out of greed.
Masuda, Ohmori and his bosses overall need to be more transparent. Would be better for consumers AND devs.
Last edited:
So I just got denied cancelling preorder. (Ireland)
Nintendo
Was it not for US only?
The representative just refused to address the issue when he realised that what he is quoting actually doesn't make sense.
I'm trying to see if there's European Customer Ombudsman on twitter. I think it'd be good to publicise the issue if that's the case.
Nintendo
Was it not for US only?
The representative just refused to address the issue when he realised that what he is quoting actually doesn't make sense.
I'm trying to see if there's European Customer Ombudsman on twitter. I think it'd be good to publicise the issue if that's the case.
People keep saying harassment and death threats yet I have never seen one directed to a dev.
most of the ones I see are generally on gamefreak the company. I need receipts.
yeah I found the thread and unfortunately it was US only. I'm not sure if EU has the same policy.
most of the ones I see are generally on gamefreak the company. I need receipts.
yeah I found the thread and unfortunately it was US only. I'm not sure if EU has the same policy.
With Breath Of The Wild, Mario Odyssey, Xenoblade 2, Three Houses, Luigi's Mansion 3, Smash Ultimate, damn I really hoped the Switch would've been blessed with the best or the most innovative entry for another one of Nintendo's legendary franchises, but leave it to Game Freak to ruin that perfect streak. Maybe the backlash for this shitshow will prompt them to make an awesome Gen 9, one can hope. For now, this will be the first generation of Pokémon ever to which I skip day one. I have Astral Chain on my backlog, sorry.
Honestly, I think the "support" is unwarranted and misaligned in nature. The hashtag movement was in response to the criticism being levied at Gamefreak. If it's anti-harassment, then it shouldn't be #thankyougamefreak. I don't think people realize that supporting others doesn't necessary mean giving praise. I can be anti-harassment even if I dislike Gamefreak's business practices. The people who started the movement conflated "praising Gamefreak" with "anti-harassment". Of course people who mock the hashtag when the hashtag is designed to dismiss the complaints. If the hashtag was #don'tharassgamefreak, I don't think much people or anyone at all would use it sarcastically.
What exactly are people thanking Gamefreak for? Why do they feel the need to thank them? Because they're unhappy about the amount of negative feedback targeting Gamefreak. Their primary motivation is to challenge those feedback rather than dispel harassment. It's also an annoying way to take the moral high ground in this whole debacle. You can see many users claiming that it's "supportive in a toxic environment". Is it? So everyone else is labeled as toxic now? Because they didn't thank Gamefreak? Positivity and support is limited to "praising" and "agreeing" with someone? Jesus Christ.
People lying about how "it's fine as long as your criticism is constructive", but they never treat any criticism as constructive. They still attack you for being toxic and they'll generalize about the whole community when they can. Is stereotyping not a toxic behavior in itself? What makes these people "thanking Gamefreak" so much more morally superior when they're just spouting sophistry? I am disappointed in people that see this as a black and white situation. You either support Gamefreak by thanking them or you're an entitled, toxic terrorist that are harassing devs all the time.
This is what I got quoted from T&C:
Please refer to the instructions provided to you about the right to cancel:
The thing is, it's not compliant with law to sign a waiver to refunds of goods actually. Europeans are entitled to a return in most cases 14 days from purchase.
Lmao literally several of the same people being "toxic" in that Capcom thread are in here complaining about people "misusing" that hashtag. How is that in any way different to sarcastically saying "Capcom is baaaaack"?
And of course, it all comes down to pure console warrior trash
And of course, it all comes down to pure console warrior trash
I agree wholeheartedly. thankyougamefreak (sarcastic use) isn't even that bad compared to the other tag that is seeing heavy use in Japan that they started specifically because they were pissed at the initial thankyougamefreak.
Excellent post. This "anti-harassment" excuse is a load of smelly horseshit. Every developer gets criticised. GF isn't special. They deserve some heat for the things people have been complaining about.
Until someone provides concrete receipts that the hashtag was started about targeted harassment and not because people didn't like others being mean to poor GF, I'll take that excuse for what it is: an after-the-fact justification/excuse to take a moral high ground against criticism of a corporation that makes toys they like.
And honestly even if the hashtag was created for that purpose, I don't see how using it sarcastically is out of bounds when people can literally make a post that says "Fuck [developer]" and leave the thread forever with zero moderation.
Last edited:
Well it's co-opting something that had good intentions to unify people who are against the new game.
On this site, we often talk about how poor working conditions are for developers, like the Rockstar story for example, Hideo Kojima at Konami, long working hours at Epic etc. Then of course we talk about toxic gamer culture, so #ThankYouGameFreak was actually quite a refeshing change. It was nice and it was positive, it wasn't so much about the new games in my opinion. It was about people looking back at the past and saying thank you to a developer for happy memories.
However, some people didn't let that be, they didn't want people to thank Game Freak. They didn't want people to be positive, they wanted to take that hash tag and turn it into something that mocked the developer. I find this ironic, when people here demand publishers treat developers with more respect why don't we?
Of course people can critisize the game, and most individuals do so politely. They say what they dislike and maybe they won't buy the game as a result which not going to ruin someone else's enjoyment of the game but let the people who want to do something positive, be positive and don't twist their message into something else. You're just silencing them and robbing the developers of love from the fans.
Nah, that's a load of crap. No one needs to be "unified" against criticism of a (seemingly rushed and unfinished) videogame. No one needs to white knight for a gigantic corporation known for peddling toys for children.
There's no real difference between what's happening here and what has happened with other devs in the past. Capcom is back was a celebration of Capcom's recent success, and people turned that shit right around. Same exact energy.
This happens all over the place with marketing (and it is most certainly marketing), yet this is the first time I've seen it moderated.
There's no real difference between what's happening here and what has happened with other devs in the past. Capcom is back was a celebration of Capcom's recent success, and people turned that shit right around. Same exact energy.
This happens all over the place with marketing (and it is most certainly marketing), yet this is the first time I've seen it moderated.
People are welcome to be positive, and saying "thank you" sarcastically doesn't hurt anyone.
It's also important to note that there is a difference between the developer, a corporation behind the biggest media franchise ever, and individual developers, in plural.
It's also important to note that there is a difference between the developer, a corporation behind the biggest media franchise ever, and individual developers, in plural.
How likely would it be for Game Freak to consider teaming up with another developer for main Pokémon games? And which developer would be the best to join in your opinion?
I'm posting this in this thread as well as I feel it to be relevant, and may explain how we (or more to the point Game Freak) have got to this point:
It's been extremely disappointing watching this shit-show unfold for the last four years or so, and something I've been apprehensive about during all of that time.
I think a lot of the most hardened fans among us knew something wasn't right in 2015 when Zygarde was beginning to get a lot of attention in the anime and across merchandise and spin-off games. A lot of people, myself included, suspected this was leading to a 'Pokemon Z' reveal but as time went on it became apparent that might not be happening.
We had X and Y in 2013, Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire in 2014, and many predicted 'Z' in 2015 or even 2016 after time passed. And it wasn't even just Zygarde that caused speculation for this, we had the likes of Ash-Greninja as well, a bizarre Mega Evolution that wasn't a Mega Evolution for Greninja, and has somehow made Ash canon in the games which largely remained separate in the past (the only other references that spring to mind are event Pokemon given away to tie in with the anime or movies).
Fast forward to February 2016 and Sun and Moon were revealed, and not only as part of a brand new seventh generation for Pokemon, but they'd also be coming to the 3DS. Prior to the DS, generations were typically one per console, however that's always been blurred line with the Gen 1 being on the Game Boy and Gen 2 being on the Game Boy Color (Gen 2 was fully playable on the original Game Boy barring Crystal), so it was perhaps unexpected 3DS was getting another generation, the DS was a massive hit sales wise and kind of made sense to have two generations given its lifespan and install base.
I think normally this would've been fine had we been following normal console cycles and the Wii U was a moderate success and perhaps even followed up with a more generic home console, and the same goes for the 3DS, it just so happened that the Switch being a thing threw a proverbial spanner in the works for how the Pokemon and console generations would pan out. So now we have the Switch (then known as the NX) on the horizon, and a new generation of Pokemon on the 3DS.
I remember there being speculation at the time that a Pokemon 'Z' was scrapped in favour of fast tracking a new generation of Pokemon for the 3DS. There is some evidence for this, such as the bizarre insertion of Zygarde into Sun and Moon (it has nothing to do with the mythos of Alola and the only thing we have close to an explanation is the appearance of Ultra Beasts as to why it's there) and a weird special form of Greninja with an Ash 'bond evolution' which to me always felt like a redesigned mega evolution that would've been for Greninja (and I imagine Delphox and Chesnaught would've also had one in a hypothetical Pokemon Z).
You can also see in the very design of Sun and Moon that these games are not really that suited to the 3DS, with the bottom screen being relegated to a very ugly, and actually irritable at time, Rotom map, which doesn't even function well as a map (i can't begin to describe how many times I've tried to navigate myself around Alola by trying to use it as a map and becoming utterly dumbfounded at why everything is so hard to read - this is even more ironic when you consider that given these games are in full 3D with larger environments than previous games, a map could be especially useful). We don't even need to go into the fact that the games are nothing pretty and at times with a lot going on can be a technical nightmare (although Sword and Shield haven't exactly done a lot to remedy that particular grievance lol).
It's my thinking that Sun and Moon were hurrily made for the 3DS after the Wii U wasn't being saved and needed to be followed up with the Switch sooner rather than later. Z was cancelled, a few of its elements were shoe horned into Sun and Moon, which in themselves were now being made for the 3DS rather than the Switch (which would've perhaps given us a 4 year long sixth generation, and a launch of Sun and Moon in the fall of 2017).
This is also evidenced in the fact that Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon did not do a lot to further the mythos of Alola, giving us 'powered up' versions - a few new Pokemon (a first for a mid-generation game) and a cool although slightly short post game quest involving Team Rainbow Rocket and previous villains from the series. I don't think they'd have been badly received had we got 'Pokemon Stars' or even a year off in between Sun and Moon USUM to let them have a little longer development time. In my opinion by today's standards they are certainly the most cash-grabby Pokemon games, even if they do have more content than the likes of Yellow and Crystal and other 'third versions'. The quick release was most unnecessary and the resources put into it could perhaps have gone towards the likes of Sword and Shield.
I always thought we'd get FireRed and Leaf Green anniversary remakes to celebrate 20 years of Pokemon, however I didn't think they'd do this in the form of Lets Go Pikachu and Eevee, which I think may have taken shape the way they did with the influence of Pokemon Go - had that not been as popular as it was we may have had a more traditional set of games. I would perhaps liked to have seen these on the 3DS as well - especially if we had Z in 2015, but given the way things played out I think if Sun and Moon had come to the Switch in 2017, followed by LGPE in 2018 as it happened, and then THIS YEAR, we had USUM, they still could've kept Pokemon yearly (which seems to be their desire) but each game could have breathed (and especially for SM and LGPE with all the confusion and misinformation as to whether they're part of the same generation or not) and had proper development time.
This then would've lead us to a more ambitious and properly cooked in the oven with all the trimmings Sword and Shield in either 2020, or even 2021, made sure everything was as good as it could be with a full roster of Pokemon, moves, overworld animations, GTS, and everything else that has upset people about these games. We then could've had Diamond and Pearl remakes the year following and perhaps 'Lets Go Johto' the year after to follow that sub-series.
(TLDR) But instead we've had rushed games, cash-grabby titles and a total miscommunication between the devs and fans.If only they made Pokemon Z eh, and this could've all been avoided.
It's been extremely disappointing watching this shit-show unfold for the last four years or so, and something I've been apprehensive about during all of that time.
I think a lot of the most hardened fans among us knew something wasn't right in 2015 when Zygarde was beginning to get a lot of attention in the anime and across merchandise and spin-off games. A lot of people, myself included, suspected this was leading to a 'Pokemon Z' reveal but as time went on it became apparent that might not be happening.
We had X and Y in 2013, Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire in 2014, and many predicted 'Z' in 2015 or even 2016 after time passed. And it wasn't even just Zygarde that caused speculation for this, we had the likes of Ash-Greninja as well, a bizarre Mega Evolution that wasn't a Mega Evolution for Greninja, and has somehow made Ash canon in the games which largely remained separate in the past (the only other references that spring to mind are event Pokemon given away to tie in with the anime or movies).
Fast forward to February 2016 and Sun and Moon were revealed, and not only as part of a brand new seventh generation for Pokemon, but they'd also be coming to the 3DS. Prior to the DS, generations were typically one per console, however that's always been blurred line with the Gen 1 being on the Game Boy and Gen 2 being on the Game Boy Color (Gen 2 was fully playable on the original Game Boy barring Crystal), so it was perhaps unexpected 3DS was getting another generation, the DS was a massive hit sales wise and kind of made sense to have two generations given its lifespan and install base.
I think normally this would've been fine had we been following normal console cycles and the Wii U was a moderate success and perhaps even followed up with a more generic home console, and the same goes for the 3DS, it just so happened that the Switch being a thing threw a proverbial spanner in the works for how the Pokemon and console generations would pan out. So now we have the Switch (then known as the NX) on the horizon, and a new generation of Pokemon on the 3DS.
I remember there being speculation at the time that a Pokemon 'Z' was scrapped in favour of fast tracking a new generation of Pokemon for the 3DS. There is some evidence for this, such as the bizarre insertion of Zygarde into Sun and Moon (it has nothing to do with the mythos of Alola and the only thing we have close to an explanation is the appearance of Ultra Beasts as to why it's there) and a weird special form of Greninja with an Ash 'bond evolution' which to me always felt like a redesigned mega evolution that would've been for Greninja (and I imagine Delphox and Chesnaught would've also had one in a hypothetical Pokemon Z).
You can also see in the very design of Sun and Moon that these games are not really that suited to the 3DS, with the bottom screen being relegated to a very ugly, and actually irritable at time, Rotom map, which doesn't even function well as a map (i can't begin to describe how many times I've tried to navigate myself around Alola by trying to use it as a map and becoming utterly dumbfounded at why everything is so hard to read - this is even more ironic when you consider that given these games are in full 3D with larger environments than previous games, a map could be especially useful). We don't even need to go into the fact that the games are nothing pretty and at times with a lot going on can be a technical nightmare (although Sword and Shield haven't exactly done a lot to remedy that particular grievance lol).
It's my thinking that Sun and Moon were hurrily made for the 3DS after the Wii U wasn't being saved and needed to be followed up with the Switch sooner rather than later. Z was cancelled, a few of its elements were shoe horned into Sun and Moon, which in themselves were now being made for the 3DS rather than the Switch (which would've perhaps given us a 4 year long sixth generation, and a launch of Sun and Moon in the fall of 2017).
This is also evidenced in the fact that Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon did not do a lot to further the mythos of Alola, giving us 'powered up' versions - a few new Pokemon (a first for a mid-generation game) and a cool although slightly short post game quest involving Team Rainbow Rocket and previous villains from the series. I don't think they'd have been badly received had we got 'Pokemon Stars' or even a year off in between Sun and Moon USUM to let them have a little longer development time. In my opinion by today's standards they are certainly the most cash-grabby Pokemon games, even if they do have more content than the likes of Yellow and Crystal and other 'third versions'. The quick release was most unnecessary and the resources put into it could perhaps have gone towards the likes of Sword and Shield.
I always thought we'd get FireRed and Leaf Green anniversary remakes to celebrate 20 years of Pokemon, however I didn't think they'd do this in the form of Lets Go Pikachu and Eevee, which I think may have taken shape the way they did with the influence of Pokemon Go - had that not been as popular as it was we may have had a more traditional set of games. I would perhaps liked to have seen these on the 3DS as well - especially if we had Z in 2015, but given the way things played out I think if Sun and Moon had come to the Switch in 2017, followed by LGPE in 2018 as it happened, and then THIS YEAR, we had USUM, they still could've kept Pokemon yearly (which seems to be their desire) but each game could have breathed (and especially for SM and LGPE with all the confusion and misinformation as to whether they're part of the same generation or not) and had proper development time.
This then would've lead us to a more ambitious and properly cooked in the oven with all the trimmings Sword and Shield in either 2020, or even 2021, made sure everything was as good as it could be with a full roster of Pokemon, moves, overworld animations, GTS, and everything else that has upset people about these games. We then could've had Diamond and Pearl remakes the year following and perhaps 'Lets Go Johto' the year after to follow that sub-series.
(TLDR) But instead we've had rushed games, cash-grabby titles and a total miscommunication between the devs and fans.If only they made Pokemon Z eh, and this could've all been avoided.
YOU think it's a load of crap but I'm glad the moderation team doesn't share that sentiment.
Bethesda mate, it has to be Bethesda.
Not likely. Game Freak likes to have a tight knit culture and complete control over everything.
And their development philosophy is around small improvements, not big leaps. Remember how messy X and Y were compared to Sun and Moon?
User Banned (1 Month): Modwhining and hostility towards staff. Inflammatory generalizations.
I don't buy this bullshit. People got mad that others were criticizing their favorite toy company so they decided to send unearned praise to them in the face of the shit show that is Pokemon SwSh. They then tried to take the moral high ground and proclaimed much of the criticism to be "toxic" while shouting "we forgive you, king" as loud as they could to drown out the "haters."
Then, moderators of ResetEra, who allow "Capcpom is baaaaack," fuck EA, fuck Activision, fuck Ubisoft, fuck Konami, Fuck Bioware, Fuck Bethesda, and so, so much more decided it would be a Galaxy Brain move to warn people off of criticising miniscule indie developer GameFreak, because it would just be unfair to hold them to the same standard that literally every other game developer has been held to on this site. Handwaving away concerns because "the game isn't out yet" despite the whole thing being leaked and streamed is just peachy keen. Lobbing a sarcastic softball that calls out the corny protectiveness of a fanbase that is coddling a company that produces a multi-million selling entertainment franchise because people suddenly realized that being assholes online may hurt the developers' feelings in this instance and this instance only because only GameFreak has real people working on their games (unlike Ubisoft and Bioware and Bethesda and Activision and EA) is the farthest thing from what should be moddable action, especially in a forum where routine veiled accusations of shilling for companies or a lack of moral scruples due to a poster's unwillingness to comply with the boycott du jour are levied against people with no mod action in sight. There has been exactly zero mod response to their actions in this thread, while they apparently have time to heavily moderate other Pokemon threads. Are we gonna see the bullshit warnings reversed? Are we going to get any transparency at all for the power tripping warning wave for a hilariously innocuous sentiment that pales in comparison to previously tacitly endorced toxicity surrounding other game releases? I thought this place was supposed to be different from the old one, with more consistent and transparent moderation, but in practice it seems like there's a list of "prominent developers" in addition to the prominent members list that absolves you from criticism and must be sheltered through strict tone policing
Last edited:
Why should I even keep reading with this kind of hostility? If you're going to just disregard my view like that I'll disregard yours too.
What capcom thread are you guys talking about?
Yeah i don't agree with moderating the hashtag. Imagine the same level of moderation applied to something like bethesda, it would be laughed out of the room.
Yeah i don't agree with moderating the hashtag. Imagine the same level of moderation applied to something like bethesda, it would be laughed out of the room.
Whenever people use the term "lmao" either right before a statement or at the end of a statement, what I usually notice about said statement is it's usually some kind of aloof, condescending deflection of the thing the person was originally responding to, where the usage of "lmao" is used to deceive people into thinking that you're laughing so you're above this discussion or you put "lmao" to make it seem like you don't really care as much about the topic as much as the person you're responding to.
So using lmao tends to be a tool used to achieve dominance in a discussion, while what could be done instead is actually engaging in the discussion directly in the first place. Saw a shit ton of those kinds of statements in this thread and there's no way I wasn't the only person that picked up on it.
So using lmao tends to be a tool used to achieve dominance in a discussion, while what could be done instead is actually engaging in the discussion directly in the first place. Saw a shit ton of those kinds of statements in this thread and there's no way I wasn't the only person that picked up on it.
It's just weird to think about how the biggest media brand in the world needs protecting. They have money. They are a corporation. This is capitalism. They can afford PR. They can afford transparency so people don't have to sniff around their code for answers.
It was never about the company as an entity, more the individuals pouring their heart and soul into it.
Technically you lose your legal right to this once you download your digital purchase. I'm not sure how this applies to preloads though, where you only have a fraction of the purchase, but it's certainly in the spirit of the law to not lose your right then.
Which is unique to GF, apparently, as no other company gets this "think of the people" nonsense in response to criticism.
People can pour their heart and soul into garbage. Using that as a shield from all criticism is lazy.
No, its not unique. The amount of outrage is completely disproportionate to even the most broken big releases.
Uh, I'm gonna need receipts that this game has some unheard of amount of scrutiny levied toward it that isn't earned by it being part of the largest media franchise in the entire world.
Ridiculous statement. People still rake Konami over the coals for Kojima, and that happened four years ago. Literal governments got involved with games exploiting gambling with lootboxes. Gaming media won't care about Pokemon after a week and likely won't understand the controversy since many of the controversial design decisions affect the more hardcore fanbase.
My man have you seen any other exclusive game ever on this site? May I introduce you to Crackdown 3 or Death Stranding? Does Anthem ring a bell? Those all got a ton of scrutiny, especially when considered proportionally to their popularity. Is it any surprise that one of the biggest entertainment brands on Earth going on 15+ years would have a large amount of scrutiny and interest, and thus backlash to negative news?
Who decides that it's "disproportionate"? How do you justify that claim? If you're telling me it's because you personally don't think it's a big deal, then that's not a justification. That's just a dismissive response on par with "it's not as good/bad as people say". Your standard is not everyone else's standard. Don't even say something dumb like "this kind of outrage should be reserved for real life crises and not video games".
????
There is no deception there, when people do that they are laughing at the absurdity of the statement. Wether or not you agree the statment is absurd is another story.
I guess you never played Mass Effect, they had two meltdowns that were way bigger than this one
Umm no? Bethesda continues to get shit. EA gets shit. "Disproportionate" in what way? Where are the number. Don't make stuff up
I did, and I don't remember there being 5 threads a day on everything wrong with ME3, campaigns trying to guilt people into sending physical letters and spamming hashtags, years worth of spamming comment sections and twitter posts. Shit I had never even had to block people on any board or request a ban until interacting with the Pokemon threads on this site. Its not just these new games, everything about Pokemon seems to bring out the worst most petty people, which is really fucking sad for a cute IP aimed at a younger audience.
There are literally Fallout 76 threads where people say "fuck off Todd Howard/Pete Hines" without getting warned.
I don't see the difference between Bethesda Game Studio individuals and Game Freak individuals. Why do some developers get protected and some developers get thrown to the wolves?
Because those are clearly directed at a corporate structure that allows these issues to take place. Sure, they can be misused, or applied without real substance. That's an issue that can make people consider their usage going forward. Hijacking a positive message aimed at development studio Game freak; pushed to release games at a yearly rate is obviously different. But oh? A simple warning? Whatever will those poor posters do, am I right?
I'm glad you skipped Fallout. You're just entrenched in Pokémon topics all the time. You're not entrenched in other companies so no you don't know what's going on.
Eh there have been other fandom meltdowns before. It always seems like the worst in the moment.
Going to need the receipts on that one.
People will bring up lootboxes and such, but even well known disappointments like Fallout 76 received way, way more scrutiny than this.
What about andromeda, where it wasn't even loot related? People to this day still make fun of "that face". Yet if you bring up trees in swish, it's a problem.
Agree and disagree.
Agree that twisting a positive message into something negative is uncalled for. Devs are struggling with low-morale, so the human support is necessary to prevent further stress.
Disagree however that we have to thank GameFreak for their efforts, because right now, the devs are struggling. If the development structure needs to change so we can get more quality games (even if at the expense of fewer releases) and devs can properly work on a product without having to worry about a tight deadline due to marketing deals, then said change should be demanded. If the devs aren't to blame, then the higher-ups are (i.e. the people who represent GameFreak, thus it's fair to refer to them as GameFreak).
Reminder that GF intentionally wants a yearly release schedule. If time is short and they don't want to invest more money, then quality will naturally decrease, leading to a more hostile environment where devs will become even more pressured by the company, let alone the fanbase.
The whole reason we speak against crunch it's exactly that. Healthier devs mean healthier industry. I have an issue with #ThankYouGameFreak because it implicitly refers to the company as a whole, while only the devs should be getting that level of respect.
Last edited: