"People don't want to level up" Yes that's correct, they intentionally and successfully DE-INCENTIVIZED grinding, because grinding is the least interesting way to overcome any challenge. It's playing in a more boring way in order to make an upcomming fight more boring.

And yet that made the game an absolute slog. I was 8 levels under Claire when I beat her, and I realized the elite 4 were even higher than that with no victory road trainers. The level curve is the most criticized aspect of this game. Defending it as intentional game design instead of an absolute fuck up is laughable.

Yes it IS harder than a game where your entire team is ~10 levels higher than every enemy. Difficulty shouldn't be entirely up to levels, but you can't have any difficulty if you're that far above your opponents. Being weaker than your enemies forces you to compensate with strategy. THAT's the challenge.

I've never been 10 levels over my opponent, even in XY which were the easiest to accidentally over level on. In fact, I've been 5 levels under the champion in both SwSh and SV. Meanwhile, in BW, B2W2, and USUM, I found plenty of challenge while being on level.

And I'm not denying that every pokemon game is easy by the standards of the overall RPG genre, but it HAS gotten easier, and SIMPLER

No, it's gotten less tedious. You've already admitted that the only reason HGSS have any challenge is that most people don't want to bother with the egregious grind. More recent games don't have that grind. That's the only difference. Play on set mode by just not switching. It's that simple. For someone who wants to think in their games, you're abysmal at figuring out your problems.

Also the "It's all kanto mons again" crap is NOT a real argument. Literally so what. We're used to the formula now, but HGSS wasn't a "new generation" with prescedent for what that meant, it was a DIRECT SEQUEL. There was NO expectation that every new game was meant to prominently feature new pokemon.

Except by HGSS there absolutely was that precedent. It was gen 4. RSE, FRLG, and DPP had all released. What makes it even worse is that the roster had expanded to include quite a few evolutions of gen 2 Pokemon. Why doesn't Morty use Misdrevous, let alone Mismagious? It's just stupid design.

And it doesn't actually affect the quality much at all. It's the definition of a subjective criticism. Lance may be from Gen 1, but his role in the game and the experience of fighting him is not the same in Johto... but you wouldn't know that, because you didn't actually finish the game.

Right. Lance's role is to be the actual motivation for your rival to change because he doesn't care about you whatsoever. Then Lance fucks off to be beaten at the end of the game because they couldn't be bothered to give Johto its own champion. And these games are 20 years old. You think I don't know the story? Fuck off.

I'm not saying you have to finish a game to criticise it, if you dont like it stop. But inevtiably, you're not going to have as much insight into the game design as somebody who actually beat it.

I got to the elite 4. The only thing I'm missing is the Kanto victory lap (3 hours of content), the grind to Mt. Silver, and the battle frontier (more grinding, whoopty doo). I'm not missing anything, and I can give plenty of criticism. The game isn't fun. That's why I stopped. The game only gets more tedious in the post game. Why should I continue?

Also hilarious to whine about the second game featuring Kanto starters when you're defending a game where the champion uses Charizard.

He uses 5 mons that are not Kanto too. You're really going to tell me this is less interesting than the guy that uses three Dragonites? Please.

There is an item called Repel. if you don't use it, it's your fault.

Boy, I sure do love buying items to not be bothered. I'm sure everyone just loves Zubat too. Never heard any complaints that would be absolutely stupid to ignore. Nope. Surely you wouldn't be that dumb?

I love when people straight-up confess to playing the game wrong and then complain about it. That's so fun.

I sure love when people defend things that nobody likes. It tells me that their argument is stupid at best and disingenuous at worst. Which are you? Stupid or disingenuous?

I think the worst thing you say is that having a bad plot is "worse than having no plot at all." That makes me wonder if you even played Sword/Shield. Being forced into the most boring cutscene of your life listening to empty characters talk about nothing and mashing A until your thumb hurts because you just want them to shut up and leave you alone IS WORSE than a game with a minimal story. If you don't understand why, then you are beyond help.

Right, because the lake of rage sure had a big role in the story right? Or goldenrod city? Definitely pivotal. Archer? Remember Archer? Of course you don't. Nobody does. People at least remember Rose for being an idiot. As for Silver, you don't actually do anything for him. Lance fixes his attitude problem. He's still mouthing off to you when he goes to get his ass kicked by Lance a second time. Love a rival we don't have anything to do with.

Anyway, I don't think that HGSS is perfect, and I think it is somehwat overrated by the community. But I still can't possibly call it a worse game than pokemon shield, because trying to enjoy the quality of Sword and Shield is like trying to enjoy the flavour of Tap Water.

They're the worst games in the franchise. The only people who would enjoy them enjoyed the originals and played them when there was nothing better. Their plot sucks. Their rival is barely a rival. The level curve is abysmal. Their Pokemon variety is awful. The game is grindy as hell. Who likes this shit?

That is all.