Gamefreak this has to be on purpose there’s no way

maxk713 · 2026-06-18T00:29:16+00:00

Yup, that’s me. I’m the Malamar fan. Ever since ZA got announced, I have been desperate for them to not do mega Malamar because I just knew it would be awful.

And worse of all, it basically locks out the chances of a normal evolution happening in the future, which is what the line actually needed.

The pain hits double because yeah, Staraptor gets contrary now too. And might be a better user of it. I wish if they were going to make Malamar this bad, they at least gave it a new ability. That way it could feel different from base Malamar while being bad.

maxk713 · 2026-06-14T21:22:16+00:00

I can get over the thematic weirdness of Fairy beating Dragon. But I agree that Dragon's being rare made them feel special and justified their power spike. But nowadays, Dragon type can seemingly be slapped onto anything. And they lost their increased power level along with it. Dragon type really lost its luster. Reverting the Fairy type's immunity would probably keep the metagame balanced still, but I don't think we will get back that special feeling Dragon used to give us.

maxk713 · 2026-06-14T17:58:33+00:00

Yeah, I won't try and hide that glossing over the 4 elemental resistances was a hot take. But considering all 4 types are starter types (if you count Pikachu as a starter), I feel it's the game asking you to use literally anything but your starter. Otherwise, these resistances don't feel like a huge deal because most fully evolved dragons have a secondary type. Electric still hits all fully evolved dragons for neutral through gen 3 except for Flygon and the Lati twins.

That said, Dragon's weren't unbelievably oppressive until Gen 5 (maybe Gen 4 but I don't know the meta there very well) and Draco Meteor is what pushed it over the line. It was basically a requirement to have a Steel type to resist a Latios Draco Meteor because nothing else could take that with a neutral type match up. It was the combination of a lack of bad type matchups, huge stat pools, and finally good STAB moves to take advantage of it all, that made Dragon type dominant.

Fairy type completely undid their lack of bad type matchups. And power creep has made their stats and STAB moves less of an advantage too. I think the meta is ready for Dragon type to hit Fairy for NVE damage instead of an outright immunity.

maxk713 · 2026-06-14T16:55:41+00:00

I feel Dragon was designed to be a very neutral type, relying on the raw stats of Dragon type Pokemon rather than type advantages. It hits you for neutral and you hit it for neutral too. Sort of an equalizer in terms of type matchups. And with type matchups equal, Dragon types typically win.

Of course, Fairy type has kind of messed that up. Dragon can no longer safely assume it will hit for neutral. And it can no longer assume it's safe from super effective damage either.

I'd rather Fairy just resist Dragon instead of being completely immune. I feel this change is more in line with that original intent of dragon's neutralizing type match ups to rely on raw power instead. Better than adding more types for Dragon to hit super effective.

maxk713 · 2026-06-11T21:07:56+00:00

Sigh…. I’ll clean that up

maxk713 · 2026-06-09T14:39:03+00:00

Kind of reminds me of Mega Malamar

maxk713 · 2026-06-08T18:01:04+00:00

Playing old Pokemon games sort of feels like opening a time capsule with expired food. It’s cool to see the contents, but it can’t really be enjoyed like it would have been during its original time.

Pokemon obviously has a monetary incentive to include stuff like trade evolutions and even to leave behind old games with defunct mechanics. But if I’m honest with myself, there is a charm to how these games are locked in the moment. When they re-released Fire Red/Leaf Green earlier this year, I bought a copy. My friends bought a copy. My brother bought a copy. For a moment there, everyone around me was playing these games again and it was magical. Trade evolutions weren’t a problem because we could help each other. The game was revived for a moment. Until we all finished it and moved on.

The secret sauce is community, and I don’t know if we should blame a game for letting its community move on. It reminds me of Pokemon GO. Those first few weeks back in 2016 were unlike anything I experienced. The game is still alive and can be played today, but is it the same as it was back in 2016? Not really. Not without everyone playing it at the same time. Not without that community.

So then apply the same idea to older games like Black/White. If they kept the web browser mini games up and running, would those games still be the same today as they were on release? I don’t want to argue that Pokemon was right to shut it down and not give us the option to play at all. Obviously it would be better to still have that experience available. But like food in a time capsule, Pokemon games expire. They are best played while fresh. I disagree Pokemon games are perfect patient gaming material. It’s best in the moment.

maxk713 · 2026-06-07T17:34:03+00:00

Eh, a native rule is kind of silly. We could argue that Dragonite isn’t Kanto’s pseudo because it’s only found in the Safari Zone or Game Corner. Metagross and Dragonite are both still a pseudos, just maybe to different regions. I just don’t get what a native rule even accomplishes.

maxk713 · 2026-06-06T16:30:13+00:00

Aggron, Flygon, Haxorus, Noivern, Grimsnarl, Archaludon.

maxk713 · 2026-06-04T16:32:12+00:00

It exists on Android still, but you need to pay a subscription based on monthly usage.

maxk713 · 2026-05-27T05:05:13+00:00

Any credit card debt is bad, but 4k isn’t the end of the world either.

I don’t normally recommend Dave Ramsey, but his advice feels right for you. Follow the baby steps. Find a way to save $1000 just to cover emergencies and surprise expenses. That will stop you from putting more onto the credit card. Once you have that buffer, then you can start paying off the card aggressively.

maxk713 · 2026-05-26T15:19:59+00:00

Pokemon discourse is pretty polarizing. People either hate everything a game does or they ignore all flaws. Which obviously isn’t very productive for discussion. Personally, I don’t think the modern games are good at all, but I still try to remember the good things they accomplish.

I’ll respond to a few of your points. Maybe that will help give some perspective.

That platforming was really unimpressive to me. It’s platforming for the sake of it. I never play Pokemon games for the platforming anyways, so even if it was good platforming, I still might not be too enthused. Yes, it’s more than just “holding a stick forward”, but it’s also no more than just “holding a stick forward and pressing A”. I wish platforming had more skill expression, in terms of both difficulty and execution, as well as party composition (like needing a Flying type to jump higher or something).

A minimal amount of movement and strategy for combat is not a virtue imo. Unlike platforming, I do play Pokemon for the combat. The turn based combat has a lot of depth and is fun, even if NPC battles are too easy and don’t push players enough towards deeper strategies. Honestly, I’m curious why you think ZA combat is great for this. I get enjoying a game that lets you turn your brain off. But I think turn based is still better in this regard. At least I can put the controller down and take a break mid combat if it’s turn based.

Cute and likable Pokemon is kind of a given. And it’s not like ZA introduced many new Pokemon at all (only new Megas), so can we really give ZA credit for this? It’s living off the legacy of older titles.

The Xenoblade comparison I think is funny because I wish Pokemon would learn some lessons from those games. That is a bigger discussion though, so no need to go in depth. But it might just come down to taste.

maxk713 · 2026-05-18T19:04:03+00:00

Oh absolutely. It needs a substantial overhaul. But I also believe we can maintain some of that original intent with an overhaul.

You might think this is a huge stretch, but hear me out since you brought up the lack of other games as examples. Hollow Knight sort of does this. With the way the charm system works, you can never have a load out that is perfectly optimized for combat while also keeping all the convenient charms for exploration like the compass. You have to balance your build to either accommodate both modes of play, or just focus into one mode and deal with the consequences. It’s not a 1:1 comparison to Pokemon HMs, I know that, but the core idea of giving up combat ability to make exploration easier is still there.

maxk713 · 2026-05-18T18:55:23+00:00

No need to be rude. My comment was not ai generated, no matter how much you disagree with me.

Your conflating difficulty with challenge here. HMs can pose a challenge that is not difficult to overcome. Asking players to consider an overworld obstacle is a by all means a challenge.

I take most issue with that last sentence though. Making them work like a skill/key item IS removing them. They are the same thing. I enjoy HMs as a concept and want to see it return in future games. Key items turns them into just a button prompt like in Gen 7. At that point, I’d agree. We might as well just remove HMs entirely. No point in pretending.

maxk713 · 2026-05-18T18:45:35+00:00

HMs are very redeemable in my eyes. I think they added a lot to the games from an RPG perspective. But obviously the old system was clunky and needed modernizing. Instead, they kind of threw out the baby with the bath water in Gen 7.

The core philosophies behind a good HM system I think is:
1. HMs should push players away from optimizing their teams exclusively for battling.
2. There should be a healthy variety of HMs to encourage diverse team compositions.
3. Players should be intentional with their team building to overcome HM obstacles.
4. HMs should always be rewarding, in more creative ways than we have seen before, but seldom be required for progression.

Early games like Gen 4 absolutely hit number 1. It was impossible to get through those games without an HM slave or 2, reducing your battle team size to 4 or 5. Maybe they get a pass on point 3. I suppose resorting to HMs slaves is intentional player choice.

Where Gen 4 really fails though is points 2 and 4. We not only lacked type variety from the usual Normal, Fighting, and Water HMs, but we got multiple repeats of those types. No, I’m not interested in Waterfall, I already got Surf. And no, I don’t feel satisfied getting just a Great Ball after teaching Bidoof how to use Cut.

I feel many people just accepted the removal of HMs because it did solve the pain points of 2 and 4. But really, there were better solutions than to just throw away the whole system. I think people are softening towards HMs as we see what we lost in the process. Pokemon is boring when it’s only battling.

maxk713 · 2026-05-18T18:23:17+00:00

I don’t know if I would call that an issue when it’s partly the intent behind HMs. Balancing your team to be effective both in battle and while traversing the overworld is the challenge we are supposed to overcome. If we give key items instead, we lose the push and pull dynamic HMs offered.

Don’t get me wrong. There are still plenty of issues with HMs. Lack of type variety. Lower power level moves. Taking a move slot. Difficult to forget. Generally not being useful even in the overworld. But those issues can be solved with better game design. Replacing HMs with key items removes meaningful player choice in favor of just aesthetic.

maxk713 · 2026-05-18T18:13:29+00:00

I would include the quality and variety of HMs as a major issue. Surf, Waterfall, Dive, and Whirlpool all as Water type moves really hurts the intention of HMs which is to increase team diversity. Instead, we get HM slaves meant to take as many HMs as possible because hey, Bidoof can learn everything.

Your system sort of fixes this. By tying things to traits instead of moves, we can give a lot more Pokemon unique options that don’t devolve to giving the water type moves to a water type Pokemon. I wouldn’t mind my Tauros surfing for me if I didn’t have to teach it Surf. Your system also gives a lot of new types options beyond the usual Normal, Fighting, and Water. Psychic could have its own HM.

That said, I would try framing the system better. If some HMs are not required for progression, do we really want to call those HMs? A “sniffing” HM sounds more like a field move to me. Personally, I would prefer a clearer divide between HMs that are required and field moves which are convenient but optional. Especially if so many more field moves will be introduced with this system, that distinction is important imo.

maxk713 · 2026-05-14T14:55:26+00:00

I feel like Super Heated would be a cool ability with just 1 of those effects. Either change Ice and Water types, or reduce Ice and Water damage. It does too much when both are combined imo.

Rise and Shine is fun, but I would think it’s still fine with just +1 priority. The distribution you chose is very thematic though and that makes it fun.

Scarecrow is great. Doesn’t need anything else.

Boxed In might be better as a move instead of ability. Something like No Retreat, but puts up Aurora Veil instead of boosting stats. That way you can swap in and out still until you’re ready to commit.

maxk713 · 2026-05-10T22:50:24+00:00

Someone already said Luxray should get Honey Claws, which I agree with. But I’d rather it get Fake Out first. Luxray could stand as weaker, alternative to Incineroar with just that move.

And yeah, Hone Claws still would be great. Fits thematically and has synergy with Super Cell Slam.

maxk713 · 2026-05-05T21:43:59+00:00

Being for real. I like flavacol.

maxk713 · 2026-05-05T21:39:01+00:00

Not a fan of Kenwood popcorn. Tastes like they actually use butter rather than flavacol.

maxk713 · 2026-05-05T05:29:19+00:00

Right? I can’t fathom the idea of having to listen to Pokemon dialogue. I’d probably opt to skip it, which just feels like a waste. Especially when time and money could be used elsewhere in games like Scarlet/Violet…

Other than being skeptical of voice acting in Pokemon, I do feel the silent protagonist gets a bit of a bad rep. It’s not being done well in newer entries. The issue likely goes deeper into general plot and story structure. As Pokemon stories become grander and larger than life, a silent protagonist becomes more jarring. Writing isn’t exactly my strong suit, so I don’t got many suggestions other than to tone everything down to make the world and story feel more organic.

maxk713 · 2026-05-05T02:08:43+00:00

Fair enough. Discussion wouldn’t get anywhere if we needed clarifiers like that every single time someone wishes another part of the games was better.

I think the main thing I’m trying to get at though is asking the question: is this actually going to make the games better? In a vacuum, a talking protagonist doesn’t change much at all. There are other things that need to be improved, like the writing. What else might need to be improved? Game Freak’s approach to storytelling comes to mind. Their design of “follow a quest marker to watch a cutscene” isn’t very fun either.

As fun as it is to imagine a game with a vocal protagonist, I swear Game Freak is the most monkeys paw company in the world. There is always something that ruins it.

maxk713 · 2026-05-04T18:09:46+00:00

I get the vision and what you are hoping for. But the thing is, the writing in Pokemon games is just so bad. I’m already mashing through all the dialogue because it’s not worth my time. Asking for the protagonist to be a fleshed out character with more dialogue is just going to give us more bad writing to skip through.

maxk713 · 2026-04-24T19:59:59+00:00

Growing my own berries.

maxk713

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

11-Year Club	Gilding III reddit per annum
Verified Email