Seen 7 Hours Ago
Posted 15 Hours Ago
28,639 posts
13.8 Years
The upcoming SwSh expansion passes will be the first time a main series Pokémon title gets paid DLC. What do you think of this? Would you have preferred a third/other version instead?

SwSh owners, will you be buying these passes?
art blog | art thread | vpp | mal | ffxiv
sheep x bobandbill 5ever


This is fine.

A cape
Seen 1 Hour Ago
Posted 1 Day Ago
15,812 posts
12.5 Years
PokéCommunity Daily Post icon PokéCommunity Daily Post
Note: I'd like to use posts here as quotes in an upcoming Daily article, both for and against! Please don't hold back, and share your two cents.

(I'll share my own later.)


刀劍 のザシアン.

Age 28
Seen 23 Hours Ago
Posted 5 Days Ago
1,413 posts
10.9 Years
I already pre-ordered and got my Galarian Slowpoke.
A third game sounds fun but I don't mind an expansion.
Urshifu seems so interesting.
"We draw the sword with a clean conscience and with clean hands.."


Location not valid.
Seen 3 Days Ago
Posted 3 Days Ago
2,472 posts
10.8 Years
I'm hyped, after seeing all of the new forms and Pokémon they've revealed so far. So, I'll most likely get it when it comes out.

Especially the Gigantamax forms for the starters.💕

I think it's a good idea doing it as a dlc update instead of releasing a whole new game version (like Emerald). A third game sounds nice, but it must save time, if they can just send out this sort of data (the dlc update) instead.

🚀 📱 💕


Age 27
Seen 3 Weeks Ago
Posted 3 Weeks Ago
5,937 posts
11.3 Years
I prefer it over a third version. I’m pumped that Pokemon is getting into DLC!
"if people did not exist, this would be an ideal place"


Age 27
Seen 13 Hours Ago
Posted 2 Days Ago
14,235 posts
6.7 Years
It would've been nice to see all this in the game from the start, but at least they're doing away with 3rd versions and what we're getting costs less than buying a 3rd version (without having significantly less additional content than most 3rd versions), so there's that at least.
Nah ンン
“No, I... I have to be strong. Everyone expects me to."
Age 22
Rijeka, Croatia
Seen 4 Hours Ago
Posted 4 Hours Ago
322 posts
2.1 Years
I love it and absolutely prefer it to a third version.

I always felt they made the first pair of games, and then they'd make the third game and shift all competitions, giveaways and content to it, leave those with a first pair game behind and the first pair of games itself lacking and undesirable. I think this annoys and inconveniences most players with a first pair version, since most people won't pay a lot of money just to restart and go through essentially the same game again but with some cool new gimmicks. That's both wasteful and tedious. Pokémon is not that kind of game to most people.

This new regime extends the games' lifespan and keeps them relevant and accessible to a wider audience than a third version has. I'm happy with that.

Do consider that the image on the official website shows the Expansion Pass in the bottom row of the options screen, far on the right, with room for about 4 such labels in total. The Expansion Pass is said to be the first DLC pack - will there be more afterwards?


Age 28
The Future
Online now
Posted 1 Week Ago
319 posts
8.9 Years
I love that Pokémon is using well-designed DLC that replaces the "third game/sequel/version 2.0" path they have been going down for the past decade. While I am a bit disappointed the TWO DLCs are not a completely separate game (I like starting out with a brand new game), I am interested to see how it will work and possibly improve and build upon the base game Sword and Shield.
I hope that players that cannot afford to buy the additional DLC will at least get an update that brings some improvements to the base game's battle and story animations.

Child Amnesiac

Music hacker

Age 20
Seen 2 Weeks Ago
Posted June 18th, 2020
322 posts
1.4 Years
This could be a replacement for the sister game trend that GF has hopped off of as of gen 5, it could also be a way to keep people satisfied while they work on another game for an extended period of time. I'm thinking that they may do a battle frontier DLC later down the line.

But with that being said, people are going to complain that this should have been in the main game, (I like to think that making it cost $30 is GF's way of punishing the fanbase after 2019).


everything starts and ends with cube

Age 21
Seen 2 Hours Ago
Posted 20 Hours Ago
1,767 posts
1.6 Years
I think that at least one part of the two dlc should've been in the game as an actual postgame, but whatever, we got this and although not a good move imo, it's definitely a better move than a third version.

now if there's something that bothers me about this though i don't think it's really related since they are technically free, are the 200 pokemon added. not bc i think it's unnecessary but because it's contradicting. the dex cut was supposed to be for the sake of a more balanced metagame, but we now have all the legendaries, garchomp and volcarona back so all that """""balance""""" went down. idk if they had planned this before and used the balance thing as an excuse or they "listened to the fans", but i see it as yet another dumb move from game freak


Somewhere in a cornfield
Seen June 27th, 2020
Posted June 7th, 2020
225 posts
306 Days
It’s a better idea than a 3rd version. Every third version has basically been the same exact game with minute differences. I wasn’t that much of a fan of SwSh when I played it but I’m probably still gonna but the DLC. I feel like it’s extremely early to get DLC, but that’s just me. I feel like they’ll retire this generation by next year with how early the DLC is being released.


Age 31
Seen 20 Hours Ago
Posted 3 Days Ago
32,487 posts
17.7 Years
This is absolutely perfect for me. I've found myself less and less enthused to play third versions as the years go by. (I asked for Ultra Sun for Christmas the year it came out and my copy is still in the plastic wrap.) The option to get all the new content and only pay ~$35 instead of paying $90 for a whole new game and having to replay all of it again? It's perfect for me. This is how I want to consume Pokémon games from now on.

paired with erik destler.


Professor's Assistant

Age 22
Seen 5 Days Ago
Posted May 6th, 2020
97 posts
7.9 Years
I love the idea of the DLC, especially since I get to use my previous save data so I can take the Pokemon I bought with me that DESTROYED Leon to grand new heights, and honestly I was getting tired of having to replay the same game pretty much with only slight differences the very next year. I'm usually one to replay Pokemon games so this is ideal for someone like me.
I'm not sure what to put here anymore,i'll fill it up with something at some point but for now, stay golden! My Twitch!!
Current challenge(s): Random Team challenge Black 2 0/8 Badges.
Age 28
Seen 2 Days Ago
Posted January 10th, 2020
13 posts
1.1 Years
I'd rather have DLC over a third version, because it's hard to justify paying the price for a "new" game that has slight changes.

On the other hand, Sword and Shield just came out a month and a half ago. I feel like it's a little scummy to announce paid DLC so soon. I wonder if a releasing a free update first (even a small one), then announcing the DLC, would have smoothed things over a little bit with the fanbase.


Aspiring Professor's Aide

Texas, United States
Seen July 2nd, 2020
Posted January 10th, 2020
55 posts
331 Days
Honestly, I vastly prefer this to a third version. Having to completely restart just to see new content at the end of the game is a little annoying. Even better is that this kinda gives Game Freak more opportunity to work on and polish future titles since they can just set a small team aside to work on the DLC stuff and then maybe get 2 years to make the game instead of just one. To answer the question of will I get it? ... I already purchased the Expansion Pass last night. I can't wait to see more Pokemon in the game too.
/!\ Please send me a PM here or on Discord if you add me on any of the following. /!\
| 3Ds FC: 0619 - 5500 - 0519 | Switch FC: SW - 7362 - 2356 - 3326 |
| Main Team (Shield): :May be changed around here and there, still experimenting. |
| Pokemon GO FC: 5706 - 0357 - 1276 | Partner: | House Instinct : There Is No Shelter From the Storm |
Seen March 5th, 2020
Posted January 10th, 2020
90 posts
4.7 Years
it's better than having to pay $60 for the game a 2nd time, like what they usually do.

I do, however, think it stinks that it's version exclusive. I got the double pack as a late birthday gift, and now I either have to buy it twice- basically paying for a full-price game, or pick the specific version I want to focus on


Sapphire Star

Age 30
Online now
Posted 6 Days Ago
11,968 posts
5.8 Years
OK, I am going to make one long, thorough post about this, and then I am probably, hopefully, never going to talk about it again. I'm going to say my piece and get out. I can already hear the “Don't like it, don't buy it, stop ruining it for everyone else!” cries in my ear, and I don't need to repeatedly say I don't like it. But I'd like to say I don't at least once, and why I don't. Please note this is all my opinion before you scream at me, and I am never once going to presume to speak for other people or claim my opinions are facts. Disclaimer, right there.

...also, I am going to apologise to bobandbill for making a lengthy post that is probably completely unusable for Daily ^^;

The short version: No, I am not happy about this.

Now, for the longer version nobody will agree with or want to read:

I would not have preferred a third version. What I would have preferred is the game I should have gotten when I bought Pokemon Shield, because this content should have been in the game from Day #1. It is NOT entitled to say this. I would invite people who believe that it is to consider that postgame has been in previous titles, and that what you're paying for with this designed to act as postgame, something you didn't previously have to pay for separately. To address the point about third versions and sequels having the postgame and needing to buy them again: you knew those were coming. It was guaranteed those were coming, because they always did - excluding Pokemon X/Y, of course. This DLC was NOT announced when SnS were released, but has been announced two months later. The assumption that SnS would not be receiving DLC is a valid one, because this sets a new precedent for Pokemon. Therefore, it is not entitled to say that this content should have been included from Day #1. What they sold us was an incomplete experience disguised as a complete one. It's pretty standard industry practice to do this now, yes, but even so. There is a personal element to it as well - I felt that SnS were extremely lackluster, content-empty experiences, and I will explain the rest of that shortly - but I am not basing that statement solely on this. I suppose that won't make it any less valid to some, and people will still think it is, but I'd still like it understood that I have reasoning outside of personal dislike.

I will concede – reluctantly – that this is not entirely Game Freak's fault, because they clearly rushed SnS out to meet a deadline that was not within their control. If they'd been given the time they needed, we would probably be getting these games with all this content in them. Much as I dislike Masuda and his attitude and approach to these games, I do believe that a lot of these decisions he supposedly made, he made under duress, at the behest of powers far beyond himself who care only about the profit that the games are making and not the quality of them. Masuda is a composer ill-fitted for his current role, and I am sure that he did the best he could.

But it's obvious Game Freak have had this in the works for a long time, because the amount of information they revealed about this DLC practically outstripped everything they showed for SnS across about a year's worth of snippets of information. This is where all the content in SnS went. For them to be announcing it this soon, to the point that they feel comfortable putting up an expansion pass already, shows very clearly that this is at least a third of the game they originally had intended to release. Now they're going to make us pay for it if we want to experience it, because they can get away with it.

Also, what happened to “we're not adding in any more Pokemon to these games” hm? All those excuses about making models from scratch, high quality animations, how difficult it would be to balance the games with more Pokemon...we're getting 200 more. Half again as many. Just like that. Welp. What does that say about Game Freak as a company? Not much. You can argue that this is to please the Dexiteers – which won't please them, because 600/890+ is still 600, not all of them – but they'd been riding this “we're not doing it” stance long after the Dexit backlash started, so it's clearly not in response to that, because if it WAS they would have never said it wasn't going to happen; they would have kept silent about it or admitted it MIGHT happen in some form, which they could have easily done without alluding to paid DLC in any shape or form. I'm not saying more Pokemon is a bad thing. But what I am saying is that this just digs a deeper hole for Game Freak's reputation – or what's left of it, because their PR is worse than Bethesda's – and it makes them difficult to trust going forward.

Looking at what Masuda said exactly about this, "We currently have no plans to make the Pokemon that are missing from the Galar Pokedex available in-game." doesn't mean "we will never add Pokemon that are missing from the Galar Pokedex into the game" but, again, the timing of this announcement clearly shows that they DID have plans to do it when he said that. If he seriously expects me to believe that they decided to suddenly have plans to add in 200 Pokemon between November and now, with the level of detail they showed in the Direct, considering all the excuses Masuda previously cited for why that number of Pokemon had been cut...well. This will probably be a point of contention amongst people for the reason I am about to go into in the next paragraph, but I find it difficult to believe they didn't have this in the works, very thoroughly mapped out, if they are revealing it this soon. 200 Pokemon is a very specific number, and not one they'd just throw out there if they didn't have the game re-balanced to include them already planned. The entire thing is extremely sketchy, in my opinion.

Also yes, I realise this is speculation to some extent. I don't know what goes on at Game Freak. But you know what I DO know? What's been going on with Pokemon Masters. The honesty and openness that the devs of that have communicated to the players has been amazing, frankly. Game Freak cannot follow their example and be honest about their struggles with these games and their plans for the future...why, exactly? They don't owe us any information? That's a poor shield to hide behind. Game Freak have been nothing but evasive and close-mouthed about SnS since the Dexit backlash hit the internet, and whilst I can understand not wanting to jeopardise sales, the PR has been an absolute mess, and there was clearly no need for it. If they don't want me to think the worst, they shouldn't project it. Yes, I know Game Freak doesn't give a damn about what I or anyone else thinks of them. But I wanted to acknowledge the point that this is all speculation on my part, because I'm sure someone will throw it in my face at some point. The question that should be asked, I would suggest, is WHY we weren't told what was going on at Game Freak. How much better would it have been if Masuda had been upfront about this? Why the secrecy and lies? Just so people didn't wait to buy the games? So there was no negative reaction to the DLC? If there wasn't then, why isn't there now? It's still going to cost the same amount of money to buy the complete experience. Timing is everything, I suppose.

Anyways. This is also very worrying for the future, which is another reason I am not happy about this DLC. No more third versions or sequels! No more paying twice for what is essentially the same game! Yes, that's very good. But let's look at where this could lead us further down the line. Gating off Pokemon behind DLC—oh wait, that's already happened here, hasn't it? There are ways around it with Home and trading etc, yes, but it's still happened in some form. It's a start. If you're jumping on the franchise at this point, you've got a VERY frustrating future ahead of you trying to trade for all these, so it's as good as gated for some. I will give credit and acknowledge the free update is a good gesture. But that's not going to mean much to people who don't have these Pokemon already, can't afford to invest in Home or won't for whatever reason, and can't acquire them via trade. We'll call it a half-gate, then. One you can pass through if you have the right credentials, the credentials in this instance being either a) a history with the franchise, or b) a friend to trade with. Don't have either and not buying the DLC and want the Pokemon? Sucks to be you!

How about having Pokemon locked behind lootboxes, or monthly subscription fees for a “game-as-a-service” model title? Don't think those are too likely? Pokemon Go is raking in RIDICULOUS amounts of money with microtransactions, so there is clear evidence people are going to pay for it if it happens, and Game Freak are clearly under a lot of pressure to rake in revenue: lifetime sales have been declining year-on-year with Pokemon titles up to this point (I expect SnS will turn this around, but whose to say the next games will echo SnS' success?) and DLC is money they can, clearly, easily cash in on...and they can even sell basically the same content twice with one DLC pack per version.

We've already had a lootbox of sorts with the Let's Go Pokeball Plus Mew, and if lootbox Pokemon happen, people are going to compare them favourably to that example, because they won't cost as much money as that did, and they will probably be dressed up to be more consumer-friendly. An easy way to get a Pokemon you want! Rare Pokemon you can't get in the wild, right here! They'll still take your money. Lootboxes not Nintendo's style? Go download Mario Kart Tour or Fire Emblem Heroes and come back to me. Subscription services not Nintendo's style? Go look at Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp....or Mario Kart Tour again.

Yes, I know those are mobile titles, and that TPC is not Nintendo. What TPC is is the owner of the largest media franchise in the world, and they can do whatever they damn well please. Mobile practices like microtransactions and lootboxes have been sneaking into video games for years now and, like it or not, Pokemon is a AAA franchise. It might not have the budget, or the dev team, but it's a AAA franchise. These things are expected. So they'll happen. People will grumble, and complain, and there will be backlash. They'll still buy the games. Still pay for the content. And if they don't...well, who cares? Plenty of other people who do will instead of them. And it'll be great, because it's Pokemon. When in reality it's EXACTLY the same as these things that other industry titans are reviled for.

I'm fear-mongering? A few years ago we were all laughing at the idea of Pokemon ever receiving DLC. It'd never happen. Game Freak, for all their flaws, made complete experiences that didn't require additional purchases or other nonsense. Game Freak didn't gate off their content behind paywalls. Now look where we are. Maybe not for a generation or two more, but we WILL see Pokemon either as a game-as-a-service with a subscription fee, with microtransactions, or lootboxes. Or something worse. There is too much potential for it to NOT happen, and with this DLC, they're testing the waters. They're going to like the results. They're going to want to do more. For a while, people will be happy, despite being asked to pay more for the same amount of content without really knowing it. Then they'll push further. They're in this to make money, so of course they will.

At this point I'm going to make a point, because it's a good time to as I'm reading this back and arguing it with myself. That point is this: I CARE about the state of this franchise, and I'm sad to see things go this way. I will not just "vote with my wallet" and not buy the games, or "shut up and let people enjoy things". I'm allowed to be critical, and I'm critical because I care. But I'm not going to blindly consume media when it does something I fundamentally disagree with. Besides, this is the only post I'm going to make on this subject (don't quote me if you're hoping for a response or discussion, btw...VM me if you want I guess though) and I'm almost done, so bear with me. Or don't. You know you could just not read this, right?

Game Freak are going to get away with this, and it's going to be positively received, because all the ambition and the scope that they promised and failed to deliver with Sword and Shield are being put into this DLC instead. They're going to make the games what they should have been at launch, and whilst this is definitely a good thing, the manner in which they are doing it is so disgustingly anti-consumer and downright scummy that it negates any and all goodwill, as far as I'm concerned. Whether or not this DLC is any good is irrelevant, in my opinion – it's a very worrying sign of changing times, and whilst it'll happen gradually, and be portrayed in a positive light, in the end we're going to end up in exactly the same place EA took us with Star Wars Battlefront II.

I know this is standard industry practice, and THIS was what was bound to happen sooner or later - not Dexit, but this carving up of the games so that pieces could be sold back at a later date. DLC has been creeping into flagship Nintendo IP for a while now, and Pokemon was clearly next in line. I'm not against the concept, persay. What I AM against is Game Freak half-arsing their game, rushing to release it, and then locking the rest of the content behind a paywall. A lot of developers do it, but...well, this is a sign of the end of an era where Game Freak was simply better than they were. This has huge potential for abuse, and with their reputation and colossal install base, they could easily get away with it. People will THANK them for getting away with it, even.

I expect the DLC will be good. I expect it will be enjoyable. If it ever goes on sale to below half price, years down the line, I might even be a filthy hypocrite and buy it...or ask someone else to buy it for me, salving my conscience in some small way, haha. I can understand why people are excited for the content: it's more Pokemon! More of the same! I say this without any sarcasm, because more of the same has worked SO WELL for Pokemon for years and that's great. But this extra content shouldn't exist in this form, and I'm sad that it does. I'm worried for what it means for the future. And I'm disgusted with Game Freak for acting as though they're doing us a favour and like they didn't know EXACTLY what they were doing this entire time.

So yeah, that's the long version. Thanks for reading, if you did! Bear in mind it's just my opinion and doesn't have to affect your enjoyment of or excitement for the game, and neither is it an attack on you as a person. It's just a bunch of meaningless text on the internet from some person who doesn't matter at all. There's a lot of speculation, and a lot you'll probably disagree with, but...well. I hope it was an interesting read if nothing else :3


Has sent out Pikachu!

Age 23
Seen 4 Hours Ago
Posted 13 Hours Ago
5,948 posts
11.5 Years
I'm okay with this, but I do hope we get a part 3 and 4 to put in the other remainder of the Pokemon not in the game? I'm not one of the people extremely upset by the dex cut, but I do understand the people who are upset by it.

DLC is just... natural these days? I do think that there'll still eventually be another game in Galar, though, but not an enhanced version, maybe a sequel.
Theme: Osamu Dazai (Bungo to Alchemist)
Pair: Drew
Bristol, England
Seen 3 Weeks Ago
Posted July 2nd, 2020
335 posts
1.2 Years
Doubt I will get this, Shield was so poor story wise, and now they want us to pay for a post game and £30 which is only £20-£30 less than what most paid for the full game, its a joke £90 for what we should of had and maybe more if they release downloadable content, pretty much daylight robbery. I'm all for downloadable content but if I'm paying £30 it better be more than a post game and pokemon that should of been in the game.

Also when home comes out would these pokemon that are being added be able to be transfered through from pokebank after the free update


what will it be next?

Seen 3 Weeks Ago
Posted May 22nd, 2020
6,328 posts
13.6 Years
I think paid DLC is fine, especially at a lower price than the original games. If they went the way of Sun/Moon and just released UltraSword and UltraShield, priced it at $80 and called it a day, I likely wouldn't have bought them. Cheaper DLC that offers a smaller but better developed region sounds great. And it adds a bunch of old Pokemon, to boot. At the time of writing, it seems as though they put a lot more work into the Wild Area, which is what severely disappointed me about Sword and Shield. I thought it would be a ton of fun to explore every nook and cranny of the areas, but I found they are boring and samey. Nothing interesting to explore apart from new wild Pokemon. No story development entwined within the wild areas. Just a huge place with random NPCs and raid battles. It got old fast.

I'm a fan of expansions for the Pokemon series, as opposed starting new games over every couple of years. Most of us play the same character anyway, so if they treated Sword and Shield as the baseline "vanilla" game for the Switch going forward, each new installment could be a new region that your character travels to. You keep all your Pokemon that you trained up, and instead of catching 'em all every single time, you just catch the new ones and add on to your already-filled dex. You could just cheese and destroy all the gyms with your super leveled Pokemon, or catch the new ones and beat the game that way. The latter sounds way more fun to me, but whatever, it's up to you. Your character would have a super stocked wardrobe and you could collect items of clothing from all the different regions as the game adds more and more expansions. Treat it like World of Warcraft. Vanilla is Sword/Shield, then release a Burning Crusade, Wrath, Cataclysm, etc etc etc. That would be dope.
Seen March 16th, 2020
Posted January 19th, 2020
26 posts
211 Days
When I first heard of the DLC I was so happy! Pokemon Sword is one of my favourite games and I am really excited to get some new content.
I will buy the DLC but I think it is a little bit pricy. I think it is like 30 Euro, right? But yeah I will still buy it and after that I will see if it was worth it. Haha xD
It just kinda reminds me of the Breath of the Wild and the Splatoon 2 DLC which where great and they cost only about 20 Euro.
I am not complaining or anything. Tbh I do not know everthing about the DLC because I want to enjoy the DLC and all of its content by myself. ^^
Seen 3 Days Ago
Posted July 3rd, 2020
3,167 posts
6.4 Years
If Sword/Shield was a game that had a good amount of content that kept me playing for hours past beating it I would welcome the DLC with open arms. But I beat the game at around 30 hours and then slowly stopped playing because there was barely anything to do after finishing.

My feelings are the game was already an extra $20 on the switch. I got a game that had about the same content as x and y, possibly a little less. Now if I want more content I have to pay more for an expansion that I feel probably should of just been apart of the game. So I'm not feeling wild about it all. Also is it confirmed there isn't going to be a third version because of this or is this just assumed?