• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Can't catch em all anymore

  • 108
    Posts
    13
    Years
    • Seen Mar 31, 2024
    So we all know we can no longer catch them all. What would you do about this? Would you continue to only have a few hundred older Pokémon in the new games? Would you only have the mons from that generation in each game? Would you add every single mon? It would be challenging to make a game with every mon. Imagine having the first route with every beginner rat and bird and bugs and other similar mon, along with the new mons. I imagine that the game world is would have to get bigger. What would you do?
     
  • 46,762
    Posts
    3
    Years
    I'm fine with the limited Dexes as they have been in SwSh and Scarlet/Violet. As long as they keep rotating the omitted Pokemon around I've got no problems with it at all.
    400 in the base game Dex was fine for SwSh. It did feel a bit on the low end for Scarlet/Violet since we've now breached 1.000 Pokemon. I guess I'd up the cap to 500 mons in the base game's Dex in the next generation myself.

    Also...
    *Points at Pokemon Yellow for already not having all Pokemon as catchable*
    https://www.serebii.net/yellow/missing.shtml
     
  • 24,922
    Posts
    3
    Years
    • Any pronoun
    • Seen today
    Ideally adds all or most. Recognizes some possible barriers with that (updating movesets, abilities, model creation and testing, behavior). Aims for at least 10-12 evolutionary lines of each Pokemon type catchable in both games. Favors Pokemon with the fewest number of appearances in-game (by main story, not by transferability).

    Also needs to consider biome population. Is there a good variety of Pokemon in grasslands, caves, deserts, oceans, and snow areas? Feels bad if there are new Pokemon are every turn in the grass, but only swarms of Zubats, Geodudes, and Drilburs in caves. Results in higher numbers of Water-types, probably.

    Technically needs to consider power distribution a little too. Might have lots of non-evolving Pokemon planned for an early biome or something. Imagine Pinsir, Heracross, Tauros, Sawk, Throh, Durant, Bouffalant, Stonjourner, and Indeedee in some hypothetical early biome. Invalidates the point of all the quick evolution Pokemon (even more). May need to cut certain Pokemon (and reintroduce more common ones) out of balance.

    Edit: Restricts legendaries to 10 or so: 2 box art, 0-1 big bad, 3-4 of a theme, and 5ish for fun cameos/callbacks.
     
    Last edited:

    Sweet Serenity

    Advocate of Truth
  • 3,372
    Posts
    2
    Years
    So we all know we can no longer catch them all. What would you do about this? Would you continue to only have a few hundred older Pokémon in the new games? Would you only have the mons from that generation in each game? Would you add every single mon? It would be challenging to make a game with every mon. Imagine having the first route with every beginner rat and bird and bugs and other similar mon, along with the new mons. I imagine that the game world is would have to get bigger. What would you do?

    One of my biggest complaints about the newer Pokémon games is the limited Pokédex. I believe Pokémon should include every Pokémon in its games, much like the older games. Including every Pokémon makes collecting them more challenging, grants every player access to his or her favorite Pokémon, and adds more variety to the competitive battling scene. Adding Pokémon from a single generation severely limits the experience, especially if the game is from a generation with a small amount of regional Pokémon, such as Generation IV or VI. What I would do is add every single Pokémon but not include every Pokémon in the overworld, similar to the Alola games. In fact, no game exists where every single Pokémon has ever existed in the overworld. Instead, the games should have the usual limited amount of Pokémon in the overworld, but the player can still have access to every single Pokémon through Pokémon HOME transfers or trading. That way, Game Freak doesn't have to jeopardize their framerate or the game in general by having every single Pokémon on the early routes.
     

    Palamon

    Silence is Purple
  • 8,174
    Posts
    15
    Years
    You never really...could catch 'em all, even in Generation I unless you traded. But, even before generation 8, in generation III until FR/LG, Emerald, Collo and XD were added, you couldn't catch 'em all there, either. And getting a living dex in gen 3 is impossible, anyway, unless you're willing to spend hundreds on all the other games.

    Tbh, Dexit never bothered me. I knew it was going to happen someday...where we couldn't bring certain Pokemon with us into newer games. It's a shame, but what's done is done.

    But, this is probably how it's going to be forever. We'll never have a Pokemon game except maybe Pokemon Go with all the Pokemon ever again.
     
  • 1,182
    Posts
    3
    Years
    • Seen yesterday
    As far as I know the "catch 'em all" motto comes from the anime... I mean, from that anime with the protagonist that barely cares about catching anything.

    Technically we could never catch them all. Evolution, trading version exclusives, trading with other games, and gift Pokémon obtained in-game or through other special methods have allways been a thing.

    Pokédexes were always limited, except in Gen 1 and 2 because there were few Pokémon back then so there was no reason to cut anything. The modern games just don't have a post-game national dex, but all the games since Gen 3 offered a limited selection of Pokémon actually obtainable in those games.
     
    I actually liked what was done in BW and keeping the dex to new Pokémon, so I wouldn't mind going for that. And DLC, rather than introducing mostly some older Pokémon back to the dex, would instead introduce more new ones. Sure it's more work to design even more new mons for the DLC but probably not much more than it would've been to create a third version instead.
     

    Harmonie

    Winds ღ
  • 1,079
    Posts
    17
    Years
    As far as I know the "catch 'em all" motto comes from the anime... I mean, from that anime with the protagonist that barely cares about catching anything.

    Technically we could never catch them all. Evolution, trading version exclusives, trading with other games, and gift Pokémon obtained in-game or through other special methods have allways been a thing.

    Pokédexes were always limited, except in Gen 1 and 2 because there were few Pokémon back then so there was no reason to cut anything. The modern games just don't have a post-game national dex, but all the games since Gen 3 offered a limited selection of Pokémon actually obtainable in those games.

    While the old Pokemon games did not allow you to capture every single Pokemon without connecting with others (or other copies/systems lol), the BIGGEST factor here is that those Pokemon were all coded in the games and could be transferred over by the end of the generation one way or another. (IIRC, Gen III was the generation where many Pokemon straight-up weren't available at all until FR/LG, but generations beyond then benefited from ways to transfer from generation to generation).

    ALL Pokemon being available in a game by one mean or another is what people are talking about. Generation VIII made a number Pokemon completely unavailable to transfer or obtain at all, and that is apparently permanent. THAT is the issue that we have, and it's an issue that past Pokemon generations did not have.
     

    XVanitasX

    Banned
  • 41
    Posts
    7
    Years
    • Seen May 19, 2023
    Who cares? I never wanted to "catch 'em all", that was always just a cheesy catchphrase for me. In fact, I don't imagine many people bother to complete a full dex in every game. It's a waste of time, imo. I only ever catch the Pokemon I like and want to use, so it doesn't affect me in any way.
     

    Harmonie

    Winds ღ
  • 1,079
    Posts
    17
    Years
    Who cares? I never wanted to "catch 'em all", that was always just a cheesy catchphrase for me. In fact, I don't imagine many people bother to complete a full dex in every game. It's a waste of time, imo. I only ever catch the Pokemon I like and want to use, so it doesn't affect me in any way.

    I believe once transferring from generation to generation became easier, people liked to maintain a dex throughout the generations. I could never manage it myself, but I believe I've seen people do that.

    Besides, you said "I only ever catch the Pokemon I like and want to use, so it doesn't affect me in any way"... Well, what if your favorite Pokemon can't be caught? That's an issue I'm running into a lot in Generation VII and IX. It's good to use new Pokemon every generation, but sometimes even when you're using new Pokemon you still want or need a specific Pokemon in your team, but you learn it can't be obtained and it's very disappointing.

    Even if they go down the Gen VII route and do not count them all in the Pokedex, at least let me use any Pokemon I want in each game. It's the least they can do.
     

    XVanitasX

    Banned
  • 41
    Posts
    7
    Years
    • Seen May 19, 2023
    I believe once transferring from generation to generation became easier, people liked to maintain a dex throughout the generations. I could never manage it myself, but I believe I've seen people do that.

    Besides, you said "I only ever catch the Pokemon I like and want to use, so it doesn't affect me in any way"... Well, what if your favorite Pokemon can't be caught? That's an issue I'm running into a lot in Generation VII and IX. It's good to use new Pokemon every generation, but sometimes even when you're using new Pokemon you still want or need a specific Pokemon in your team, but you learn it can't be obtained and it's very disappointing.

    Even if they go down the Gen VII route and do not count them all in the Pokedex, at least let me use any Pokemon I want in each game. It's the least they can do.

    No. I think it was the right choice to get rid of the full dex. You have to understand, there are currently over 1k pokemon in existence and that number is only going to keep increasing. It's impractical, if not impossible, to implement them all at this point. I'd much rather GF focus on more important things than getting every single pokemon in their games. And like you said yourself, with every gen come new pokemon, some of which you will unavoidably find appealing in their design, so it's not like you're going to be stuck without your old favorites with nothing new to try.
     
  • 1,288
    Posts
    7
    Years
    I fell into the "catch em all" trap around the 7th and 8th gen only to realize it was impossible and a huge waste of money. Pokemon Home is now more like Pokemon Prison. I didn't even bother picking up BDSP, P:LA, or SV. I was so disappointed in dexit that I just gave up. I still go to the older games from time to time, but I can't get myself to re-do a whole run-through of the story no matter the generation. I'm sorry Pokemon. :(
     
    Back
    Top