You can in the sense that there's nothing physically stopping you from doing the comparison. You can't in the sense that it isn't a meaningful comparison outside of subjective taste, as you yourself agreed. You can like oranges more than apples but neither is an inherently better fruit than the other. And I could continue with an essay on the philosophy of art but this would veer wildly off-topic but a PGC thread, so I'll just leave it at that. I sincerely think we won't because we can't even agree what makes any one entry good or not. There are people like yourself that are all about the competitive scene, there are people that are all about the single scene, there are people that are all about the lore. Like in some other thread here there was this person that said Scarlet and Violet was bad because, among other things, there weren't discussions on it on how to do a proper paella. That never crossed my mind as a negative (neither did having said discussions as a positive) and I'm fairly certain that never crossed your mind either. People just want and expect and like wildly different things and for a series as broad as Pokémon it means that consensus is a very hard thing to come by. You mention downpost that you think that the best Pokémon games came from generation V, I hate them and think they're easily my least favorite games in the entire series for a variety of reasons. And the thing is, games are ultimately for entertainment. Dastr happens to like simple games and that's fine. I won't lie and say that I don't think their reasons seem to be largely nostalgia based but so what? It's a AAA game they play in their spare time, liking or not doesn't need to have a deep reason behind it and it's not like going "Oh, I didn't like it" is going to meaningfully hurt the creators the game. They can drop the series for whatever reason, and as long as said reasons are reasonable to them, that's fine. They could dislike the series' direction for something as vapid as "I hate orange and purple" and it would be a valid reason for them not to play it any longer. The peak and the best being different seems a bit contradictory but OK.A nd while your evaluation might not take graphics into account, a bunch of people take and that's fine. It's the video part of videogame. Some people like MUDs which are all text, others are OK with terminal games like Dwarf Fortress and Rogue, others are OK with any visual games, others prefer games that are more visuals than games and others only like full blown 3D productions. While there's a lot to be said about the subject, at the end of the day these are all valid approaches to determining whether they like how the series is going. And in the interest of keeping the peace, you and Dastr seem to be talking past each other now, can you just stop engaging with them for now, at least for this particular line of conversation?
I disagree with that. I don't think that topics lack meaning simply because they are "subjective." Considering that subjectivity refers to people's personal feelings, tastes, and opinions, people can have meaningful discussions regarding why they have those personal feelings, tastes, and opinions. Regarding the apples and oranges analogy, the topic doesn't have to be about which fruit is "inherently better." Instead, the possibility exists that people can have a healthy discussion about
why they prefer one fruit over the other and maybe introduce new ideas that could open people's minds to new personal tastes, feelings, and opinions. For instance, maybe we can discuss which is healthier and make some suggestions on what fruit to eat more. Subjective topics should never be gatekept under the premise that "it's just my opinion; deal with it." Objectivity and facts should never be the only topics for debate. The same exact logic should apply to Pokémon too. You're making it seem as if I'm invalidating other people's opinions, as if I'm saying they're not allowed to dislike the new games for whatever reason. If so, that's not true.
I am 100% fine with people not liking the new games for any reason. However, I
love the new games and I enjoy having conversations with people that don't love them for reasons stated earlier. Like you mentioned, if someone says that they don't like the new games because they don't like the literal scarlet and violet colors, sure their opinion is "valid," but that doesn't mean we
can't or
shouldn't have a healthy discussion about that opinion. For example, maybe we can ask why the literal colors even matter to begin with and how they're relevant, and ask that person if they enjoy certain aspects of gameplay in video games. If they do and those aspects happen to exist in the new Pokémon games, then we can have a healthy discussion about the matter and maybe suggest that they might enjoy the game because of those gameplay features and potentially introduce them to new positive
subjective experiences. If they're not interested, then they can simply say that they won't enjoy the game no matter what or simply not respond in the first place. This is basic common sense and social skills 101.
As for me and Dastr95, I tried my best to ensure Dastr95 that I didn't intend to invalidate their opinions. I simply wanted to
discuss them. Nevertheless, and this is important, people have to understand that when posting in a topic about whether or not there is
hope for future Pokémon games and whether or not
Pokémon will ever be good as it used to be, everybody won't share the same views. This means that people with different opinions are likely to come by and explain why they have such an opinion. If you share your opinion, you should expect other people to respond to that opinion as well,
especially if they disagree. If the responses are within the rules, then no reason should exist for them not to be peaceful. My response of Pokémon games evolving and not being 2D forever is
100% relevant to the topic of Pokémon having hope in the
future and is not, by any means, intended to invalidate Dastr95's opinions. The same exact logic applies to them not liking the game for nostalgic purposes, which they claim is false, and that's fine. If Dastr95 can understand that, then there is absolutely no reason for this conversation not to be peaceful. It's just that challenging someone's opinion doesn't mean that I "have a problem with it." It's important that they understand that. If they can't understand that or accept that fact, then we don't need to speak on it anymore. If we
can establish that, then we can have a healthy discussion. If not, then they can say that they don't want to discuss it further or just simply not respond. I just find it strange how people can post their opinion in an arguably controversial thread that is likely to attract various opinions, but seem to have an issue with people discussing said opinions.
