Why? Are you saying that pokemon have never spread throughout the world? that pokemon aren't successful etc? think of it like dogs, chickens etc - there are numerous different types but the differences arent THAT varied and they are everywhere - and have spread successfully (Been reading a book on chinese expansion called iirc, 1421, that explains how chickens can be used to show expansion of china - think of it in the same way, colonists taking food stock, pets etc). Of course a lot of local stuff will be unique, and of course there are places that haven't got this spread of wildlife (yet?) but that will be the exception not the rule.
I appreciate this is real life stuff in a computer game, just thought it worth mentioning.
Now this I don't get at all - Pokemon was, yet again, hugely successful and the franchise is going from strength to strength. Care to enlighten me as to how this could cause Gamefreak to head 'straight for the jagged rocks below'
If GameFreak worried about 'some fans' they would have a LOT of worrying to do, and no way of getting games out. What you have there is personal opinion, not a strategic view of various cross sections of customers, target audiences etc
I would bet a HUGE amount of money that gamefreak is monitoring what is liked and disliked across various cross sections - whole marketing depts rely on this data, as do game developers. They will know what has worked and what hasn't and adjust accordingly. Unfortunately it may not be to your liking, or mine, how they do it - for example i would prefer they went down a 'harder' route of more aggressive looking pokemon etc - but I accept that doesn't fit in with their target audience.
But however you look at it I fail to see how GF are looking at falling onto any rocks, or why they should make a 100% brand new pokemon range - especially not when, with so many pokemon, they could spread it over 2 games etc.
