What if a mainline Pokémon game released once every 5 years?

[Sheep]

Let's say mainline games will now release every five years, rather than every 1-2 as it currently is. Be honest - do you think you would get impatient waiting, or would it be too much? Maybe you'd be okay with it since it means more time to polish the games, but would still find it a tough wait?

 

[FakeNate0]

I wouldn't be impatient. In fact for a Pokedex enthusiast, would make it easier to manage time and probably do some shiny hunts on the side during the wait or try filling up pokedexes that get buried by newer games and over 1000+ pokemon. (Let's admit, shiny hunting takes longer than when games actually release regardless if they decide to release them every year or 5 years.) I don't really get bored of playing the same "old" games for 5 years, still play most of them to this day. Wish they could make something amazing, with intentionally added glitches for players who are seeking them out if the devs take their time on making a new region, see a new side to an older region, and perhaps refine more graphics and audio.

 

[Devalue]

Would be fine. Replays the games quite a bit, much like FakeNate0. Fills the gap with other games just as easily too. Wants to see what they could do with all the extra polish time.

 

[TeeVeeBlue]

I would be so impatient even though I understand that's a normal development time 😅

However, I do agree with others that it would be a good opportunity to replay the older games and do the longer completionist tasks in them. If the Pokémon company did ever move to longer dev times, it'd be cool if they added more completion challenges with rewards (maybe different tiers of rewards depending on difficulty) to Home to incentivize replaying older games. I'm trying to complete the national dex in gen 3 right now since PLZA still won't be out for a bit, and I'm really enjoying how much more involved and tedious (for lack of a better word) catching the legendary dogs is in gen 3 Kanto.

It would be nice if the older games were more accessible (easier to acquire) for newer players though or older ones who got rid of their games. I'm still kicking myself for getting rid of Colosseum back in 2007…

 

[ReKoil]

I'd be perfectly fine with it. I still haven't finished PLA due to doing random stuff in random Pokemon games (like my Normal types playthrough in AS for example). At this rate I'll likely still haven't finished it when Z-A releases... an extra year or two for some breathing room would be nice =3

 

[Janp]

I would welcome it. I think releasing 1+ games per year is crazy. With bigger windows between releases, it would give devs more time for development. Which could result in games that are actually good.

 

[Rock_Salazar]

I am in favor of releasing a mainline game every 5 years. More dev time means more time for polishing. Also it makes the generations last longer and have a better staying impact. Not to mention that should give more time for spin offs to fill in those bi-yearly time gaps.

 

[nl4real]

While my personal experience ends with the 3DS games, the consensus I've observed at this point is that the Switch Games suffered from being rushed, so future releases definitely need more time in the oven.

 

[_confused_piplup_]

That's too much, and I see a problem with that: many people stop playing after a while, or anyway, there are less things to do. It feels funnier when the games come out as there's a general hype and you get to experience things with other people too. GF is also relatively bad at mantaining games, so 5 years is definitely too long. If they found ways to keep the game and the community alive, then maybe yes. But I hardly see that happening.

 

[PoryKid575]

tbh I would find it a tough wait (for all its problems, the hype cycle for S/V was absolutely magical); but I still think it would be worth it. Dexit likely wouldn't be a thing, the post-game would likely be vastly more fleshed out and not as reliant on online, and the games would just be a lot more thought out and feature-rich. And as Rock_Salazar said, a 5-year cycle would give more time for a generation to make an impact and get interesting spinoffs (ideally by other studios so GF can focus on the core games).

 

[Setsuna]

I definitely think a convincing argument could be made that they're releasing the games way too fast. Honestly with this topic I think of a realization that hit me a while ago, where I thought generations lasted a lot longer when I was younger. I was sitting here thinking the older generations had something like 4 years in-between debut releases (1999 for Gold and Silver, 2002 for Ruby and Sapphire, etc.) until I realized Scarlet and Violet released 3 years after Sword and Shield. It just feels different now that I'm not a kid. I think the big reason I'd want a longer wait in-between Pokemon games is just to selfishly reobtain that feeling of waiting what felt longer in-between releases like when I was younger.

But more realistically I think the thing is just, there's a lot more releasing now. Pokemon as a franchise is making a lot more games and it feels like all of them have a lot less time in development. I can't argue with the idea of polishing a game for another year or two to make sure it's in a more... satisfying? state when it's released. It's a big nuanced thing for me but I think the short answer is that I think I'd be happy to wait now that I'm older, and I think these games could really do with slamming hard on the brakes. I can't see it ever happening, but I'd be happy to see it.

 

[Pendraflare]

I feel like it'd be a little much. As mentioned, people might find themselves bored without as much to do after a while. They'd have to give DLC on more than one occasion to keep it alive. Which they did with Sword/Shield and Scarlet/Violet, admittedly. But the game by itself isn't going to prop things up for too long.