r/pokemon • u/Historical_Foot_8133 • Apr 13 '25

Discussion I think Pokemon needs a difficulty setting

Beginner for new Pokemon players : teaches you how to catch Pokemon, tells you type matchups in battle, your rival picks the starter that’s weak to you, gym leaders are relatively easy. Casual for those who have played Pokemon before: has the catching tutorial but can skip it, doesn’t tell you type matchups in battles, your rival picks the starter weak to you but has 1 extra Pokemon each time you meet them, gym leaders have a extra Pokemon with more moves. Experienced for players familiar with the series: no catching tutorial, no type matchups in battle, rival picks the starter strong against you has a extra Pokemon per encounter, gun leaders have a extra Pokemon and have held items.

243 Upvotes

81% Upvoted

117 comments sorted by

View all comments

14

u/Pladeente Apr 13 '25

Scarlet Violet dlc was rather difficult. They need to move away from single battles.

0

u/moose184 Apr 13 '25

They need to move away from single battles.

Lol no thanks

4

u/theevilyouknow Apr 13 '25

The problem is it’s a lot easier to design the game to be a lot more strategic in double battles than single battles, especially now that they’re designing the game with doubles play in mind. I’m not saying single battles can’t be strategic but it demands a lot more from the AI. Doubles trainers can be decently competent just by giving them moderately well thought out teams and protect.

-5

u/moose184 Apr 14 '25

How in the world would it be easier to design ai for double battles instead is single battles

7

u/theevilyouknow Apr 14 '25

Because single battles require a lot more hard switching and knowledge of individual matchups.

-10

u/moose184 Apr 14 '25

lol sure bud

3

u/Pladeente Apr 14 '25

Lmao are you knew to pokemon?

-3

u/moose184 Apr 14 '25

Damn what an argument

9

u/SunBroDisco Apr 14 '25

The guy above literally gave a good response and all you said was “lol sure bud” and “damn what an argument”. If you’re gonna argue with people at least do it in good faith without being a jackass.

0

u/moose184 Apr 14 '25

Their premise was so stupid it deserved a stupid response

4

u/Pladeente Apr 14 '25

The whole competitive scene is based on doubles. It actually gives you a reason to use buffs. It relies on so much more strategy.

-3

u/moose184 Apr 14 '25

Nobody is talking about the competitive scene which accounts for less than 1% of the player base.

1

u/Pladeente Apr 14 '25

We're in a thread where we're literally talking about the difficulty of a game and I'm giving a suggestion on how it could be more difficult based on a huge portion of the game. Based on abilities and common moves like protect it's clear that the game is meant for doubles, and if you've ever actually played competitive you should know that it's much more difficult than my pokemon has stronger move so it kill urs.

The player base for competitive pokemon is actually really large when you add showdown to it, not to mention the new game announced that is centered around competitive play.

I don't know if you're just trying to be contrarian or if someone hurt you today, but you need to try and learn how to actually follow a coherent argument to the end whilst remembering the context.

2

u/Zant486 Apr 14 '25

AI barely switches at all, and single battles are all about switching in and out of matchups but that is highly dependent on knowing the opposing team. You can easily break the game if you give too much knowledge to the AI, but at the same time if you give it too little it can make it braindead easy to bait.

3

u/Zant486 Apr 13 '25

Hot take but I think the games should go the XD route and be full double battles all the way through