• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Pokemon Sword and Shield Expansion Pass announced

Quezacolt

Member
Jan 8, 2019
554
1,008
450
So the price of two DLC's is the price of a full game... Wow.... The days where there were a bunch of cheap DLCs seem great now o_O. At Worst, two DLCs would cost half the full price of the game...
The season pass is 30$, if it was 60 it would be absurd
 
Jun 29, 2019
84
101
190
I will leave this here from a Nov. 10th article. Mind you, a day less than 2 months ago...


 
Jun 29, 2019
84
101
190
 

Frotchki

Neo Member
Jan 14, 2018
18
19
255
$30 for each version if you got both of them. So a total of $60 more dollars.
Both expansions ( island of armor/ crown tundra) are in each $30 season pass. The only difference between the sword and shield version are some of the pokemon encountered. But you can trade to complete your dex. And you can transfer pokemon available in the pass through home. So if you caught it in another game you can put it in sword/shield. Spending $60 on both passes isnt necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shaqazooloo
Jun 29, 2019
84
101
190
Both expansions ( island of armor/ crown tundra) are in each $30 season pass. The only difference between the sword and shield version are some of the pokemon encountered. But you can trade to complete your dex. And you can transfer pokemon available in the pass through home. So if you caught it in another game you can put it in sword/shield. Spending $60 on both passes isnt necessary.


Do you really think the individuals that have both games wouldn't want all of them? While unnecessary, those die hard sheeple will spend the $30 for each one.

And those are the people Game Freak are counting on for the extra revenue...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smasher89

jimjonjimmy

Member
Feb 16, 2010
268
28
840
You sure? Because in the OP it's stated that...;
You are correct. Looking on the eShop you will need to buy the Expansion Pass twice if you own both versions of the game. That is if you want to play through the expansion twice.
 
Last edited:

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
11,680
20,805
1,885
So this is why the base games don't really have legendaries beyond the covermon?

Imagine R/B/Y charging you money to hunt the birds, or G/S/C charging you money to hunt the dogs.
 

Roufianos

Member
May 14, 2015
2,784
1,813
585
Last gen at least had like 9 decent ones though.

Yea, the last couple of gens have had quite a few decent designs. Enough to build teams for at least 2 playthroughs. This is by far the ugliest gen yet.

I remember finishing the game and going on YouTube to see if I'd missed any. What do I get? A penguin with an ice cube head and those hideous fossil dragons.
 
Jun 29, 2019
84
101
190
no, the operative word there was "currently". clearly shit has changed.

digressing ...I'm happy that there are more than just those 35 that were data mined before. that was a bit depressing.

But that was around Nov. 10th... so what? A week later they said let's do DLC and show it the second week of January...? Haha, no... they deliberately held back content.
 

MagiusNecros

Gilgamesh Fan Annoyance
Mar 18, 2012
14,773
236
775
But that was around Nov. 10th... so what? A week later they said let's do DLC and show it the second week of January...? Haha, no... they deliberately held back content.

No doubt about it. Since this content takes time to develop it was likely in the framework around release or a month or two before. No plans my ass.

Or they had to meet a deadline and put out an incomplete product.

From my perspective they blatantly lied to their consumers twice and the majority are fine with that. Which I find pretty pathetic.
 

Ryu Kaiba

Member
Sep 12, 2018
1,001
1,588
475
They already ruined the design language
Pokemon used to be beasts, creatures that you train for battling






but they keep trying to pander to twitter and making designs like this:









They're beauty and the beast creatures, or they're lazy filler or they're a sign that pokemon is in the wrong hands. They aren't pokemon.
 

Fbh

Member
Dec 6, 2013
15,230
10,617
1,070
Going forward thats what everyone should do.

But is there any precedent that they'll make one? I doubt Nintendo will give up on the chance to make $90 from Pokemon, and I'm sure that like 95% of their audience will happily pay.

As far as I know Breath of the Wild didn't get any Goty edition. All I can find on amazon is a base game + DLC "bundle" which just costs the same as buying both things separately.
 

Ryu Kaiba

Member
Sep 12, 2018
1,001
1,588
475
I....I love Appletun :(
It's fine to like it I just don't think it makes sense as a Pokemon. Its a worm eating an apple.
the other one is an ice cream cone
the other one a candle
and ...a set of keys
I don't get it.
But Maybe I'm wrong for thinking all of it should fit into my structure of what a Pokemon should be.
 

Jooxed

Gold Member
Live on Twitch
Aug 27, 2019
4,834
11,203
925
It's fine to like it I just don't think it makes sense as a Pokemon. Its a worm eating an apple.
the other one is an ice cream cone
the other one a candle
and ...a set of keys
I don't get it.
But Maybe I'm wrong for thinking all of it should fit into my structure of what a Pokemon should be.

Oh no I think the other ones are dumb as well I often am opposed to the inanimate object Pokemon, even Appletini was meh for me but Appletun was just a design I liked. I agree with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ryu Kaiba
Feb 29, 2012
884
113
695
I disagree. Gen 2 had a healthy mix of really good designs and even shared the same art style of gen 1.
Agreed, Gen 3 you can still see that same art style but that is when it starts to branch off with the newer designs. There was some youtube video that I totally agree with, that the Pokemon designed now look more like toys on a shelf instead of something you'd see in the wild. Gen 1 and 2 (to an extent gen 3) imo is Pokemon designed by a team that had creative passion and doesn't feel so, i don't know, forced I guess you could say.
 

Quezacolt

Member
Jan 8, 2019
554
1,008
450
They already ruined the design language
Pokemon used to be beasts, creatures that you train for battling






but they keep trying to pander to twitter and making designs like this:









They're beauty and the beast creatures, or they're lazy filler or they're a sign that pokemon is in the wrong hands. They aren't pokemon.
I get this feeling, but i also wonder if sometimes people ignore certain gen 1 designs just to prove that the new ones suck.

Voltorb and electrode, magnemite e magneton, Exeggcute and Exeggcutor. These are pokemon that aren't really beasts, they are the same as the examples you used, so you can't really say they only started doing it now, pokemon always had this.
 

Ryu Kaiba

Member
Sep 12, 2018
1,001
1,588
475
I get this feeling, but i also wonder if sometimes people ignore certain gen 1 designs just to prove that the new ones suck.

Voltorb and electrode, magnemite e magneton, Exeggcute and Exeggcutor. These are pokemon that aren't really beasts, they are the same as the examples you used, so you can't really say they only started doing it now, pokemon always had this.
No I was right these are still dumb
 
Last edited:
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Shaqazooloo

Silvawuff

Member
Mar 9, 2012
2,721
690
820
This DLC was in development long before anything was announced. Not sure how this could be a "response" to the whole national dex outcry. I think game development vs. consumer perception has always had a very skewed expectation. This isn't in defense of the DLC or how this game is being monetized; it was certainly handled poorly on both ends.

I miss the days when games would be launched as complete, whole products. It's an interesting, complex topic and it's frustrating for players because we frequently have little information to go off of to make a formative opinion about why developers arrive at the decisions they do.
 

Khalid M.

Member
Nov 8, 2018
1,281
1,527
520
They already ruined the design language
Pokemon used to be beasts, creatures that you train for battling






but they keep trying to pander to twitter and making designs like this:









They're beauty and the beast creatures, or they're lazy filler or they're a sign that pokemon is in the wrong hands. They aren't pokemon.
Voltorb and Magnemite say hi.

Clefable is filler.

Seel is one of the blandest designs for sure.

And why would Game Freak pander to Twitter? And to whom on Twitter? You think a japanese developer is gonna care what English-speaking fandom says?

C’mon, people have been displeased about new Pokémon since at least gen 4, and GF have always been doing whatever they felt like.
 

Ryu Kaiba

Member
Sep 12, 2018
1,001
1,588
475
Voltorb and Magnemite say hi.

Clefable is filler.

Seel is one of the blandest designs for sure.

And why would Game Freak pander to Twitter? And to whom on Twitter? You think a japanese developer is gonna care what English-speaking fandom says?

C’mon, people have been displeased about new Pokémon since at least gen 4, and GF have always been doing whatever they felt like.
I didn't forget Seel but a Seal is a very Pokemon lookin' animal. The Twitter pander is real, doesn't matter what nation the company is from, they are the worlds biggest IP and it's admittedly good marketing.
 

DeviousAngel

Member
Mar 11, 2012
632
20
575
Toronto, Canada
I'm conflicted. Generally I'd much rather prefer DLC to a third version or sequel; I think it gives the original game some value as opposed to it feeling worthless a year after release. $30 for both expansions (assuming you don't double dip) is also a pretty good price compared to $60 for a third version game, especially given how meaty these expansions seem.

What conflicts me is: 1) That Gamefreak not only released a clearly-unfinished game, but based on those trailers they knowingly went ahead and did so while withholding plenty of finished material; I think I would have enjoyed these news more if they had announced the expansion a bit later, and only after they patched the game's most glaring faults at no cost to appease fans. 2) They could have been FAR more transparent about the dex cut; heck just say something like "pokemon will be released as DLC in the future" or something.

PS: Regarding pokemon designs, they have to adapt with the times. Dragon Ball Z angry eyes and jagged edges/points may have been cool in the 90's and therefore may be cool to those who first played red/blue around then, but these design choices don't resonate with kids today. Furthermore, as more Pokemon are made it becomes necessary to dig deeper for inspiration and as a result plenty of the new designs actually have really fascinating backgrounds!
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Shaqazooloo

Mista

Dragonslayer
Nov 21, 2014
20,427
35,357
1,420








Disclaimer: I love all the first 5 generation and most of the Pokemon in all of those. Gen 6 Has some good, but mostly bad or uninteresting designs, and I don't think I really like a single design from gen 7 & 8.
Nice post mate. The thing is with each new generation the designs feels so random to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bryank75

Thurible

Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,748
1,825
630
Come oooonnnn mate. We’re just having some fun together😂
Sometimes I take things literally, so I apologize if I caused concern on the part of you guys.
Well, now I am.
:(, I thought we were buds (you are cool man).



I actually am a fan of gen 3, though I admit a good part of my love is nostalgia (first games I played, and actually bonded a bit with some or my sisters playing with them). It also added weather, natures, and abilities (if I remember correctly). I loved how colorful the landscape and pokemon were. Ludicolo is such a weird design and I love it. It also ran pretty smoothly on the gba and every game I played after that was a bit slower imo (especially diamond and pearl). I just have a lot of love for it. I have no problem if someone loves or hates it honestly, its all just opinion based.
 
Feb 29, 2012
884
113
695








Disclaimer: I love all the first 5 generation and most of the Pokemon in all of those. Gen 6 Has some good, but mostly bad or uninteresting designs, and I don't think I really like a single design from gen 7 & 8.

Great post and you can go even further with this, with the constant repetition of shapes/patterns, just all the extra unnecessary geometry all over them. The simplicity of gen 1-2 designs are just so good to me. Whenever Gamefreak does a timeline of their Pokemon games and show the creatures in order by each gen, you can literally see the progression where the designs start to look (imo) shitty. The elements of gen 1-2 are imo perfect. The people that use designs like Muk, Voltorb, Magnemite as ammo for bad gen 1 designs are imo just looking at it on a surface level and aren't digging a little deeper. I hate that excuse of "Muk is a shitty design because its literal shit". The elements that go into designing Muk completely destroy Garbordor. And what's a real shame is you can bring all this together in a conversation with hardcore Pokemon fans and it literally goes over their head. I used to be one of those types of fans, but me and a friend of mine have had these types of conversations and its mind blowing how much sense he made.
 
Last edited:
Jun 26, 2013
5,513
6,497
800
Great post and you can go even further with this, with the constant repetition of shapes/patterns, just all the extra unnecessary geometry all over them. The simplicity of gen 1-2 designs are just so good to me. Whenever Gamefreak does a timeline of their Pokemon games and show the creatures in order by each gen, you can literally see the progression where the designs start to look (imo) shitty. The elements of gen 1-2 are imo perfect. The people that use designs like Muk, Voltorb, Magnemite as ammo for bad gen 1 designs are imo just looking at it on a surface level and aren't digging a little deeper. I hate that excuse of "Muk is a shitty design because its literal shit". The elements that go into designing Muk completely destroy Garbordor. And what's a real shame is you can bring all this together in a conversation with hardcore Pokemon fans and it literally goes over their head. I used to be one of those types of fans, but me and a friend of mine have had these types of conversations and its mind blowing how much sense he made.
The other thing is that Gen 1 Pokemon were the very first Pokemon to be designed, you know, back when the franchise had yet to take off. I would personally cut the Gen 1 designs some slack because of that.
 
Aug 16, 2012
9,178
4,082
970
30
North West, UK.
Gen I was designed by three people. The latest gen probably had at least 10+ designers working on it and James Turner was the art director, taking over from Yusuke Ohmura and before him was obviously Ken Sugimori. The internal dealings for Gamefreak when it comes to Pokemon design gradually changed with every gen.