Why won't Nintendo create difficulty options for Pokemon?

They did in BW2. But like many other features that people like, they took it out of future games.

>>30687201
You can make it harder for yourself by doing things like turning the Exp. Share off and putting the battle flow to Set.

>>30687251

And classic Gamefreak, they made you jump through stupid ass hoops in order to even select the difficulty.

>>30687201
go for a nuzlocke run

>>30687201
Play an SMT game, you won't have to worry about it being too easy

>>30687415
I already have and yeah I like SMT, which is one of the reasons I can't go back to Pokemon

>>30687201
Altering the difficulty would mean storing different data for every NPC in the game. If a game cartridge is already running okay/poorly with only 1/2 of its space taken up by the base game--adding alternate NPC data to increase/lower difficulty would risk killing frame rates and such.

I suspect that GF will actually give us difficulty options on the Switch games (After Stars though) because the cartridges will likely be able to store much more data and still run smoothly.

>>30687286
And on Sun/Moon this really does up the difficulty a lot. Started a nuzlocke with no exp on (not battle set though Im not crazy) and lost on that first little fight against Ilima. Gg lvl 10 Smeargle

Pretty sad that you have to handicap yourself to make it harder. That being said I really fucked myself over for Sun/Moon since I thought it'd be pathetically easy like Gen 6 was, so I turned off exp share and battle switch and kept swapping out my team, but they made it slightly harder so it took me by surprise a few times. I actually died

>>30687366
i liked drill dozer and pocket card jockey

i don't know who is in charge of the litany of ass-fucking-backwards decisions made vis-a-vis pokemon but they are capable of making games that aren't pants on head retarded, they just choose not to

then again, it is almost impossible to fuck up solitaire

>>30688085
>Altering the difficulty would mean storing different data for every NPC in the game. If a game cartridge is already running okay/poorly with only 1/2 of its space taken up by the base game--adding alternate NPC data to increase/lower difficulty would risk killing frame rates and such.
>I suspect that GF will actually give us difficulty options on the Switch games (After Stars though) because the cartridges will likely be able to store much more data and still run smoothly.
Do you really think that Pokemon is running crappily because the cartridges are too full? I'll give you a hint: they dont have to load twice as much onto the cart for double battles, where the slowdown is worst.

>>30688085
It's not a matter of cart space, it's a matter of effort. Designing pokemon teams for NPCs is a lot of dreary data entry that no one wants to do. Having Easy, Medium, and Hard modes would take three times as much of that dreary data entry.

I used to think we needed difficulty options too, but after experimenting a bit with what's already possible in the game, I think that Pokemon has such malleable difficulty that we don't really need them. No Exp Share, Set style, no healing items in battle. There you go, hard mode achieved. Nuzlocke it or restrict Pokemon Center uses to once per building for added fun.

>>30687201
Op, what would you do to make the games "harder"?

I'm currently working on a simple romhack for XY, I've halve the exp all pokes gives, so you can't just skyrocket in levels (even with exp share), edited a lot of the moves base power, as well as some of the typing (how are mega punch/kick NOT fighting type moves, anyways?), and mostly added to the base stats of most "common" Pokemon so that most final stage pokes and up having around 480-500ish base stats. I didn't realizs some generic route 1 Pokemon were actually as utterly weak as they are until I started editing.

Also, Im going to make it so that at least all important battles, rivals, gym leaders, admins and such, all have max IVs/EVs on their pokes.

Also also I've made healing items cost double, so you can't just super potion your way through half the game.

Just sayin, Set Mode and turning off the Exp Share is increasing the difficulty, and it is intended to be so.
And no, is not handicapping yourself as much as it is to choose a "hard" mode over a "normal" one; they are just not named "easy" and "hard" mode respectively because it does not feel good to aknowledge to play an "easy" mode.

Added personal thought, I think that user-made challenges are not a good thing by default - obviously you can do them if you enjoy them but remember you are warping a lot the intended mechanics of the game and what makes you experience, so you might eventually ruin the game for yourself rather let you enjoy it more.
For example i find Nuzlocke excessively frustrating and anxious, i did it once on Red but that was more than enough for me.
On the other hand i do not use in-battle items unless is for menial and tedious tasks ( like chaining pokèmons to steal items ), and so far it worked well to me; i also stated to limit my pokèmon usage pool, but that ended up being unfun and i dropped it.

They need to increase the challenge by setting more nuanced challenges like the dominant Lurantius, mostly.

Dude I've been playing Pokemon since near the beginning. All I did was to turn the exp share to off and constantly rotate my team because I cannot decide for shit what I want to train. Result? I made a mismove against Sina's Glaceon (decided to use Brick Break instead of the Z-Move) and I almost fucking lose that battle. I was even leveled with her.

Moreover, catching Pokémon became way more difficult this gem, if they get to call an ally it stops being a matter of just catching the mon but also being lucky enough that they won't call yet another ally while they slowly chip your life away. Or when you want to find a mon that only appears as a reinforcement.

What else do you want? Set exp share off, set instead of switch, and there ya go.

^ this. agree totally.

Much of the shit i set myself to do was unnecessary, and i had many close quarter battles even thought i play since red.

It is not titanium hard, but it is enjoyable hard. Sometimes you might have it easier or harder depending on the pokèmons you have or if you have grinded, but that' s the norm for this kind of games. Just enjoy it.

I think my biggest issue with the games' difficulty is that so many Trainers only have like 2 Pokemon, including Ace Trainers. That makes no fucking sense even from an in-universe perspective.

I'm tired of people around here being so apologetic of GF's laziness. Difficulty options are in almost every fucking game now. There's no reason they don't exist other than laziness, stop making excuses for them.

>>30694940
>I didn't read the thread
Also the amount of Pokemon doesn't matter. The red card trainer was difficult enough as it was. I wasn't about to be defeated or anything, but I did put a struggle.

>>30694953
I did read the thread, and it's full of the typical "you can play the game with weights tied to your hands to make the game harder" responses (along with a couple retarded ones which completely misunderstand how game data works). It's not the fucking player's responsibility to make up for the developer's design choices, especially if the alternative being asked for is one where nothing changes for people who are satisfied with the way the games currently are and an alternate option is introduce for those who aren't.

And I get early route trainers and such having 2 or 3 Pokemon, but it's fucking dumb for Ace Trainers towards the end of the game to still have only 2 Pokemon. That makes no sense from a game balance or in-universe perspective, why are they getting ready to challenge the Pokemon League when they don't even have half a team?

>>30687286
Anyone actually playing without those?

It's still easy as fuck and I'm constantly oveleveled. I'm fucked more by my terrible team composition at this point. Like I'm facing Olivia right now and all 4 of my Pokemon are weak to Rock.

I think some trainers are excessively easy too.

At a certain point difficulty skyes up but the trainers are mostly a grindfest, except for late game where you actually have some interesting encounters ( like the couple right before the battle tree).
This does not surprise me tho, it is a thing since Red in a way or in another.

Talking about in-universe setting, makes sense to me for people to have 1-2 pokèmons tops. They are kinda like a pet after all, the Player Character is a very special case that can allow himself to actually train and have multiple pokèmons with ease but i imagine for the normie character even only having a somewhat trained pokèmon can be a thing, between jobs and daily life.

The point here is that pokèmon has a design conflict where it is in the middle of a challenge fantasy and a survival fantasy. Challenge means that the player can be in top performance pretty much always and has to deal with challenges that take that into consideration, survival ones are quite the opposite where the player has to defeat weaker enemies/challenges without however the possibility to recover quickly.

Pokèmon has a recover like a challenge fantasy but challenges like a survival fantasy, except cases where it is tailored to be toward challenge fantasies ( like most "boss fights") that are in fact really fun and look like the direction pokèmon is moving torward, which i do not displease at all.

To add up, "normal" trainers are there more to showcase different pokèmons and let your train and test over them, which has no precise design space compared to the aforementioned "challenge" or "survival", it ' s a side utility.

>>30694998
I'm playing without it and I'm typically 2-3 levels higher than the opponents. I've run into a couple hard battles but I haven't blacked out a single time yet. I mean, one thing that heavily factors in is what Pokemon you're using. If you were using a team of 6 shitmons then the 2-3 levels probably wouldn't save you.

>we now know about how important exp share is to difficulty
>Totems like mimikyu provide interesting challenges to unprepared teams
(Fucking Lum berry)
> Item and Z trainers utilize either good strategies or Z moves that guarantee KOs.
>back to a 6 mon champion

SM with XP share off was way more challenging than BW2 challenge mode ever was.
Granted my team was mostly shitmons, but stuff actually got KOd, and even a few wipes against stuff like Mimikyu, E4, the dark kahuna and Sinas glaceon (cutiefly and rowlet had a problem with it)
This was the only time in a pokemon game that I've had to stop and grind while under levelled, because when your only mon that gets SE hits getting KOd by Z moves then presents a challenge.


The challenge mode is there, and it makes it way harder than every other pokemon game.

>>30687201
It's called turn off the fucking exp share and play on set without z-move spamming

>>30694979
Turning off two menu options not named 'hard mode' is different from one menu option named 'hard mode' how?
How is 'set' and 'exp share off' unreasonably gimping yourself?
Are you a child that literally needs to see the words ' hard mode' to understand what that means?

>>30694998
You are still in early game. Wait a bit.

>>30695128
I know the knee jerk reaction of you GF apologists is to go down your tired list of things already in the game, but for once try to understand these discussions come up because of things that AREN'T in the game. Making the games better is their fucking job and they don't need you brown nosers defending them and their millions in profits.

Toggling both those things doesn't solve the root cause of why these games are too easy, especially the fact that nearly every trainer only has 2-3 Pokemon even towards the end of the game. Their basic philosophy when designing the game is to make it easy because their primary target audience is kids so having an alternate harder mode would only be a good thing. More options is not a bad thing. I know that might scare you because Pokemon is the only game you play, but other games have it and they do just fine.

>>30695241
We are saying that a difficulty setting exist. If it it hard enough that' s nother matter entirely.

Also, consider that the game has to be balanced for pretty much everyone, it' s not like their only audience is people that plays it since Red. I am not talking about kids, i am talking about the other people that just got into the franchise. While we might argue that kids are more than grown-ups i want to remember you that grown ups are still a good slice of their sales, and you can totally bet your cosmog that GF won't deny themselves this part of the audience. But also grown ups can suck.

The thing i noticed about this game is that pretty much every trainer uses different pokèmons. For a newbie having to deal with different pokèmons can really be a burded, unless they look up on internet deals about then ( but that makes pretty much everything easy). For a more experienced player those fights are way easier however, and here is where i think GF lacked in this game, not because the challenges were not set right but because they set only one kind of challenged and did not design the game space to account for other kinds of challenges.

also, the only game i play? srsly.

>>30695241
>Thread complaining there isn't a difficulty setting
>explain how they've created a difficulty setting, and how the way it's made gives it the biggest difficulty gap yet
>Th-thats not what we were saying! Where is my pander mode!?

Stop moving goal posts and fuck off

>>30695241
Trainers are there for learning new pokemon and grinding. You're not meant to wipe there. Thats what boss battles are for.
A few party KOs over a route? Sure. But theyre always going to be glorified encounters

But with route bosses, kahunas and two team villains, that all scaled mon numbers as the game went on, it's at least a big improvement

>>30688085
would be exclusively value replacements, fucking like 2kb, fuck off they're just lazy