Post Script
Pokémon and ‘Dexit’: a very modern scandal
Last month, while surveying the past decade in videogames, we discussed the controversy surrounding Mass Effect 3 and how Bioware and EA’s response marked a tipping point for the relationship between big games and their players. Nevertheless, the vitriol that greeted Game Freak when producer Junichi Masuda revealed that Sword & Shield would be the first mainline Pokémon game not to include every monster from previous generations still came as a surprise. We thought this welcoming series – a game with broad appeal that promotes cooperation – had one of the most convivial communities in videogames. Alas, many of those players proved depressingly ready to turn upon the game’s creators as soon as the bad news was announced.
In keeping with the games’ UK-inspired setting, this soon became known as ‘Dexit’. Others made comparisons to Marvel villain Thanos, some noting that the Avengers antagonist had been more merciful than Game Freak, since his finger snap had only wiped half the population from existence. For his part, Masuda bullishly suggests around 400 monsters will be the norm for future entries, allowing the studio to focus on other improvements, including more expressive animations – which are evident among the new additions to its more manageable roster.
Regardless, the complaints have rumbled on ever since that first eruption of invective, with a legion of ‘fans’ actively determined to find fault. In some cases, the allegations were unproven: one apparent datamine suggested a large number of monster models had effectively been copy-pasted from 3DS entries Sun & Moon, though there was no source for this. Meanwhile, early players posted selective complaints alongside GIFs highlighting the game’s apparent technical shortcomings while dismissing any improvements elsewhere. The perception was that Game Freak had compromised on quantity and quality.
In truth, Game Freak had given the naysayers some ammo, with a host of cuts beyond the monsters, including 144 Pokémon moves. This was always likely to happen at some point – the series has simply grown too unwieldy to effectively balance its competitive metagame. That said, was the first mainline Pokémon game on home console hardware really the right time to do it? And are fans really wrong to expect a little more from one of the medium’s biggest moneymakers? Not all of its visual issues can be attributed to its platform: this is a console that can (just about) run The Witcher 3, for heaven’s sake.
Other criticisms were more a matter of taste. Sword & Shield’s streamlined campaign seems to have been built with competitive players in mind. Some bemoaned the absence of regional lore, while others wanted more dungeon-like areas with environmental puzzles, where encounters are frequent and an escape rope mandatory. These are legitimate grievances, though in the tumult of social media it’s hard to separate them from those simply piling on for the sake of it.
That furore has been amplified by a number of specialist sites, which have taken to carrying news pieces on every controversy that kicks up enough of a stink. This comparatively recent trend only serves to tell these mobs that their opinions matter; that their voices, however shrill and misdirected, are being heard. One even ran a poll asking if Game Freak deserved criticism for reusing assets, a common development technique that rarely comes under such close scrutiny.
Sword & Shield are certainly not without flaws, though we understand enough about the vagaries of game development to know that any issues are unlikely to be exclusively the fault of the studio. Given the earning power of the series, there’s a strong case to be made for Game Freak to be afforded more time and resources in future. But in the meantime, it would surely behove us all to think before pouring petrol on an already raging bonfire.