Why I love the Battle Tower
So, I'm upset that S/V didn't include a Battle Tower feature, and I wanted to see if anyone else felt the same. It allows more casual players like me who like battling (but don't really like the more hardcore aspects of competitive) to have fun when the game is completed. It also allows me to continue using Pokemon that I like without having to worry about overleveling them.
What do you guys think?
Comments
-
It's a little annoying when people ask what the point is if you don't earn money, exp, or the opportunity to fill out your Dex. Or worse yet, insinuating that something like the School Battle Brawl is a replacement.
The point is to bridge the gap between casual and competitive play, and in doing so adding dozens if not hundreds of hours of replayability beyond the standard 10 hours it takes to complete the game. Battling is a major aspect of the Pokemon experience whose role in the franchise's broad appeal cannot be understated. It's important to provide meaningful experiences that test the players' skill and knowledge without the unfair advantages present in the story mode.
3 -
I accept that the majority of players do not really engage with the post-game or features like battle towers. I wonder what the statistics are for the percentage of players that actually even finish the game.
That said, something being used by a minority of players does not mean that it does not have value or is not worth implementing. The more diverse the range of experiences available in the games, the more likely it is that any given player will find an activity that really appeals to them, be that competitive battling, breeding, shiny hunting, Nuzlockes or anything else you can conceivably do in a Pokémon game.
Over the years, Pokémon has gradually drummed out the side activities and gimmicks (contests, Pokeathlon, etc.) until we ended up with the streamlined experience we see in the games today.
Play the story, build a competitive team, play online, buy and play the DLC seems to be the sole expected path of progression.
Some of the activities were very unpopular and either did not offer enough variety compared to regular Pokémon gameplay and battles or were too bizarre to really find an audience.
But I feel battle towers/facilities/etc. certainly filled a void in a world before the always online availability of a competitive opponent; when it was unreasonable to expect children and teens (or anyone for that matter) to go out into the real world with a link cable and expect to consistently find people to battle. In that world they certainly made a lot of sense.
Now online battling is seen as a substitute for such facilities, if not the logical replacement. You can face human opponents (who at least have the potential to function better than an AI), there is no need to create opponent characters and teams or design AI to use them, and you have theoretically limitless content and battles.
But while all of that is true, as others have pointed out, battle facilities still serve a purpose. More content within the game. The potential to explore more of the world and its story and characters. A place to practice and test teams before taking them online.
I do not buy the whole "kids have smartphones, so they have no time to play a post-game" argument. It is an excuse to not spend time developing what was previously expected as standard content. And when management expect multiple Pokémon games per year now, I cannot blame developers for wanting to cut corners and content where they can, with any justification.
I just think it is sad the highest grossing media franchise in the world is so miserly they have to cut these corners in the first place.
0 -
@TheJeffers Wait, only a minority of players even use the feature? It’s literally the main Postgame activity I do in each game, alongside breeding and training other Pokemon to use.
2 -
@TheJeffers Also, online battles are not a good replacement for the Battle Tower, for a couple of reasons:
- As I’ve mentioned, PvP combat is too advanced for some people, such as myself. The Battle Tower offers a space for me to freely experiment without having to worry so much about metagames and all that.
- YOU LITERALLY HAVE TO PAY FOR ONLINE PLAY, something many players such as myself are not willing to do.
0 -
@TheJeffers Also, assuming Pokémon is primarily targeted towards kids, and Nintendo Switch Parental Controls have a feature to limit online functionality- how is online battling supposed to be a replacement for the (presumably many) children whose parents don’t want them to be so exposed to the internet at a young age.
Apologies for my little rant- Long story short, the argument that online battling is an adequate replacement for the Battle Tower is flawed in many ways, due to how each feature works and the availability of each feature to the general player base.
0 -
I wish the two comments I just posted weren't held for review. That would sure make conducting this discussion easier.
It seems that yours aren't.
0 -
@TheJeffers I thought they were, but not for very long apparently. Moderators really need to have better communication on when comments will be held for review.
0 -
Well, we'll see. Not quoting and keeping my posts short seems to help, but I am a longm'n.
0 -
@D-ManBlue You do, yes. You who comes on a Pokémon forum to willing spend your free time talking about Pokémon with strangers on the internet.
The overwhelming majority of people who play Pokémon in any capacity are not so invested. Many of them drop the game the moment credits roll. And I would be surprised to learn that more than half of the total players even finish the game.
Your perspective is probably warped because you likely spend your time talking to other highly invested players: on these forums and other social media, in your friend group, at tournaments and events you may attend, and in the content you consume elsewhere, like YouTube videos.
Most people are not like that. The games aren't even the biggest part of the Pokémon franchise.
0
