Pokemon X and Y's Pokemon Bank Won't Launch Until Dec 27

[AuronFtw]

And the major competing portion of the Pokemon category don't bother with that stuff. If they are doing it for competitions, they use hacked Pokemon, they don't go through the time it takes to raise it. And Nintendo allows this as long as the hacked Pokemon don't have anything they couldn't get naturally.

So, actually, the best of the best don't deal with that crap.

This man is correct. I competed at state level tournaments (yes, hawaii had a hardon for pokemon back in the day) in RSE and FrLg era, and back then pretty much everyone used action replay. As long as your pokemon had legal IVs, EV spread, movepool, trainer id/secret id matched (for safety), etc it was always far easier to hack a team than to raise one. There was always a small chance of bad egging, so we'd typically make duplicates or triplicates, but when you're hacking it's not that big a deal. We also typically had 3-4 different teams available depending on tournament rules; some allowed Zapdos, some didn't, so I had a Golem or Jolteon around as a starter in case Zapdos was banned.

With Gen 4, that shit got even easier. The action replay for the DS era let you upload custom codes to your game, which spawned Pokesav. Some time later, pokesav creators enabled gifting over wifi, making it even easier to collect your hacked pokes.

Some folks like raising pokemon, but honestly I only had time for that shit when I was in middle school. Hatching eggs, level grinding them, EV training them, checking their stats via online calculator at lv50 to guesstimate IVs, releasing pokemon because it was a fucking blaziken with 2 attack 5 speed, repeating... got old fast. At least now TMs are repeat-use, that was one big reason everyone hacked back in the day, but reducing grind was the main reason. And since Nintendo is cool with it as long as you don't bring out spiritomb with wonder guard, we can hack away to compete while the kids can grind away to waste time, and everyone's happy.

 

[TimeLord]

Also they need to cover server costs somehow.

$40 box price? Chances are only a small fraction of the playerbase will use this, and a smaller fraction still will actually play for the whole year. They could easily have taken it out of the box price at very little loss, if any.

It's not the epitome of dirty moneygrabs on par with EA, but it's pretty questionable. Especially considering how wifi pokesav will be working a few weeks after launch, if not earlier, making long-term pokemon storage kinda pointless to all but the most extreme of collectors (who are a very, very tiny minority; again, easily covered by box sales).

So what's the problem? If you don't want to use this, or only want to transfer pokemon over for one time from older games, then you get the free month to do so. If you want to keep going then you pay all of $5. Everybody wins. Nobody is forcing it on the people who don't want to pay

 

[SilverUchiha]

To Answer all questions: (because I've seen them pop up multiple times):

#1. Yes, there will still be in-game storage. Obviously or they'd launch this right away so you could catch more than six when you get the game. It'd be dumb if they didn't have that. But reports from Gamefreak/Nintendo have already said that the in-game storage will be drastically cut, meaning you CANNOT store every Pokemon in your game. As to why they're doing this, I can only assume it's a smart financial move on their part, but I'm not sure if there's any in-game reason for it.

#2. Honestly, $5 is a drop in the bucket compared to what you could be paying. I was almost expecting $10/year or $15. $5 is worth it for a lot of reasons. Aside from being able to actually store all your shit, you can keep those same Pokemon around for future games to transfer. They've said this will work with all future Pokemon titles. So when generation 10 is here, you can still keep your Charizard or Primape you transfered from FireRed/LeafGreen into HeartGold into White/Black2 that you'll put in PokeBank to get data for in X/Y. As some people have said, it's "future-proof." And being someone who has generally avoided transferring because it really is too much of a pain in the ass, this is something I'm all for. Though, granted, this feature was FREE on Pokemon Stadium, but those days have long since passed us and since this requires online servers running 24/7, I'm not opposed to paying. Though I would like a new Pokemon Stadium instead.

#3. Personally, I'm not a competitive pokemon player (though I am interested in the idea since I raise some of them with that in mind). For me, I'll end up keeping the boxes on my game for the teams I'll rotate through, what I'm breeding, and maybe legendaries if there is room. For anything I'm just catching for the sake of "catching them all," I'll keep them in the online storage because they're just in the way otherwise. For me, this seems like an ideal way to remove excessive clutter.

#4. My speculation as to why they're delaying this feature so much, GTAOnline, Diablo 3, SimCity, and any other always online game or service that launched and was bugged with a week of crashes, being unable to log in, or just other stupid glitches keeping people from enjoying it. I'm not saying those games are bad or fucked up (maybe I am for SimCity), but I think Nintendo has observed a lot of this over the course of the past few years when it's come to learning how to effectively use online gaming and storage properly. So they're waiting a couple months instead of just a couple weeks before launching it to make sure it works properly for everyone. I mean, how pissed would you be if you try to use it day one and it fucks up so bad you lose all those Pokemon you were trying to transfer over? I know I'd be pulling my hair out thing of all the hours I wasted making some of those teams.

 

[The White Hunter]

It's kinda disappointing that this costs anything, when every other gen was free to transfer up. And it's not like money is the problem. Pokemons main series is a yearly franchise with two games a year. Why can't a little of my purchase cost cover the cost of this?

Every other gen had a transfer technique that either required a DSi (GBA to DS) or two DSs. Also the old way of transferring was limited to 6 at a time. This can be done box by box.
Also they need to cover server costs somehow.

Personally, I'm so glad something like this finally exists. Game Freak seem to have been punishing people for transferring pokemon from older gens for years now and while the release date disappoints me (I was hoping to transfer everything right away) I'll still drop $5 or whatever the UK equivilant will be.... Probably £5

Considering that I can damn well fill 4 or 5 boxes trying to get one pokemon with the right natures and at least one useful IV to me this extra space is a freaking god send, easily worth £5 a year for the competitive player.

 

[hickwarrior]

*snip*

Ah, thanks for the answers. Yea, that sounds about reasonable. I just hope That the cut isn't too drastic though... Would love to catch at least most of the pokemon in the new gen.

 

[SilverUchiha]

*snip*

Ah, thanks for the answers. Yea, that sounds about reasonable. I just hope That the cut isn't too drastic though... Would love to catch at least most of the pokemon in the new gen.

My guess is that the Pokemon catchable in X or Y are able to be stored just fine. But anything not obtainable (unobtainium) would necessitate the extra storage. Especially given that we only have the game's storage for two months. It'd be shit if we couldn't legitimately catch everything the game had to offer before the online service was available.

Glad I could help. I just saw the mess of confusion above and decided to answer based on everything I've been reading up to now.

 

[loa]

But reports from Gamefreak/Nintendo have already said that the in-game storage will be drastically cut, meaning you CANNOT store every Pokemon in your game. As to why they're doing this, I can only assume it's a smart financial move on their part, but I'm not sure if there's any in-game reason for it.

Okay how is there not a shitstorm about this yet?
This is pretty anti-consumer no matter which way you look at it.

 

[hickwarrior]

*snip*

Ah, thanks for the answers. Yea, that sounds about reasonable. I just hope That the cut isn't too drastic though... Would love to catch at least most of the pokemon in the new gen.

My guess is that the Pokemon catchable in X or Y are able to be stored just fine. But anything not obtainable (unobtainium) would necessitate the extra storage. Especially given that we only have the game's storage for two months. It'd be shit if we couldn't legitimately catch everything the game had to offer before the online service was available.

Glad I could help. I just saw the mess of confusion above and decided to answer based on everything I've been reading up to now.

I still think it's bad to have to wait 2 months to truly play the game how you'd want to play it though... But at the very least, they're taking their time to make it as flawless as possible. Don't want to lose all those pokemon I've been working on.

Though I do hope they will give us a nice little feature that allows us to catch pokemon from other regions in Y and X, even if it's outside of the game.

 

[BooTsPs3]

It's kinda disappointing that this costs anything, when every other gen was free to transfer up. And it's not like money is the problem. Pokemons main series is a yearly franchise with two games a year. Why can't a little of my purchase cost cover the cost of this?

Every other gen had a transfer technique that either required a DSi (GBA to DS) or two DSs. Also the old way of transferring was limited to 6 at a time. This can be done box by box.
Also they need to cover server costs somehow.

Personally, I'm so glad something like this finally exists. Game Freak seem to have been punishing people for transferring pokemon from older gens for years now and while the release date disappoints me (I was hoping to transfer everything right away) I'll still drop $5 or whatever the UK equivilant will be.... Probably £5

Your argument is basically "this sucks less than before", which isn't really acceptable to me. It was slow before. Speed it up. Don't make us use pal park or the minigame from B&W and just directly transfer the pokemon to the new games boxes. Problem solved.

Not to mention a single pokemon is about 120 bytes of storage. The cloud holds up to 100 boxes, 30 pokemon in each box. Which adds up to a whopping 360kb. That's right. 360kb if you use every last space. Yet this is a paid service? I must bring up what i said before. Why am i paying for such a tiny amount of storage, when pokemon already costs 5 euro more than the regular price for 3ds games?

Sure, it's cheap. But it should be free. Or there should be an alternative. Even if it were a slower one. What about when i play an older game again in future and want to transfer over what i trained? I'm gonna have to pay, because the trial is only a month.

Yeah, this sounds like a nice feature. But it also sounds like i'm being gated from content i already paid for, for no good reason. It's a staple of the franchise to transfer pokemon up gens (barring gen 2 to 3, but there was a massive overhaul regarding stats and how they were handled, so it kinda had to be done to add the depth to the game that it did), but now that feature is limited to those willing to pay. And i simply can't justify that on a game i will have already spent 50 euro on. It's not about it being priced to high or anything, but i'm just disappointed that such a feature would require payment, and i refuse to support such a business practice.

 

[KingWein22]

I am all for this. I want to start going to competitive Pokemon tournaments, official or otherwise. And now this can help me out, and can flesh out the various moves that come with future gaming. $5/year is no strain on my budget.

 

[Ipsen]

It's kinda disappointing that this costs anything, when every other gen was free to transfer up. And it's not like money is the problem. Pokemons main series is a yearly franchise with two games a year. Why can't a little of my purchase cost cover the cost of this?

Every other gen had a transfer technique that either required a DSi (GBA to DS) or two DSs. Also the old way of transferring was limited to 6 at a time. This can be done box by box.
Also they need to cover server costs somehow.

Personally, I'm so glad something like this finally exists. Game Freak seem to have been punishing people for transferring pokemon from older gens for years now and while the release date disappoints me (I was hoping to transfer everything right away) I'll still drop $5 or whatever the UK equivilant will be.... Probably £5

Your argument is basically "this sucks less than before", which isn't really acceptable to me. It was slow before. Speed it up. Don't make us use pal park or the minigame from B&W and just directly transfer the pokemon to the new games boxes. Problem solved.

Not to mention a single pokemon is about 120 bytes of storage. The cloud holds up to 100 boxes, 30 pokemon in each box. Which adds up to a whopping 360kb. That's right. 360kb if you use every last space. Yet this is a paid service? I must bring up what i said before. Why am i paying for such a tiny amount of storage, when pokemon already costs 5 euro more than the regular price for 3ds games?

Sure, it's cheap. But it should be free. Or there should be an alternative. Even if it were a slower one. What about when i play an older game again in future and want to transfer over what i trained? I'm gonna have to pay, because the trial is only a month.

Yeah, this sounds like a nice feature. But it also sounds like i'm being gated from content i already paid for, for no good reason. It's a staple of the franchise to transfer pokemon up gens (barring gen 2 to 3, but there was a massive overhaul regarding stats and how they were handled, so it kinda had to be done to add the depth to the game that it did), but now that feature is limited to those willing to pay. And i simply can't justify that on a game i will have already spent 50 euro on. It's not about it being priced to high or anything, but i'm just disappointed that such a feature would require payment, and i refuse to support such a business practice.

Then please enjoy the lack of Gen VI. Hell, you're draining my enjoyment for the game (kidding) just witnessing your complaints. But I can't see how you would enjoy your game if these are the complaints you levy.

Not to say that you're wrong; DLC creep is a legit issue for consumers of video games these days. But I'm under the assumption that this situation is balanced better; I get to, if I so choose, transfer my Gen V pokemon FREE, on condition that I acquire the apps within the first month. It's if I want to continue that it ends up costing....5 of probably whatever currency one's nation circulates. Not even to mention the extra space, etc. I get to do the MAIN DAMN THING I wanted to do concerning the previous generation, and you consider a staple of the series.

It's a staple of the franchise to transfer pokemon up gens

And on that front, I must inform you that no, you do not get to decide what content goes into games. That's why the game is ~50 euro; you pay for set content, and thus you'll have to decide whether it's enjoyable or not. If they let you decide (AKA you make developers make content for you, or any specific consumer), you'd be paying them direct, and thus, pay more. You exchange 'freedom' of choice of content for a lower price (in my weirdawesome perspective).

As I have heard Owyn Merillin put it, games are a 'beer and peanuts' luxury. You gotta pay for it, and it gets expensive like luxuries do. But its price and entertainment scale doesn't match the connotation of 'luxury'.

But it should be free.

Food, water, and shelter should be free. Then we can literally spend the rest of our lives in entertainment. Unfortunately (and for double-unfortunately solid reasons), this is not the case. Why should our games precede this notion?

And apologies, I just wanted to tear your post into some pieces tonight.

 

[loa]

snip

Wait waitwait. Hold on.
You can no longer transfer from the previous gen if you have a ds and 3ds /2 3dses or whatever and b/w, that is now a payment only feature?
How is this okay? You seem to think it is.

 

[Ipsen]

Wait waitwait. Hold on.
You can no longer transfer from the previous gen if you have a ds and 3ds /2 3dses or whatever and b/w, that is now a payment only feature?
How is this okay? You seem to think it is.

It's not okay, but it IS more comfortable.

I'll mention it again; do your gen V>VI transference before the year ends, and it's free. You have your loophole, so do exploit it.

The process seems to be the easier type of transfer as well; read: the Pal Park method, which you can do on one system (and I don't think they'll take away DS compatibility any time soon). It sure as hell beats the gen IV>V method, in which I had to buy another DS to perform. If someone can pay $5 to avoid buying another system, I'll be happy for them.

And I'll speculate here that due to these conditions:
a)the new transfer uses online servers
b)Pokemon is stupidly popular
c)Pokemon X/Y is a worldwide release

It might cost a bit to upkeep.

But nah, I'm banking on Ninty just reaching into my wallet again.

 

[Yosato]

OP's point was the first thing I thought upon hearing about this. I've got a shit-tonne of Pokemon traded all the way back from the Ruby/Sapphire/LeafGreen/FireRed days, but still nowhere near enough to fill all the boxes on one profile. I'll be good with the free month; should be able to transfer everything over without much trouble.

Gutted as I am that we'll have to wait I'm still really happy they implemented this. The endless hours I spent trading over one Pokemon at a time was horrific. That damn music haunts my dreams.

 

[loa]

It's not okay, but it IS more comfortable.

More like no longer possible without internet for no reason.
If this was an additional option it would be fine but it's the only way.
Right?

 

[Dragonbums]

It's not okay, but it IS more comfortable.

More like no longer possible without internet for no reason.
If this was an additional option it would be fine but it's the only way.
Right?

Would you rather have a repeat of the transition between Gold/Silver to Ruby/Sapphire era?

Because there was a very real possibility that they would not of been able to transfer Pokemon from this gen to the newest one because the difference in graphics, typing,(some older Pokemon got converted to Fairy or part fairy), etc.

Honestly, it's not like you were able to transfer immediately when you got the game anyway.
It always involved beating the game first.

 

[Ipsen]

More like no longer possible without internet for no reason.
If this was an additional option it would be fine but it's the only way.
Right?

Right?

Because we can't step outside, right? (disclaimer: quite possible)
No way wifi isn't quite common in a library, malls, or that one kinda crappy coffee shop chain. Cmon, your 3DS takes care of half the battle.

And I really hope you're just standing up for the little guy here, for posting on the escapistmagazine.com doesn't convince me of your lack of broadband connection.

And if all else, you don't have ANY decent internet, you haven't lost the game. It's never been the objective of the game (read: what prompts credits scroll) to 'catch 'em all'; don't be brainwashed by pokemon season 1. Eventually, even Pokemon, one of the slowest changing game franchises, will move on to other service methods.

 

[SilverUchiha]

But reports from Gamefreak/Nintendo have already said that the in-game storage will be drastically cut, meaning you CANNOT store every Pokemon in your game. As to why they're doing this, I can only assume it's a smart financial move on their part, but I'm not sure if there's any in-game reason for it.

Okay how is there not a shitstorm about this yet?
This is pretty anti-consumer no matter which way you look at it.

Is it though? I mean, just looking at it point blank, sure. But the $5/year is, as I said already, virtually nothing when compared to a number of other subscription based games or online services (that's roughly 42 cents a MONTH at best). For all the features it'll offer (ie, easier transferring for this and ALL future games), that's not really anti-consumer. Especially considering that $5 a year from (estimating numbers) 2 million people works to about 10million a year. While we already know Pokemon will make more money than that just by the initial game sales alone, an extra 10 million could EASILY help them with more stuff to add to the Pokemon games digitally. Release new Pokemon into games via DLC or new areas to explore (or release old regions accessible in X/Y like Kanto or Hoenn). And given that we're already being changed, the prices of those would probably be exceedingly low as well, if anything (given that event Pokemon are always free).

I think, for the most part, Pokemon has gained enough good will where people are giving this a chance before raging about it too hard. That, and the target demographic is kids. Most kids probably wouldn't fully understand WHY this COULD be perceived as "anti-consumerist". But, as I said before as well, a lot of what I'm saying is speculation if there aren't articles online that already explain it (which this post here is mostly speculation). Can't wait til the whole thing is up and running to see how it will actually work.

 

[trytoguess]

Is it though? I mean, just looking at it point blank, sure. But the $5/year is, as I said already, virtually nothing when compared to a number of other subscription based games or online services (that's roughly 42 cents a MONTH at best). For all the features it'll offer (ie, easier transferring for this and ALL future games), that's not really anti-consumer.

To be honest, despite the low low price I'd say it's still anti-consumer. Like I've mentioned in my other posts, Nintendo could allow save files in the SD card. Along with getting rid of any hard limits on the number of mons you have, this would make it possible to easily transfer Pokemon between games. For example: You've a save file for Pokemon X and Nintendo releases Pokemon X+1. X+1 could scan your SD card for a Pokemon X save file and modify the necessary data so some or all of your Pokemon are transferred.

 

[Dragonbums]

Is it though? I mean, just looking at it point blank, sure. But the $5/year is, as I said already, virtually nothing when compared to a number of other subscription based games or online services (that's roughly 42 cents a MONTH at best). For all the features it'll offer (ie, easier transferring for this and ALL future games), that's not really anti-consumer.

To be honest, despite the low low price I'd say it's still anti-consumer. Like I've mentioned in my other posts, Nintendo could allow save files in the SD card. Along with getting rid of any hard limits on the number of mons you have, this would make it possible to easily transfer Pokemon between games. For example: You've a save file for Pokemon X and Nintendo releases Pokemon X+1. X+1 could scan your SD card for a Pokemon X save file and modify the necessary data so some or all of your Pokemon are transferred.

$5.00 a year is so ass cheap.
If you can afford a pack of gum every week, you can definitely afford the Poke bank.
Could they of put that on your SD card? Sure.
But SD cards are used for other things to, and personally, people lose stuff. I'd rather have my Pokemon on the official servers, than on some third party SD card.

Honestly, this is going to be how they do Pokemon transfers from now on. That means, no longer do we have to worry about whether or not our teams can be transferred over to the next gen. It also means, they don't have to waste their time programming shit minigames just to transfer over six Pokemon at a time.

You aren't paying for a service that will only be available for one game. You are paying for a service that will be there until Pokemon dies, or they convert it to something else (if/when Pokemon goes away.)