Why is it ok for Pokemon and Nintendo to releases 2 version of same games?

While some maps were similar. There wasnt really much overlap past chapter 5, which is when the split happens. And the only time you really saw much overlap was with the third and final route. Even when the maps were similar, the encounters usually werent. It also came out around the same time as StarCraft 2. Which went through the same practices.

Fates had issues. But it wasn't the primary issue with that game wasn't the greed. 2 of the three routes were just poorly designed. The only good part of Fates was Conquest.

The fact is, the game being greedy is an issue. But there were FAR bigger concerns with that game. The elephant is in the room, and it reeks, diverting attention away from everything else.

I spend around 40 euro on Conquest, I would say that was worth the money.

I spent 20 euro on Revelations. And that campaign was just a waste of cash and time. I did not bother with Birthright because of the things I had been hearing about it.

Yeah this is dumb. But I bet their analytics do not give a shit what we think about it.

I feel for the fans tho... if they pulled this crap with a MH game I would go batty or would have to cave and buy both to 'hunt them all'. Both options feel itchy

My predictions were true.😎

Remember, folks, that humans are, by their base nature, predatory opportunists. They will seek to get away with things so long as they face no consequences for it. Nintendo have yet to face any consequences for this practice.

So to answer the question; "f*** you, we're Nintendo, that's why."

Or you could have saved the $40 for the game had it came with all routes together. Its a day one game, split 3 route into dlc and versions, think about it.

Fire Emblem isn't a great example here. They made multiple full-length campaigns, each different from the other, and you could buy them together for a discount.

Pricing-wise, it was basically the same as a full game with a standalone expansion. So there's no real drama there - and besides, they improved on the practice be releasing Three Houses on the Switch with a ton of content.

As for Pokemon, the games have a huge emphasis on collecting and trading. The whole point of Red and Blue was that you couldn't get 100% of the Pokemon without trading with your friends - it encouraged interaction, more sales, etc. without really damaging the game at all (because who didn't have a friend with the opposite title?).

I've bought both for the last few gets, mainly because my partner and I tend to play them at the same time. It makes more sense than buying two copies of exactly the same game.

Indeed lol.

Need a hug?

Its a great example. Shit way back in the 90's in Resident Evil 1 on PS1 you could do Leon A and Claire B or vice versa or starcraft having 3 full separate campaigns or even Chrono Trigger on Snes having multi world multi ending adventure. Closes comparison SRPG, Tactics Ogre you have a very sizable Law, Chaos or Neutral route. Its a day 1 game and nintendo even made a special edition version containing all version of FE Fates.

Nah, those were usual response. U use to say these thing too techhog ~

Y’all are completely missing the point of Pokémon having different versions.

FE was the cash grab, not Pokémon.

Yeah, the dual releases are kinda scummy, but they can sort of wave it away with the whole trading aspect. However, remaking all the old games over and over is a buncha crap.

Anyhow, I just don't buy these games.

Originally it was made to gather attention and grow the franchise through events, but now that it is established, i dunno, works for them and makes a lot of money so i don't see them stopping.

@goldenelementxl: Even if the intent was to engage with your friends to trade this for that, I think later features such as online trading via the GTS have made this point obsolete. The first three gens get a pass, but anything beyond that is just refusing to break away from an old tradition.

I don’t see Nintendo holding a gun to anyone’s head.

EA has the surprise mechanics. Not holding a gun to anyone's head, so its fine btw.

Which they did for three houses.

Also, I wouldnt suggest anyone to play revelations or birthright. Again, people dont think of it much because there were far bigger fishes to fry with Fates, and with Three Houses, all routes came with a single package anyways.

Conquest was for all intents and purposes, a fully fledged out game. 22 of some well thought out chapters. Is really nothing to scoff at. There is a reason why all 3 games are ranked seperately, and conquest ranks really highly while the other 2 are ranked among some of the worst games in the series. With Revelations often considered the worst.

As for tactics ogre, the difference between routes was MUCH smaller than Fates was. Fates determined your entire roster, and as a consequence, what classes are available to you. Likewise, you would be going through teh same maps no matter the route, and there was very little thought put into the encounter design of those games. The story did differ quite a bit, and Law was so much better than Chaos. Whlie Neutral arguably was the darkest of the chapter 3 stuff. While Tactics Ogre choices permutated around 1/5-1/3 of your playthrough (depending on how many side quests you go through in act 4), Fates would determine Over 4/5ths of your playthrough.

Stop giving Nintendo money for this shitty practice!

Which will never happen because for some reason I can’t fathom the fans are rabid.

Most Pokemon players don't buy both versions. Most players buy one version, and many of them then trade Pokemon with other players who have the other version. The purpose was to add a social element to the game. That's how Pokemon blew up and became a cultural phenomenon.

Regardless you suggest or not people play one version or the other, the fact they separate the campaign itself was scummy. I also disagree its a full fledged out game as the other path exists from day 1 which ninty offers discounted $20. I only took tactics ogre as example as its the closes to the genre, lots of other games able to offer multiple exclusive story routes and even later FE three houses offers it.

On Tactics Ogre its very big and the game itself is much longer to finish than the whole of FE Fates. You have to choose sides by the end of chapter 1 and story progress very differently in chapter 2 and 3 but arrive at the same point in chapter 4 either u with law neutral or chaos. And the ending itself have 8 variation depending on your dialogue choices. This game originally from PS1 remastered to PSP able to do routes effectively. And its not just this game tons of other games too.

TC, have you even SEEN the state of the Pokemon (and Nintendo) fandoms of late? They make Star Wars look like a f***ing picnic. So no... no one has seen it as okay.

They haven't done that since Black and White. And no, the third versions (Yellow to Red/Blue, Crystal to Gold/Silver, etc) don't have ALL the content. Yellow couldn't let me evolve Pikachu (because that's what happens in the show to Ash's Pikachu) without trading someone else for their Raichu.

What a sheep thing to say. Do you have any proof of that? You don't. Games are for Nintendo fans, they buy everything with Nintendo written on the box, that's why its selling like crazy for more than two decades.

lol Jag is the farthest thing from a sheep.

I don't know dude, i've seen him with very sheep-like behavior as of late. He might be transitioning like many have in 2021. Soon, he might even be offended if we call him anything but a sheep.

Ultra Sun and Moon be like

@sakaixx said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

@lamprey263 said:

And then they release a third version that has what both versions have... I am surprised the masses haven't made a stinky fit about this but it does sell well so probably why they can get away with it.

They haven't done that since Black and White. And no, the third versions (Yellow to Red/Blue, Crystal to Gold/Silver, etc) don't have ALL the content. Yellow couldn't let me evolve Pikachu (because that's what happens in the show to Ash's Pikachu) without trading someone else for their Raichu.

Ultra Sun and Moon be like

Nope! Like Black 2 and White 2, that's a bit of a different story in the same region. Not like Yellow/Crystal/Emerald version at all.

@nintendoboy16 said:

@sakaixx said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

@lamprey263 said:

And then they release a third version that has what both versions have... I am surprised the masses haven't made a stinky fit about this but it does sell well so probably why they can get away with it.

They haven't done that since Black and White. And no, the third versions (Yellow to Red/Blue, Crystal to Gold/Silver, etc) don't have ALL the content. Yellow couldn't let me evolve Pikachu (because that's what happens in the show to Ash's Pikachu) without trading someone else for their Raichu.

Ultra Sun and Moon be like

Nope! Like Black 2 and White 2, that's a bit of a different story in the same region. Not like Yellow/Crystal/Emerald version at all.

Nope. B/W2 was a sequel to B/W. while Ultra Sun/Moon was just enhanced games like how story for pokemon emerald and cystal bit altered.

@sakaixx said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

@sakaixx said:

Ultra Sun and Moon be like

Nope! Like Black 2 and White 2, that's a bit of a different story in the same region. Not like Yellow/Crystal/Emerald version at all.

Nope. B/W2 was a sequel to B/W. while Ultra Sun/Moon was just enhanced games like how story for pokemon emerald and cystal bit altered.

Then how come they have been received as "different enough to warrant a purchase?" The others V3's never had this reception.

@nintendoboy16 said:

@sakaixx said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

@sakaixx said:

Ultra Sun and Moon be like

Nope! Like Black 2 and White 2, that's a bit of a different story in the same region. Not like Yellow/Crystal/Emerald version at all.

Nope. B/W2 was a sequel to B/W. while Ultra Sun/Moon was just enhanced games like how story for pokemon emerald and cystal bit altered.

Then how come they have been received as "different enough to warrant a purchase?" The others V3's never had this reception.

Idk I dont care enough to defend it. Game literally just an enhanced version and its probably big enough for people to recommends it like how the battle frontier (tower?) In emerald was really good.

B/W2 it takes place 2 years after B/W and u even play as new character and starts from a different town. Pretty sure the seasons mechanic got updated too. Forgot been a long ass time since last played it.

It's ok for all companies to release two versions of the same game. Or 10 versions, if they'd like. Some companies have even worse business practices than that which also is within their right to have.

I personally don't buy two versions of the same game, as I value my money more than that. Doesn't stop others from buying a cosmetic in their f2p game for 20 bucks, or from buying the same Pokémon game twice in order to get less extra content than from your average DLC.

I agree, it was really scummy to charge for Revelations and Birthright. Those 2 should have been free, and Conquest should have been discounted by 10 euro for being bundled with such trash. I am being dead serious. Those 2 atrocities should never have been made.

The ending in Tactics Ogre has THREE variations, not 8.

One if Catiua is Alive. This will also give you a scene with each surviving unique in your party.

The other 2 happen if the above criteria isn't met. Your ending will depend on your Chaos Frame with the 3 main factions.

Most of TO has you go through the same stuff over and over, Chapters 2 and 3, no matter which route you pick, are miniscule compared to Chapter 4, which is the same for everyone with a few permutations here and there (usually in the form of an optional battle).

Um, just a few hours ago, I posted this in another thread:

...Does that sound like a "sheep" thing to say? I thought sheep believed Mario is the greatest thing since sliced bread?

Were you around when Pokemania began in the late '90s? School playgrounds frequently had kids linking Game Boys together so they could trade Pokemon between different versions of the game. That's why two versions of the same game were created with different sets of Pokemon, to encourage trading Pokemon between players.

Other publishers: get flack for re-releasing/remastering/porting their games years later

Nintendo: releases two versions of the same game at the same time

I was straight up the perfect age for it, and fund it to be kiddy while being like 9yo or whatever i was back then. Also, i know that it was a thing back then, but this doesn't explain them continuing on the same path in the 21st century. They can easily release the missing content in a cheap dlc like everybody else. But no, they milk their nostalgic fans like its 1997.

Same as conquest and birthright. Save for few exclusives the map still the same even with different factions and story.

Sure, they could release it as cheap DLC. But a big part of what makes Pokemon is trading. If you could get just get all the Pokemon as cheap DLC, would there even be an incentive to trade?

Either way, the whole point of a business is to "milk" as much profit as it can. Nintendo can get away with "anti-consumer" business practices because it works. They have a lot of casual fans who just don't care. It's like how EA keeps releasing the same FIFA game every year at full price. They could just release DLC updates every year, but they instead release a full-price FIFA every year, because they have a lot of casual fans who just don't care. That's just business.

But what trading are we talking about? Most of those people buying these games are adults wearing nostalgia goggles. They ain't traiding pokemons in school as we were still in the 90's. The time have changed, and the Pokemon franchise did not evolve one bit. Why? Because their fans allow them to be lazy. And lets not compare this to the worst in the business, FIFA, to make it sound like milking with the Pokemon franchise ain't that bad.

There is a better example of why there is no need for versions. In even the first gen abra which you can caught in both Blue and Red, will only evolve to Alakazam if you trade.

The double pack thing is questionable though, especially with BDSP since the digital code version only has one code.

There are other ways to have trading, though those would have resulted in a concern troll thread saying that they're locking content on the cart for no reason lol

Man ... this backfired hard.

@techhog89: Oh look at this techhog89 fake rage quitting Nintendo/Switch while deep down he is still a sheep.

No it really isn't. The first 6 maps are shared, then after that they are pretty much exclusive unless they take place in the same area like The Rainbow Sage chapters. And even in those cases, encounter design varies so much.

Stop lying.

Again, there is a reason Conquest is very well regarded in the FE community while Birthright is reviled.

Most of the actual map sharing was found in the Revelations route. Where they just took maps from the other 2 campaigns.

I played all version of FE Fates I know what I am defending. Same with Tactica Ogre some maps the same but enemy placements and objectives were different.

I dont care whether its reviled or not its not my concern.

I agree with the legacy argument that jg4xchamp made. Also, it gives kids such as siblings and friends a version with which to identify. I was Pokémon Blue as a preteen, and my friends played Red. That sort of thing meant something as a kid.

Heck, I’m getting Brilliant Diamond, and my wife will get Shining Pearl. We will play through the game together but separately on our own Switches.

Yup I get it. its like selling 2 version of infamous one for bad side one for good side.

fact is its the same game with different skins.

cough vr cough. they already did lol.

Yet, reality is against what you are arguing for. Even when you entered the wind tribe town the map was completely different.

The overlap was found in the revelations campaign, not the Birthright/Conquest.

Maps in Tactics Ogre were based on the where you are on the world map. Maps dont just recycle across the 3 paths, but you usually end up playing on the same map multiple times in a single campaign. Each zone had around 2 maps, some have only one. And since you end up revisiting the same zones multiple times you end up replaying the same map in a campaign, over and over.

I liked Tactics Ogre, but its maps and encounter design were not its strong points. Especially in the PSP remake where most units had only 4 move vs 5 in the original.

Edit: I looked at the maps just to be sure. There were 5 overlaps, in a 23 map long campaign. Not counting paralogues which were all unique from eachother. Save for 3 shared ones.

Needless to say, by and large, most maps will be unique from eachother. Conquest differs from Birthright far more, than routes do in either TO or 3 Houses. Hell, they were even specifically designed for different audiences.

While I do agree that they shouldnt have been split, your argument in this thread has been absolute rubbish.

Because Nintendo is smart with money

@Maroxad: yeah that is specific chapters you showing that is different. Others chapters have same map but different objective. None of what I said is wrong as I repeatedly mention there are exclusive maps.

For tactics ogre its the world map mechanics of the game that allows it to have many more shared maps in chapters unlike FE Fates extremely linear design. The way events played depending ur alignment, u unlock maps from different points and still have exclusive stages, same as FE Fates. But Tactics Ogre also have random battles where level that not used in story route used as a stage for encounter. Regardless as said, different lengthly routes either you join the law route or join the resistances.

As mentioned, FE Fates was a greedy move by nintendo and fans somehow lick that practice, even defending this blatant cash grab when other games before and after able to combine all routes into 1 single game. Why would anyone be glad Nintendo break the game into 2 so they dont have to play the "reviled, weak" birthright route.