The official student newspaper of University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire since 1923.

The Spectator

The official student newspaper of University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire since 1923.

The Spectator

The official student newspaper of University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire since 1923.

The Spectator

I hope the Pokémon leaks are true

Can they give us one more good Pokémon game on the Switch?
If+these+games+are+real%2C+I+will+be+happy.+If+they%E2%80%99re+not+real%2C+then+so+be+it.+This+franchise+is+losing+me+and+many+others%2C+though%2C+so+whatever%E2%80%99s+next%2C+I+certainly+hope+it%E2%80%99s+a+good+one.
If these games are real, I will be happy. If they’re not real, then so be it. This franchise is losing me and many others, though, so whatever’s next, I certainly hope it’s a good one.

Those who wish to avoid all potential Pokémon leaks, turn back now.

At 11:05 a.m. on Tuesday, Feb. 6, an anonymous user posted an alleged leak of the next games in the series on message board site 4chan. It has been making its rounds on the internet since.

The user claims that the next entries in the series will be another Let’s Go game, set in the Johto region. The games will also serve as remakes of Pokémon Gold, Pokémon Silver and Pokémon Crystal.

The rumored games, Pokémon Let’s Go: Wooper! and Pokémon Let’s Go: Togepi!, would also be the last entries in the franchise on the Nintendo Switch.

Story continues below advertisement

I, for one, hope the leaks are true. This franchise has been inconsistent at best on the Switch. The first Let’s Go games were the first Pokémon games on the console, but are still the best ones visually. 

Let’s Go: Pikachu! and Let’s Go: Eevee! received a mixed reception upon release thanks to their de-emphasis on battling, a staple of the series. Instead, these entries focused on the catching aspect of the games to appeal to players of 2016’s worldwide craze Pokémon Go.

I believe that the games accomplished what they wanted to. The catching being confined to motion controls was a silly addition, but otherwise the games accomplished what they wanted to accomplish. 

After the Let’s Go games, we got Pokémon: Sword Version and Pokémon: Shield version. They received criticism upon release for graphics and story but kept the core Pokémon gameplay formula intact.

2022’s Pokémon Legends: Arceus felt like a glorified tech demo. The game played well, deviated from the formula of the series and showed how much untapped potential it had. The graphics and performance, however, left plenty to be desired.

Disaster struck on Nov 18, 2022. Pokémon: Scarlet Version and Pokémon: Violet Version released worldwide. The game was and still is plagued with technical issues and looks worse than some games from 20 years ago. That’s without mentioning the add-ons.

If Wooper and Togepi are real, we will at least receive a game more visually impressive than the rest of the Pokemon games on the system. For me, that is only one of the many positives.

I liked the Let’s Go style of gameplay. It de-emphasized battling, yes, but that was advertised. We were told that the emphasis would be on the catching, and that’s what was delivered.

Above all, I want another game on the Switch that lives up to what Pokémon can be. The series has made literal billions of dollars, yet Scarlet and Violet look worse graphically than a good number of games from 20 years ago. 

Scarlet and Violet just received the last of their Downloadable Content, and in my opinion, it was garbage that looked and played terribly. But hopefully, we’ll get some news soon. 

The Pokémon Company has labeled Feb. 27 as Pokémon Day, as it is the day the original games hit store shelves in 1996. They have a Pokémon direct each year on this day, a video in which they update and announce goings-on in all things Pokémon.

If these games are real, I will be happy. If they’re not real, then so be it. This franchise is losing me and many others, though, so whatever’s next, I certainly hope it’s a good one.

Tolbert can be contacted at [email protected].

Leave a Comment
More to Discover

Comments (0)

The Spectator intends for this area to be used to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Comments are expected to adhere to our standards and to be respectful and constructive. As such, we do not permit the use of profanity, foul language, personal attacks or the use of language that might be interpreted as libelous. The Spectator does not allow anonymous comments and requires a valid email address. The email address will not be displayed but will be used to confirm your comments.
All The Spectator Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *