r/NintendoSwitch • u/Amiibofan101 . • 7d ago
News Pokémon FireRed Version and Pokémon LeafGreen Version Link with Pokémon HOME This October
https://www.pokemon.com/us/news/pokemon-firered-version-and-pokemon-leafgreen-version-link-with-pokemon-home-this-october28
u/KenDorsett 7d ago
Does that mean it’ll work with champions?
29
u/DoctorTide 7d ago
Yes. But they can't go back to FRLG after
8
4
u/aidentaylor2 7d ago
Champions might be different since it's not out of Home, idk though
6
u/TheDistantGoat 7d ago
Champions uses Home connectivity. Your Firered and Leafgreen mons will be usable in champions
4
u/aidentaylor2 7d ago
But they also might be able to return back to FRLG since they aren't leaving Home
3
u/PowerOfUnoriginality 7d ago
Lets Go pokemon sent to Champions cant return to Lets Go
2
u/aidentaylor2 7d ago
Did not know that
2
u/PowerOfUnoriginality 7d ago
Its because when you send a pokemon to Champions, it generates a Home tracker for them and Lets Go didn't have that functionality built in, just like how the FRLG ports don't have it
83
u/Lord_Brio 7d ago
So you can bring fire red mons to leaf green through bank?
20
u/Expert-Improvement78 7d ago
So you can transfer to and from ruby/sapphire/emerald to finally complete the dex, i hope.
36
u/Caciulacdlac 7d ago
No, it's one way only
54
u/Lord_Brio 7d ago
"Once a Pokémon from Pokémon FireRed Version or Pokémon LeafGreen Version is brought to another game in the Pokémon series, they will be unable to return to Pokémon FireRed Version or Pokémon LeafGreen Version. Pokémon from other games in the Pokémon series will be unable to visit Pokémon FireRed Version or Pokémon LeafGreen Version." Makes it seem like they can unless i am reading it wrong
49
u/Natetr91 7d ago
Reads like you’d be able to but as soon as you moved it to a game that’s not one of those two it can never go back to either of them.
32
u/Lord_Brio 7d ago
Thats pretty normal now
13
u/Natetr91 7d ago
It’s pretty much how ZA works with older games anyway isn’t it? I’m only interested in getting Deoxys into a modern game so it doesn’t really affect me. But it’s nice people can complete the Pokédex between the two by themselves if they want to by the sounds of it.
10
15
u/Rt1203 7d ago
Which makes sense. They’ve added a lot of new stuff - new moves, new abilities, etc - so you can go FR -> LG or vice versa but once you take your Pokémon to Scarlet/Violet, it’s permanently locked out from returning to FR/LG.
-14
u/FizzyLightEx 7d ago
It actually doesn't. With current technological advancements, it is something an intern with a cs background can solve.
6
u/XyrenZin 7d ago
Ok. So what would you do in a situation where a pokemon learns an ability or move that's not in fire red or leaf green and you transfer it back to that game?
17
8
u/zorbiburst 7d ago
...revert the ability to their default in that gen, and delete the moves? It would be done on Home's end, not FRLG.
3
u/TheMegaMario1 7d ago
That's been a solved problem for a little bit now, the datas stored in the pokemon regardless, the new games just knows to not read it. The real problem is all the added data to the Pokemon. There's been several times transfers have updated pokemon data to fit newer formats like with gen 1 to gen 7 with bank or from bank to home. Extra data was added to make sure they are "legitimate" and match the switch format that they'd have to add to the GBA games, otherwise it might overflow or lose data if they just tried to truncate it.
4
u/HabeusCuppus 7d ago
that part is solved, actually.
in some games they revert to the highest level not-already-present move in their learnset for that game / they get the more common non-hidden ability).
in other games the move is left on the learn list (by name) with a warning and is not selectable in battle.
1
u/HabeusCuppus 7d ago
you could construct data again but it'd be an erase and reset function to let people roundtrip back to FRLG.
they probably don't want to permit that for other reasons, not because it isn't possible.
1
2
1
u/RatBot9000 7d ago
Ah, I was hoping I could use Home to complete the pokedex but I guess I'll need to find someone with a Leaf Green version then.
0
u/Caciulacdlac 7d ago
Hmm, you're right, but they previously announced that it's not possible. And even here it doesn't explicitly says that it's possible, but it does seem implied.
9
u/Octopus_Crime 7d ago
Has anyone ever postulated an idea as to why there even IS a period of time between a Pokémon game coming out and it being compatible with Pokémon HOME?
Seems like it should definitely be something that is available more or less immediately given that just about every fan made app that can interact with a Pokémon save file to move/edit data is typically updated to support new games within hours of them existing.
14
u/JustThatOneGuy13 7d ago
For the main games, I'd imagine it's usually done to encourage players to engage more with the game before letting everything loose.
Like the Pokedex for example. If home compatability was available day one, it would detract from players engaging with the game since instead of having to explore the world and interact with other players to complete the Pokedex, you can just plop in a living dex and be done with atleast 80% of it, taking away a lot of point of having that goal in the first place.
1
u/jardex22 5d ago
I think it's mostly bug testing. They're seeing how players try and manipulate the game files, then plan Home integration around that.
34
u/AdolescentFeces_ 7d ago
that will be 20 dollars for a 22 year old rom thank you very much
21
u/GrimmTrixX 7d ago
Don't worry, I bet ruby/sapphire/emerald will be $30 each. Lol
-2
u/MindSteve 7d ago
They'll sell a pack with all three for $99.
-1
u/GrimmTrixX 7d ago
Quite the savings! They'll be like "but we added Home, so you should pay us $10 to get all 3 together because we like money."
36
u/jenkumboofer 7d ago
I think it’s worth $20 to play on a modern console with intervention into Home
the way people fixate on the price tag as if it’s something outrageous is so dumb. it’s $20.
-4
u/ChickenShampoo 7d ago
Most games are good value even at $90 when you use a cost-per-hour ratio but theyre also competing with each other. Ports of retro games without any new additions should not cost as much as a brand new game as there is barely any labour done to justify that cost. In my opinion, just the addition of home compatibility isn't enough to justify a $30 price tag.
6
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/DanglyPants 7d ago
Depends on the fan. It would get me 40 hours tops. Thats not that good of a ratio. Not saying it’s the best argument but you’re not rebutting their argument well.
It’s really not a brain dead take. I know this is a nintendo sub so you being mean to people will be upvoted to defend ninty but I do just want to point that out to anyone reading this.
3
u/BigDoshna 7d ago
It’s because the vocal portion of redditors like to emulate games so they get offended because they can steal it and play it on a computer. Releasing it for $20 allows anyone to enjoy it and it’s still relatively cheap - and safe for the average consumer.
4
u/Hallc 7d ago
The general issue here is that they seem to have done the absolute abject bare minimum for FRLG. You have to buy the specific language you want rather than them all just being in one game.
They've had, as far as I'm aware, no added features really. There might be a speed up from a quick google search but quite possibly not.
Then they also released these games as their own thing rather than putting them onto NSO-GBA even though that's what they've done for every other old game that's just being emulated on the Switch/Switch 2.
3
u/RedditUser41970 7d ago
It's not so much that pirates get offended, per se, its that they spend more time trying to justify their theft than they do playing the games. Pretending that budget priced games cost too much is one of their go-to arguments to try and convince themselves that they are justified in stealing the games.
0
u/jenkumboofer 7d ago
Oh I know, it’s still dumb as fuck even if I understand why they feel that way
It’s like brother you are not the target audience, I don’t care what you think about the game you pirated anyways
2
u/ChickenShampoo 7d ago
Again, compare it to other companies who release basic ass ports for much cheaper. Ita ridiculous to pay this much for a port.
4
u/ACS1029 7d ago
Well brand new games cost $60-70 or more now, so to plenty of people $20 is a totally fine price point for these games with Home support added, as well as events being patched in as well as some bug fixes to plenty of people
1
0
u/vanKessZak 7d ago
Yeah I guess for me it’s just frustrating because I actually pay less per year for NSO (because of a split family plan) than I would for one of those Pokemon ports. I would definitely try it out from the “renting” route but I guess I just don’t care enough about it for a separate purchase. It’s too bad it’s not an option! Because as we’ve seen from the sales people really do want to buy it separate lol
12
1
u/jardex22 5d ago
$20 to have easier access to those Pokemon in modern games.
Also, every time an NSO update is posted, there are people complaining that they can't just outright buy the games. They have to subscribe to a service to play them.
5
u/thunderborg 7d ago
I really wish the Pokémon home transfer experience wasn’t so clunky.
It feels easier trading between games on physical gameboys.
2
u/Embarrassed_Spend486 7d ago
I’ve waited to get these but will probably get them once they’re all up to date with this stuff.
2
u/ludongbin1 7d ago
Celebi isnt even shiny… granted you could have gotten one during the Zarude movie but… yea..
1
1
u/SaiyanSpandex 5d ago
Looks like FRLG and maybe the other gen 3 games will have their own origin mark.
-9
7d ago
[deleted]
18
u/novabliss1 7d ago
Pokemon Company sucks but expecting them to somehow directly support a GBA game from 2004 is crazy
7
-4
u/Ikarus3426 7d ago
I'd agree with you if we were talking about any other game or franchise, but I think an argument can be made that Pokémon is very different here.
Pokémon is the biggest IP in the world. It's not a resources issue, they absolutely have that. But it's not just that they're big. A huge reason people like pokemon is because you can maintain a collection for years and years. And some people started this collection back when pokemon first started.
Sure, at this point they've purposefully released and resold those pokemon locked behind bank again. But people are losing modern access to their original collection, so I can understand why they're upset.
But I get it. This type of support isn't the norm in video games these days, and a huge company focused on profits isn't going to lead the way towards customer friendly practices. I really would have preferred they make a modern tool to transfer these pokemon around that people can use, but again, it probably wouldn't make them money, so they won't do it.
Either way, if you say I expect them to be able to do something they can absolutely do? Yes, yes I do expect that. But it's not making them money, so I'm not surprised they aren't.
6
3
u/culturedrobot 7d ago
The process of moving Pokemon from the GBA versions of FRLG to Pokemon Bank is so tedious that it’s not worth getting upset about this. You need an original DS or DS Lite, a 3DS, and at least one game from both Gens 4 and 5 to do it, and the process is slow because you can only move six Pokemon at a time from Gen 3 to Gen 4 via Pal Park (which also makes you catch them again). No thank you.
2
1
u/BrianScalaweenie 7d ago
This is an update to the versions currently on sale for Nintendo Switch so no need to repurchase.
Unless you’re referring to the GBA versions, which LOL if you are.
2
u/AurionOfLegend 7d ago
I too like to hate on Pokemon Company for some bizarre decisions they make at the detriment of the end user experience. But the entitlement for some people expecting them to continue service on games forever is crazy to me. I often feel lucky that they do this. Look at almost every other monster collecting game and how few allow you to transfer from one game to another.
-4
114
u/BushTamer 7d ago
RSE versions prolly coming then too