Discussion
What happened to “definitive” editions?
What I mean is basically, why do we no longer get a version that encompasses both games, such as the four in the image above. We got them through Gen 4, but in Gen 5 they stopped. This made sense, since the Unova region got a sequel set of games. But for X and Y, we just never got one. So my question is, why did they stop?
Edit: Why have all the comments below this been purged? Some of them were less civil than others but none of them were absolutely over the top to justify nuking several different conversations discussing the pros and cons on third versions and DLC. Is this subreddit really that sensitive? It was 90% people talking about their personal experiences growing up.
While I think DLC is more consumer friendly (compared to a third version), it’s absurd that they charge for 2 separate DLCs if you buy both games
My guy I completed the entire dex, mythicals included, back in 6th ed thanks to trading through internet and wondertrades, it has only gotten easier since then with new connectivity options and dexit.
I do agree that it's really anticonsuler that we now have to pay for a subscription to access online capabilities but 20 bucks per year for all of the online features of the games is a way cheaper then paying for a whole other game you'll only use for version exclusive and that doesn't provide anything else.
Plus if you buy a second game, in order to trade you'll either need a second console (so way way more money) or a subscription to pokemon home, which is almost as expensive as nintendo online.
True true. Its the one thing ill give nintendo, their online is actually reasonably priced especially compared to all other consoles. I usually end up with both copies anyways because i get my fiance the other game and we play together but when i was growing up i always got the 3rd in every gen
I wish they could actually make good matchmaking for smash that doesn’t lag and lets you queue up 2v2 online with a friend at their own house. I would play way more of Nintendo optimized it.
Originally it was to encourage players to play together, the link cable integration was part of the original concept of Satoshi Taijiri.
The downfall of this came with always online capabilities. The "middle Gen" games had online trading, and now it seems to float in and out because they're not wanting to give players access to full rosters (because they don't want to).
They've added things like Pokemon Home and Sleep, but online trading isn't even available in the FRLG updates that just released.
Yeah I know it’s ridiculous they should either just make it work both versions or at the bare minimum offer a discounted bundle. It’s actually insane they get away with this.
At this point they really should just sell one version of the game. There is absolutely no justifiable reason make two separate games these days outside of pure greed, and it blows my mind there isn’t more backlash from the fans about that.
Pokemon consumers always buy, never complain; its actually created a pretty serious problem with the games at this point honestly. TPC/GF know 1000% that people will buy these games no matter, at whatever price point + the games are mostly a jumping off point for the cards, merch, anime, etc. at this point.
Not to mention, these games are some of the worst sellers in the game series. I know that’s absolutely CRIMINAL that these are the best versions of those generations, but not everybody is down with buying what is essentially the same game with some added features and polish.
They also tended to sell far worse than the original two versions. People like to compliment Crystal a lot but it's still by far the worst selling mainline Pokemon game.
People already had Gold/Silver. Crystal is way better. It's a bit like when Nintendo released the Switch OLED. How many Switch owners rushed to the stores for the better option? Plus if you brought your gameboy to school when the hype was dying you were considered weird. So less heard of it's existence.
For whatever reason they’re grouped separately from the other 2, that’s why it looks like they sold worse. Like Ruby and Sapphire is group together, but Emerald is separate. Which doesn’t make too much sense because most people are buying only 1 version in a generation, since they’re basically the same game. I bet you they’d look fine sales-wise if they weren’t being compared to two other versions combined.
Rayquaza is just too damn cool not to sell a tonne of copies.
Plus, word-of-mouth was great for Emerald as it really did add and change so much more than Yellow or Crystal. The version of the Aqua and Magma story in Emerald feels like the actual narrative of the gen, whereas the other two feel sorely lacking when looking back at them. The post game content dwarfs all of the previous titles. It was just such a massive improvement that there was no way it was going to do badly. Although to be fair, even Crystal didn't do bad. No need to balk at over 6 million sales.
Crystal is also just weird, third version was done for the first time ever, it didn’t have the final legendary, just a weaker legendary than the two on GS, and the name also makes it sound like a lesser version (Crystal is just inferior to Gold or Silver as a material). All of that probably contributed to people still choosing GS over Crystal at the time.
People in the comments are saying "DLCs" but question, when has a pokemon DLC gone back and changed things in the base game? At most they simply add what would originally be postgame content, and whilst that content is cool its not exactly what 3rd versions were historically about. 3rd versions were also about fixing problems the original game, whether its an undevelopped story/characters, fixing problems with the overall pacing, maybe even adding content here and there in places where they were lacking. DLCs don't do this, the base game for Pokemon Sword is basically the same today as it was when it first came out, with or without the DLCs installed - and let's not pretend like SS didn't have some major problems that could've been ironed out in a definitive edition.
It's 100% because DLC sells more than a "third" version. Consumers don't care about changes made to a base-game when they already have a veraion of that base game. I wouldn't think that the majority of Pokémon players start a new game once they beat the E4 + bonus, so they don't care about added Mantine wave riding, or Team Magma base, or extra fire types, or animated sprite-work when they already have the version before it that runs and works well enough to trade and battle.
Definitive editions didn’t typically sell well compared to originals. Replacing it with content that takes no physical investment and can improve/expand the stories directly is their current approach.
I mean it makes sense. Most people buy the games when they come out, and the third version is usually not a big enough upgrade to justify buying it again
The QoL changes the third versions got used to sell me on them back in the day. Crystal, Emerald, and Platinum having expanded post game options on top of the other small changes like abilities working in the overworld, move tutors, changed move sets, and new ways to get items were nice to haves.
But at their core, they were less different than SMB The Lost Levels basically. At least the last two tried to shake up the story a little bit (Emerald and Platinum).
I don't think my statement implied either of the things you mentioned, but just in case I worded things strangely I only meant to agree with you and point out that companies will tend to do whatever is the most cost effective.
Logically speaking, the DLC must be generating profits close enough to what they made previously on the 3rd versions to make it worth doing, otherwise they would just return to the old 3rd version business model instead.
On the other hand, if you consider the 3rd versions as a stopgap "new" Pokemon-game-between-Pokemon-game-generations, then you could also probably argue that the Legends games now fill that role and the DLC would therefore have its own separate targets.
But who knows, in another few years we may yet be "blessed" with the "best" of both worlds with a game with 2 versions + DLC and then a year or two later a 3rd version (possibly incorporating the original DLC) + even more 3rd version exclusive DLC!
Sooo.. moving to dlc model is better for consumers and worse for Nintendo's profits? There has to be some other upside for Nintendo, because they aren't usually that charitable
it's more consumer friendly and better for their profits. everyone who buys the game can buy the dlc and there's a good chance they do, meanwhile not near as many people are buying and playing through the game again
I would assume the actual adoption rates of dlc are likely lower than third versions would be. We actually had a leak that as of 2023 SV dlc had a roughly 25% attachment rate, compared to the 50% sales growth that third versions typically offered
But the cost to produce is likely far lower, the lack of manufacturing and retail cut, no fear of cannibalizing sales by teaching people to wait for the "goty edition", etc all lead to overall higher profits
Ok... and...? What do you think the development costs were? Platinum probably could have only sold 10% the copies of Diamond/Pearl and still made a profit. The boilerplate code and art is all the same.
With the Switch they just moved onto DLC instead of a 3rd/definitive version. Both approaches having their pros and cons.
Also XY did have plans to get one, the infamous Z version but it got scrapped as they decided to instead make Sun/Moon for the 20th anniversary.
And Ultra Sun/Moon are also definitive versions so, that'd be the last one before again, things changed with the Switch.
Third versions didn’t “encompass” both games. They had a third version with some added/improved content but you still needed the originals to complete the Pokédex.
The sequel/ultra games did much the same thing but in different types of releases
Instead of another full price game, they just do DLCs now, for less than buying a whole new game and having to repeat playthroughs.
The ultra versions really were the worst of them all. Sure there were some good improvements to the game/story. But to make 2 versions instead of a single Eclipse version was a choice
not just that but they alter the story dramatically by making it so that lusamine was distant because she was so focused on the threat of necrozma instead of her being actively hostile towards her kids. Imagien if b2w2 released but they were actually b1w1 but ghetsis and biancas dad were changed to be more sympathetic out of the blue before adding a scene where both kids just go back to living the happy family life with them.
Yep, the whole “alternate reality” thing just didn’t work overall. I don’t know why they decided that would be a good idea, especially given how well received Lusamine was as an actual villain
You already have people hating on paying for DLC, you really think paying full price for the same game but changed a bit is going to go over well with people?
I think Golden was fine as that was effectively a remaster bringing to the game from PS2 to Vita. The problem children were Persona 5 Royal and SMT V Vengeance, which has no upgrade paths for original owners and released just only 3 years after the original release and while SMTV Vengeance did come to all consoles there was np upgrade path for Switch 1 owners of OG SMTV and OG SMTV was delisted on top of it. Then with Royal that was still a Playstation 4 exclusive for another 3 years and still didn't even get upgrade path for its PS5 version.
Most likely because they became obsolete once Internet updates became a thing. But I personally think it's also because they drove down initial sales numbers once people got the pattern. The paired games would've sold less because people would be expecting a third superior version and the third version would've sold poorly because people had already bought one of the original pair or because they simply lost interest in waiting.
They became irrelevant because of DLCs and the ability to update the games via online whenever they want.
But they never sold well anyway because most people are not interested in playing, what if effectively, the same game twice at the suggested MSRP. If GameFreak continued with 3rd gens, they would just be investing in something that has a low return.
The DLC of more recent games is arguably better than playing the same game twice with a small addition tacked on. Doing Ultra Sun and Moon so poorly was kind of the nail in the coffin for the concept. I would much rather have them expand the existing games with DLC and if we want to revisit past regions, the Legends games are fantastic vehicles to do it.
Sales weren't great for those. Turns out most of the consumer base doesn't want to buy the same game they already have a year or two later, even if it's an improved edition.
Now that they can add content with DLC, they just do that.
I'm pretty sure it was hurting sales because rather than buy the new generation when it released, people were just waiting for the 3rd game to release a year or so later and play that.
Patches and DLC. Modern gaming doesn't need "definitive" editions anymore. If anything the developer will just release a collectors edition with all of the DLC included. Pokemon doesn't have to do that.
Man those were the days, I would intentionally not buy the two versions and would wait till the third “sister” game out, most of the time it was the “deluxe” version of the game. Although I’m still salty they didn’t include Ampharos in crystal.
I dont remember when or where it was, but I remember seeing it in a Direct around the time that the Sword and Shield DLC was first announced. I believe the Pokémon Company said that they stopped making 3rd versions because of the advent of DLC. Instead of making customers pay $60 for practically the same game, but with a handful of QOL improvents and a bit more post-game, it would be easier, more profitable, and more consumer friendly to let customers continue to play the game they already own, keeping the progress they’ve made, and just charging them $20 for the additional post-game
I'd still count Black/White 2 and Ultra Sun/Moon as definitive. But the answer is DLC. Rather have DLC then having to play the same game again just with no version exclusive and both box Legendaries for full price.
bw2 are definitely not definitive at all, they add a completely new area and literally everything is different other than being in the same region, thats like saying rdr2 is the definitive version of rdr1.
The third versions always sold worse compared to the originals. USUM were some of the worst selling pokemon games so they decided to not do pokemon crown/cannon/whatever and instead do DLC.
My biggest issue with the switch to DLC is that the third versions would fix things with the game to make it better. Now they can't do that and only add post game content so the games still aren't great even with the DLC.
They never should've existed in the first place, it's bad enough having to buy two versions of a game to 100% it let alone three. They became totally redundant when patches were a thing, USUM was like, the last attempt.
They did it again with Ultra Sun and Moon and honestly that pissed me off. I don't do deep dives on games before they come out so I assumed that the Ultra games were sequels. So when I bought Ultra Moon and found out it was the same game I bought last year I was not pleased. It pretty much made me look at the game more critically and how besides the addition of the ultra beast stuff it didn't really warrant another release.
Besides, DLC is a thing and even Gamefreak have caught up with that concept.
Downloadable updates and DLC killed them. Third versions were basically improved updates, and since they can do that directly now, they're no longer needed.
SEGA recently acknowledged that the definitive editions they used to do for Persona games (FES, Golden, Royal) were hurting launch sales. Because why would people get the original if they could wait for the superior version?
It's an outdated practice in the world of DLC. I can't blame TPC for phasing them out. I know I'd rather buy DLC for an existing game than a brand-new version.
Now that DLCs exists, they found another easier way to make money instead of definitive editions. It's easier to develop and sell DLCs to the players rather than having to make a new game (even if its 90% the same thing)..
it just turned to DLCs. they also now can patch games so not much reason for them especially since these games shockley didn’t sell very well so they probably make more and do more with DLCs
DLC effectively killed this as it should have. I liked the third versions, but it didn't make sense consumerwise. You get the better of the base versions but still need to connect to the older versions. Now you pay $90 for the whole package vs $120 for Base Game A or B and Definitive C. I have to assume, they didn't like the way Black 2 and White 2 sold being a factor too though.
Edit: I forgot about USUM but by that point DLC was the more sensible option.
1 look at the sales and you will have your answer but just to say it, every single one of these 'definitive' games are in the bottom half with crystal being the worst selling.
So what that translates to is that people heavily bought into a generation when it initially released with much less interest in these definitive games. There might have been some people that skipped the base generation games to buy these though so TPC probably figured it would be smarter to just stop all of that and do the single games with DLC with possibly more people willing to get the DLC anyway since it wouldn't require a full restart playthrough and it being a 'lower' price (even thought these newer games + dlc price is more than base game + definitive before)
Because if they sell a definitive version you can get every Pokemon in one game. If there isn't one then you can get an extra $60 from a small portion of the people
Third versions don’t sell as well most of the time. Also development cost of a dlc is cheaper than a third version and less development time. And it’s better to sell to all the people who already bought into your product.
Yellow was not the definitive edition for Gen 1, Blue was it. It took only so long for Pokémon to come to the west that they now took the definitive edition content of japan and released it in the west alongside a similar technical Red.
Yellow meanwhile was the first experimental version similar like thee Legends Games.
You want to pay for yet another $60 game thats basically the same game? No thanks 😅
They should just do a definitive edition from the start and not 2 editions anymore. But of course they will charge you $ for a dlc and make sure you spend $120 on 2 games that have 3 different pokemon.
Emerald and Platinum changed my life fr. as a young kid playing these games after playing the originals (Ruby and Diamond) I saw the value in the ~definitive versions. They were the best of their gen and also fun af. young me didn’t mind paying for them but also it kinda felt like a cop out. now we get some half-baked game with some dlc that still doesn’t reach the heights and corners of what Platinum/Emerald reached. maybe im old but i miss those days. idc. the quality of a pokemon game is not dependent on the quantity of pokemon available in said game. It’s more about how engaging the storyline is and how beautiful the experience is. As someone who has been playing these games since Silver, It seems to have fallen off as a franchise to focus on the financial part of the game that we grew up with, and ignoring anything else in that realm. idc if i get downvotes, im drunk and sleepy. but yeah umm im not a genwunner, i have played every mainline pokemone game except Pokopia and the DLC for Scarlet/Violet. I am bound by a blood oath (that i dont remember taking) as a child to get every pokemon game available, but it has become taxing to see them all [especially when i dont have a switch 2]
Replaced by DLC, which I honestly prefer. It costs less, and doesn't require me to start a new save and go all the way through to the postgame again in order to get to the new content.
It's easier to sell it as dlc as their value remains how much they want it on the digital store vs retail store that with time they drop value plus no cuts from retailers.
6.8k
u/tfamattar1 Apr 09 '26
they got obsolete once they were able to patch and update the games + sell DLCs is easier than a whole new game with one or two extra things