how is preventing your opponent from dragging out the game a bad decision. you just told everyone here that you play stall.
tell me you have never played competitive without... you get the joke i cba to finish it
(in descending order) balance, offense, offense, offense, ho, ho, offense, ho, ho, offense, balance, balance, ho, offense (with another ho as most recent team on another device)
yeah i play stall don't i. wanting a single good recovery move with non-zero distribution is stall isn't it. you also say that like being a stall player is some absurd taboo that should never be told to anyone which is just peak comedy lmao
its not artificially adding difficulty. If someone wants an easy way through a game, they should get one. its not their fault you are a competitive level player who goes out of there way to get one of the few pokemon with dragon dance.
this is besides the point i'm trying to make. this game marketed itself and treats itself as a choose-your-own-path kind of game; if that's the case, the path i want to choose is the path that i go around the region. if i encounter a brick wall, tough shit; in a game like elden ring for example, i can do starscourge radahn (a mid-game boss) as
the first boss, and i can beat him undergeared and underlevelled by simply playing well enough, which is why no level scaling works in that game. mons does not have that luxury; unless you go out of your way to access the stupid stuff like x items and dragon dancers, as i said, then choosing your own path is met with a big "fuck you, come back later" sign when you get to something later than intended, which sort of goes against the entire point of choosing my own path (as the game is essentially telling me my choice was wrong) and thus essentially the main draw of the game.
in terms of post game, I was referring to area zero.
area zero itself is quite good. but area zero is the only bit after the main credits that is actually worth playing. for most games with DLC, the DLC itself is almost always considered part of the post-game, even when it isn't actually locked to the post-game. with my quarrels with the DLCs just being extensions of the main game and offering essentially nothing new, when i already didn't like the base game, this essentially makes area zero the only playable section.
very overhyped. the only bit of the plot that is remotely interesting is area zero (distinctly not terapagos; the base-game's area zero content + the sada/turo kitakami encounter only) because actual stuff happens. nemona essentially has no plot being a mindless "see battle, do battle" robot, arven's attempts charm but just misses the mark and comes off as uninteresting, who the fuck cares about penny lol. mons plots being bad is sort of just a given though, which is why i didn't initially fault the game for it.
you probobly just saw the big numbers. if you look at the top, it got some 7/10s by critics.
and you did not actually read the reviews.
reviews are obviously going to be skewed towards extremes just by human nature. i'm looking through some of these text-based reviews and a lot of these are either around the 6-7/10 range (which, to be clear, is
the baseline for most games to even be considered playable in today's landscape), but a lot are also lower and not very many being higher than that range. this is obviously just going to be subject to sampling bias to some degree, but i'm just going off of the first pages of google, which seem to have a below-par outlook for the game (and especially the DLCs), though perhaps not extreme as mine.