Item Traps in Pokémon Games?

Games have a way of making players do certain things by compulsion or force. Perhaps that could be considered true for Pokémon games as well in certain respects. One way that could happen is by forcing players to use up certain game items in order to make progress in the games at certain points; this is what I would define as "item traps". Now, I'd like to make the argument that the situations in some Pokémon games can also present themselves as "item traps" for their specific cases.

Some of those "item traps" may lie in the puzzle spinoff games: most recently, Café Remix has some stages that practically require certain Pokémon to clear, but even then that's not enough, since the same stages practically require items to enhance the skills of the Pokémon. While some players may chalk up the possible misplay of the stages due to inexperience or not enough time spent, the fact of the matter is that somehow the items present their necessity, thereby realizing them as "item traps".

Meanwhile, in Pokémon Go, if one used a Bottle Cap for a Pokémon, the higher-level tasks of Hyper Training for the IV stat of HP feature tasks of earning Candy for a Buddy Pokémon by walking with them. If the Bottle Cap was used for a Legendary or Mythical Pokémon - and most Trainers are expected to do so - that invariably means walking 20 km for each Candy, unless they get them excited manually (which is possible but time-consuming) or use a Poffin (which is instant but... it's an item, and thus an "item trap" lies in wait). Granted, the usage case is very specific, but the "item trap" can present itself in that case.

For the main series games, if the act of giving a drink to the Saffron City guards is considered an act of compulsion, and so would be the use of items in Trainer battles involving the CPU by both sides, then these could be loosely considered "item traps" by the definition above. They aren't strictly "item traps", but they're sufficiently demanding situations that in some ways do prompt the usage of items in order to continue progress.

There are likely to be more examples of "item traps" in Pokémon games that have escaped my mind, the scope of my Pokémon gameplay experience, and the creation of this write-up, but the situations that prompt them to appear should be quite evident by the above examples. In any case, usage of items is essential for Pokémon games or otherwise, but it cannot be denied that at certain points, the usage becomes not only essential but down right needed so that one's progress doesn't come to a screeching halt.

One year ago: The Little Big Problems of TCGP

Two years ago: Too Many Simultaneous Events in Pokémon Unite?

Three years ago: Brandon's Back in My Town!!!

Four years ago: The Hisui Cup of GBL

Five years ago: Good Game, Poor Communication?

Six years ago: Get Going for School, Pokémon Style

Seven years ago: Increased Limits in Go... Indefinitely?

Eight years ago: Cosplay: YASUMI

Nine years ago: Perfection and Excellence

Speedrunning Features

Many Pokémon games have lots of features that add bulk to the games and give outlets of aspirations for players (Trainers, partially depending on the game) to work on and pursue. Not surprisingly, it is also that "bulk" that makes things hard for them, with particular regard of dealing with them - with speed, no less. With that, I had a thought about the specific concern of making "speedruns" with them in more than one respect, and I've decided to try to write a little something about that... perhaps in a bit of a speedy manner as well.

In one sense, the "speedrunning" is for testing through them - which many should so that others don't have to, and especially so if the player is marked for beta testing as with the case sometimes in Pokémon Go. Even if testing isn't a concern (or more specifically, is already done), it may be that they're needed for certain purposes that players need, for example leveling up (Pokémon Go) or facilitating Pokémon transfers (with relation to the main series). In that case, speed may be of some absolute importance for getting things done.

Outside of the games, there may be the need to understand the features quickly, whether that would be for personal needs or the need of sharing that understanding with others. The latter evidently can take many forms from the verbal to the visual, perhaps including what you're reading right now. The speed may also be relative, depending on the Pokémon game and the relevant player base, but if the need for speed presents itself, then the players in the player base can and do have a way of making it happen - a bit of comfort and motivation.

Speed may or may not be a necessary aspect of the features in question for the Pokémon games, but the concern of "speedrunning" through the features may be something that makes itself necessary according to the player bases of the games and what the aims of that "speed run" may be. Given the "bulk" of the games, which may be a partial result of the features in question, there could also be the need to downplay that bulk and allow the players in the player base to pursue and work on more aspirations than ever before with a "speed run".

Now, I think I've got a bit of feature "speedrunning" to do in my own (Pokémon) case...

One year ago: Dreaming of "The Chase"

Two years ago: (More on) The Funko Pop! Figures

Three years ago: Translation Issues in Café Remix?

Four years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day Repeat, 7/16/2022

Five years ago: Pokémon Go Fest 2021, Day 2

Six years ago: Team GO Rocket's Aerial Attacks

Seven years ago: The State of Nominations

Eight years ago: The Eevee Identity

Nine years ago: Only One Save File

Changing the Year Mention Convention

As part of their attribution, Pokémon games mention the year of their first release, which many players (Trainers) will have seen at least once when they start up the games in question. In the most recent time, however, this has changed to a somewhat radical approach, which would be... not mentioning it at all. This change might be a small thing, but it may be considered to have some implications, and therefore I thought about discussing it, how it applies (or has applied), and what this might mean for the Pokémon games in question.

Those who play Café Remix, Unite, and TCGP will likely have noticed this recently as they loaded up the respective games, looked toward the attribution notice on the title screen, and found that the year that is usually present there has gone missing - which is how I personally found out about it through playing said games. Again, it's a relatively small and recent change: for many, it may possibly go unnoticed, and not too long ago, the year had still been present on the games that I have mentioned above. It's also a sudden change after many, many years of maintaining the (previously) established convention.

The change can be considered to be in line with this year's big Pokémon anniversary, since if it really had been willed as such, it would have occurred a lot sooner - as in, even several years ago would have been a prime time for the change to occur. Meanwhile, the presence of the year that indicates a time that has somewhat passed might be perceived by some players (Trainers) as being something dated, so the removal of the year in a way also removes such a perception and allows the game to remain perceived as "current" even if it's not - as well as furthermore "relevant", which may be a bigger thing given a certain game.

A change in the way that attributions are made in certain works (for games and beyond) may be small, but it is still possible to draw out certain messages. In the case of the Pokémon games above - and others I might have missed - the change that is made with the removal of the year in the attribution can indicate that such a mention may not matter anymore given how long Pokémon in general has been around. What matters then would be the games continuing to make history, no matter what year it may be.

One year ago: Cosplay: ChibiCon 6 x ICC & ICGP Finals 2025

Two years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day Classic, 6/22/2024

Three years ago: The Eternal Pokémon Fanfare

Four years ago: The Catch 'Em Battle Arena

Five years ago: All for a "Pokémon (Pikachu) Meal"

Six years ago: Dub Absence, Again

Seven years ago: Tournament+Cosplay: Club 40 Indonesia Tournament

Eight years ago: Food Chain Axioms

Nine years ago: Technology, Good and Evil

Referencing Pokémon Lineage

Pokémon fans are well-versed in the fact that many of the eponymous species have a certain lineage, being the way that they relate by way of evolution. This is a part of what makes them fascinating, but it also leads to the issue of how they can and should be referenced by virtue of that aspect. It's an issue that I'm now tackling in a discussion to consider various points of view that relate to it and what ultimately can and should work best.

For that, TCG and Pokémon Go may provide the answer. Many Pokémon of lower evolution stages in the former are called "Basic" Pokémon, and that makes for a sufficient reference for them. Meanwhile, in the latter game, evolution lineages depend on the Candy of a certain species, and they roughly correspond to Basic Pokémon, which would affirm them being called as such. As for later evolution stages, they would be sufficiently referenced as "Stage 1" and "Stage 2", following what the TCG outlines.

As for further evolution forms on top of that (Mega Evolution, Gigantamax, and onwards), they can be considered just further "extras", since the games deal with them in different ways, including both games mentioned above. Yet they also correspond in seemingly being able to be considered as "ultimate" forms - a consideration that will be discussed shortly - to the Stage 2 species. Inasmuch as they are dealt with differently and even exclusively, there too is an apparent commonality. 

It should be noted that other people and parties can and have referenced Stage 1 and Stage 2 forms differently - for example, treating them as ordinals in their respective evolution lines (which is still valid to some extent), or treating the Stage 2 forms as "final forms" (which is also in a way still true since a line has a "maximum" of three). These references have to be weighed alongside the above considerations and certain games, as well as the fact that there have been many developments for Pokémon and its species.

Then, there's that "ultimate" form consideration, which also implicates a consideration of "baby" forms (which is also still existent for some Pokémon) along with ordering according to age. These considerations would mostly be for shoehorning analogues to a certain other series primarily for an extent of understanding, and the real way of understanding things would be in the other ways as mentioned above.

Understanding Pokémon species and the ways that many of them are related by evolution lineage can be considered an important part of appreciating Pokémon in general, and a way of referencing this consistently is always nice to have. Fortunately, according to certain facets of the franchise, this is quite doable as per the above, and the understanding that is carried in this way can put the viewpoints of many Pokémon fans on the same page.

One year ago: My Numbered Card Progress in TCGP

Two years ago: The Unnerving Feeling and Pokémon

Three years ago: Gimmicks in Café Remix

Four years ago: Sending Champs to Be Champs

Five years ago: Remembering Missing PokéStops and Gyms

Six years ago: Pokémon Conventions?

Seven years ago: Integration Prospects

Eight years ago: More Pokémon Paper Things

Nine years ago: Poké-Crafts Made out of Paper

New Terms Involving Pokémon

Before I get into the main content of this post, I'd like to say that I had been planning to make this post for over four years, but I have never dealt with some of the elements that are to be mentioned in this post - at least, not in their actual first-hand implementation. For that, I will mention the reasons why and developments since then, after the respective elements are mentioned in parentheses (). Now, on with the actual post.

People in many fields of discipline will eventually grapple with new terms for elements that are introduced with increased knowledge or improved states of affairs in those fields. While not exactly a "field of discipline", Pokémon has a lot of things that are tantamount to that, and fans, players (Trainers), and so on have to grapple with new terms as well. Most recently (or in the most recent past), a few of these new terms have come to light for them - certainly, including me - so I thought I'd go over those new terms, three of them in fact.

The first of these new terms is "Paradox Pokémon". These are Pokémon species that look like some other Pokémon that are already known, but they're not that; they stand alone much like Legendary Pokémon or Ultra Beasts. They also come from the two times of "Ancient" (which represents the past) and "Future". Their English names are also natural words (for example, "Great Tusk" and "Iron Treads" respectively that look like Donphan superficially) rather than contrived words, and they lend themselves to the dynamics of the ninth generation.

(I still do not have the main series games of the ninth generation, which is what I was hoping to deal with before I actually cover this term. However, I did mention it briefly in an older post about "historical Pokémon", which was a necessity given the topic; the intent was still to make the first or at least formal mention in this post. Since then, as I've witnessed, they've also been present in the TCG - one way of which is to be explained soon - and there's even one example in Café Remix.)

Next comes the term of "Alpha Pokémon". Making themselves present in the Legends games, these Pokémon are of a bigger size than what is mostly expected, and they're also stronger in battle - which also becomes evident with their high IV values when taken out of those games. In those games, when present in the wild, their eyes (if they have them) are also glowing red, the nearly universal sign of something angry and fierce. At least, they can become a fierce part of one's collection as well.

(I also still do not have either of the existing Legends games, for which this term is evidently so associated with them. Yet a couple of years after the release of the first Legends game - Arceus - Pokémon Go hosted the first Go Wild Area, which featured Mighty Pokémon that essentially becomes the implementation of this concept in much the same way, pretty much minus the angry red eyes. Mighty Pokémon then stayed for the next one, and with Alpha Pokémon staying in Legends: Z-A as well, they're here to stay.)

Meanwhile, in the TCG realm, there is the new term of "Pokémon Tool". This term represents a sub-class of cards that can be attached (equipped) to Pokémon with useful effects for them. They used to be in the Item sub-class of Trainer cards before they were differentiated (in a way, expanded), and given what they do, it's not hard to see why - they can be defined, delimited, and regulated in this way. The differentiation has since occurred for cards in different sub-realms of the TCG, both past and present.

(I have no cards of this kind, at least ones that are in both English and physical form, yet I've seen them in action physically by way of my TCG fellows. More importantly, I've dealt with them electronically in some way, including in the most recent realm of TCGP, where they were introduced a little over a year ago. As with Paradox Pokémon above, that post was also waiting on this long overdue post for its first formal blurb, which was desperately necessary but now is more or less fulfilled for that.)

Fields of discipline and Pokémon have one thing in common (at the very least) in that both of them are in constant development. That process also means that new terms are very much possible for the realms of concern - and in the case of Pokémon as above, that has in fact happened. Grappling with the ones above in particular becomes - or has become, given their time presence - the concern of fans for the franchise, and doing so might just become the prompt for future (and great) developments that they can muster.

With that, this long overdue post has been written up and covered all the details that it is (was) intended to cover. Hopefully, future developments won't take so long to be covered as with these, and I would eventually be able to deal with them as intended.

One year ago: The Light and Shade of the Moon Islands

Two years ago: A Pokémon Performance Dream

Three years ago: Notes on Development Notes

Four years ago: Prankster Possibilities

Five years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day, 6/6/2021

Six years ago: Repetition for Reputation

Seven years ago: Be with You, Always with You

Eight years ago: (The Least) Local Ex-Raid, 6/6/2018

Nine years ago: Pokémon Direct, 6/6/2017

Pokémon Sites on ".gg" Domains

The ".gg" domain for web page addresses is a domain that is affiliated to Guernsey, but in real usage, it is also very popular among gamers (and web sites associated with them) because the initialism "GG" stands for "good game" - something I may or may not touch upon at a later time. Accordingly, it is also used by some Pokémon web sites, which are also popular due to the size of the fandom. With that, I thought I'd go over some of these web sites for their significance among Pokémon fans and of course the use of the above domain.

For those who deal with Pokémon Go, they'll likely recognize two websites that bear the ".gg" domain. One of those is the former The Silph Road and Silph League Arena (silph.gg), which bears mention because of the very fact that it has the domain. After its demise and with more recent developments, there is Dracoviz (dracoviz.gg) that serves half of the purpose of the former site - specifically the community or grassroots tournament aspect. Either way, the sites affirm usage of the domain to represent the game players as such. 

More recently, there is RK9 (rk9.gg) - yes, like the above is to Dracovish as this one is to Arcanine in phonetics - which serves Pokémon gaming more generally. In fact, its purpose is to consolidate info for Play! Pokémon tournaments wherever they are concerned (Europe and the Americas) with relevance for the individual pillars of the "pantheon" along with info for prospective spectators and registration aids for competitors, including for recent VGC. This site demonstrates significance for itself just as much as it does for its domain.

Certain players, specifically those for Pokémon Go in certain regions of Asia, will also likely have dealt with the start.gg web site, as that site serves as the tournament organizer for qualifiers of that game for some countries in the region. It's somewhat different (and perhaps a bit obscure) compared to how things are done for Pokémon Go elsewhere, but it bears mention for the relation to the topic at hand and its spirit.

Web sites for Pokémon affairs or otherwise can be registered with more typical domains, but specialty domains like the above have a certain spirit to it, even if technically they're more relevant to a country. The web sites mentioned above that have the particular domain and relation to Pokémon affairs of different kinds possess that spirit, and there is something to be said for what they have in common to make a "good game" just that.

One year ago: TCGP: Celestial Guardians Take Charge

Two years ago: Cosplay: "Mobile Japan Fest" [2]

Three years ago: Listen to Our Hearts

Four years ago: More Online Statuses for Pokémon Go?

Five years ago: Three Bears

Six years ago: Missed Pokémon Merchandise in Snacks

Seven years ago: Watching in Style, with Friends

Eight years ago: To Know the Unknown

Nine years ago: You Are Blessed

Region-Locked Pokémon Games

In these days, Pokémon is practically everywhere, but gaming sometimes isn't. Some games in the bigger world of gaming are only available for purchase and/or play in specific regions of the world, making them "region-locked". Pokémon has largely escaped this problem with many of its games being available in many places, yet it's the part that "didn't escape" that's still a problem. For that, the topic seems to be appropriate and worth it to be discussed, being that it has already become quite applicable.

By now, an apparent one of these should be obvious: the TCGL game is in fact region-locked. The installer (on PCs) and app (for mobile) can only be downloaded from the regions where the game is available for play. Even if the game is somehow installed, the game will check for the location of the player, and if the location isn't in the play region, the game won't allow itself to be played. It's a frustrating one for players who need the virtual TCG implementation through this game and/or already active with it.

Less apparent is one of the currently active mobile games, as Pokémon Masters EX. The game has "shuttered" its service in many locations, and it is in fact the game I mentioned would be making a "precious departure". In doing so, the game is essentially locking itself out of certain regions, even though the game continues to be developed and to be playable in other places. There may be certain reasons for doing so, given the mechanisms of the game, but that may not matter to those who become unable to play again.

Meanwhile, although Pokémon Unite itself is not region-locked, some parts of the game are, can, and have been. Being Chinese-developed, it has a player base there, and it is apparent that the players there have their own server and they may or may not interact with those outside of that server. Then, a certain World Championship event in the past has had parts of it restricted only to certain players in the world, with others being able to play through the full event. The aspect is still evident, if only elementally.

As great as it is having Pokémon in all kinds of ways to play and enjoy it, the fact remains that it's still quite possible for certain Pokémon games to be restricted to certain players in certain places. That has evidently applied to the above games to certain extents, limiting those who can play the games (in whole or in part) by location. Even aspects that apply distinctly to other games can apply to Pokémon games as well, and in this particular case, it plays into and affects the quality of Pokémon being everywhere.

One year ago: Cosplay: Ruang Cosplay First Gathering

Two years ago: In a Trainer's Bag

Three years ago: Being Surrounded by Promotional Cards

Four years ago: NADWPKMN - The Video Series: Episode #1 - An Introduction

Five years ago: Pass Challenges with Pokémon

Six years ago: Total Experience

Seven years ago: Legends Among People

Eight years ago: Pictures Worth Thousands of Words

Nine years ago: Pokkén Sentiments

Stop Killing (Pokémon) Games

Besides playing games, gamers (and other people beyond the realm) also have the interest of preserving games so that other gamers can play them as well. That becomes the key rationale behind the somewhat recent movement of "Stop Killing Games", which has the aim of ensuring the playability of games, specifically ones that require an Internet connection to play and the players spend good money on in order to play. It's a movement with some good ideals to be sure, but it can also be considered that for Pokémon, the key idea can be interpreted in a different way yet has some alignment to the original intent.

The movement itself started close to two years ago after a certain game that required online connectivity though mostly played by one got shut down, and it has gained a lot of traction since, with support from various gamers. The movement also has had some results - though perhaps of the unexpected kind - so it merits consideration in this day and age where many games are played online and many require it as such. It too has some applicability to Pokémon... including for that different interpretation I mentioned.

What I'm getting at is not "killing games" by ending their services, but by killing off their player bases by making things less accessible for new and old players alike. The recent change to way of getting Unite Licenses in Pokémon Unite is a rather potential "killer" in this regard, while event content in Pokémon Go is a minor or "shadowy" one. If the responses to these are not good enough, then their player bases will definitely be killed, which would make it easy to justify killing the games entirely - and no player really wants this to happen.

Meanwhile, the original spirit of the movement is applicable to some current Pokémon games. Unite does have an offline mode, but it's rudimentary in a way and can stand to be improved if the inevitable happens. Café Remix is currently all online - perhaps given its save data and event features - and it might be hard to translate that to an offline mode, although if it can be willed, then a way might just exist for that purpose. Yet other Pokémon games (like Pokémon Go) are not really meant for or easily translatable to offline play, posing challenges.

Games can conceivably die for certain reasons on both sides of the developmental divide, and in this day and age, online games are especially vulnerable due to the dynamics in those sides. With the given movement as above and the current state of some online Pokémon games, there is a significant imperative to make sure current games can stay as lively as possible among their players while dying games can at least have a chance at a "second life" of sorts.

One year ago: There Is a Place...

Two years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day, 1/6/2024

Three years ago: The Embers of a New Season

Four years ago: Pokémon Asia Bulbasaur Mug

Five years ago: No Scans for You

Six years ago: Pokémon Statues

Seven years ago: ...With Gatherings and Safari Zones for All

Eight years ago: More Odd Poké-Pika Things

Nine years ago: A 3DS Story

Type Matchup Guides: Fast and Stress-Free Aids

More modern iterations of Pokémon games have what I call "type matchup guides", for either the Pokémon or the moves that they use. These guides are certainly to aid the player in using them and determine how effective they'll be against an opposing Pokémon. Regarding their function, they might also be considered to have other values in their implementation, and after looking at those implementations, it could be said that those other values are to relieve stress and make things fast for the player, as fast as the circumstances may be.

In the main series games, the "guides" appear for the Pokémon moves in battle. In regular gameplay, this would be more to relieve stress as players (Trainers) go through the battles. However, since VGC gameplay is timed in both move selection and overall battle, the speed issue plays quite a bit into the presence of these "guides". They remain helpful in either case especially after their introduction, but the values above still make themselves evident in both of these cases, and that's a good thing for the concern of all those who play.

Slightly going back to the puzzle predecessor of Pokémon Shuffle, the "guides" appear during Pokémon selection to indicate which Pokémon are effective against the Pokémon for a stage. In most circumstances, this would be more for the stress relief of selecting which Pokémon can or should work, but if the selection is to be made moments before the stage expires (as for a Special Stage), then the fast aspect would no doubt play into this selection. After that, it's just a matter of dealing with the speed and stress that the stage itself possesses.

Recently, Pokémon Go had implemented the "guides" for moves in all kinds of battles - raid, Max Battle, PvE, and PvP - and it's another "little big" transformation that I meant to cover in that post but somehow I just ended up forgetting about it. Regardless, all of these battles are fast-paced, and the "guides" help out a lot with that, which could make one wonder why they haven't been implemented in any and all of them until just recently. Of course, for the stress aspect, that comes into its own along with the speed needed for all of them.

Overall, the helpfulness value of these "guides" are very high, which makes them somewhat absolutely needed for Pokémon games in modern times for experts and novices alike. The individual circumstances of the games also provide perspectives into their implementation and in particular what aspects they also help out in. According to the above, that would be the aspects of speed (being fast) and stress, relieving the latter and generating the former. As that happens, it results in a great Pokémon gaming experience in these times.

One year ago: Finding Loving People for Playing Pokémon Go

Two years ago: Brighter Days of Pokémon Youth

Three years ago: Leveling Up Pokémon in Café Remix

Four years ago: Having Pokémon Friends Over for the Night

Five years ago: I'm Gonna "GOTCHA!" Good

Six years ago: The Singapore Pokémon Center

Seven years ago: (Welcome Back to) Local EX Raid, 10/2/2018

Eight years ago: Preparing for Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon

Mega Evolution on Parade

In the past, I had discussed about Mega Evolution in different framings, a minorly pessimistic one when it apparently seemed to be put to rest, and a slightly hopeful one after it has taken a foothold in Pokémon Go. Fast-forward to today, the concept has seen a resurgence, which could be described as a "parade" of sorts; not only that, fans of the past and present are quite receptive of this resurgence and particularly how it's being presented. This current state of affairs for a Pokémon evolution form that almost became a bygone one definitely demands attention and addressing, particularly for the relevant factors contributing to it - as in the games that will feature them.

Along with the prior discussion, I had postulated that it might take something new to bring it back to prominence and provoke a good response. Now, that something has become clear: that would be Pokémon Legends: Z-A, which takes the setting of Lumiose City as the heart of Kalos, the region that heralded Mega Evolution in the first place. In fact, new Pokémon with this evolutionary form have been revealed, from Mega Dragonite during the latest Pokémon Presents to those for Victreebel, Hawlucha, and Malamar in various (and quirky) social media announcements, and just now through a "final trailer" for other expected and unexpected species. Much, much more will become clear(er) when the game gets released next month, with this cavalcade heralding that clarity.

Then there is the TCG (physical as well as Live) with the coming Mega Evolution expansion. Some of the featured forms will certainly be for the "first batch" species that fans already know and recognize, and players will need to deal with them as "ex" cards that evolve from their earlier stage forms. Obviously, there was some planning for this to coincide with the Legends game as above, and that works out well for the momentum of that game while bolstering the TCG itself - allowing it to "take part" in the parade, in a way.

Meanwhile, there has been word that over the course of the remaining part of the year, Pokémon Unite will finally implement Mega Evolution for Pokémon other than Mewtwo (that has been the pioneer and yet still the only one as such even now). They'll be a sight to see when they finally appear, and their "ground rules" may also become evident at that point, but it is clear that Pokémon Unite has offered its contributions to the parade. 

Of course, Pokémon Go will take everything into account. In fact, nearly all of the "first batch" species now have their forms in the game, or will eventually. That means the "second batch" from the new Legends game will follow suit, whether it's during this rather "form-changing" season or all the other ones that will come afterwards.

From its beginnings in the sixth-generation games, Mega Evolution truly has had its ups and downs. The momentum of the main series games that featured them is one upward moment, followed by the almost immediate downward one of their nearly becoming deprecated. Then there were just sporadic inclusions in other facets, before the current almost full resurgence with a "parade" heralded by a game that promises to be sensational. Like any parade, at least some excitement is to be had as its participants appear, and with the ones above for Mega Evolution, fans will definitely be set for a good time as they watch the "parade" pass by.

One year ago: On Half Decks and Full Decks

Two years ago: Spoiler Alert

Three years ago: Longing for Pokémon Donuts

Four years ago: The Fate of My Local Pokémon Hangouts

Five years ago: Competitor Ranks of the Silph League Arena

Six years ago: Personal Branding

Seven years ago: To Judge and Be Judged

Eight years ago: Catering to Old and New Players

Narrowing Down Pokémon Types

The 18 types of Pokémon species in the main series games and some related ones didn't come all at once; the majority of them came first and a few were added later, as I had discussed early on in this blog. That's a lot of types to consider, and there may be the thought that some of these types can be narrowed down - in other words, simplified. That has in fact happened for other Pokémon game areas or realms, and that also prompts a bit of thinking and discussion on the approaches and their generality.

For those who are versed with the current TCG era (including the modern TCGP), they work with 10 types: Colorless, Leaf, Fire, Water, Lightning, Fighting, Psychic, Dragon, Darkness, and Metal. There is quite a bit of "subsuming" of main series types with these types - for example, Bug is subsumed in Leaf, Ice is subsumed in Water, and Ghost is subsumed in Psychic. Fairy had also been included in past years as a type, but its expected members are now just subsumed under different types (examples are Wigglytuff in Colorless and Gardevoir in Psychic). The narrowing down of types here seems to work well and explains its persistence.

Meanwhile, Pokémon Unite does have "types" too, although they're not all prominent; they can be seen in the screens that deal with emblems and their collection. The "types" are Red, Green, Blue, Yellow, Black, White, Gray, Purple, Pink, Navy, and Brown - 11 of them, all based on colors rather than elementals. As would be expected, there are similar subsuming processes here, only with a few differences (like the Pink "type", which is an obvious nod to Fairy, while there is a bit of "vagueness" for dragons, proper or otherwise). It's comparably simple yet seems to demand as much of the systematics of TCG.

Given the above, it seems that when narrowing down the types, the essentially persistent and necessary ones are the "common" and "starter" types - the ones that pertain or relate to Grass, Fire, Water, and Electric, plus Normal as a supplement. The qualities of darkness and metallicity are also an apparent modern persistence. The other types have some leeway for narrowing down in their regard, especially dragons - again, proper or otherwise - which even in regular Pokémon parlance are a source of contention. These types may be slightly superfluous.

Still, with the way that the Pokémon main series games (and their derivates) are, the 18 types will continue to persist in them for the challenges that they bring. In other Pokémon (game) realms, fewer of them might just suffice to bring similar challenges, and thus a narrowing down is not only workable but also practical for one reason or another. At least, whether many or few, the challenging presence of types in Pokémon is unquestioned.

One year ago: Remembering Past and Present Sponsored Locations

Two years ago: Holowear of Interest, Revisited

Three years ago: The Summer Cup of GBL

Four years ago: My Personal TCG Equipment Wishlist

Five years ago: On the Mining of Data

Six years ago: Mementos of...

Seven years ago: Cosplay Events, Wherefore Art Thou?

Eight years ago: Connection Issues?

On the Live Service Aspect of Pokémon Games

In today's breadth of gaming, including in relation to Pokémon, games are offered for play through different mechanisms. One of those mechanisms is having the games as what is called a "live service" that players essentially "sign up" for - just like services of the non-game kind - and play it while it is active. The mechanism has a certain relevance for Pokémon games as well, and it is useful to draw insights from that through a discussion, as a post on this blog.

First, a little more about the mechanism is in order. In contrast to games that are offline, live service games are necessarily online and continuously updated as a result. Players would authenticate to play the games, and all their progress is stored online, making for easy retrieval but also making that fact even more of a necessity. Other aspects would also be able to keep the players engaged in the games... at least until some kind of an "end" presents itself.

Based on the description above, Pokémon Go fits the bill of a live service game in pretty much all respects for online authentication, record-keeping, and engagement. In fact, the fate of other similar games from (ex-)Niantic also pretty much affirms the case. The virtual TCG clients both past and present, as well as Pokémon Unite, are also essentially live service games that are heavily dependent on the online aspect to keep all of their things together to play them.

Similarly, Café Remix is also really a live service game as it is totally dependent on an online connection, in contrast to its predecessor Shuffle that can be played mostly offline and only has a few online perks (and is in fact otherwise still playable even now). The main series games have mostly kept up their offline nature, though some of their parts nowadays may necessitate them - and players - to interface online in different ways, mirroring some live service aspects.

The concern of the "end" as suggested above does raise questions for what would happen if it becomes necessary if the online part was cut. This has also resulted in some initiatives to address the issue, although there isn't yet a full resolution. Regardless, those who play the Pokémon games above that are essentially live service games may have their hands full wondering what should be done if (and when) the service becomes unavailable to them.

A live service game isn't all that bad, of course, and evidently it's already the case for some Pokémon games. Yet the characteristics that make such games what they are also present some caveats for those who engage in the games, keeping in mind that they're just like certain non-game services. No service is needed for fun, though, and knowing that, players are free to get their fun from any game they like with any mechanism - also applicable for Pokémon ones.

One year ago: Of Leeks, Ducks, and Horses

Two years ago: Remaking My Pokémon Papercraft Models?

Three years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day Goodies, Round 3

Four years ago: What It Takes To Jump-Start Pokémon Go Trainers

Five years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day, 7/19/2020

Six years ago: The First Johto Saga English Opening Theme

Seven years ago: Fast Moves and Charged Moves

Eight years ago: Movie Times

Switching Up (and Upgrading)

For those who haven't heard the news, the Nintendo Switch 2 has been released recently, along with a certain race-driven launch title that isn't quite related to Pokémon but may cause similar stirrings for its fans. Even so, this "(not-)successor" will coexist with its predecessor - as addressed previously, and for some foreseeable time ahead - and in some sense, players are to "upgrade" to it. That also applies for some of the current games for the predecessor, which also includes some Pokémon games.

The reason is that some games now have upgrade packs (free for many, paid for some) that will provide enhancements and/or new features for the console, and two of these games happen to be the ninth-generation Pokémon main series games of Scarlet and Violet. In fact, the upcoming Legends Z-A game will also be in this state, being playable on both consoles but having enhancements for the newer one. This latter game will also have more info out soon, but at least improvement is welcome for the former.

As for certain people upgrading to the console - me specifically - conventional wisdom may dictate that it may not be wise to adopt such a new console early on except to deal with the novelties, which are not too numerous at the moment and especially for Pokémon. I myself am apt to give the new console some adaptation time before deciding to take it up, especially for certain pertinent Pokémon matters. In the end, it would be for when "the time is best", not "the time is now" as many would have it.

If the new Nintendo console is of any indication, however, the best of things (as the original Switch) does not need something completely new to become something better - it just needs a better version of itself, which is practically what the Switch 2 is. That also goes for some of the existing and upcoming games, including Pokémon ones, for which "good" and "better" versions are (due) to exist for play on both consoles. In that respect, to switch up and upgrade may very well be in the futures of many sooner if not later.

One year ago: Not Alone... But Alone

Two years ago: The Mystique of 151

Three years ago: Knotting Destinies and Love

Four years ago: The Mystique of the Slowpoke Well

Five years ago: Good Storage Limit Counts

Six years ago: I'm a "General"!

Seven years ago: Viewpoints and Preferences

Eight years ago: Hounds and Hyenas, Canines of the Dark

Ties or Draws in Pokémon Games

Many Pokémon games will surely (and demand to) have battles that result in a victory for one side and defeat for the other. However, in some cases (and rare ones at that), a tie or draw might just be possible, not exactly favoring either side as a result. While being infrequent, the possibility of a tied or drawn result becomes a fascinating one for the Pokémon games in question and demand at least a little bit of exploration for how, where, and when it might occur and what happens afterwards.

In the main series games, a tie would have to involve both sides coming down to their very last Pokémon and both of these getting knocked out near-simultaneously, usually the defender getting hit by a move and the attacker affected by a move/battle effect or status condition. Meanwhile, in Pokémon Go, sometimes a PvP battle will come down to the same state and there's a chance that both Pokémon will use their Fast moves simultaneously for the final hit, in which case both are knocked out and the tie occurs (a check of the Journal will affirm this). Given the non-resolution of a tie, in a tournament, it is likely that another battle (in both cases) will be required to resolve things, whereas the latter's case occurring in the GBL will just be treated as is but with less ill effects when ratings are concerned.

As for the realm of the TCG, since most matches will resolve in someone taking their last prize card to take the win, the situation often precludes one from occurring. Some physical tournaments, however, particularly those with absolute set time limits per round, might be more apt to award a "double loss" - not exactly a tie or draw, but close enough - for matches between players that just seem to drag on and on. In the TCGP sub-realm, meanwhile, the same setup as above in the main series games can occur, resulting in both players earning a point on the same turn and thus a tie, which will be indicated outright on the screen. It's still pretty rare by any means but not impossible.

Then, there's Pokémon Unite. Here, a tie or draw is practically guaranteed not to happen, because even if both teams achieve the same score in a match, it will always resolve to a win and loss, with the win condition (in other words, "tiebreaker") being which team got to that score first. Certainly, the new "First to 500" play mode introduced somewhat recently makes it clear that a team is surely going to win or lose, the latter if the other team achieves the objective instead, and the former if the team achieves the objective as intended. This kind of assurance of the outcome of a match may be the thing that helps keep them going.

Battles in the Pokémon games have all sorts of dynamics associated with them that helps them to arrive at decisive resolutions of wins and losses, but a few might still lead to the indecisive one that is a tie or draw. At that point, it might be up to the players, officials, or the games themselves to make a resolution through certain means and keep the results as decisive as they should be without the tie or draw occurring.

One year ago: LINE App in a "Downturn"?

Two years ago: Silph Arena Factions S2 Postseason Metas

Three years ago: NADWPKMN - The Video Series: Episode #3 - The Games I Play

Four years ago: Mastering Balls of Hands and Feet

Five years ago: It's a-Mario Time

Six years ago: Going Big in Galar

Seven years ago: Pokémon Archetypes

Eight years ago: New Paradigms

Day Turnovers in Pokémon Games

Many people and fans like me play Pokémon games on a daily basis. Accordingly, many of the games also keep track of progress on a daily basis, which further means determining when one day ends and another begins - that is, when the day turns over. It would also be predictable and expected that different games would do so in different ways, and that becomes something fascinating to explore as well as take advantage of for certain gameplay purposes, at least within reasonable limits that they allow.

Contemporary games will use the time of the device - be it a phone or a Nintendo console - that it is set to, which ideally should be the local time of the player and shouldn't be changed unless there are very good reasons, one of which is when one is traveling (most phones of today will automatically do so anyway). That device time is taken as the time in the main series games on Nintendo consoles, which has been the case since the fourth generation thanks to timekeeping in Nintendo DS; previously, the games used a battery for keeping time. In any of these cases, the midnight of that time is when the day turns over. This is also the case for Pokémon Go on a phone, for which its location dependence also provides a check for the time and explains the necessity of keeping the time in line.

For other games, the "day" is different. Café Remix and its predecessor Shuffle turn over the day at 6 AM UTC, as in my case the day turns over at 1 PM local time. This will certainly mean different times of the real day for wherever one lives and whether or not that's also affected by certain seasonal time changes, but the gist is that the day turns over at the exact precise moment wherever one plays. The 6 AM UTC turnover also applies to TCG Pocket, where the game will demand that it restarts at that time. Meanwhile, Pokémon Unite has the day turning over at midnight UTC, thanks to my observations of it turning over daily mission tasks at 7 AM my local time.

Some leeway can be gotten when playing as the day turns over, certainly not so much for TCG Pocket as above that demands a restart when the moment occurs. A match can be started in Pokémon Unite just as the day is about to turn over, and the achievements from that match will count for the Daily Missions of the next day. Likewise, some stages in Café Remix can be played as the day is about to turn over and they'll transition the player to the next day. In any case, however, one should be careful that there are no events that end on a particular day and haven't been dealt with, for they'll surely disappear when the day turns over.

With the way people play Pokémon games daily, tracking the days and rewarding those daily plays become not only useful but also essential in some ways. And if done right, one can schedule plays as the moment(s) of the days transition from one to the next to take advantage of them to fulfill specific objectives usefully. The moment(s) are then useful to games as well as the people who play them.

One year ago: The Blood of Youth

Two years ago: Tournament: SWEEP JR vs. Foul Noctowls Elite (SA Factions)

Three years ago: Steering and Nearing with Tsunekazu Ishihara

Four years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day, 5/15/2021

Five years ago: Coming Full Circle

Six years ago: Everything Old Is New Again

Seven years ago: 15 Minutes of Fame

Eight years ago: Fallen Comrades

Surrounded by Bots in Pokémon Games?

After a couple of "soft" posts with some relations to Pokémon, it seems now it's time to make a couple of "hard" ones relating to gameplay elements. One of those that becomes a current concern (actually, a returning one - more on this shortly) is the perceived presence of automated players, else known as "bots". I had already discussed them in the past for one Pokémon game, but now I want to broaden that discussion somewhat and bring up the concern for multiple games, as well as the perception that one may be "surrounded" by them.

The returning concern would of course still be for Pokémon Unite, for which one may feel that it is more pervasive than the previously discussed situation. For example, players at a lower rank may have a difficulty advancing through Ranked matches due to some players having bot-like behaviors, with or without definitive proof that they're actually automated. This leads to the feeling of seemingly being "surrounded" by them, especially as they may be still present outside Ranked matches with the same behaviors I had previously described.

Meanwhile, the latest hit game of TCGP may now have "bots" as an applicable concern. Some players feel that a number of matches may seem "rigged" with the opponent having certain decks and cards as well as possibly definite play patterns. Though the proof of them actually being "bots" may be even harder than the example of Pokémon Unite above, due to the fact that TCGP is a two-player game, the concern of "bots" may become plausible as it's not hard for one to automate oneself to the play of a deck, even more so for an actual system.

In the early days, some players in Pokémon Go may have been set up with automation - I was even witness to such a system for that - but now it may be that such players are hardly there due to controls placed by Niantic. It may then be that the game is relatively free of that,  making the players feel less "surrounded", though there may be some shades or remnants of that even today. Authentic activity is the thing that keeps this game going and makes it fun for everyone, regardless of whatever legacy or presence of "bots" may be there.

With that, the feeling of being "surrounded" by bots may only be a perceptive one, at least in cases of "open" situations and few players, and otherwise there may some strong signs according to the behaviors of many more players. That may have a "hard" effect on gameplay and other elements, especially if things don't go "hard" on them, yet that warrants the proof that is also "hard" to come by. Whether or not they may be (or have been) present, gameplay efforts without automation can and should continue as a response to the perceptions.

One year ago: Needing a Time Distortion

Two years ago: Keeping It Simple with Pokémon

Three years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day, 4/23/2022

Four years ago: The (Post-"General") Longest Journey

Five years ago: Touching and Caring for Pokémon

Six years ago: Pokémon for a Puzzle Professor

Seven years ago: (A Late) Local Ex-Raid, 4/23/2018

Eight years ago: Luffy and Infernape

My Prospects for Pokémon Virtual Console Games?

From time to time, I've mentioned Virtual Console, Nintendo's service offering for enabling play of games for legacy platforms on current consoles. The mention is certainly warranted because the service includes a good bunch of Pokémon games, from the main series and even beyond. In fact, a few have recently even been announced for the upcoming Nintendo Switch 2, affirming its utility and popularity. Even so, despite my interest, I haven't been dealing with this area to a great extent, and it seems I may have to explain and lay out my possible prospects in this area of games should I go on to deal with it.

Right now, I have a few regular Pokémon game affairs going on, so to fit in new game dealings is always a challenge, let alone to fit what I already deal with other life necessities - including ones that may affect the writing of posts such as this one. Therefore, for Virtual Console games of the Pokémon sort, I may want to look into games that I can deal with quickly and effectively. While older main series games likely cannot factor in because of this, as I've mentioned once, other useful games may fit in under these considerations.

One unfortunate barrier for Virtual Console dealings for many including me, however, is cost. On the older 3DS console, I still have to pay for the games to play them, while on the Switch and beyond, that is compounded by paying for a Nintendo Switch Online subscription for advanced services, of which Virtual Console is one. While the latter is also required for current VGC dealings in current main series games, I've let this go by the wayside, so any Virtual Console effort might have to go alongside VGC efforts for posterity.

The growing library of Virtual Console games, including Pokémon ones, still do seem to make it compelling for me to just jump in and play, if I were free of any and all restrictions. At that point, I would take my pick of any Pokémon game that is available... but I would still prioritize the ones I really, really want to play, and there are already a few such games on the lists, including ones slated for addition soon. Again, the keywords are "free of restrictions", so it would have to be a moment of utmost convenience to play the games.

It seems that my prospects for Pokémon games on the Virtual Console might be a bit blurry at the moment, and efforts to clarify that might not be able to be accomplished within the short term. Still, it looks like Virtual Console will be in it for the longer term, and that longer term may just make it viable for me to jump in at some point in the farther future. That would then mean a lot more Pokémon games at my disposal, with more aspects to deal with and discuss.

One year ago: Going through the 13s

Two years ago: Seeing Polkadots in the Silph Arena

Three years ago: Language Bridging Songs

Four years ago: Getting Collective and Connective with Pokémon

Five years ago: Quizzes and Knowledge

Six years ago: Going For New Competitions

Seven years ago: Artistic License

Eight years ago: I Found You, Black and White

The Next (Next) Successor: Nintendo Switch 2

Way back in the first year of this blog, I mentioned how the Nintendo Switch became the "successor" console for Pokémon main series games of future generations, a future which is now past (or technically still the present) with the entry of the eighth and ninth generation games on the console. Recently, Nintendo has made the next move and introduced what could be termed as the next "successor" to the "successor"... or just a renewal of the "successor" status. Aptly, as stated in the title of this post, it's called the Nintendo Switch 2.

As demonstrated by its "teaser trailer", the entry model of the console will be slightly larger, feature a revised controller design that snaps rather than slides into place, and have other design improvements. What is most important, however, is that the console will play games for the original Nintendo Switch, with a few exceptions - most likely due to the new controller design affecting the gameplay of the unplayable ones. This key part also has a few implications for its "successor" status, not to mention upcoming Pokémon games.

So, to some extent, the Nintendo Switch 2 is not quite a "successor", more like an advanced version of it vis-a-vis the Nintendo 3DS toward the DSi (itself also not quite a "successor") and the original DS. Still, it will have its exclusive games that can only be played on the new console, again much like these prior consoles, and the status stands. The main series Pokémon games likewise had games on the prior consoles and will surely have new games on the new console while old games can still be played on it.

The question then becomes how (and when) new main series Pokémon games on the new console would leverage the exclusive capabilities and features of that console for its further entries - as in the tenth generation and possibly eleventh if it makes it that far, just like for earlier consoles. Those capabilities and features are what the games have always depended on and admittedly done well even in the present, so it remains to be seen how that would proceed and thus be realized in the games to come.

Understandably, any new console is always a big undertaking for the parties involved, be it the console maker (in this case Nintendo) and game maker (in this case Game Freak for the Pokémon main series games). The upcoming Nintendo Switch 2 is a big thing in its own regard, and while its "successor" status may or may not be quite affirmed at this point, at least upgrading the status of itself as a "successor" is still something viable, particularly for the future of Pokémon and other popular game series in this area.

One year ago: Pokémon Go Event Rollup, 2/24/2024

Two years ago: The Hoenn Cup of GBL

Three years ago: The Johto Cup of GBL

Four years ago: Learning from Each Other, for Life

Five years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day, 2/22/2020

Six years ago: Don't Forget Our Roots

Seven years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day, 2/24/2018

Eight years ago: Memories of Johto

Different Regions, Different Strokes

Pokémon by now is a universal franchise and fandom across regions of the world. However, what might not be so universal is the way that different regions of the world are managed, dealt with, or treated with respect to Pokémon affairs, specifically for the purposes of being able to compete with those from other regions and implying the tournaments that lead up to the annual World Championships. It's a matter that makes for a good bit of discussion.

It helps to see how this is so with a few pertinent examples. In the past, I had mentioned one example for Pokémon Go and the Asia Pacific region, and this also ties into several related tournaments in the countries associated with the championships, whose winners are representative. A similar situation occurs for Pokémon Unite, which has its own regional championships for select teams in the region.

Then, locally there is a championship series for the TCG in the form of "League" tournaments named after specific types of capture balls, where players collect points to move into higher stages progressively, with the peak being to select representative champions. Elsewhere, players will recognize "regional" or "challenge" tournaments with similar purposes, though with a multinational scope, even with VGC involved.

With some of these differences, it's hard not to consider that there would be a root cause for them. The licensing, distribution, and all related matters handled by different parts of the corporate entities involved in Pokémon would certainly indicate that things may have to be performed in different ways for different parts of the world, and that has been proven as such with the different kinds of tournaments above.

So, as universal and deep-to-the-core (for many of its fans) as Pokémon is, it seems that even some things have to be performed in ways that don't appear to be universal, as with the tournaments above, due to certain legalities that may be involved in them. What does remain universal, though, is the ways that fans play the games and do so against others in the world, and the most important thing is to keep reconciling that across any sort of differences.

One year ago: Pokémon Figures for the Rest of Us

Two years ago: Cosplay: Isshoni Tanoshimimashou 17

Three years ago: Pokémon Go Community Day, 2/12/2022

Four years ago: Fourth Anniversary of My Regional Figure Group

Five years ago: Pokémon as a Study Aid

Six years ago: A Pikachu Pillow Keychain

Seven years ago: Anywhere Is

Eight years ago: My Essential Pokémon Cosplay Equipment

The (Personal) Importance of In-Game Trainer Appearance

It is recognized that two current and popular Pokémon games (Go and Unite) have a way of representing the player Trainer in those games along with an array of customizations for that representation. They do so with "avatar items" for the former and "fashion items" for the latter, though they refer to much of the same (or similar) things and some players (like me) may have the tendency to interchange the terms with or without intent. Of course, as a player representation, it has a certain quantity of importance for every player, though this quantity will surely differ from one player to another. I thought I'd take a post to discuss this aspect, especially how it could pertain to me personally.

Undoubtedly, for some players, this would be important. One of my fellow Pokémon Go players (Trainers) immediately took to customizing the Trainer appearance to put on some weight to it - a feature recently introduced in that game - to make it more representative of the player's actual appearance. Others, meanwhile, had jumped on the latest "punk" hairstyles that were introduced along with the Wild Area event that featured Toxtricity, even though they themselves do not possess such a hairstyle. So, the importance could be for either true or idealized representation, or something within the gamut in between both. That seems to ring familiar with the current season of the game.

Meanwhile, the options in Pokémon Unite are more idealistic and may be considered more reflective of what players see in themselves as a Trainer. Still, there is a degree of players being able to customize as they see fit, perhaps to align slightly more with their real selves rather than their imagined ones. Evidently, hair and contact lens color options - also recently introduced much in the same way as appearance options in Pokémon Go - somewhat play into this. Many of the outfits (notably the "animal" ones) in the game, however, could still be considered to be out of the ordinary and less realistic.

As for me personally, I might be able to say that Trainer appearance in the games mentioned above is important, but not to the point that, say, I'd expend actual in-game currency to make my appearance fit what I want to show in the world. In any case, I've established (in a way) its importance by basing the outfit I use in the videos on the YouTube channel for this blog according to selections I made in Pokémon Go, being ones I've made freely for that purpose... which is something that I still need to get back to, as an aside. Yet I might want to keep the appearance updated as I see fit with the situation.

The great thing about customizing Trainer appearances in both of the games mentioned above is the ability to put oneself (or a representation of such) within the game, and that is important if nothing else. For those who jump on the latest customizations, it might very well be very important for them, while those who are more conservative - like me - might see a lesser degree of importance. Any appearance of the self is still important in certain ways, and an envisioned Pokémon Trainer can be shown as such.

One year ago: In Pursuit of Unite Licenses

Two years ago: The Present Trouble with Silph Arena

Three years ago: More Evolution Stages for Pokémon Species?

Four years ago: Pokémon SM KFC Family Meal Toy: Mimikyu & Ultra Ball

Five years ago: Renewed Oaths: Pokémon Direct, 1/9/2020

Six years ago: Custom Pokémon Merchandise

Seven years ago: A Pokémon-Pikachu Balloon

Eight years ago: Where It All Started