Talk:Spin-off Pokémon games

Reclassification

I think there are too many unofficial series. How about we group the games by genre? For example, the Stadium games, Colosseum, XD, and Battle Revolution fall into the Competition genre, according to Nintendo and TPC (I know they're not consistent but it would make more sense). SatoMew2 (talk) 15:23, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

IMO the page is currently divided very sensibly. If anything, I'd almost want to introduce some sort of extra organization under the Other section. (Off the top of my head, perhaps by console or soemthing.)

Regarding the above example, I personally don't like grouping the Stadiums with Colosseum/XD. The story has always been the main aspect of the latter two in my mind, and the Stadium games just don't have that at all. (FWIW, I hardly know PBR at all.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Wizards of the Coast

Why isn't the card game that wizards of coast had on their website back in the early 2000s on here? It was brower-based, but maybe someone has a copy of it. I don't remember whether it used shockwave or not. --Sandrew26 (talk) 13:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

"Side series"

What exactly does the phrase "side series" mean in reference to Pokémon games? The first line of this article links to a "side series" article, but the article doesn't actually exist (it just redirects back here). Moreover, some articles appear not to make a distinction between "spin-off" and "side series" games, whilst others do. Pale Prism (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I wanted to ask the same question.--Rocket Grunt 16:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be fixed? Because Stadium falls under "side series" and, as Pale Prism stated, the page doesn't exist, Stadium isn't even listed anywhere on the site. Why not add all "side series" games to the spin-off games page? --Dundeey (talk) 23:23, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I feel like side series refers to games that have to do with core series games like stadium being able to directly link with Pokémon red and blue and providing rewards for the core game Mego17 (talk) 00:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

I just checked the side series section and it includes Pokémon bank and home as well as stadium and coliseum so I think it means companion games that are in some way connected to the core series like to transfer Pokémon or providing rewards Mego17 (talk) 00:42, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

The GO Debate (Side Series or Spin Off?)

Judgement call time. There has been some gnashing of teeth regarding where GO is supposed to, well, go. (the Edit history of this page, for one thing.) Is it a spin-off or treated as part of the "side series" group? It's gotta go somewhere, as it is on the Individual spin off template, but on neither the spin off page or the side series page. This sort of needs to be settled by either solidifying what side series means or redefining what side series means, as leaving GO in an organizational limbo state isn't a good thing. I'm on team "define side series as any game with direct communication to core-series games, even if only through first communicating to another side series game", meaning Ranger and GO get to be over there but The Thieves and the 1000 Pokémon and Pokemon Pass stay here since providing a serial code is just short of direct communication, and Smash Ultimate stays here because it only receives data from a core series game. (We can cross the amiibo bridge if a core series game ever implements them.)

(I'm putting this on this page because it appears to be where GO is supposed to be if not for the kerfuffle. I guess redefining Side Series is not exactly within this page's bounds, but it forms my opinion.) Salmancer (talk) 16:25, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

So let's break this down. Almost all of the side series games can have some data, typically Pokémon, transferred and stored in them from the core series games, which can then be transferred back into the core series games. Whereas the spin-off games are more self-contained with some being able to send data such as gift Pokémon to the core series games. Additionally, several side series games, such as Stadium, Colosseum, XD, etc. share a lot of gameplay similarities to the core series games. GO has features of a side series game, such as connectivity with the core series, but it's mostly (completely?) one way, which makes it more like a spin-off. It also shares several gameplay similarities, which does also make it similar to a side series game.

Notably, side series was born out of convenience, due to the gameplay similarities. It's often simpler and more useful to group information for the core series and side series, such as info about Pokémon and locations, or info about Trainer battles, all together in one place. The question is whether there's a benefit or a need to have Pokémon GO data grouped with the core series data. I haven't really heard a convincing argument that there's a need for it, so I'd personally wager that GO is simply a popular spin-off with several unique distinctions. Landfish7 16:56, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

The easiest way I can think to define side series are games whose primary selling point are their complementary functions to the core series. (Besides Colo/XD, which only aren't core series because TPCi explicitly says they aren't). GO was not only "sold" well before it had any connectivity, it was ancillary and now largely irrelevant outside getting the one Pokémon that requires it. I also don't think it would be all that helpful for GO players to have GO info be lumped in with side series' in places. glik^glak 20:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I think I was a little hotheaded when I put this up. It's entirely possible that the reason GO isn't on this page was that no one noticed after it was removed for allegedly being a side series game two years ago. (Reminder to self to not assume malice.) Pokewalker is apparently in a similar limbo state, so I do want this sorted. (Pokewalker is on the side series template, not on the side games page, is in the self contained category, not in the self contained template, its page labels it as a peripheral only, and it is in the peripheral category.) Anyway, I'm okay with either definition as long as we pick one, although there are some things to keep in mind.

By glik's definition, Pokemon Pass is a side series game, and apps are allowed in the side series definition as per HOME and Ranch. I prefer this one because it involves fewer to no subjective calls. I question calling GO's connectivity irrelevant, as it is a source of underleveled Pokemon (FEAR cares, and while it is competitively unviable, it has an Appendix page), the only renewable source of most Legendaries and Mythicals short of replaying full RPGs (for some Mythicals, not even that works), and is the only way to get Furfrou with trims into HOME until a new core series game comes out with the species. (Which makes Furfrou quite the commodity within HOME.)

Landfish's definition raises the somewhat thorny question of: "GO has similarities to Let's Go, a core series game, because Let's Go is inspired by and directly ties into GO. Does this pull GO into being a side series game? Let's Go centric pages would benefit, in my opinion, from having GO information closer to them than is afforded by classifying GO as a spin-off. (Examples would be the Caught Pokemon and Released Pokemon pages. Candy might count, but GO data may be too long.) The Mystery Box is obtained in GO after the first transfer to Let's Go or Home and only reusable after performing another transfer, meaning the connection is two way by technicality. (on the same level as save bonuses.)

I think GO coverage as it stands is in the wrong place, seeing as every Pokemon page has a header with a direct link to the GO section. This means that people looking for GO information aren't finding it where they want to, and therefore Bulbapedia's organization is failing some portion of the readership. Currently GO data for Pokemon articles sits at the bottom of the side games data, already at nearly the bottom of the page. If current thoughts are to order Pokemon article sections by usefulness, the current system does not live up to that future standard. Anywhere else is probably better, and said header link (which has to stay because some readers are likely used to it) means it wouldn't be buried no matter where it goes. This, however, is more of a question of page structure than game classification, so that discussion probably should happen at a later point. Salmancer (talk) 01:01, 11 January 2024 (UTC)