Pokemon Home launches next month, will have free and premium tiers, brings back the GTS

LightBeam · Jan 30, 2020

Alex21xx said:
im tired of always transfering pokemon from other games, can't they find an automated solution?^^

Well, maybe they'll get a solution for ya, but you'll have to pay the price !!

GbaNober · Jan 30, 2020

'Free' slogan is just a clickbait nowadays but in reality it's kinda disappointing when we observe how their business model works.
this is too much.

KingBlank · Jan 30, 2020

chaoskagami said:
No. Just no. Look, here's the thing: adding blockchain does not automatically make a useful.

Blockchain is useful for distributed and versioned data, like git repos or transaction ledgers. Something that can have elements "put in" or "taken out" will inherently be incompatible with blockchain, because it isn't intended for that use case. Blockchain is not a storage solution, it's a immutable record of versioned/appended data and cryptographic ownership information.

I don't see how this is incompatible at all. You insert a new pokemon into the system (new data is appended) you trade the pokemon, (the transaction is stored), you withdraw the pokemon (the pokemon is flagged as withdrawn)

I did a quick google search and found claims that a gen V pokemon in the box would be about 150 bytes, which is reasonable for a blockchain with a max block size of 1 megabyte.

Even if you don't store the pokemon themselves in blockchain, you can store a hash of the file which represents the pokemon.

But yeah, I also have a kneejerk reaction to blockchain (my boss wants us to use blockchain, but he is not sure how he wants us to use it...)

RedBlueGreen · Jan 31, 2020

KingBlank said:
I don't see how this is incompatible at all. You insert a new pokemon into the system (new data is appended) you trade the pokemon, (the transaction is stored), you withdraw the pokemon (the pokemon is flagged as withdrawn)

I did a quick google search and found claims that a gen V pokemon in the box would be about 150 bytes, which is reasonable for a blockchain with a max block size of 1 megabyte.

Even if you don't store the pokemon themselves in blockchain, you can store a hash of the file which represents the pokemon.

But yeah, I also have a kneejerk reaction to blockchain (my boss wants us to use blockchain, but he is not sure how he wants us to use it...)

Gen VIII mons look to be about 350 bytes (344 specifically, but additional stuff might impact it, say items or event info).

So 6000 mons would be about 2 MB assuming they don't add a crap ton of data to them in Home, or don't use some weird new file type that's way bigger for some reason.

chaoskagami · Jan 31, 2020

KingBlank said:
I don't see how this is incompatible at all. You insert a new pokemon into the system (new data is appended) you trade the pokemon, (the transaction is stored), you withdraw the pokemon (the pokemon is flagged as withdrawn)

I did a quick google search and found claims that a gen V pokemon in the box would be about 150 bytes, which is reasonable for a blockchain with a max block size of 1 megabyte.

Even if you don't store the pokemon themselves in blockchain, you can store a hash of the file which represents the pokemon.

But yeah, I also have a kneejerk reaction to blockchain (my boss wants us to use blockchain, but he is not sure how he wants us to use it...)

Pokemon are 688 bytes as of Gen7 (sun/moon.)

Again, you cannot "remove" data from a blockchain. It is a permanent and immutable record. Storing hashes of the Pokemon themselves is also a no-go, because it's possible for a trainer to produce two identical Pokemon, which would result in a hash collision and only the game generating that Pokemon would know how to disambiguate the two properly. Aside from this, it would be impossible to withdraw any Pokemon from a blockchain without some kind of special record.

In more practical issues, blockchain is vulnerable to 51% attacks and hackers can almost certainly stuff a bunch of junk Pokemon in and seize control of the entire network.

It's just not the right tool for the job. I'm sorry. It's like using a doubly linked list to store what should be a malloc'd piece of memory.

Joom · Jan 31, 2020

diggeloid said:
So does this let you transfer Pokemon that aren't normally available in Sword and Shield? If so then that explains why they cut the roster: so they could sell it back to us later!

This really speaks volumes about your age if you think that this is the first time GameFreak has done this. They're just finally joining the modern age. They've always released a stripped down gen as two versions, then released a "full" version of the same gen a year or so later that people have always paid full price for without complaining. So, this hate hype toward SwSh is pants-on-head retarded because people can't seem to understand that these are the exact same business practices that they've been practicing since 1996. Now that mommy and daddy aren't buying your games for you anymore, you get to feel what they did, except you're bitching about how unfair it is. Can all of you grow up already?

GilgameshArcher · Feb 1, 2020

MythicalData said:
R.I.P. Pokemon

yeah, but no, look how much money they make!

SonicRings · Feb 2, 2020

Jesus $16 USD a year is a joke for this. Can't wait for hacks to advance so people can safely use hax on their main switch to make backups of their Pokemon (pksm's) themselves for free.

goldensun87 · Feb 3, 2020

Long live PKHeX.

goldensun87 · Feb 3, 2020

Joom said:
This really speaks volumes about your age if you think that this is the first time GameFreak has done this. They're just finally joining the modern age. They've always released a stripped down gen as two versions, then released a "full" version of the same gen a year or so later that people have always paid full price for without complaining. So, this hate hype toward SwSh is pants-on-head retarded because people can't seem to understand that these are the exact same business practices that they've been practicing since 1996. Now that mommy and daddy aren't buying your games for you anymore, you get to feel what they did, except you're bitching about how unfair it is. Can all of you grow up already?

While I agree that he is a newbie, I have to disagree with you about Game Freak "always doing this". I did not buy Yellow, because the amount of new content did not justify the purchase. I did not buy Crystal, because the amount of new content did not justify the purchase. I bought Emerald and Platinum, despite having bought Ruby and Diamond, because the amount of added content did justify the purchase. I did not want to buy B/W, but then GF did a mix-up on us, by not only splitting the third version into two games, but also making them actual sequels. So, to get the whole story, I purchased both games of the same color. As much as I hated having to buy both games, at least this time, the follow-up game was an actual sequel instead of the "same game with bonus content". Gen 6, there were no third versions, even though I actually wanted both Z and Delta Emerald. Gen 7 I did not buy, because by then, the 3DS was hacked wide open, so I just acquired backups of both S/M and US/UM. And, as bad as those games were, they were actually still complete, full-fledged games.

Gen 8 is a bare-bones, incomplete game sold at full-price, then players are coerced into paying even more to "complete" the game. Before Gen 8, all the games were complete products, and with hacking having been more easily accessible back in those gens, one did not have to buy the third versions, to acquire things like tutor moves.

KingBlank · Feb 4, 2020

chaoskagami said:
Pokemon are 688 bytes as of Gen7 (sun/moon.)

Again, you cannot "remove" data from a blockchain. It is a permanent and immutable record. Storing hashes of the Pokemon themselves is also a no-go, because it's possible for a trainer to produce two identical Pokemon, which would result in a hash collision and only the game generating that Pokemon would know how to disambiguate the two properly. Aside from this, it would be impossible to withdraw any Pokemon from a blockchain without some kind of special record.

In more practical issues, blockchain is vulnerable to 51% attacks and hackers can almost certainly stuff a bunch of junk Pokemon in and seize control of the entire network.

It's just not the right tool for the job. I'm sorry. It's like using a doubly linked list to store what should be a malloc'd piece of memory.

Hmm, what would be a good tool for the Job then?
It would be nice to have some kind of cloud backup service, but it is unreasonable for somebody to host that kind of service for free - and if they charge for it Nintendo will surely C&D them.

Maybe IPFS based, but I have doubts that IPFS is any good.

chaoskagami · Feb 6, 2020

KingBlank said:
Hmm, what would be a good tool for the Job then?
It would be nice to have some kind of cloud backup service, but it is unreasonable for somebody to host that kind of service for free - and if they charge for it Nintendo will surely C&D them.

Maybe IPFS based, but I have doubts that IPFS is any good.

IPFS is also the wrong choice. That's a distributed versioned data store. It's not sequential like a blockchain, but it's P2P in the same way that torrents are. Nobody would want to waste space storing other people's Pokemon on their devices, and owners of things on IPFS cannot be changed (they're signed with a private key.) The whole point of IPFS is to duplicate things that multiple people keep track of like web pages or media, but also allowing easy updating of this content by the one who put it there. Nobody has any interest in your pokemon boxes, so nobody would be storing a copy of it and thus it would not be backed up. This not even getting into trading.

Protip: you cannot use P2P tech to implement personal cloud storage in any situation, even Pokemon, because the point is to not have others possessing your data.

FGFlann · Feb 6, 2020

goldensun87 said:
While I agree that he is a newbie, I have to disagree with you about Game Freak "always doing this". I did not buy Yellow, because the amount of new content did not justify the purchase. I did not buy Crystal, because the amount of new content did not justify the purchase. I bought Emerald and Platinum, despite having bought Ruby and Diamond, because the amount of added content did justify the purchase. I did not want to buy B/W, but then GF did a mix-up on us, by not only splitting the third version into two games, but also making them actual sequels. So, to get the whole story, I purchased both games of the same color. As much as I hated having to buy both games, at least this time, the follow-up game was an actual sequel instead of the "same game with bonus content". Gen 6, there were no third versions, even though I actually wanted both Z and Delta Emerald. Gen 7 I did not buy, because by then, the 3DS was hacked wide open, so I just acquired backups of both S/M and US/UM. And, as bad as those games were, they were actually still complete, full-fledged games.

Gen 8 is a bare-bones, incomplete game sold at full-price, then players are coerced into paying even more to "complete" the game. Before Gen 8, all the games were complete products, and with hacking having been more easily accessible back in those gens, one did not have to buy the third versions, to acquire things like tutor moves.

It really has been bad. Gamefreak has always had a problem with feature stripping but starting with Gen 7 it has really become a joke. I'm starting to think we'll never get triples back at this point let alone the national pokedex or battle facilities. Couldn't even find the time to put in a few NPCs for ribbons in Galar apparently.

KingBlank · Feb 10, 2020

chaoskagami said:
IPFS is also the wrong choice. That's a distributed versioned data store. It's not sequential like a blockchain, but it's P2P in the same way that torrents are. Nobody would want to waste space storing other people's Pokemon on their devices, and owners of things on IPFS cannot be changed (they're signed with a private key.) The whole point of IPFS is to duplicate things that multiple people keep track of like web pages or media, but also allowing easy updating of this content by the one who put it there. Nobody has any interest in your pokemon boxes, so nobody would be storing a copy of it and thus it would not be backed up. This not even getting into trading.

Protip: you cannot use P2P tech to implement personal cloud storage in any situation, even Pokemon, because the point is to not have others possessing your data.

If that pro tip was true nobody would use google drive, (you can always encrypt files on others PC's) and I dont care if somebody else has a copy of my game saves.

but yeah, unless you have some kind of incentive built into the service (say share 10GB of other peoples files to get 100MB of your own p2p cloud storage) I would not want to store copies of other peoples random files.

aarti · Feb 12, 2020

no one gonna mention that it's out now

FGFlann · Feb 12, 2020

aarti said:
no one gonna mention that it's out now

It's out now.

aarti · Feb 12, 2020

FGFlann said:
It's out now.

thanks

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

King of Nothing

Well-Known Member

G̷̘̫̍̈́̊̓̈l̴̙͔̞͠i̵̳͊ţ̸̙͇͒̓c̵̬̪̯̥̳͒͌̚h̵̹̭͛̒̊̽̚

❤❤❤

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

King of Nothing

G̷̘̫̍̈́̊̓̈l̴̙͔̞͠i̵̳͊ţ̸̙͇͒̓c̵̬̪̯̥̳͒͌̚h̵̹̭͛̒̊̽̚

Well-Known Member

King of Nothing

Killua Zoldyck

Well-Known Member

Killua Zoldyck

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum