Pokémon Go players believe the trading system, which requires trainers to be in close proximity with each other rather than allowing them to trade over long distances like in the core series, is “anti-Pokémon.” In their view, the restriction goes against one of the most important philosophies of the franchise.
“Let me trade with my long-distance buddies,” said one Pokémon player via a Reddit thread posted on May 9, sparking a community-wide discussion on the topic.
That conversation starter was accompanied by a meme highlighting how having the Lucky Bonus applied to a long-distance friend is meaningless since it’s impossible to trade without meeting up. Others echoed the sentiment, saying trading should be possible without needing to be nearby—like in the core series. They could still have bonuses applied to in-person trading to encourage players to meet up, but there’s no reason why they shouldn’t be allowed to trade over long distances.
This prompted one player to say that trading in Pokémon Go is and has always felt “too anti-Pokémon.” Hundreds of others agreed. They even claimed other aspects about it fit the bill too, like not being able to trade any Pokémon more than once, which makes it hard to retain Pokémon that evolve from trades.
The reason for this is trading causes Pokémon IVs to randomize. If Niantic allowed players to trade repeatedly, they could keep trading until their critters had the perfect stats. A solution could be to allow players to trade a specific Pokémon once per day, but if they caught and traded a large quantity, they could still trade them until they got one with perfect stats.
Either way, some players insisted they’d be happy to sacrifice the IV randomization element of trading if it made for a better trading system.
In the end, they concluded Niantic won’t change a thing because it won’t benefit the company. The community seems convinced Niantic isn’t in their corner, especially not as of late. Niantic’s decision to go ahead with the controversial Remote Raid Pass changes despite widespread backlash from players was the biggest indicator of that, and the cut runs deep.
