Pokemon TCG Pocket's Trading Feature Faces Backlash, Prompts Developer Response

DeNA, the developer of Pokemon TCG Pocket, has pledged improvements to the game's recently implemented trading feature following significant player criticism. The controversy centers around the perceived high cost and restrictive nature of the system.
High Cost of Trade Tokens Sparks Outrage

Introduced on January 29th, 2025, the trading feature allows exchanges of 1-4 Diamond and 1-Star rarity cards from Genetic Apex and Mythical Island booster packs. While welcomed by players aiming for Pokedex completion, limitations – notably the restricted card selection, introduction of a new in-game currency (trade tokens), and the exorbitant cost of trading – fueled widespread dissatisfaction.

DeNA acknowledged the negative feedback on February 1st, 2025, via a Twitter (X) post, stating they are actively investigating improvements. A key change will involve providing multiple avenues for acquiring trade tokens, including through in-game events. Currently, obtaining tokens necessitates sacrificing higher-rarity cards, creating an inefficient and potentially frustrating process. For example, trading a 4-Diamond card requires 500 tokens, while selling a 1-Star card yields only 100.

DeNA justified the initial stringent rules as a measure to counter bot activity and multi-account exploitation, aiming to maintain a fair and enjoyable card-collecting experience.
Genetic Apex Booster Pack Accessibility Concerns

The launch of Space-Time Smackdown booster packs on January 29th, 2025, also sparked controversy. Some players reported the disappearance of Genetic Apex packs from the main screen, leading to concerns about their accessibility.

This proved to be a user interface issue; the Genetic Apex packs remain available, albeit via a less prominent "Select other booster packs" option. While understandable as a design flaw, some players suspected a deliberate attempt to promote the newer packs. Suggestions for improving the home screen's clarity to avoid future confusion have been raised. DeNA has yet to officially address this separate issue.