Pokemon X and Y Director Discusses Changes in Story

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

EHKOS:

Some_weirdGuy:

EHKOS:
It's really sad that the biggest change Nintendo can think to do is make pokemon go Super Sayan.

Digivolve*
Going super saiyan would be same appearance + golden hair and glowy auras - sonic already nicked that one.
The new pokemon temporarily evolve, though a device the trainer keeps with them, and then change back to their rookie form afterward. That's totally digimon :P

------
The OP just makes me think they need to hurry up an implement mutiplayer then. If it's all about you and the group of friends, (and we already know they really won't go the mmo route) then having drop-in/drop-out mutiplayer seems like something that could work well. Go into some option, invite nearby people, begin adventuring - you and 1 or 2 others.

You quoted the wrong guy but I just realized you're right. And the funny thing is that it's completely justifiable since Digimon was a rip-off of Pokemon in the first place.

I apologise kind sir... I'm uh... not quite sure how I managed to quote you while still having the text from Mcoffey somehow :X
However, for digimon being a rip-off: Didn't digimon's evolving mechanic came from tamagotchi's? I remember something about digimon being made by the tamagotchi mob as a more male-focused 'paint job' for the virtual pet devices, which were around before pokemon, so you can't really say they ripped-off the (temporary or otherwise) evolution thing from pokemon, even if the digimon anime came out after the pokemon one XD. (?)

As it is though, pokemon were already using 'temporary evolutions' by gen 3 i think, where castform changed with the weather, deoxys changed depending on what game it was in, etc. It's a natural extension. I wonder how long though until they bring in fusions... It will happen eventually.

Some_weirdGuy:

EHKOS:

Some_weirdGuy:

Digivolve*
Going super saiyan would be same appearance + golden hair and glowy auras - sonic already nicked that one.
The new pokemon temporarily evolve, though a device the trainer keeps with them, and then change back to their rookie form afterward. That's totally digimon :P

------
The OP just makes me think they need to hurry up an implement mutiplayer then. If it's all about you and the group of friends, (and we already know they really won't go the mmo route) then having drop-in/drop-out mutiplayer seems like something that could work well. Go into some option, invite nearby people, begin adventuring - you and 1 or 2 others.

You quoted the wrong guy but I just realized you're right. And the funny thing is that it's completely justifiable since Digimon was a rip-off of Pokemon in the first place.

I apologise kind sir... I'm uh... not quite sure how I managed to quote you while still having the text from Mcoffey somehow :X
However, for digimon being a rip-off: Didn't digimon's evolving mechanic came from tamagotchi's? I remember something about digimon being made by the tamagotchi mob as a more male-focused 'paint job' for the virtual pet devices, which were around before pokemon, so you can't really say they ripped-off the (temporary or otherwise) evolution thing from pokemon, even if the digimon anime came out after the pokemon one XD. (?)

As it is though, pokemon were already using 'temporary evolutions' by gen 3 i think, where castform changed with the weather, deoxys changed depending on what game it was in, etc. It's a natural extension. I wonder how long though until they bring in fusions... It will happen eventually.

Ah, that's just what I've always heard, was that Digimon blatantly ripped off Pokemon. Also I now want to fuse Haunter with about one hundred different other 'mons.

I figured I wouldn't get away with not hearing about Pokemon's biggest hypocrite N. Seriously, It's like everyone wants him to be their best friend, when he's just a weak trainer..

Anyway; Glad to see the series as a whole taking new literary leaps and bounds.

Mcoffey:

You're right, they're not. I was just listing off potential things that could be done that weren't the usual gyms/badguys/elite4 formula.

Those are opposing statements. You can't replace core mechanics and central themes with things that aren't those, otherwise there is no game. The challenge still stands.

Honestly if Nintendo wanted to just blatently rip off Bethesda, while retaining the turn-based combat, I would have no complaints. Their stories may suck, typically, but at least Bethesda tries to engage with the player on a level besides "be the best, just because".

I feel this needs to be addressed... First of all: yes, you would. Who are you kidding? You would scream "GameFreak ripped off Bethesda!" all over every forum if that happened.

Second, Skyrim has no depth; Pokemon has only depth. Both engage on the same level: becoming strong enough to complete the next challenge. That's not an opinion, that is gameplay data. By all means, try to claim that it isn't, but you know as well as I that everything in either game eventually devolves into grinding levels. Or maybe you played a different Skyrim than I did.

I'm not even talking about being open world (Nice, but not necessary), just simple world building. It's something they've never really bothered with and it makes their games feel very shallow to me. They obviously don't care about this place, so why should I?

Don't they? Did you ever notice that not a single person in the entire history of Pokemon is ambivalent towards Pokemon? Everyone either completely loves Pokemon or doesn't understand them. Did you ever notice how the "idle chatter" of the NPC's, billboards, signposts, and television/radio stations constantly teach you the game's mechanics and subtle nuances of its primary pastime? The Pokemon world is exactly that, a world of Pokemon; simple, succinct, complete. Remember, simplicity is not the same as absence.

Why bother trying to be the best or catch em all, when they're just gonna toss out a hundred new ones next year?

Why bother playing Skyrim if there's just going to be another, better Elder Scrolls game?

Indeed, why bother trying to win any game if you're just going to play another one eventually?

Lunar Templar:

RJ 17:
*GASP!* TWO starting Pokemon?! He's a madman I tell you! A MADMAN!!!

3
there's gonna be a Torchic giveaway to go along with the launch as well.

which means an all fire starter team for me.

cause some trainers, just want to watch the world burn .....

That and as far as I remember Fire was always the best starter no matter which game. :P

RJ 17:

Lunar Templar:

RJ 17:
*GASP!* TWO starting Pokemon?! He's a madman I tell you! A MADMAN!!!

3
there's gonna be a Torchic giveaway to go along with the launch as well.

which means an all fire starter team for me.

cause some trainers, just want to watch the world burn .....

That and as far as I remember Fire was always the best starter no matter which game. :P

I don't know, Totodile's evo's were more badass than Cyndaquills(despite me loving the lil guy) in Gen 2, and easily the best starter of that Gen :P

Mcoffey:

TKretts3:

Mcoffey:
The show showed that people eat meat, presumably tauros and miltank meat...

NO NO NO! BLAH BLAH BLAH, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!
Do NOT break the first unspoken rule of Pokemon. ._.

It's the only media I know that shows the pokemon world as a place where people live, not just a few areas where people stand around waiting to tell the player one sentence factoids until they move on to the next gym. I haven't read the manga, so until then I work with what I got. :P

In the interest of fairness, both the manga and anime occasionally show normal real-world animals living in tandem with Pokemon and humans. Not an extensive amount, but they're still there every now and then.

I've always wanted there to be a decent post-elite four game. I'd love to be able to be the champion of the elite four and beat down on starry-eyed hopeful youngsters like you are when you start the game. But nothing ever happens, as far as I know. You just carry on trying to catch the pokemans.

2xDouble:

Mcoffey:

You're right, they're not. I was just listing off potential things that could be done that weren't the usual gyms/badguys/elite4 formula.

Those are opposing statements. You can't replace core mechanics and central themes with things that aren't those, otherwise there is no game. The challenge still stands.

Honestly if Nintendo wanted to just blatently rip off Bethesda, while retaining the turn-based combat, I would have no complaints. Their stories may suck, typically, but at least Bethesda tries to engage with the player on a level besides "be the best, just because".

I feel this needs to be addressed... First of all: yes, you would. Who are you kidding? You would scream "GameFreak ripped off Bethesda!" all over every forum if that happened.

Second, Skyrim has no depth; Pokemon has only depth. Both engage on the same level: becoming strong enough to complete the next challenge. That's not an opinion, that is gameplay data. By all means, try to claim that it isn't, but you know as well as I that everything in either game eventually devolves into grinding levels. Or maybe you played a different Skyrim than I did.

I'm not even talking about being open world (Nice, but not necessary), just simple world building. It's something they've never really bothered with and it makes their games feel very shallow to me. They obviously don't care about this place, so why should I?

Don't they? Did you ever notice that not a single person in the entire history of Pokemon is ambivalent towards Pokemon? Everyone either completely loves Pokemon or doesn't understand them. Did you ever notice how the "idle chatter" of the NPC's, billboards, signposts, and television/radio stations constantly teach you the game's mechanics and subtle nuances of its primary pastime? The Pokemon world is exactly that, a world of Pokemon; simple, succinct, complete. Remember, simplicity is not the same as absence.

Why bother trying to be the best or catch em all, when they're just gonna toss out a hundred new ones next year?

Why bother playing Skyrim if there's just going to be another, better Elder Scrolls game?

Indeed, why bother trying to win any game if you're just going to play another one eventually?

Each Elder Scrolls game is a different experience. I've only fought Mehrunes Dagon once, and I've only been a storm cloak once. I've been Pokemon League champion more times than I can count. It's boring now.

And I wouldn't shout "Gamefreak ripped off Bethesda". I'd probably shout "Gamefreak had a good idea for the first time in years!"

Pokemon has depth, I already said this. It just doesn't have any depth in the ways I care about. I could give a shit if the bag of trash pokemon has been balanced perfectly for endgame levels against the pinecone pokemon. I'm still doing the same shit I was doing in third grade. Who cares?

And the people in pokemon aren't people. They're sign posts. They says one thing and nothing else and never move. There's no life to any of the towns you visit. You go there, you fight the gym, and you leave. Everyone will still be in the exact same spots they were in if you decide to come back.

arc1991:

RJ 17:

Lunar Templar:

3
there's gonna be a Torchic giveaway to go along with the launch as well.

which means an all fire starter team for me.

cause some trainers, just want to watch the world burn .....

That and as far as I remember Fire was always the best starter no matter which game. :P

I don't know, Totodile's evo's were more badass than Cyndaquills(despite me loving the lil guy) in Gen 2, and easily the best starter of that Gen :P

The existence of a fire monkey and all the jokes that can come from that prove fire's superiority. :P

Mcoffey:

Each Elder Scrolls game is a different experience. I've only fought Mehrunes Dagon once, and I've only been a storm cloak once. I've been Pokemon League champion more times than I can count. It's boring now.

And I wouldn't shout "Gamefreak ripped off Bethesda". I'd probably shout "Gamefreak had a good idea for the first time in years!"

Pokemon has depth, I already said this. It just doesn't have any depth in the ways I care about. I could give a shit if the bag of trash pokemon has been balanced perfectly for endgame levels against the pinecone pokemon. I'm still doing the same shit I was doing in third grade. Who cares?

And the people in pokemon aren't people. They're sign posts. They says one thing and nothing else and never move. There's no life to any of the towns you visit. You go there, you fight the gym, and you leave. Everyone will still be in the exact same spots they were in if you decide to come back.

"Each Pokemon game is a different experience. I've also only fought Elite Four Lorelei once, and I've only been a boss of Join Avenue once. I've been 'savior of the universe' more times than I can count; it's boring now." Differently-named bosses and random titles are not distinct content. Incidentally, I suggest looking up some classic Might and Magic titles (specifically 7, 8, and 9) if you're so set on claiming Elder Scrolls as a shining example of creativity and unique experiences.

"I've been shooting differently-colored bad guys with various flavors of fireball for over 25 years. I'm still doing the same shit I've been doing on the NES. Who cares?" Incidentally, the trash bag pokemon isn't nearly balanced against the pinecone. It has no chance at all, since it doesn't learn any fire moves it can use effectively and can't use any of its STAB attacks thanks to Steel's immunity to Poison. heh.

Say you were a rising star in the world of basketball. All you do is go to a city, win your game, and leave. Rinse, repeat. The people aren't people, they are obnoxious noise. Does that make basketball a bad game or boring to play? (only if your team sucks. heh.) I will state again, Pokemon is not an RPG. Pokemon is a sports game with RPG elements. You play as an athlete entering into competitive tournaments, and your focus is on that alone. Consider this: is that really all those people say and do? or is that all you, the player character, see and hear, with your mind focused entirely on Pokemon? That, my friend, is depth. Narrow depth, to be sure, but depth nonetheless.

What you're asking for is a Pokemon RPG, which partially exists in the form of the marginally successful Mystery Dungeon series and the "good, but not successful enough to start a franchise" Pokemon Conquest. That will not likely return to the core series thanks to Colosseum 2 and its indirect sequel, XD: Gale of Darkness reviewing and selling so poorly. (...despite doing everything older fans asked for while taking great pains to remain accessible to children who aren't yet old enough to read. It's true, "you can only please some of the people some of the time.") Consider also the mediocre success of actual monster-collection-based RPG games, such as the Monster Rancher, Digimon, and Spectrobes series. Is Nintendo or GameFreak really going to risk millions of dollars to create a similar title for such a painfully hostile environment when their core product is a guaranteed million-seller? Basically what I'm saying is: you should buy Pokemon Conquest, Monster Rancher, Digimon World, and Spectrobes games, if only to support the genre. heh.

RJ 17:

arc1991:

RJ 17:
That and as far as I remember Fire was always the best starter no matter which game. :P

I don't know, Totodile's evo's were more badass than Cyndaquills(despite me loving the lil guy) in Gen 2, and easily the best starter of that Gen :P

The existence of a fire monkey and all the jokes that can come from that prove fire's superiority. :P

Chimchar was Gen 4 :P i'm on about gen 2! xD

Plus Snivy in Gen 5 in my opinion was the best starter. but overall yes, fire are the best :P

Azaraxzealot:
Ehhhhh, I can't think of anyone who isn't at least near into puberty or isn't in some kind of suspended childhood that actually cares about the story. Most people who play Pokemon now play it for the metagame and battling of other trainers in-game.

Most people who play video games aren't the nerds who populate internet forums, using terms like "metagame"; that represents the minority. Your view of the world does not reflect the world as a whole.

arc1991:

Chimchar was Gen 4 :P i'm on about gen 2! xD

Plus Snivy in Gen 5 in my opinion was the best starter. but overall yes, fire are the best :P

For me I started in Gen 1 with fire, went with it in Gen 2 because Quilava is adorable and I loved Typhlosion and the moves he could learn (mine knows Aerial Ace for some reason), but then in Gen 3 I started going with water types. Regretted that with Gen 4 mainly because I hated Empoleon and kinda wish I had gone with Turtwig to get Torterra. Gen 5 for both I went with Oshawatt because Razor Shell is a nice move and I love the evolutions for it, though the same could be said for Snivy. *glares at Tepig and his evolutions*
Fire/Fighting was cool in Gen 3, but you didn't have to do it for every subsequent Gen Game Freak! >.<

OT: Possibility for 3 starters all at once!?
Too...much...change...for...skull...to...handle!
image

Sheo_Dagana:
Two starters? Good lord, man... it won't make much sense to take both Fennekin and Charmander... but I'm gonna.

Pretty much my exact reaction to this news. Bulbasaur and Squirtle are awesome and all - but Charmander's better... and Fennekin looks damn awesome compared to Chespin & Froakie.

At least they'll have Flying & Psychic as secondary types!

EDIT: Glad to hear they're making more effort on the story. I loved the plot of White/Black a lot. The sequels were a real letdown on that front but the originals were great. For once it didn't seem all about becoming Champion.

What I'd love to see is having to defend your title as Champion (once you get it... let's face it, we will still have to get it) every once in a while from rising stars.

Awesome. Took you fucking long enough, Gamefreak. Not that Gen III, IV, and V weren't enjoyable, but this is the first time they've made significant gameplay changes/additions since Gold/Silver/Crystal. Hmm. The only problem now is choice. I'm thinking Charmander/Froakie, because two fire types would be weird, and Chespin does not appeal to me at all.

ReinWeisserRitter:

Azaraxzealot:
Ehhhhh, I can't think of anyone who isn't at least near into puberty or isn't in some kind of suspended childhood that actually cares about the story. Most people who play Pokemon now play it for the metagame and battling of other trainers in-game.

Most people who play video games aren't the nerds who populate internet forums, using terms like "metagame"; that represents the minority. Your view of the world does not reflect the world as a whole.

I'd say the popularity of pokemon tournaments and the existence of smogon and all the battle programs that exist, it kind of justifies my argument that most people who play pokemon are in it for the competitive battling wither with other trainers or within the game.

Mcoffey:
SNIP

You're essentially asking Nintendo to flesh out a world which inherently doesn't make any sense. That's just silly. Seriously, the entire experience of Pokemon is focused on gameplay, and has been since day one. There is no 'lore' or wider backstory, there's simply a world where everything has been designed to work around the idea of collecting Pokemon and fighting them. There aren't any hospitals, only Pokemon centres. There aren't any general shops, only Pokemarts. The only radio stations we ever listen to are Pokemon stations, the only TV shows Pokemon TV shows. The only hobby people have in the game world is collecting and fighting Pokemon.

Why? Because that is the core mechanic of the game, and Game Freak/Nintendo designed the entire world around that mechanic.

The entire Pokemon setting is inherently absurd, and the best thing Nintendo can do is accept that absurdity and keep the focus on gameplay. As soon as they start trying to 'flesh out' the world and lore, they have to start addressing stuff like why there aren't any damn people doctors, why there don't seem to be any airplanes in existence, and what kind of fucked up society sends its ten year old children out into the wilderness to fight monsters.

I mean, you'd have an easier time trying to make sense of an Italian plumber jumping on turtles to save a princess from a giant dinosaur than you would making sense of that.

Not ever game needs lore. Some games, in fact I would argue most games, benefit from focusing on gameplay first and foremost, and not padding themselves out with superfluous backstory. Game Freak look to have made some pretty huge changes to the gameplay formula which, with the huge graphical upgrade and Nintendogs Pokemon mechanic, should be all they need to justify a sequel.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Mcoffey:
SNIP

You're essentially asking Nintendo to flesh out a world which inherently doesn't make any sense. That's just silly. Seriously, the entire experience of Pokemon is focused on gameplay, and has been since day one. There is no 'lore' or wider backstory, there's simply a world where everything has been designed to work around the idea of collecting Pokemon and fighting them. There aren't any hospitals, only Pokemon centres. There aren't any general shops, only Pokemarts. The only radio stations we ever listen to are Pokemon stations, the only TV shows Pokemon TV shows. The only hobby people have in the game world is collecting and fighting Pokemon.

Why? Because that is the core mechanic of the game, and Game Freak/Nintendo designed the entire world around that mechanic.

The entire Pokemon setting is inherently absurd, and the best thing Nintendo can do is accept that absurdity and keep the focus on gameplay. As soon as they start trying to 'flesh out' the world and lore, they have to start addressing stuff like why there aren't any damn people doctors, why there don't seem to be any airplanes in existence, and what kind of fucked up society sends its ten year old children out into the wilderness to fight monsters.

I mean, you'd have an easier time trying to make sense of an Italian plumber jumping on turtles to save a princess from a giant dinosaur than you would making sense of that.

Not ever game needs lore. Some games, in fact I would argue most games, benefit from focusing on gameplay first and foremost, and not padding themselves out with superfluous backstory. Game Freak look to have made some pretty huge changes to the gameplay formula which, with the huge graphical upgrade and Nintendogs Pokemon mechanic, should be all they need to justify a sequel.

Not to get nitpicky but the comics and occasionally even the anime do contain something along the lines of lore, or at least a more functional world. I remember in one episode of the anime back when I was still young enough to be part of the target demographic where a bus transporting pokemon (I forget why) crashes and leaves a bunch of them injured and there aren't any pokecenters nearby so they rush all the pokemon to a regular hospital where the doctor gets exasperated because he doesn't know how to treat pokemon, just people.

It wouldn't be impossible to create an epic chrono trigger style narrative with pokemon, especially given that there are at least two legendaries with the power to send people hurtling through time, it's just not what the designers want to do with the IP and that's ok. Some games you just play for the mechanics.

Also pokemon totally has planes Skyla's gym is located on an air strip and she flies you to the next town.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Mcoffey:
SNIP

You're essentially asking Nintendo to flesh out a world which inherently doesn't make any sense. That's just silly. Seriously, the entire experience of Pokemon is focused on gameplay, and has been since day one. There is no 'lore' or wider backstory, there's simply a world where everything has been designed to work around the idea of collecting Pokemon and fighting them. There aren't any hospitals, only Pokemon centres. There aren't any general shops, only Pokemarts. The only radio stations we ever listen to are Pokemon stations, the only TV shows Pokemon TV shows. The only hobby people have in the game world is collecting and fighting Pokemon.

Why? Because that is the core mechanic of the game, and Game Freak/Nintendo designed the entire world around that mechanic.

The entire Pokemon setting is inherently absurd, and the best thing Nintendo can do is accept that absurdity and keep the focus on gameplay. As soon as they start trying to 'flesh out' the world and lore, they have to start addressing stuff like why there aren't any damn people doctors, why there don't seem to be any airplanes in existence, and what kind of fucked up society sends its ten year old children out into the wilderness to fight monsters.

I mean, you'd have an easier time trying to make sense of an Italian plumber jumping on turtles to save a princess from a giant dinosaur than you would making sense of that.

Not ever game needs lore. Some games, in fact I would argue most games, benefit from focusing on gameplay first and foremost, and not padding themselves out with superfluous backstory. Game Freak look to have made some pretty huge changes to the gameplay formula which, with the huge graphical upgrade and Nintendogs Pokemon mechanic, should be all they need to justify a sequel.

I disagree. The world feels artificial and boring to me, which is a shame because it doesn't have to be. All fantasy worlds are absurd, but most at least try to make their worlds convincing. I don't care what's happening in the game, because the creators clearly don't. It feels lazy to me.

Azaraxzealot:

ReinWeisserRitter:

Azaraxzealot:
Ehhhhh, I can't think of anyone who isn't at least near into puberty or isn't in some kind of suspended childhood that actually cares about the story. Most people who play Pokemon now play it for the metagame and battling of other trainers in-game.

Most people who play video games aren't the nerds who populate internet forums, using terms like "metagame"; that represents the minority. Your view of the world does not reflect the world as a whole.

I'd say the popularity of pokemon tournaments and the existence of smogon and all the battle programs that exist, it kind of justifies my argument that most people who play pokemon are in it for the competitive battling wither with other trainers or within the game.

It really doesn't; millions of people play the series, and most people don't take video games that seriously, or much of anything that seriously. Again, you're talking about the minority (most people don't even go onto message boards to talk about video games, so you're talking about a minority within a minority, even), and your being a part of that minority doesn't automatically make it what most people are doing. Go ask the next person at a bus stop or some other such public place playing Pokemon if they have any idea what smogon is, or the last time they've been to a tournament.

ReinWeisserRitter:
Go ask the next person at a bus stop or some other such public place playing Pokemon if they have any idea what smogon is, or the last time they've been to a tournament.

Done, they knew exactly what I was talking about. EVs/IVs/Breeding for certain moves/Base Stats and certain battle strategy terms.

I've done this quite a few times actually, I've met less people who DON'T know how the metagame really works than those who do.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here