Nintendo is Making a Full Pokemon RPG for the Switch

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Addendum_Forthcoming:

What sort of story can you expect with something that is effectively "Fantasy Poaching & Dogfighting: The Game" ...?

Something better than just the same exact plot and goal for the protagonist over and over again, and gameplay that has more strategy involved beyond the "use the same Pokemon for every fight until you've powerleveled up to the point you can crush EVERYTHING effortlessly" strategy which is the very first strategy any first time RPG player comes up with. The challenges the player goes up against should be specifically balanced under the assumption the player is going to use that exact strategy first and foremost, and the story could go in any number of directions. Maybe there's an army of rogue Pokemon leading a "revolution" that the player has to stop, perhaps there's an impending worldwide disaster that's going to destroy the Pokemon world that requires the player to travel the world finding and catching particular Pokemon to prevent, maybe the main character's town was destroyed by a criminal organization and they are going to seek revenge, maybe a plot that's completely unique. These kinds of plots do appear in the Pokemon franchise, but the trouble is even when they do they're largely regulated as barely noticeable B plots rather than being a main focus, usually a 5 year old could come up with something more interesting, complex, and less cliched, and tend to be repeated with any given line of games.

I mean it has numbers and levelling, but I fail to see how having numbers that influence other numbers simply being more visible than in most games qualifies it as a roleplaying game. That's just gameplay. I don't remember ever allocatng those numbers to specific stats.

Have they introduced anything since then that could make it a roleplaying game?

RPG has become a very very broad genre of game. A combat system that provides some form of numerical advancement is really all that's needed. Having stats and leveling in some form is enough to qualify Pokemon as an RPG, and neither are the player being able to pick and choose stat increases nor being able determine their character's motivations and role in the story is needed to qualify. A Role Playing Game is as much about playing a fixed role the player has no actual input in deciding both narratively and gameplay-wise as it is about being able to decide anything and everything.

immortalfrieza:

Something better than just the same exact plot and goal for the protagonist over and over again, and gameplay that has more strategy involved beyond the "use the same Pokemon for every fight until you've powerleveled up to the point you can crush EVERYTHING effortlessly" strategy which is the very first strategy any first time RPG player comes up with. The challenges the player goes up against should be specifically balanced under the assumption the player is going to use that exact strategy first and foremost, and the story could go in any number of directions. Maybe there's an army of rogue Pokemon leading a "revolution" that the player has to stop, perhaps there's an impending worldwide disaster that's going to destroy the Pokemon world that requires the player to travel the world finding and catching particular Pokemon to prevent, maybe the main character's town was destroyed by a criminal organization and they are going to seek revenge, maybe a plot that's completely unique. These kinds of plots do appear in the Pokemon franchise, but the trouble is even when they do they're largely regulated as barely noticeable B plots rather than being a main focus, usually a 5 year old could come up with something more interesting, complex, and less cliched, and tend to be repeated with any given line of games.

You see the problem with thatis though, right? I'm pretty sure if the narrative of a bunch of pissed off wildlife about being poached, smuggled, and forced to fight on the basis of human entertainment rose up and thought that was pretty shitty and humans need to die... that might become a level of hyperawareness for every mum that mindlessly bought a copy of the games for their kids over the years that basically their kids havew been playing cutesy dogfighting in a world where the entire economy seems to be propped up on entertainment from seeing violence towards caged creatures and saying that's okay.

And essentially the player isn't some noble saviour of the people, but rather using captured wildlife to fight other wildlife that are rebelling against being forced to fight.

That would make foran *awesome game* but I imagine every mum might stop buying pokemon for their kids. I mean it gets way too close to real-world politics at that point. Better to have it have that seemingly invincible shield wheresimplysaying; "But it's cute!..." manages to deflect any further gaze into what isa pretty fucked up universe and moraity.

I mean the world of Pokemon is basically Dark Eldar from 40K with a brighter palette set.

RPG has become a very very broad genre of game. A combat system that provides some form of numerical advancement is really all that's needed. Having stats and leveling in some form is enough to qualify Pokemon as an RPG, and neither are the player being able to pick and choose stat increases nor being able determine their character's motivations and role in the story is needed to qualify. A Role Playing Game is as much about playing a fixed role the player has no actual input in deciding both narratively and gameplay-wise as it is about being able to decide anything and everything.

I get that, but even in the fakest 'RPG' there isstill some level of your characterplaying towards a role. Picking an outcome. if it lacks that, why not just call it an turn-based action adventure game? Like most Zelda games (Minus turn-based)?

Wrex Brogan:
Maybe? It's hard to tell with pokemon - they used to do 3 games to a set, then Gen 4 had 3 games and two remakes, then sequels with no remakes, then two games, two remakes, and their development times are getting faster... at this point, it's either Gen 8 or Remakes (or, as implied, a really late port) given the time frame, or it's own separate game that's still considered mainline. They do different shit each cycle, honestly.

Actually Gen 3 had 5 as well, with Firered and Leafgreen

Addendum_Forthcoming:

immortalfrieza:

Something better than just the same exact plot and goal for the protagonist over and over again, and gameplay that has more strategy involved beyond the "use the same Pokemon for every fight until you've powerleveled up to the point you can crush EVERYTHING effortlessly" strategy which is the very first strategy any first time RPG player comes up with. The challenges the player goes up against should be specifically balanced under the assumption the player is going to use that exact strategy first and foremost, and the story could go in any number of directions. Maybe there's an army of rogue Pokemon leading a "revolution" that the player has to stop, perhaps there's an impending worldwide disaster that's going to destroy the Pokemon world that requires the player to travel the world finding and catching particular Pokemon to prevent, maybe the main character's town was destroyed by a criminal organization and they are going to seek revenge, maybe a plot that's completely unique. These kinds of plots do appear in the Pokemon franchise, but the trouble is even when they do they're largely regulated as barely noticeable B plots rather than being a main focus, usually a 5 year old could come up with something more interesting, complex, and less cliched, and tend to be repeated with any given line of games.

You see the problem with thatis though, right? I'm pretty sure if the narrative of a bunch of pissed off wildlife about being poached, smuggled, and forced to fight on the basis of human entertainment rose up and thought that was pretty shitty and humans need to die... that might become a level of hyperawareness for every mum that mindlessly bought a copy of the games for their kids over the years that basically their kids havew been playing cutesy dogfighting in a world where the entire economy seems to be propped up on entertainment from seeing violence towards caged creatures and saying that's okay.

And essentially the player isn't some noble saviour of the people, but rather using captured wildlife to fight other wildlife that are rebelling against being forced to fight.

That would make foran *awesome game* but I imagine every mum might stop buying pokemon for their kids. I mean it gets way too close to real-world politics at that point. Better to have it have that seemingly invincible shield wheresimplysaying; "But it's cute!..." manages to deflect any further gaze into what isa pretty fucked up universe and moraity.

I mean the world of Pokemon is basically Dark Eldar from 40K with a brighter palette set.

There's plenty of video games and other stories designed for children that have more morally ambiguous and complex plots and more balanced, interesting gameplay than the Pokemon series has ever managed and it never resulted in parents crying bloody murder (or when it did, nobody actually cared). Being designed for kids is no excuse to dumb down the plot or gameplay, a good game including those designed for kids is something an adult can enjoy just as well as a kid, and vis versa. A lot of the RPGs from the Super Nintendo era were like this, such as Earthbound, Chrono Trigger, Breath of Fire, and so on. The problem is that the Pokemon series has been marketed towards children from the very beginning, Nintendo knows that somewhere around 8-10 kids are going to pick it up, maybe be rabidly interested in it for a year or 2, then drop it for something else. This is the reason why Nintendo haven't made any attempt to evolve the gameplay and just repeat the same story over and over again, because kids aren't particularly well versed in what's cliched or not yet and they are aware there will just be a new crop is kids coming along to play the game which will be all new and exciting to them, so they don't have to bother to actually KEEP fans interested. That, and the metagame is what keeps the fanbase that does stick around for more than one game around anyway. Why bother trying to make the singleplayer portion worthwhile when they can just make the fans do all the actual work for them?

I get that, but even in the fakest 'RPG' there isstill some level of your characterplaying towards a role. Picking an outcome. if it lacks that, why not just call it an turn-based action adventure game? Like most Zelda games (Minus turn-based)?

I don't think you DO get that, there is no such thing as a "fakest" RPG, it either is or isn't an RPG. RPGs have hybridized with so many other genres that it's become very very difficult if not impossible to define what is or isn't an RPG anymore. Traditionally RPGs have 3 things in common:

Levels or character statistics that could be improved over the course of the game.
A menu-based combat system.
A central quest that runs throughout the game as a storyline.

However, there are plenty of RPGs which don't conform to all of these. There's plenty of RPGs where the story is basically nonexistent and the game focused entirely on the advancement portion, such as roguelikes, as completely open and free stories as possible like the Open World Bethesda games, and everything in between. A menu based combat system isn't necessary either, such as with a lot of Action RPGs. Levels and statistics fixed or determined by the player seem to be a defining trait of RPGs, along with typically equipment advancement, I don't think I've seen an RPG that didn't have at least the former. Picking an outcome has absolutely NOTHING to do with what makes an RPG an RPG whatsoever. All of this is perfectly fine, anyone saying something isn't a true RPG is nothing more just someone trying to justify dismissing an RPG they don't like, not because it actually isn't an RPG.

Addendum_Forthcoming:

What sort of story can you expect with something that is effectively "Fantasy Poaching & Dogfighting: The Game" ...?

You obviously watched the 4Kidz version of Pokemon. First of all, Pokemon aren't analogous to plain animals in our world, because we know regular animals exist in the Pokemon world.

Pokemon are completely different. Ever since recorded history, prehistoric humans have lived under the fear of Pokemon.

To us they look like cute immortal animals, but 10,000 years ago they are widely regarded as malevolent deities, anomalies of wild animals, supernatural creatures with command over the elements, demons that can possess humans, and the undead. Pokemon were feared for their ability to render regions ablaze, or cause massive flooding. Psychic and ghost Pokemon were especially feared, for their ability to turn an entire village into mind controlled zombies, a fate worse than death.

But the truly most terrifying are the "Legendary" Pokemon. There are legends of cities and principalities disappearing and reappearing a decade later, as if they were warped into another plane of existence, or legends of animals turned into non-geometric masses. There were traders with stories about encountered an unkown Pokemon, attempting to battle it in vain, only to return to town realizing a hundred years have passed.

Admittedly I haven't played much... mainly because I found the concept incredibly fucking creepy. Personal hangups, but usually teenagers that torture and cage animals for fun or profit turn out to be weirdoes and just plain wrong, and trying to make it cutesy gave it that weird North Korean cartoon propaganda for kids-vibe.

Civilization was not able to develop until humans were able to tame Pokemon. It was at first necessity, since humanity had no means of warding a Pokemon off without another Pokemon. The surviving tribes that were able to tame stronger Pokemon eventually became civilizations of their own.

However, humanity with all its cunning, realized they were in possession of war gods. An entire field was dedicated to researching how to tame more powerful Pokemon. City-states rose and fell because of the Pokemon they possessed. Pokemon battles are nothing like we see today. One Pokemon could exterminate an entire civilization if left unmolested.

In the peaceful modern world, Pokemon taming has been mastered such that most Pokemon have been domesticated. Pokemon battles have become a relic of an older age, like bull-fighting. Yet, the dark truth is that the rise of Pokemon battles and the creation of the Pokemon League was for a reason other than recreation. Championships serve an ulterior purpose: to find the best there ever was. The entire system was created by shadow factions and governments in a never-ending power struggle, vying to create a Pokemon Master who is able to tame an omnipotent Pokemon. One who could tame one of these Pokemon could control the universe itself. Pokemon Masters were designed to bring about a new world.

However, some of leaders in the inner echelon of some factions became impatient, and created a means to clone the weakest Pokemon with omnipotent powers, Mew, which is where the Pokemon movie starts off. This is why the movie differs so much in tone with the anime, because 4kidz removed most of the backstory. This is the real story of Pokemon.

Edit: Just in case, this was a joke

 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