Pokemon needs to stop being afraid of innovation.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

ZeroMachine:

black_knight1337:

StealthMonkey43:
No, changing Pokemon will just ruin the game and upset fans...

it wouldn't ruin it and wont upset fans. most people are hating on people that want pokemon to change but if it ever does happen (highly doubt it will) you guys who are hating now are gonna be like OMFG THIS IS THE BEST POKEMON GAME EVAR!!! obviously the stuff suggested in this thread will have to be tweaked a bit but if it was implemented in the slightest way than i would be playing pokemon more than i do.

Yes. 'Cause you totally know my taste in games.

i aint claiming to know ppls taste in games i am simply saying this because it is true. other game series have gotten revamped and while there is some people that hate it most people find that it is way better than what it was.

mjc0961:

GrimHeaper:
You don't have to powerlevel anything at all, just be smart.


You see that someone beat an entire team of level 75 pokemon with 6 level ones.
Granted it wouldn't work in anything besides the game, but that is what you are talking about.
Any RPG suffers the same flaw of leveling, though there are an increasing amount that allow you to adjust your level.

I must object, good sir. Here's competitive (meaning two real players, no AI) 1 VS 100 with the level 1's winning:

I've seen Magikarp sweep Legendaries.>.> Nacho
And you need that sash for anything, the person I showed didn't use such a thing, but sturdy instead.

black_knight1337:

ZeroMachine:

black_knight1337:

it wouldn't ruin it and wont upset fans. most people are hating on people that want pokemon to change but if it ever does happen (highly doubt it will) you guys who are hating now are gonna be like OMFG THIS IS THE BEST POKEMON GAME EVAR!!! obviously the stuff suggested in this thread will have to be tweaked a bit but if it was implemented in the slightest way than i would be playing pokemon more than i do.

Yes. 'Cause you totally know my taste in games.

i aint claiming to know ppls taste in games i am simply saying this because it is true. other game series have gotten revamped and while there is some people that hate it most people find that it is way better than what it was.

You said "you guys who are hating now are gonna be like "OMFG THIS IS THE BEST POKEMON GAME EVAR"".

That means that yes, you are claiming to know my taste in games. You even said that there in your reply. "i am simply saying this because it is true."

Guess what? It's not. Yes, some revamps have ended up wildly successful (the transition to 3D Zelda) while others have been almost universally panned (more recent example, though I enjoyed it: Dragon Age 2).

But the fact of the matter is, you claimed that all of us that don't like the OP's ideas will change our minds if a game like this was released. That means you think you know more about us then we do.

Kindly choose your words more carefully next time if thats not what you wanted to imply.

Other posters have already called the OP out on pretty much all his points, but I do have one suggestion that could kind of make point number 7 work (so long as point number 8 is not implemented). Perhaps, instead of having only the grass, water and fire type starters available, or opening it up to any basic unevolved pokemon, you could have a specific starter pokemon of each type at level 5 to choose from, with your rival always picking a type that is good against yours. I could run down some choices for other types now:

Electric: Mareep, Elekid, Shinx
Bug: Caterpie, Weedle, Wurmple, Venipede
Flying: Starly, Pidgey, Pidove
Steel: Aron, Klink, Beldum
Ground: Sandile
Dragon: Dratini, Gible
Psychic: Gothita, Solosis
Ice: Vanillite, Spheal
Dark: Deino
Rock: Larvitar
And let's not forget Normal: Whismur, Lillipup

Those are pokemon that have the characteristics of the usual fire-water-grass starters:
1. They are the first of a three-stage evolution purely on the basis of level
2. They have a damage-dealing move at level 5
3. The typing they are listed under is their primary type, barring only Flying, but I made those particular pokemon exceptions, as most people know them as primarily Flying pokemon and they suit a primarily Flying role well.

Only Ghost, Poison and Fighting did not have at least one pokemon who could match these criteria, but there were pokemon that came close (Gastly, Zubat, Machop). Some of them probably aren't entirely ideal candidates (see the Bug types and Deino; evolution either too fast or too slow), but the point is that with some tweaks to existing pokemon it can be done without even expanding the roster. I think that would be really the only major change I could think of that would be really beneficial out of the list provided by the OP.

EDIT: Corrected for more accurate data (forgot about a few pokemon that evolve when traded).

Crazie_Guy:
Sounds like you want Pokemon to be... well, not Pokemon. You know you can play other games, right? You clearly want to, so you probably should. As for Pokemon, the core games stick with the winning formula and refine and perfect... and still there are many spinoffs that play with different types of gameplay. What do you think of the Pokemon spinoffs, exactly? I don't see you mentioning any of those. If something so radically different was actually made, would you even take notice or would it be written of as just another non-core game?

At the very least, I will say that any calls for major changes that may have held ground around 3rd gen are mostly invalidated as of the advent of wifi battles. I'm sure many people will be dropping by to expouse on the merits of competitive battling against humans. Let me just say that the single player game and the online game are quite literally two different games, and the latter is like a glorious multilayered cake to the formers' bran muffin. I can't exactly say you haven't played Pokemon if you haven't explored the metagame, as a game certainly still needs to stand up on its singleplayer... but let's just say you've essentially bought a chess board and then resolved to do nothing but play checkers against yourself. You've missed the best part. The core system behind Pokemon allows for an utterly astounding amount of strategic depth in the competitive arena, and changing it would be a very bad move. I can't even begin to describe what it's like to be a part of the battling scene, but it easily ranks up there with my glory days on starcraft, and more recently league of legends.

I will agree that Gamefreak could be a bit less blatant about money grabbing with dual versions, but I disagree on the core problem behind it. It's not the version exclusives that really get most people. It's not hard to trade for what you can't get, especially now with wifi. The real problem is their insistance on one and only one save file per game. Generally getting the second version is done so that a player can have one version for their permanent game, and another one that can be restarted and replayed. If you could have multiple saves on one cart, I'd be fine with the dual versions.

I want Pokemon to be less tedious and more engaging, in other words, better, I want it to be just as worth playing now that I'm older as it was when I first picked it up. I want Pokemon games to be interesting enough that I'm playing it practically for entire existence of the francise, is that too much to ask? (BTW, the answer to that question is NO.)
Also, you should note that most of the changes I am suggesting are refering to the main game itself, not person to person competitive battling. Competitive battling is fine as it is, the problem is that the single-player game seems to be just be for solely competitive battling, with pretty ineffective stuff padded around it to make this less obvious. I want them to either make Pokemon single-player mode worthwhile or just show it for what it really is, just a pool to catch Pokemon to play competitive battling with. Oh, and the single player mode is less than effective at teaching anyone how to beat human opponents because of how ridiculously easy it is to exploit the system of it.

Dude, have you even played a Pokemon game? O.O

The story of the main game is literally only a small portion of the game, it's there to restrict you so you can't go anywhere you want, unless you'll be facing level 50's with a level 5 starter Pokemon...Seriously go back and play a Pokemon game, The story is there just so you can get a bit more EXP for your Pokemon and to add a challenge...that is it. The story should not be taken seriously (my opinion)

I can't disagree with your second point, but seriously what else could they do? And if you are not Hooked to Pokemon when you play it, your doing it wrong, it's the most addictive game in existence.

The battles are fine and have been since Red and Blue (even though in that generation some of the moves were STUPIDLY annoying or over powered.) Unless they created a game for the 360/PS3 we will only see turn based combat because that is the best kind of combat for that game, controlling a Pokemon and pressing Y, X, A and B for each move would just be confusing. Plus dude, if all your Pokemon got the same EXP it removes the challenge of the game, there is EXP. Share and the Lucky Egg, use them.

Pokemon battles are hardly repetitive with the amount of moves that have been implemented into the game, i take it your the guy who has 4 Attacking moves consisting of the strongest moves available to that Pokemon and no Status moves (Such as Swords Dance and Stealth Rock), Use status Moves a lot more, you will see a huge difference in how you play the game.

If you had to knock out a Pokemon to catch it, Pokemon like Mewtwo and Giratina would be stupidly easy to catch along with any other Pokemon. With your 7th point i agree, but it won't happen (at least not in this Gen)

Evolution should not be forced, I don;t evolve many of Pokemon (Buizel and Quilava for example) simply because i prefer them forms to the others (yes i know Typholsion is good, i just prefer Quilava) and for the 9th post, they release 2 games first, we all know this, then if there any minor problems, they are rectified in the 3rd game (any animations or move pool's for Pokemon) then there is a remake (sometimes) so more Pokemon are accessible to the player, that is formula, Better than COD's anyway.

I suggest try playing the games again, and using different styles, and not to take the story seriously...

Btw sorry for the rant... :$

immortalfrieza:
I want Pokemon to be less tedious and more engaging, in other words, better, I want it to be just as worth playing now that I'm older

Found your problem...

Go into a game with an empty head and don't expect to much, or skip a Gen or 2, and you'll be hooked again, it's what i did, and I'm really enjoying the series. (for the record im 19...nearly 20.)

arc1991:

immortalfrieza:
I want Pokemon to be less tedious and more engaging, in other words, better, I want it to be just as worth playing now that I'm older

Found your problem...

Go into a game with an empty head and don't expect to much, or skip a Gen or 2, and you'll be hooked again, it's what i did, and I'm really enjoying the series. (for the record im 19...nearly 20.)

I can second this.

I'm 22 now. I started playing Pokemon twelve years ago. I took a break. Between Gold version and HeartGold, I only played on emulators, and barely at that. Once I actually properly got ahold of a new version (the remake of my favorite), I enjoyed it MORE than I did before.

Still do.

arc1991:

immortalfrieza:
I want Pokemon to be less tedious and more engaging, in other words, better, I want it to be just as worth playing now that I'm older

Found your problem...

Go into a game with an empty head and don't expect to much, or skip a Gen or 2, and you'll be hooked again, it's what i did, and I'm really enjoying the series. (for the record im 19...nearly 20.)

So... I should dumb myself down and try to force myself to go into the games without expectations? WHAT KIND OF REAL GAMER IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD DO THAT!?!?! Being a gamer means that you've played many, many games in your life, and it means that you will always be craving for something new and better, no matter how good it gets, same old, same old will only hold your attention for so long. THAT is what drives the video game industry to improve itself, if it weren't for that all we'd ever have is Pong, the video game industry would never have gone anywhere and died out, and Pokemon wouldn't even exist to begin with. In fact, this need for something new and better is what drove mankind mankind to begin with.

immortalfrieza:

arc1991:

immortalfrieza:
I want Pokemon to be less tedious and more engaging, in other words, better, I want it to be just as worth playing now that I'm older

Found your problem...

Go into a game with an empty head and don't expect to much, or skip a Gen or 2, and you'll be hooked again, it's what i did, and I'm really enjoying the series. (for the record im 19...nearly 20.)

So... I should dumb myself down and try to force myself to go into the games without expectations? WHAT KIND OF REAL GAMER IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD DO THAT!?!?! Being a gamer means that you've played many, many games in your life, and it means that you will always be craving for something new and better, no matter how good it gets, same old, same old will only hold your attention for so long. THAT is what drives the video game industry to improve itself, if it weren't for that all we'd ever have is Pong, the video game industry would never have gone anywhere and died out, and Pokemon wouldn't even exist to begin with. In fact, this need for something new and better is what drove mankind mankind to begin with.

DO. NOT. DEFINE. US. EVER.

Maybe that's what being a gamer makes YOU, but some of us LIKE having things stay the same and stay simple with some things.

I want to see massive changes to Halo in the future.

I DO NOT WANT MASSIVE CHANGES IN POKEMON'S FUTURE.

NOT WANTING CHANGE IN ONE FUCKING SERIES DOES NOT MAKE ME LESS OF A GAMER.

So don't you EVER try and define us. EVER.

Now, are you going to answer the question I originally posed you earlier in the thread, or are you going to ignore it?

immortalfrieza:

arc1991:

immortalfrieza:
I want Pokemon to be less tedious and more engaging, in other words, better, I want it to be just as worth playing now that I'm older

Found your problem...

Go into a game with an empty head and don't expect to much, or skip a Gen or 2, and you'll be hooked again, it's what i did, and I'm really enjoying the series. (for the record im 19...nearly 20.)

So... I should dumb myself down and try to force myself to go into the games without expectations? WHAT KIND OF REAL GAMER IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD DO THAT!?!?! Being a gamer means that you've played many, many games in your life, and it means that you will always be craving for something new and better, no matter how good it gets, same old, same old will only hold your attention for so long. THAT is what drives the video game industry to improve itself, if it weren't for that all we'd ever have is Pong, the video game industry would never have gone anywhere and died out, and Pokemon wouldn't even exist to begin with. In fact, this need for something new and better is what drove mankind mankind to begin with.

People have done this exact thing for ages...With COD, Halo, Need For Speed and many other huge titles, Pokemon is not the only game. And i never said you should force yourself to go into the game, i simply said EITHER go into it with an empty head OR skip a Gen.

Plus...

"Being a gamer means that you've played many, many games in your life, and it means that you will always be craving for something new and better, no matter how good it gets, same old, same old will only hold your attention for so long. THAT is what drives the video game industry to improve itself"

Wrong, Being a gamer does not mean you have played loads of games, no way. It doesn't matter if you have played 10, or 100, if you play games you can class yourself as a gamer, but really only you can make that choice.

It does not mean you will also crave something better, hence loads of players are still playing COD4 and Halo 3...

Video games do improve, no matter how small, but Pokemon is made in such way, one small change to the mechanics will GREATLY change how it is played (Just like the Special and Physical swap in Gen4), changing the battle system and how to catch Pokemon may seem like small changes, but they would GREATLY change it.

arc1991:

immortalfrieza:
I want Pokemon to be less tedious and more engaging, in other words, better, I want it to be just as worth playing now that I'm older

Found your problem...

Go into a game with an empty head and don't expect to much, or skip a Gen or 2, and you'll be hooked again, it's what i did, and I'm really enjoying the series. (for the record im 19...nearly 20.)

Not to jump in, but I did the same thing with Diamond, having jumped to that from the FireRed version on the GBA years before. It didn't hold my attention very long, and I ended up returning the game two days later.

I think my problem with Pokemon now is at my age of 25, I can't stand grinding along a linear line to grow my monsters anymore, at least without motivation to do so. Having read the plot of Pokemon White/Black thanks to a website I found, I would be more inclined to play those two because of the more mature themes presented.

Animal rights is something I have yet to see in any Pokemon game, which I like a lot, as well as the idea of Pokemon still being attached to their owners even though they are used in fights. That said, the story of Black/White does have one large plot hole that GameFreak could have fixed with a day or two of extra scripting:

I may pick up Black/White at some point, but to be honest, I'm growing tired of Pokemon, even with the growth they are showing. The grinding is a big reason, but also them being the biggest monster collection series is a minor reason I don't play those games anymore, because I tend to favor games and series about monsters that are less popular with the masses, or which I have truly enjoyed before.

Ones among those being Digimon, a personal favorite, Monster Rancher, and Onmyou Taisenki.

AgentBJ09:

arc1991:

immortalfrieza:
I want Pokemon to be less tedious and more engaging, in other words, better, I want it to be just as worth playing now that I'm older

Found your problem...

Go into a game with an empty head and don't expect to much, or skip a Gen or 2, and you'll be hooked again, it's what i did, and I'm really enjoying the series. (for the record im 19...nearly 20.)

Not to jump in, but I did the same thing with Diamond, having jumped to that from the FireRed version on the GBA years before. It didn't hold my attention very long, and I ended up returning the game two days later.

That is not skipping a Gen, as i stated :P Fire Red and Leaf Green were released, then Diamond and Pearl a few years later.

I stopped right at the beginning of Gen 3, and entered again at the end of Gen 4, and i love the series more as i did as a kid. (sure that isn't skipping a Gen, but it's a good 6 years)

1. Agreed
2. Agreed
3. Easier said than done, if they get kids to play it now they'll practically be hooked for life because of the golden characteristic of nostalgia, I doubt they'll stop it soon
4. I agree with the first part, but the part about XP leveling up I'm not into, but it would cut down on time.
5. They do need to spice up combat more, but taking out turn-based combat won't make it a Pokemon game, may as well play something else.
6. Capturing Pokemon is supposed to be tedious because you don't do it that often (or, at least, in my games I hardly catch any Pokemon). That part about finding rare Pokemon is a good idea, agree with that.
7. Fuckin' agreed
8. Not too hot on that idea, it's an a good goal and accomplishment to reach an evolution, and I like it
9. Yep, hate that.

arc1991:

AgentBJ09:

arc1991:

Found your problem...

Go into a game with an empty head and don't expect to much, or skip a Gen or 2, and you'll be hooked again, it's what i did, and I'm really enjoying the series. (for the record im 19...nearly 20.)

Not to jump in, but I did the same thing with Diamond, having jumped to that from the FireRed version on the GBA years before. It didn't hold my attention very long, and I ended up returning the game two days later.

That is not skipping a Gen, as i stated :P Fire Red and Leaf Green were released, then Diamond and Pearl a few years later.

I stopped right at the beginning of Gen 3, and entered again at the end of Gen 4, and i love the series more as i did as a kid. (sure that isn't skipping a Gen, but it's a good 6 years)

Everything else I mentioned still stands, however.

AgentBJ09:

arc1991:

AgentBJ09:

Not to jump in, but I did the same thing with Diamond, having jumped to that from the FireRed version on the GBA years before. It didn't hold my attention very long, and I ended up returning the game two days later.

That is not skipping a Gen, as i stated :P Fire Red and Leaf Green were released, then Diamond and Pearl a few years later.

I stopped right at the beginning of Gen 3, and entered again at the end of Gen 4, and i love the series more as i did as a kid. (sure that isn't skipping a Gen, but it's a good 6 years)

Everything else I mentioned still stands, however.

Oooh aye, some things i agree with, like the grinding, but there are many things in games we have to do we don't like.

vrbtny:
Any employee at Nintendo gets fired if they say the word "Innovation"....

Unless it was about the wii. In that case they get paid extra.

I really see no need for them to change. Just building on a core concept is fine for a series to do, if the series in question is defined by it's gameplay which in Pokemon is the case. it won't make everybody true to see it stay the same true, but neither would radically changing it.

The only thing i wish Pokemon did differently was that they allow players to go back into different regions. Basically what Gold/Silver/Crystal allowed. You play through this new area, then go to the old ones with that region's pokemon/gym leaders. Thats the only think i wish changed

arc1991:

AgentBJ09:

arc1991:

That is not skipping a Gen, as i stated :P Fire Red and Leaf Green were released, then Diamond and Pearl a few years later.

I stopped right at the beginning of Gen 3, and entered again at the end of Gen 4, and i love the series more as i did as a kid. (sure that isn't skipping a Gen, but it's a good 6 years)

Everything else I mentioned still stands, however.

Oooh aye, some things i agree with, like the grinding, but there are many things in games we have to do we don't like.

Maybe, but I would have to toss out one of my more well liked RPGs as an example of how you can make even grinding interesting - Digimon: Data Squad on the PS2.

In the game, you have from 15-21 evolutions per single Digimon, which is 6, and each one takes anywhere from 4-15 criteria to unlock. This I like since it asks you to perform more actions than just killing monsters to earn certain evolutions.

Resonance of Fate also does something similar to this. You can switch out your guns for each of the three PCs, and buff them with hardware and special shots to make your actions even more flashy. Plus, the action bar keeps you focused on the enemies and battle.

My responses in bold.

immortalfrieza:
*EDIT* Please read my other posts on this thread before presenting your arguments. *END*

1. The stories of Pokemon games need to be better, not necessarily more mature, but need to be more immersive and detailed. There needs to be plot holes to be answered in other installments, there needs to be plot twists, surprises, revelations. In other words, Pokemon games need all the building blocks of a great story, and Pokemon games rarely have ANY of these things.
This article is a good example of something they are refusing to do that if they did would greatly help breathe life into this stale francise:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109149-Game-Freak-Wont-Let-Pokemon-Players-Be-Bad

There's no problems with not letting you be 'bad' so much as there needs to be a deeper story, would you want to be 'bad' but the gameplay to essentially be unaltered? What they need to do is focus more on the story and bring in some actual writers, they've said in the past that plot isn't given the best priority.

2. The overall plot of Pokemon games needs to change, with the exception of 2, (Colosseum and Pokemon XD: Gale of Darkness)ever since the first generation the goal of each Pokemon game has been exactly the same, go to a town, beat the Gym Leader, get a badge, go to the next town, rinse and repeat, while encountering an evil organization that isn't really evil or menacing at all that you take out, beat the Elite Four or whatever they're called that generation, become the Pokemon champion. Your mileage may vary, but this formula was done to death a LOOOOONG time ago.

It doesn't help that those games got mediocre scores or didn't sell well either, it makes them reluctant to try something like that again. They are probably in the "Don't fix what isn't broke" mindset, instead of adding something potentially risky they upgrade what we currently have.

3. This is something 1&2 would help with, people like me (I'm 24 BTW) that grew up with Pokemon are being completely ignored, no attempts are being made to keep us hooked. They never need to change anything because they market to little kids. This is for the same reason children's stories have been around for centuries without a change, it's because for every one person that grows out of it, there are countless more children that are growing INTO it. They need to find a way to serve all ages, not just kids.

One issue with trying to do this is most kids have very similar interests at an early age and very different interests at a later age that's harder to appeal to. It requires them to be able to keep the audience of people that have vastly different interests compared to a younger audience. What needs to be done is to make it more of a true 'Everyone' game instead of E meaning children. They need to drop silly things like bagon learning how to fly because it REALLY wants to.

4. The mechanics of Pokemon battles need to change, at least in the main game where the Pokemon's levels don't have to match, as long as your Pokemon CAN damage their opponents, all they have to do is power-level to beat anyone easily. This results (and I'm guilty of it too) in people just using one,two, or three (depending on if there are double/triple battles or not)Pokemon in every battle throughout the entire game, because it is a LOT less tedious than leveling up 6 Pokemon at once. The rest of your roster is just there to get you through obstacles. Also, all Pokemon in your roster should recieve XP for just being there, not just the ones that have been out, and it would be the full XP, as if they had been the only Pokemon out, and modifed by level so the lower level ones can catch up to the higher level ones.

They've been trying that with the black/white versions, overleveled pokemon's levels start to gradually plateu due to getting less and less EXP whilst pokemon that are lower level then the opponent get huge amounts of EXP. In Red/Blue there was in fact an item called an "EXP All" which did just that by the way, it never made a return.

5. Pokemon battles especially against the computer need to become much more engaging and not repetitive. They need to finally remove the turn based combat, which only required the player to know how to press the A button repeatedly, and change it to a action RPG, like Kingdom hearts or the Tales series, which even during really easy fights require you to pay attention.

They need to have more variation between sprites of the same trainer type, they need to feel like you're fighting different people. When you enter a double battle with two trainers of mirrored sprites, that totally destroys the effect. The turn based combat is quite fine, and there's no way theys make such a risky buisness move by changing up the combat. Pretty much ANYONE can play turn based combat, but not everyone can play action combat. This suggestion might be good for a spin-off game as a proof of concept, but not much beyond that.

image

6. Capturing of Pokemon should NOT be insanely tedious, the biggest problem here being that for no reason whatsoever Pokemon that faint cannot be captured, despite the fact that it would be much easier to do that way and that it happens in the Anime. Also, I know that rare Pokemon should be in there, but does that mean that I have to take out 100 small fry JUST to find that one Pokemon?!? Simple fix here, just have a system which would cause the odds of finding a rare Pokemon in an particular area to increase the more common ones you took out, eventually becoming all but certain.

The pokemon from XD and Colosseum were quite fun to try and catch due to the different mechanics. Namely you were catching other trainer's pokemon, and that due to that they were a threat and could actually KO you. What the main games lack is that after a while you get a high level pokemon with false swipe that just makes catching pokemon trivial. There needs to be more to catching pokemon.

7. Unless it's an extremely rare or story event Pokemon, you should be able to choose ANY Pokemon from that game's roster as your starter. I can't tell you how annoying it is to want a particular Pokemon at the start, but not be able to get it until almost the end of the game.

This might be interesting if implimented as a 'New Game Plus' where you restart the game from the start (All money, mons, and stuff are saved over) and you could be able to pick any pokemon you own as your starter.

8. Evolution should be forcable to ALL Pokemon, as well as via level, so that people that just want to evolve a Pokemon could just do so without having to spend hours leveling it up, and if they were actually going to use it, they would be rewarded with much higher overall stats.

There's a reason why some pokemon require trading, that's to facilitate communications between the player base.

9. Finally, one of the most important, stop releasing 2 games and eventually a third every generation. It wouldn't have to be easy to do, but there should only be 1 version where all the Pokemon from that generation could be caught in one game. The reasons for this are simple, many gamers may NOT have many friends which actually play Pokemon games, because trading is a long and completely unnecessary process that, if you don't have somebody else to link up with, you'll be forced to purchase 3 versions of the game, another of whatever handheld it is on, and a link cable, and most people that play these games and their families are NOT made of money. Linking should be solely for Pokemon battles between players and nothing else

As with the above it looks like a lazy cash in but the designers at game freak never intended for fans to buy all the versions. They expect them to trade for what they want from other people instead of just getting multiple copies. There's also online trading too you could try and use that.

Same with every Nintendo character based game. A little innovation is alwasys good thing. *Looks at Other M* O wait...

*Kicks self in face as punishment for using Other M as a punching bag.*

immortalfrieza:

chadGOLD:

immortalfrieza:

What about the plot? That's pretty much what keeps people playing an RPG even after the system grows old. Without giving anything away, is the plot different from the typical Pokemon game?

Ah the Plot! You'll notice alot of familiar things like the 6 party limit and the different forms of transportation, but Ive enhanced the Pokemon Storage system and also Re-Ordered the fight setup back to the original Red-Crystal GB games. as far as 3d battles are concerned Im not sure it's possible to animate and program 684 pokemon with individual Types and Moves. I'm not a big fan of "3D" Pokemon so the battles will stay semi-2d with the 3D moves still intact. (although I have been working on some 3D cutscenes) I would like to hear from anybody else before I finish this game because I want it to be perfect, Tell me your thoughts and Ideas that should be added because I want Gamefreak to Notice this and apply some of my changes to their game one day.

I think you're confusing plot with gameplay, plot basically equals storyline. What I wanted to know is this going to be the old and used up get the gym badges beat the Elite Four storyline (Pokemon color games) or evil organization trying to take over the world and you have to stop them storyline (Pokemon Colosseum and Pokemon XD) or something entirely different from either?

Id say its more like a 2D version of colosseum. You still get to travel cities but with the gym leaders remaining. Theres more to the "Storyline" than an evil organazation given the fact that your rival is also the creator of the game. That way I can stir up any kind of trouble I want to keep the game going. Also I was thinking about putting in the snagball, but it wouldnt be much of a game if you just took other trainers pokemon. I guess it's that you choose to do what you want. whether thats beating gym leaders or wandering my new region fighting and training.

OKay, frieza first I want to say that you assume that pokemon is your only choice in monster training game, such is your proposition for radical change, which I would understand if this were true, but it isn't, and I can immediately think of 2 series that would better fit your monster training desires.

First off is monster rancher, a relatively obscure game that is less of an RPG and more of a monster training simulator. In this game, you have no type chart, can start with any monster you want, and have an action based combat system.

If traditional Jrpg's are more your thing than go for Dragon quest monsters, which is in most ways your standard party of three RPG, but with the monster recriuting and training concept instead of a preset team

While I do respect your desire for change it would be better if you just chose an alternative instead of complaining that the most popular option isn't how you want it to be.

arc1991:
Dude, have you even played a Pokemon game? O.O

The story of the main game is literally only a small portion of the game, it's there to restrict you so you can't go anywhere you want, unless you'll be facing level 50's with a level 5 starter Pokemon...Seriously go back and play a Pokemon game, The story is there just so you can get a bit more EXP for your Pokemon and to add a challenge...that is it. The story should not be taken seriously (my opinion)

Most other storys of other RPGs also make it so that you don't go to places you can't yet handle, but they're still a significant part of the game in which the game is largely pointless without. Pokemon shouldn't be an exception and quite frankly there's no reason it has to be, there are plenty of games that I played as a child which many of which have more deep and immersive stories than the entire Pokemon Color series put together.

arc1991:
I can't disagree with your second point, but seriously what else could they do? And if you are not Hooked to Pokemon when you play it, your doing it wrong, it's the most addictive game in existence.

The GameCube games are proof that they CAN do something, and not alienate their entire fanbase while doing it. In the Gamecube games they kept the basic types and turn-based gameplay and changed most everything else, and they were a critical success and much better games than the Pokemon Color series. The addiction only lasts so long, it wears off when you evenutally realize that you're basically just catching some new 100-200 Pokemon every generation in exactly the same way you did every generation before, I'm not hooked anymore and I still should be.

arc1991:
The battles are fine and have been since Red and Blue (even though in that generation some of the moves were STUPIDLY annoying or over powered.) Unless they created a game for the 360/PS3 we will only see turn based combat because that is the best kind of combat for that game, controlling a Pokemon and pressing Y, X, A and B for each move would just be confusing. Plus dude, if all your Pokemon got the same EXP it removes the challenge of the game, there is EXP. Share and the Lucky Egg, use them.

Yeah, an Pokemon action RPG would be confusing, for people that didn't read the manual or the tutorial that they would have to put in there, and even then only for about 5 minutes. They can keep the turn based combat if they make it immersive and filled with tension, but as it is in the main game I could beat it simply by mashing the A button while watching cars go by out a window and still win with hardly a scratch every time. Also, Lucky Egg and EXP Share/All only help the problem and only slightly, not erase it, and the problem most of all is tediousness. Tediousness is a double edged sword, it gets you addicted to doing something but also is what drives you away eventually, and that's what they need to avoid.

arc1991:
Pokemon battles are hardly repetitive with the amount of moves that have been implemented into the game, i take it your the guy who has 4 Attacking moves consisting of the strongest moves available to that Pokemon and no Status moves (Such as Swords Dance and Stealth Rock), Use status Moves a lot more, you will see a huge difference in how you play the game.

Yeah, I am that kind of guy that has 4 attack moves because that makes blowing my way through the main games a cakewalk, because even after several generations the main games seem completely unprepared for this incredibly obvious approach, if they could make it so that those kind of no-brainer tactics wouldn't work that well, I might actually try something else and be more interested.

arc1991:
If you had to knock out a Pokemon to catch it, Pokemon like Mewtwo and Giratina would be stupidly easy to catch along with any other Pokemon. With your 7th point i agree, but it won't happen (at least not in this Gen)

Yeah, and if you use false swipe and the other moves designed solely for catching Pokemon it becomes stupidly easy to catch such Pokemon too, this just cuts out the middleman.

arc1991:
Evolution should not be forced, I don;t evolve many of Pokemon (Buizel and Quilava for example) simply because i prefer them forms to the others (yes i know Typholsion is good, i just prefer Quilava)

I never said that you would be forced to evolve your Pokemon if you didn't want to, just that YOU can make them evolve by force as well as by level, like the various Pokemon that evolve through elemental stones like Eevee, but extended to ALL Pokemon so you wouldn't be forced to spend days leveling dozens of Pokemon up to get their evolutions in the Pokedex.

arc1991:
and for the 9th post, they release 2 games first, we all know this, then if there any minor problems, they are rectified in the 3rd game (any animations or move pool's for Pokemon) then there is a remake (sometimes) so more Pokemon are accessible to the player, that is formula, Better than COD's anyway.

If that were the case, why couldn't they just release ONE game and use that as the testing platform for the second game of that generation, it would be less cheap of them that way. Besides, now that you can trade over the internet so the whole trading incentive to buy multiple copies is mostly obsolete anyway.

arc1991:
I suggest try playing the games again, and using different styles, and not to take the story seriously...

So I have to try to force myself to ignore the Pokemon game's faults when I shouldn't even be able to notice them, and not take the story seriously when that should be the entire point of me playing the game, the catching only a plus. I could NEVER do that, and I don't know anyone else that could not only for video games but ANY form of media.

arc1991:
Btw sorry for the rant... :$

Don't worry about it, you're a lot more reasonable and polite than most people on this thread that disagree with me.

James Raynor:
image

I don't think I've ever seen this before...

theheroofaction:
OKay, frieza first I want to say that you assume that pokemon is your only choice in monster training game, such is your proposition for radical change, which I would understand if this were true, but it isn't, and I can immediately think of 2 series that would better fit your monster training desires.

First off is monster rancher, a relatively obscure game that is less of an RPG and more of a monster training simulator. In this game, you have no type chart, can start with any monster you want, and have an action based combat system.

If traditional Jrpg's are more your thing than go for Dragon quest monsters, which is in most ways your standard party of three RPG, but with the monster recriuting and training concept instead of a preset team

While I do respect your desire for change it would be better if you just chose an alternative instead of complaining that the most popular option isn't how you want it to be.

I'm aware of those other monster raising games, many of them they aren't really much better, they suffer from many of the same problems the Pokemon color series does and many of them are in fact worse in a few ways, like Monster Rancher doesn't have a story and Dragon Quest monsters I've never played, most of the Digimon series based games haven't been that great with two exceptions, Digimon DS and Dawn and Dusk. There's also this one old playstation game I bet you've never heard of called Monster Seed that's fairly good, but not exceptional like Digimon DS and D&D.

immortalfrieza:
Le Snip

*Cracks Fingers*

Pokemon has always and will always be a game that is not built for story, and is built purely for entertainment, the story is for kids, something for the adults to do to get a bit more EXP, that's it and that's all it will be, true they could make it a bit better, but after Nintendo's huge success in march, i doubt that will happen, and it doesn't really need to.

They changed everything else because it was on a MUCH better console, they had alot more options because of the 3D world, on the DS systems, we will never see this, on the Wii, and the new Nintendo console coming in a few years, we may say huge improvements, but that is solely because of the system they have been created on, the DS/3DS has restrictions, so does the Gamecube, but the latter has far less.

But why should they do that? It would change the entire system, and i would bet anything it wouldn't sell half as good, Pokemon is successful because ANYONE can simply pick up and play it, add to much stuff, change to much stuff, and it becomes to confusing, as i stated in another post, change to much and the games would fail, simple as that. Plus who the hell reads a manual? Especially kids.

Usually they don't especially against the Elite 4 and the Champion, seriously, save one spot for a Status move if you ever play through the games again, and use the move, i can assure you you will be surprised, Status moves effect the tide of battle, and adds the strategy your looking for.

Have you attempted to catch a Legendary? Even on one health they are piss annoying! and even when they are asleep! it's literally a game of chance to get it, unless you have a Master Ball of course.

Ahh my bad, but still that's a bad move that means there would be a fuckton of items that you need to find in order to evolve a simple Pidgey, As i have stated before if that happened, it would be a HUGE change to how the game is played.

Because they want you to trade with other people, your not supposed to buy both versions (although if you do it's your choice) they then improve with the 3rd instalment, while still needing the other 2, plus if there was just one game, it makes getting the Legendary's (usually one is exclusive to one game, Palkia for Pearl, Groudon for Ruby etc) a much easier job, where it's meant to be challenging, hence the name Legendary

I simply said use different styles, try things you haven't before (we do this with pretty much every game we buy) Story's are not always the point of the game either (Bulletstorm comes to mind, yet it is still a fun game to play). The game has faults sure, but they are a minor complaint to a game giant that is pretty much the Halo of the DS system.

And meh, i see no point in arguing unless your points are completely stupid, which so far in this debate they haven't, just remember that Pokemon aims at everyone, and not just the die hard fans of the game.

immortalfrieza:
snip

Ah, but I was basing those suggestions solely on the post you made to start the thread, not from any other experiences you've had, but the exact qualities of the game were just measured for suggestions.

The overall point I was trying to make was that you are trying to change a niche game, and that you were better off with another niche or a more general audience game.

(monster rancher being the other niche with DQM being the general audiences game)

pokemon may fill the biggest niche in history, but it's still a niche, which is why a change to the formula would negatively impact much of the audience

and no I've never heard about monster seed, thanks for informing me of it.

And of course, if there isn't a game that's perfect for you, you could always make it yourself.

more than one save file please!

immortalfrieza:
snip

theheroofaction:
Ah, but I was basing those suggestions solely on the post you made to start the thread, not from any other experiences you've had, but the exact qualities of the game were just measured for suggestions.

The overall point I was trying to make was that you are trying to change a niche game, and that you were better off with another niche or a more general audience game.

(monster rancher being the other niche with DQM being the general audiences game)

Pokemon pretty much as a monopoly on the monster raising games market, they're the only MR games out there that get much in the way of advertisment, everybody else is much more obscure and much further dug down into the niche, even if they are much better like Digimon DS and D&D.

theheroofaction:
pokemon may fill the biggest niche in history, but it's still a niche, which is why a change to the formula would negatively impact much of the audience

The core mechanic of Pokemon types and catching Pokemon, in other words the main draws of the series IS the formula, it's just everything around it that needs a lot of work, and if they really put effort into it they could do it without "negatively impacting much of the audience" as you put it.

theheroofaction:
and no I've never heard about monster seed, thanks for informing me of it.

No problem, just get a guide from GameFAQs if you ever get a chance to play MS, it's fairly complex sometimes.

theheroofaction:
And of course, if there isn't a game that's perfect for you, you could always make it yourself.

Actually, I plan to become a video game designer someday, I'm just having trouble finding what part of game design I really have a talent for (it's hard to find much very specific information about them that's more than just overhyped fanfare), these days I'm leaning towards writing.

immortalfrieza:

Yeah, I realize pokemon fills most of the monster training market, that's been true ever since it started, but it dominates the market for a reason. If you don't like the game you can get one of the alternatives.

Thing is, complaining about problems something that's popular ain't gonna change anything. It's just gonna annoy the people who like it the way it is.

ZeroMachine:
Now, are you going to answer the question I originally posed you earlier in the thread, or are you going to ignore it?

Oh, you mean this one? I never noticed it above your ranting and raving.

ZeroMachine:
From a PURELY BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, why would you gamble losing money by changing a formula that is damn near GUARANTEED to work?

Besides the fact that I never said that they had to change the formula at all, the formula is this: Pokemon type advantages Vs type disadvantages + collector's joy of catching Pokemon, it's everything around it that needs to change, and there's a LOT of ground to cover. To actually answer your question, besides the fact that Pokemon is going to wither away and die from stagnation in the next few years just like every other type of media always does if they don't, what you wrote in that very same post provides that answer:
v v

ZeroMachine:
Best March in Nintendo's history.

You know why this happened? One of 2 possiblities:

1. They've NEVER released a Pokemon game in March before, which considering how many there are I doubt it.

2. It's because the games responsible for these sales ACTUALLY BOTHERED TO DO AT LEAST A LITTLE INNOVATION!!!! This is the far more likely explaination, they didn't really do THAT much, but they at least tried and I hope they continue to do this.

My replies will be in bold.

immortalfrieza:

ZeroMachine:
Now, are you going to answer the question I originally posed you earlier in the thread, or are you going to ignore it?

Oh, you mean this one? I never noticed it above your ranting and raving.

This will be the last time I respond to you. All you keep doing it attacking people who disagree with you. We disagreed, you told us we were wrong. Thats why I, and many others, began ranting and raving... to counter your own. You have been nothing but snide and arrogant to pretty much anyone that disagreed with you. I saw that you want to work in the industry. If you keep your current attitude, you will fail.

ZeroMachine:
From a PURELY BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, why would you gamble losing money by changing a formula that is damn near GUARANTEED to work?

Besides the fact that I never said that they had to change the formula at all, the formula is this: Pokemon type advantages Vs type disadvantages + collector's joy of catching Pokemon, it's everything around it that needs to change, and there's a LOT of ground to cover.

The battle system is part of the core formula of the Pokemon games. You're suggesting that changes.

To actually answer your question, besides the fact that Pokemon is going to wither away and die from stagnation in the next few years just like every other type of media always does if they don't,

Pokemon has lasted with little changes between iterations since 1996. That is fifteen years of success on the same formula with very little changes other than aesthetic ones. They can last quite a bit longer doing the same thing. That shows with the fact that every iteration is more successful than the last.

what you wrote in that very same post provides that answer:
v v

ZeroMachine:
Best March in Nintendo's history.

You know why this happened? One of 2 possiblities:

1. *snipped for being irrelevant*

2. It's because the games responsible for these sales ACTUALLY BOTHERED TO DO AT LEAST A LITTLE INNOVATION!!!! This is the far more likely explaination, they didn't really do THAT much, but they at least tried and I hope they continue to do this.

Other than new Pokemon and an aesthetic change, there were only two changes to the core of Pokemon Black and White: the way TMs work and 3 vs 3 battles, both of which were very basic and were one of the few changes fans have been clamoring for. If anything, it was all the proof they needed to stay the course and keep the games relatively the same.

You don't understand marketing. You don't understand business. You don't understand success.

Making a different game as a spinoff of the series is fine. But to change the main series in the ways you suggest would be self defeating on Nintendo's part.

ZeroMachine:

black_knight1337:

ZeroMachine:
SNIP

SNIP

SNIP

soz for delayed reply had to sleep and go to school. firstly i liked dragon age 2 as well it just felt a hell of a lot better imo. secondly a pretty damn big example of my point is mass effect. me2 brought along a tonne of changes and it was praised for it (even though i preferred me1). this is something that pokemon is in a dire need of. if it follows its current path it is going to be left behind. and let me make this clear I DO NOT WANT THIS. i want pokemon to have success for another few generations. if it makes some decent changes then it will get this success but if it doesnt then im sorry to say it but it will die.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked