Fungi Forums
Video Games => Video Game Chat => Topic started by: WarpRattler on November 12, 2009, 04:37:01 AM
-
(Note: This will be largely tl;dr for a lot of people. Those with short attention spans need not read further.)
Pokémon is a pretty successful franchise - thirteen years and it's still running strong. However, Pokémon as a game - and we're talking main-series adventure games here, not Mysterious Dungeon, Ranger, Pinball, or the various other spin-offs - sucks. There are various reasons for this, many of which I'll detail below.
Stagnation
The Pokémon games I'm talking about are traditional slooooooow JRPGs. Standard turn-based battle system, level-grinding, square grid-based overworld, incredibly linear - come on, even Dragon Quest has deviated a bit from that ancient formula for a while now!
Legendaries
Everyone knows about the special class of Pokémon usually referred to as "legendaries" - a bird trio and two incredible psychics in first-gen; a beast trio, two birds, and a grass elemental with control over time in second-gen; a trio of golems, a trio of powerful monsters with control over the weather, two playful dragons, a elusive wish-granter, and an alien in third-gen; and God knows what in fourth-gen. There are thirty-five legendaries in all, almost all of which can now be caught through regular gameplay throughout the five fourth-gen games (including some as part of the main storyline). Shouldn't legendaries be, y'know, legendary? In a way other than stats?
Too Many Pokémon, Can't Catch 'Em All
As of fourth-gen, there are 493 unique Pokémon species. In third-gen, to be able to complete the Pokédex (a major post-game goal for many players) without trading with other players, one had to own all five main-series third-gen releases, two GameCube games, and a GBA-to-GCN cable. A player wishing to complete the Pokédex in fourth-gen (again, without trading with other players, including WFC) must own all three major releases, plus a spin-off and two games that haven't been released in the US yet. Pokémon stopped being fun (or inexpensive) for completionists after first-gen.
Hacking And Piracy
Using cheating devices or otherwise hacking to obtain advantages is present in most games, but it's especially prominent in Pokémon, enough so that out-of-the-box compatibility with the latest Pokémon release is a commonly-advertised feature of many cheating devices. Additionally, no copy-protection has been implemented in a main-series Pokémon game yet, so they're easily among the most pirated games on Nintendo's handhelds in addition to being some of the best-selling games.
Multiplayer
Can you honestly say you'd praise a Pokémon game for its multiplayer? This isn't a well-crafted fighting game, real-time-strategy game, or first-person shooter. It's a turn-based RPG (and, in fourth-gen, a boring form of capture-the-flag). They somehow hold serious-business tournaments for these games, despite being largely unbalanced (enough that seventeen monsters are banned outright from standard tournament use, the equivalent of one out of twenty-nine selectable characters in a fighting game being hard-banned) and not particularly fun in multiplayer.
All some pretty glaring problems. At least two of them plague almost any long-running popular series, but Pokémon has this problem where the developers have made no effort to even slightly fix most of these problems. And why should they? As long as people keep buying these games, they don't need to change the formula, right? So they'll never make the following changes...
Change Up The Formula, Just A Little Bit
This isn't even that hard. Keeping it turn-based is fine. Ditch the grid, though. Use a better leveling system, or make grinding more rewarding - even rare loot drops from defeating monsters that carry items would be an improvement, as long as it doesn't lead to the inclusion of fetch quests. Open the world up a bit - instead of roadblocks and the HM system preventing you from getting to the next city, why not just allow you to go wherever you want (the Surf requirement to get to islands excluded), but not compensate for your lower level at all? (The system with unresponsive Pokémon if you don't have a badge allowing you to control them would definitely need to remain in place.) Just take some inspiration from other JRPGs.
Make Legendaries Legendary (And Change The Save System While You're At It)
Another easy fix. First off, ditch the Master Ball entirely. No more "oh, hey, I don't want to bother with fighting this guy, I'll just use the item with a 100% catch rate" going on. You have to work for your legendaries. Second, make it so legendaries aren't always there. To use the set-up from the first-gen games as an example, when you reach a legendary Pokémon's den, it'll be there, and you have one chance to face it; there was also one Pokémon that could only be legitimately obtained through a special Nintendo event. Scrap all that. Instead, with the bird trio, you have a 25% chance of that particular bird being there on that playthrough. If it's there, that's the bird you'll have a chance at getting; otherwise, you get a Nugget. Have it be even lower for Mewtwo (let's say 10% chance of it being there, and a Rare Candy or something otherwise), and have Mew roam the land with a one-in-67,108,864 encounter rate. In that example, there's a chance at getting exactly one bird (not your choice which), a lower chance at exactly one Mewtwo, and a very slim chance (but always a chance) of obtaining a Mew. This is the part of this scenario where everyone complains about it really being impossible to complete the Pokédex without trading. Three words: New. Game. Plus. You'd be able to start a new file in which your Pokémon from the previous game are locked away until you defeat the Elite Four Champion (added bonus if the game is programmed so that the Champion uses the exact party used to defeat the previous Elite Four). Reroll for legendaries and make it so that everything can be accomplished with a single copy of the game with enough time and effort. Also: you can only load from a particular save once (Diablo-style, not NetHack-style) - try to load from it again and it starts you back at the last Pokémon Center (with some sort of other punishment, though definitely not the "you lose all your money" thing Diablo II does). Also also: it autosaves for legendary battles (as with secret base battles in third-gen), so whatever happens happens regardless of whatever you might try to do to get out of an undesirable outcome.
Just Introduce A New Land Next Time, And Bring Back All Of The Old Pokémon
No more new Pokémon, or keep it under fifty if you absolutely have to include them, and make sure every single one uses a type combination we've never seen before if that's the case. Instead of crafting all sorts of new Pokémon, craft yet another new world, and make it so that every single Pokémon can be caught in this new world. Put it a decade or more after second- and fourth-gen. Connect it to the old lands with news clippings, television stories, books, and other sorts of things that show that the old places still exist, but they're way different from here (and make sure to document the kinds of things that might have changed there during the elapsed time). The only things that could be compared to the other lands would be the gym system (though it could have a lot more than eight badges) and the Elite Four (which could also be increased for a harder boss gauntlet).
Anti-Hacking And Anti-Piracy
This is where suddenly a lot of people get overly defensive about cheating in a video game. My standpoint? If the game detects that the save file has been altered by outside forces (such as a Pokésav equivalent or an Action Replay)? Have it corrupt the save file and scold the player. (If you really think this is too harsh a punishment - though it's seriously not - the game can warn the player the first time they do it and then corrupt the save file if more changes are detected.) Put in a copy-protection check at the file creation screen and after every gym leader battle (and code each check slightly differently as to make it harder to get around the protection); if a check fails at the new game screen, put a BAD EGG (or equivalent) in the player's party and fill every storage box with BAD EGGs (so that the player can't just dump the BAD EGG into a box to deal with it), and if it fails elsewhere, turn every Pokémon in the player's party except one into a BAD EGG and do as before with the storage boxes (and transform every Pokémon already in storage into a BAD EGG). Program it in such a way that if one tries to hack it out of the game (whether through an Action Replay code or hex-editing the ROM) it activates the anti-hacking stuff and automatically corrupts the save file. Figure out some way to code it so that it would be so much work to crack as to not be worth it. Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story's copy-protection was a big deal because it checked twice (once at the file select screen and once at the first boss fight), so take that even further.
Improve Multiplayer
There are many, many ways this could be done, and I'm not going to bother detailing more than two of them.
Bring Back Pokémon Stadium Versus
Since no experience is earned from multiplayer, there's no real reason to use player-trained Pokémon - so don't. Instead, introduce a versus mode with a system similar to one from the Pokémon Stadium titles. In this mode, each player would be able to pick a party of six Pokémon from a pool of all of them. Each Pokémon would have a choice of a predetermined moveset based on its types (for the lazy or those in a hurry) or a player-made moveset (from a pool of whatever attacks that Pokémon could learn naturally, via TM, or through one generation of breeding; some amount of these player-made movesets could be saved), and all Pokémon in this mode would be at the same level (likely either level 50 or level 100). Now, this would make some people angry - after all, they went to all the effort of breeding Pokémon to cause some destruction (http://moonside.kontek.net/drawn/smaaaash/042.html), and here's a game mode that takes the work out of creating some decent combinations - but these Pokémon wouldn't be EV-trained or anything, and the standard versus modes would still be present for those people.
Introduce Co-Op
The other multiplayer idea is (competitive) co-op. Remember the sections in fourth-gen where you could team up with an NPC for double-battling? Well, have something like that, but multiplayer. Have special co-op dungeons with high-level Pokémon and good rewards at the end. Players could stay together and double-battle, or they could explore separately and deal with the stronger monsters on their own, but one could also reach the end first and have the loot all to himself. Also, this mode would give experience from battles and allow players to catch Pokémon (possibly with some special way for one player to distract a monster in a double battle so that the other player could catch it or the other monster without knocking either of them out).
So yeah, none of those changes would probably ever be introduced into an official Pokémon release, though change is all but necessary at this point. For a fan game, though, or yet another game to try to compete with Pokémon? Many of these changes (excepting the anti-piracy for a fan game, obviously) could make for something really great.
-
I hope to God that your ideas about Legendaries, Saving, and Anti-Hacking measures never make it into a Pokemon game.
A New Game+ is only a partial fix, at best. I don't want to go through the whole game who knows how many times for the sake of catching two or three Pokemon, with no guarantee that your query will even be there (perhaps if there is a 100% chance of meeting the Legendaries in a New Game+, the idea could fly). I, for one, think that the in-game story has made it very clear in every installment that Legendary Pokemon are seldom seen and never caught or defeated (before the player hits the scene, anyway), thus: Legendary.. Part of the story, part of the reward, and part of the fun, is being able to catch that uber-monstrosity at the end of the game's storyline. I've always viewed a Legendary battle(s) as the moment when the player reaches his full potential as a trainer and subdues a creature that was once thought to be unstoppable with his rag-tag team of hard-earned and hard-trained Pokemon.
As for saving, what if you want to save before a particularly nasty gym leader or even the Elite Four? If you lose, you can just load the file from before you fought them with the items and money that would've been used in vain and lost if you failed to beat said gym leader. In the spirit of reducing the amount of grinding (one of your points that I agree with), don't force the player to rebuild his stock of supplies every time through countless Vs. Seeker rematches when he loses a battle.
We've discussed [bickered, argued] hacking before in #tmk, and my stand hasn't changed since then. If someone wants to Pokesav his game until his brain turns to mush, let him. If he wants to ruin the experience for himself by hacking a party of fully EV'd, max IV legendaries at the beginning of the game, then let him. If the experience is truly ruined, then it will be its own lesson. If he still has fun, who are we to tell him he can't enjoy the game in that way? Obviously, issues come into play when you're hacking for the purposes of winning a multi-player match. At that point, hacking should not be allowed, because it gives one player an unfair advantage and robs his opponent of a fair victory. Nonetheless, most people who hack the game that I've met hack for the single-player element, and to see what new things that they can do with the game. Most competitive tournaments check for hacks, anyway, so it's not as though measures haven't already been taken.
The other ideas (about competitive co-op, a new land with all Pokemon available without migrating or gratuitous trading, and a more open-ended game world) are good (I find the latter to be very interesting, actually), and I agree that they'd be a welcome change of pace from Stealth Rock-centric, trade-happy, linear game play.
-
Somehow when I was writing this up I forgot about the other possible punishment for hacking, which would be a lock preventing all multiplayer (trading, battles, contests, the potential co-op thing, the Underground, WFC, and anything else that might be incorporated), followed by save corruption if they attempt to hack around this (sorry, but there is no other way to actively punish a player for trying to cheat the game, especially when they're trying to cheat it so that they can ruin the experience for others as well).
For saves, look at it from a narrative standpoint: you're a ten-year-old kid alone in the world. You're a weakling who whites out if his whole team of usable Pokémon faints. Why should you be afforded what equates to the ability to cheat death?
The numbers I used were merely examples. The point was to make it so that you don't automatically get a shot at every single legendary on a single playthrough. (Now that I think about it, the New Game+ mechanic could also be expanded to randomize which previously-version-exclusive Pokémon you'd find on a particular playthrough.)
-
A slightly less harsh fix for legendaries involving a New Game+-type thing (using the bird example again) would be to have there be a 100% chance of one member of the trio on a given playthrough, and it wouldn't give a repeat if you were lucky enough to have two unique ones already. This would mean that you could catch Articuno on one run, Zapdos on the next, and be ensured your chance at Moltres on the third, but it'd also mean you could encounter several of the same type in a row before getting a different one and having an ensured chance at the third. There could be some sort of system in place to prevent this - it could be as simple as just having the game reroll that playthrough's bird if it would be the same bird a third time in a row.
Also, to make things more interesting and give the player choice in some situations: legendary double battles. You encounter Latios and Latias (or Ho-oh and Lugia, or Mew and Mewtwo, or Dialga and Palkia) at the same time. You can't catch them both on a single playthrough.
(Only event legendaries would roam, using the same mechanic already in use for roaming legendaries.)
Something Bird Person said made me want to clarify what I was saying about the save system. You'd basically have save points (Pokémon Centers and a few rare in-dungeon save points), and then you could also use only-load-once-and-you-have-to-shut-off-the-game-when-you-write-them suspend saves.
Something else: Legendaries could be deep in special high-difficulty dungeons (think ten floors, with scaling monsters on eight floors, a save point on the fifth floor, and a level 50 legendary on the tenth floor). Again, the idea is to make legendary Pokémon something a player earns in addition to something a player character earns.
-
Again, my main complaint about that idea is that no one would want to start a New Game+ and go through the entire Pokemon league and storyline again just for one Legendary Pokemon, for each Legendary you want. At that point, it goes beyond making the player earn the reward and enters tedium.
The dungeon idea is a good one, especially since most dungeons in the games so far have been rather easy (although the D/P/Pt Victory Road was good enough for me). Cerulean Cave in FR/LG, for example, wasn't nearly as big of a deal as some NPCs made it out to be.
-
It's not just for one legendary. You're acting as if the legendary bird example implies that you'd be able to get a single legendary on a given playthrough. You do realize that at present there are thirty-five of the things? If a system like I described (with an ensured chance at one legendary from a set of two or three) were implemented and you didn't fail to catch something, after a single playthrough, you would have at least ten legendaries - not counting if you happened to be lucky enough to encounter any event legendaries. Another time through and you'd complete every pair and possibly be ensured a chance at the other four non-event legendaries on the next run through.
Having the dungeon thing be a way to catch a random legendary could work, though. I was considering it merely as a way to change up how legendaries are already gotten.
Also, to combat the tedium of playing through again, have a dynamic story, plus the open-ended thing already meaning you can take on the gyms out of order.
-
Amazingly enough, I disagree with almost every assertion you made in your initial post. For the sake of brevity, I'll forgo proper sentence structure and address the entire argument in one rambling textsplosion.
*Ahem*...
The series admirably retains a rustic feel through turn-based, grid-mapped gameplay, cheating devices offer boundless fun at nobody else's expense for those who choose to utilize it, you've yet to show us the papers proving that your judgment regarding multiplayer is fact, the Pokemon series requires the least grinding of any RPGs on the market (fighting every trainer once will have your starter plenty overpowered, ramming Rare Candies down its throat solves any trouble spots), the Master Ball is there for that "You must choose/choose wisely" vibe, your "Legendaries shouldn't be there in every playthrough" idea is the worst idea since Hitler went into politics (unless you enjoy blazing through the game three times just to acquire every legendary), auto-saving after legendary battles is more sadistic, unforgiving and unenjoyable than anything the aforementioned historical figured could ever have devised, TK is absolutely correct about saving before tough foes or uncertain situations (don't punish a player for experimenting with a new strategy which turns out not to work), and you should really stop wasting fifty dollars a year on games you play only to criticize on the internet afterwards.
Anything not mentioned in the above rant is agreeable of reasonable, in my opinion.
By the way, those last three words are ones you should really get used to using more often.
-
I disagree with almost every assertion you made in your initial post. ... I'll forgo proper sentence structure and address the entire argument in one rambling textsplosion.
Arguing against points that have already been debated and supplanted is poor form.
The series admirably retains a rustic feel through turn-based, grid-mapped gameplay
Rustic != fun. Incredibly slow turn-based combat != fun. The grid is only really a problem when you consider Feebas.
cheating devices offer boundless fun at nobody else's expense for those who choose to utilize it
Except for those who then decide to play multiplayer using their hacked Pokémon - or worse, offer them up on the GTS.
you've yet to show us the papers proving that your judgment regarding multiplayer is fact
See above point.
the Pokemon series requires the least grinding of any RPGs on the market (fighting every trainer once will have your starter plenty overpowered, ramming Rare Candies down its throat solves any trouble spots)
I can think of several where grinding is either unnecessary or not even possible.
the Master Ball is there for that "You must choose/choose wisely" vibe
"Choose/choose wisely"? That might be partially true in first-gen, but I don't know anyone who threw it at anything other than whichever legendary beast they encountered first in second-gen, with the same trend continuing in future games.
your "Legendaries shouldn't be there in every playthrough" idea is the worst idea since Hitler went into politics
Way to Godwin a Pokémon thread. Do you think this is 4chan?
(unless you enjoy blazing through the game three times just to acquire every legendary)
See: dynamic story and the proposed open-ended nature. Also see: Diablo and every successful clone of Diablo. Also also see: standard starters come in groups of three. Works perfectly!
auto-saving after legendary battles is more sadistic, unforgiving and unenjoyable than anything the aforementioned historical figured could ever have devised
Really? I hear the save system in Demon's Souls is at least fifty times more sadistic.
TK is absolutely correct about saving before tough foes or uncertain situations (don't punish a player for experimenting with a new strategy which turns out not to work)
Why not punish a player for experimenting and having it blow up in their face? That kind of hand-holding is why video games are too [darn] easy nowadays.
and you should really stop wasting fifty dollars a year on games you play only to criticize on the internet afterwards.
1. I'm not ShadowBrian.
2. "Internet" is a proper noun. You must be spending too much time on it if you think otherwise.
Anything not mentioned in the above rant is agreeable of reasonable, in my opinion.
By the way, those last three words are ones you should really get used to using more often.
Why should I say "in my opinion" when it should be obvious that this is largely my opinion?
...Wait, scratch that. Turtlekid argues with fact all the time, so it might've been unclear.
-
I have admittedly never played a Pokemon game. When the franchise was becoming popular, I was in middle school and there were two camps of people--those who loved Pokemon and those who hated it. I was the latter because I didn't like what it was promoting from a psychological standpoint--the attitude of "gimme, gimme, gimme" (which came out mostly through the trading cards, more popular than the video games in my neck of the woods). I think another part of me turned away from the series because it appeared to threaten Mario as Nintendo's flagship product/franchise. The folks who were into Pokemon in my school used to get in a lot of trouble for arguing over trades, putting the idea of collecting every single card before school, and checking through their collections during school hours.
Pokemon was much more popular with the folks still in elementary school about a decade ago (those born between 1988-1994 are probably most likely to remember it as a phenomenon).
As far as the games, I never played them in the day and still haven't, but even from an outsider's point of view there are things to consider, especially if they are compared to a franchise I know more about (Mario). From what I understand most of the Pokemon games are RPGs, but even if this is disregarded there are some points to make, especially using the original poster's points as reference.
1. SIZE OF GAME: The original Pokemon games were for the old GameBoy. These cartridges seemed to be about as powerful as NES cartridges except the older ones couldn't handle color. Mario games have become bigger and longer but the idea of a limited number of objectives still remained, with either 90 or 120 seeming to be a common figure. 400+ objectives (Pokemon to catch) seems like an awful lot. Why not limit it to 120 but just make the quests more elaborate much like Mario did?
2. GAMEPLAY STYLE: All Mario games were sidescroll back when the world was black and white. Since then there have been various RPGs and 3D platformers released. Why not change things up with a platform that is exclusively RPG, especially given today's better technology?
3. MULTIPLAYER: I can't really comment on this since I'm not familiar with how the Pokemon games handle multiplayer, but perhaps more than one form of multiplayer could be introduced to a single game.
4. ANTI-PIRACY: This is a problem that goes back to the days before Nintendo was around in America. However, it's illegal no matter what and something needs to be done to crack down on it. Everyone has tried their own scheme--Microsoft has internet-based methods of checking for genuine products, some old computer games used to require a code or the insertion of a master disk (which could not be duplicated), and EA games have DRM measures installed. Here's one idea for Nintendo--have firmware/software updates block support for piracy-related devices. Apple has done this with Mac OS X 10.6.2--it evidently refuses to run on modified netbooks with Intel Atom processors. The only way to successfully implement this is to ensure that new games require new firmware/software so that the user is forced to download it. This would probably work on the Wii, but I'm not sure about the DS since I don't have one.
5. BLAST TO THE PAST: For some reason, people who play video games seem to like older stuff placed in their games, whether it be the return of an old item or an old soundtrack. Bringing back classic elements to new games would be a good thing.
-
1. SIZE OF GAME: The original Pokemon games were for the old GameBoy. These cartridges seemed to be about as powerful as NES cartridges except the older ones couldn't handle color. Mario games have become bigger and longer but the idea of a limited number of objectives still remained, with either 90 or 120 seeming to be a common figure. 400+ objectives (Pokemon to catch) seems like an awful lot. Why not limit it to 120 but just make the quests more elaborate much like Mario did?
The belief that you have to "catch them all" hasn't been promoted or used since the original came out. It was a marketing phrase and one that was successful for them. The game doesn't reward or punish you for having the entire catalogue of monsters, so there's no need to do so if you don't feel like it. As a collector, I have consistently completed the Pokedex's each generation without resorting to cheating or without griping about having too many. I did it because I enjoyed it, and the massive roster makes creating teams so much fun and means you'll never face duplicate teams most of the time.
2. GAMEPLAY STYLE: All Mario games were sidescroll back when the world was black and white. Since then there have been various RPGs and 3D platformers released. Why not change things up with a platform that is exclusively RPG, especially given today's better technology?
Not sure where you were going with this one, but the series keeps the same basic engine because its familiar and fitting. I don't see why people would want to move away from the current style unless you're completely bored of it and have no problem throwing away 12 years of strategy, basics and guidelines. Even then, they have experimented with other styles. the mystery Dungeon and ranger series exist for that reason. They make those spin-off series because they can't risk changing the main games and alienating the audience they've built up.
3. MULTIPLAYER: I can't really comment on this since I'm not familiar with how the Pokemon games handle multiplayer, but perhaps more than one form of multiplayer could be introduced to a single game.
They have, but most people continually ignore them in favor of the traditional battling/trading system. One of the biggest ones was Contests introduced in the 3rd generation, but most people shrug it off because they're optional sidequests. You never actually battle in them, but you get a chance at making your team look great in front of judges. It's a shame its an ignored feature because I've had lots of fun with them. Plus, making poffins is a fun little diversion.
4. ANTI-PIRACY: This is a problem that goes back to the days before Nintendo was around in America. However, it's illegal no matter what and something needs to be done to crack down on it. Everyone has tried their own scheme--Microsoft has internet-based methods of checking for genuine products, some old computer games used to require a code or the insertion of a master disk (which could not be duplicated), and EA games have DRM measures installed. Here's one idea for Nintendo--have firmware/software updates block support for piracy-related devices. Apple has done this with Mac OS X 10.6.2--it evidently refuses to run on modified netbooks with Intel Atom processors. The only way to successfully implement this is to ensure that new games require new firmware/software so that the user is forced to download it. This would probably work on the Wii, but I'm not sure about the DS since I don't have one.
Firmware updates for the Wii aren't uncommon and the latest ones are basically just patches to lock out homebrewers and pirates. It never works though since the homebrew community usually finds a workaround for each update. They don't take long either, so its probably in their best interest to invest in better encrypted media devices like what Sony did with Blu-Ray discs.
5. BLAST TO THE PAST: For some reason, people who play video games seem to like older stuff placed in their games, whether it be the return of an old item or an old soundtrack. Bringing back classic elements to new games would be a good thing.
Again, the series gets plenty of those, as a lot of music tracks are re-used or remixed, and the 2nd gen games let you visit a (horribly stripped down and barren) version of the first games region. Classic elements such as Gym Battles and specific natural environments also make continuous appearances in each game.
-
Mr. Wiggles already replied (largely saying what I was going to), but:
4. ANTI-PIRACY and stuff about it
Like I said, even a copy-protection system that expands on the one in Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story could potentially work. Getting around copy-protection in something like a DS game is a much more daunting task than getting around it in, say, a PC game, and making it even harder by having multiple forms of copy-protection to deal with could turn those who would take up this task away from it entirely.
(I don't think it'd be possible to do anything with the firmware on a DS or DS Lite, but it's been done before on the DSi. The DSi is also incompatible with most DS flash cards, though DSi-compatible devices were quickly developed.)
I don't see why people would want to move away from the current style unless you're completely bored of it and have no problem throwing away 12 years of strategy, basics and guidelines.
I think I've sort of been unclear on my stance here. I don't have a problem with the basic turn-based combat itself. I have a problem with said combat being a lot slower than necessary and with grinding still not being fun after decades of turn-based RPGs involving grinding.
That said, placing a lot more emphasis on double-battling would probably address a lot of my complaints about the battle system. I rather enjoy the move synergies made possible by having two Pokémon out on each side.
They don't take long either, so its probably in their best interest to invest in better encrypted media devices like what Sony did with Blu-Ray discs.
Sony's encryption scheme on Blu-ray doesn't stop anyone. The absolutely monstrous disc image sizes and relatively high cost of Blu-ray burners and blank discs do.
-
Anything not mentioned in the above rant is agreeable of reasonable, in my opinion.
By the way, those last three words are ones you should really get used to using more often.
I'm very tired of arguing about Pokémon so I don't come here to do that. It's a Dumb Game for Stupid People and they can keep hacking the heck out of it for all I care.
But I can't let that monumentally bad advice of WeeGee's stand. The phrase "in my opinion" is poor writing in any circumstance. It is redundant. Anything stated by a person is of course their opinion. There is never a reason to write it. All it accomplishes is a weakening of your arguments and making you sound unsure of yourself. The same goes for "I think that..."
This has nothing to do with being arrogant. This has to do with confidence, concise writing, and the conveyance of ideas.
-
I guess it's the Canadian in me. I believe that (whoops; there I go again...) formal essay formatting doesn't belong on decidedly casual online forums.
Why not punish a player for experimenting and having it blow up in their face? That kind of hand-holding is why video games are too [darn] easy nowadays.
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fui18.gamespot.com%2F2033%2Fcranky_2.jpg&hash=43620f9396732847d6defe4a6a56272d)
That's what the Battle Tower is for. Pokemon isn't geared towards those who play Demon's Souls or obscure Japanese shmups, and apparently for good reason. One should never have to jump into a new Pokemon title thinking, "Oh [dukar] I hope I don't screw up and lose everything... again."
Similarly, auto-saving after a legendary battle regardless of the outcome is like Super Mario Bros. permanently forcing you out of a level upon dying, which would essentially ruin the game.
-
My advice had nothing to do with "formatting". It had to do with not writing useless words that sap your sentence's power.
-
WORDS SAPPIN' MAH SENTENCE
-
My advice had nothing to do with "formatting". It had to do with not writing useless words that sap your sentence's power.
Define "power." What if I said that Weegee's points carry more "power" because he chooses to win people over through respect and humility, even admitting that his points are only his opinion? That seems rather more convincing than declaring them as absolute fact (not that that's what Warp was trying to do). Like the guy said, the whole discussion is about a video game; you don't need a formal essay to make a convincing point (you don't need a formal essay to make a convinving point anywhere, but they're more helpful in some areas than in others).
Aaaaand now we're debating about how to debate. I see this thread moving quickly into NatDT.
-
Two posts ago I wrote, "This has nothing to do with being arrogant." because I knew someone was going to take it like you just did.
Good writing doesn't use words for no reason.
Anything someone writes is their opinion, no matter what. It never needs to be written out.
This applies to all contexts: formal essays, forum posts, chatrooms, cereal boxes.
-
The 4th Generation really disappointed me to a point where I don't even want a 5th Generation. Your ideas are very good. Another suggestion is to make an evil team that's actually EVIL. I honestly think doing what Team Aqua and Magma did in the 3rd Generation would have been good for the world and space colonization that the Ginga-Dan (Galactic) wanted is something mankind needs (I'm going by DIamond and Pearls story, since I won't get Platinum).
I say an evil team should be a group of assassins who have kidnapped the leading authorities in the Pokemon world (that being Oak, Elm, Birch & Rowan) and hold them for ransom. And it is up to you to rescue the professors. And you don't rescue them by having Pokemon battles with trainers, perhaps have a really strong Pokemon guarding switches and keys and other items of importance. And why not implement some Mac Guffins or Checkov Guns?
And I absolutely agree with the New Pokemon BS. Enough is enough. There are far too many right now and its the reason Nintendo dropped the "Gotta catch em all" slogan.
Lol, when I read that post I was reminded of the Game Overthinker, too bad he won't cover Pokemon because he doesn't like it.
-
There are plenty of MacGuffins and Chekhov's guns. Are you just throwing out words you heard on TV Tropes or something?
MacGuffin examples: the badges, gold teeth
Chekhov's gun examples: old amber, Viridian City's empty gym
-
I say an evil team should be a group of assassins who have kidnapped the leading authorities in the Pokemon world (that being Oak, Elm, Birch & Rowan) and hold them for ransom. And it is up to you to rescue the professors. And you don't rescue them by having Pokemon battles with trainers, perhaps have a really strong Pokemon guarding switches and keys and other items of importance. And why not implement some Mac Guffins or Checkov Guns?
This is the worst idea for a storyline in a Pokemon game I've ever heard and considering I've read about proposed storylines involving political warfare, mass genocide and a dating sim...
And I absolutely agree with the New Pokemon BS. Enough is enough. There are far too many right now and its the reason Nintendo dropped the "Gotta catch em all" slogan.
In that case, don't bother capturing them all. Again, no one is forcing you to capture every single Pokemon in the games, so if you don't feel like wasting time capturing the oens you will never use, by all means don't do it.
-
I'd just like to see a Pokemon game with the evil team doing more than just being a minor nuisance. Have them attack the Pokemon League, do stuff after the Elite 4, that sort of thing... the last two gens have been better in that regard imo. I also like the idea from the comics of some of the Elite 4/Gym Leaders being evil, that would be pretty interesting.
-
I rather thought Cyrus was at least one step above "nuisance" in the end game of Platinum... he did try to erase the existing universe and re-create it without any emotion, after all.
Also, I can't believe I'm agreeing with LD, here, but Pokemon doesn't really need any more 'Guffins or Guns.
-
There are plenty of MacGuffins and Chekhov's guns. Are you just throwing out words you heard on TV Tropes or something?
Well, I am TV_Themes after all.
-
Thanks for reminding me why I hate Tv Tropes and its userbase as well.
-
So, Pokémon HeartGold and SoulSilver are out. And I hear they have anti-piracy that makes the ROM crash all the time - good work!
Too bad fifth-gen is going to have more Pokémon.
-
There was a time when I used to know the names of every single Pokemon. That was about 11 years ago, before Johto came into the picture.
In that case, don't bother capturing them all. Again, no one is forcing you to capture every single Pokemon in the games, so if you don't feel like wasting time capturing the oens you will never use, by all means don't do it.
Well yeah, I mean it's not like there's any big reward for catching them all, just bragging rights (which at my age wouldn't matter anyway because I'm probably the only one out of my friends that still plays these games. What can I say? I'm a kid at heart).
-
A Foot in the Door Perspective:
I got Red and Blue for Christmas years back. Played through Red and enjoyed it. I did the missingno. glitch or whatever it was. After that, it just didn't hold my interest, so I never got around to playing Blue or any subsequent releases.
I've tried some other RPGs just to see what the deal is with them (Tales of Symphonia, for example), and I just can't get into them. I do however, enjoy the Mario RPG series because, hey, it's Mario, and those are simpler, Mario-ish RPGs that I can relate to a lot more. Sounds crazy, I know, but I mean...
-
I know where you're coming from. I've never been into those intricate, convoluted RPGs as much as Mario's simple excursions into the genre, Pokemon, or SNES-era classics like Earthbound and early Final Fantasy titles.
-
Pokémon games not convoluted? That might have been true during first- and second-gen, when raising your Pokémon well wasn't about invisible numbers.
Try playing a newer Dragon Quest or a recent Wizardry-style game like Etrian Odyssey to see an example of a modern-day JRPG that isn't overly complex. Those are all a lot simpler than Pokémon for the reason given above (and I'd say far more interesting due to Dragon Quest games' beautiful and calming setting and Wizardry clones' incredibly straightforward yet still actually strategic combat), and you're lying to yourself (or ignoring a major mechanic of the game to try to make an argument) if you're trying to claim otherwise.
-
There was a time when I used to know the names of every single Pokemon. That was about 11 years ago, before Johto came into the picture.
Electrode, Diglett, Nidoran, Mankey
Venusaur, Rattata, Fearow, Pidgey
Seaking, Jolteon, Dragonite, Gastly
Ponyta, Vaporeon, Polywrath, Butterfree!
Yes, that was from memory..
/me blushes[/size]
Well yeah, I mean it's not like there's any big reward for catching them all, just bragging rights (which at my age wouldn't matter anyway because I'm probably the only one out of my friends that still plays these games. What can I say? I'm a kid at heart).
My wife and I still play. I just got Soul Silver, and she might get Heart Gold. We are so close to completeing the PkeDex in the Diamond/Pearl games (Just over 100 left!! I've never been so close, ever))
-
Electrode, Diglett, Nidoran, Mankey
Venusaur, Rattata, Fearow, Pidgey
Seaking, Jolteon, Dragonite, Gastly
Ponyta, Vaporeon, Polywrath, Butterfree!
Yes, that was from memory..
/me blushes[/size]
My wife and I still play. I just got Soul Silver, and she might get Heart Gold. We are so close to completeing the PkeDex in the Diamond/Pearl games (Just over 100 left!! I've never been so close, ever))
I managed to get about 275 (more or less) in Platinum before Soul Silver came out. My one true Pokemon gaming buddy has 403 in his Diamond Pokedex.
-
I do like that pretty much the only Pokemon you can't get in HG/SS besides event-only
'mons are the Regis and a couple of the Sinnoh Starters.
-
It's awesome that an anti-Pokemon thread has been overtaken to discuss achievements in said series. Aside from completing the regional Dex in Sapphire, I've never come close to catching 'em all.
I do like that pretty much the only Pokemon you can't get in HG/SS besides event-only 'mons are the Regis and a couple of the Sinnoh Starters.
Better yet, most missing entries can be filled without player-to-player trading, by means of the Pal Park.
-
Even then, it's obvious that Game Freak has lessened the emphasis on/need for the Pal Park in the new games, probably due to the DSi's lack of a GBA slot.
-
Weegee, your mistake was in thinking this was an anti-Pokémon thread to start. It was a thread about things the series does wrong - way wrong, in many cases - and some ways to fix them.
And so many Pokémon being available in a single game is a good thing, but it still needs to be all of them available in one game (or pair of games, more likely, because trading and money). Otherwise Turtlekid will complain about something he brings upon himself.
-
Yeah, I figured you'd call me out on that. I merely couldn't be bothered to type out, "a thread which brings up criticisms regarding the Pokemon series' style of gameplay and offers remedies for those aforementioned issues".
-
My favorite part about the whiny fans is when most of them make suggestions that go completely against the point of these games. Like a single player 3D RPG that lets you travel all regions and capture multiples of every single Pokemon. Or when they want to throw in political warfare or murder or some other evil element to make the series feel mature.
-
Pokémon games are already single-player RPGs aside from trading and battles anyway, and the games could work in 3D as long as they still kept the main-series concept of the player controlling a trainer (giving orders and using items) rather than the Pokémon.
Having all regions would be unnecessary if you had a region large and varied enough that it could feasibly contain over five hundred kinds of Pokémon (counting fifth-gen). This includes legendaries, even the gods introduced in Sinnoh - who's to say that something that's revered in one region can't be relatively mundane in another? (Cows are a good real-world example of this.)
My suggestion for randomized legendaries through special dungeons could theoretically allow for multiples of legendaries, though it could possibly be set up so it'd just be the ones where there could be more than one in existence without screwing up the narrative, such as Manaphy or Deoxys.
While those sorts of ideas for plot points probably wouldn't work in a Pokémon game, there's nothing wrong with the idea of a more mature plot, if done the way Pixar movies often have mature plots while still being suitable for younger audiences.
-
You're confusing the right definition of mature with the wrong definition that has proliferated through these children.
-
Indeed, several Legendary Pokemon have already been alluded to being just one of an entire species. Aside from ancient, mythical 'Mons like Arceus and Celebi, a considerable number of them could be demoted to semi-Legendary status with the likes of Rotom and Heatran.
It's disheartening to see the series become progressively more childish with every new instalment. While Team Rocket was a Marowak-killing, Slowpoke-poaching criminal powerhouse with realistic motives, Team Galactic was an incredulous sci-fi troupe which ultimately reproached its evil ways in a cheeseball conclusion suitable for a Disney flick. Similarly, as of HG/SS, the Game Corner's slot machines have been removed, and the building's sign now reads, "A safe and sound playground!" Lastly, the perverted old man who once peered through the Celadon Gym's windows and commented, "This gym is great! It's full of women!" now rather says, "It's full of strong trainers!"
Pitiful, isn't it?
-
You seem to ignore that a large part of Pokemon's audience is kids.
Besides, its a mini-game you wouldn't have played in the first place. Get over it.
-
You seem to ignore that a large part of Pokemon's audience is kids.
I'm well aware of that, but Game Freak has no reason to be toning the plot's edge down further every time.
Besides, its a mini-game you wouldn't have played in the first place. Get over it.
It's not the minigame itself; it's the statement its puts across by replacing the slot machines. Game Freak is making itself into society's *****.
-
Dude, Team Galactic's head almost destroyed the universe in Platinum. And he didn't just stand there in a building and relent on his plans when you beat him. You had to chase him into another dimension to take him down.
And the choice would have been editing the game or not getting it released (or not getting it released with a rating that actually fits the game; I don't know how the EU's laws there work). Huge difference between not wanting to fight the law (because no matter how popular Pokémon is, the law would certainly win) and "making itself into society's *****."
(For the record, the Japanese versions of the remakes included wine glasses on tables in one location. Those were edited for the US version, probably because what the ESRB defines as "Alcohol References" would've bumped the game up to a T rating.)
-
I hate Tv Tropes and its userbase as well.
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi52.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg16%2FMidgetBottle%2Freactionimages%2Fshadoloo_snape.jpg&hash=ac97d06f0834d04e926d22ddf9ec1e9c)
Seriously, though. I know people have opinions, but this topic seems to scream troll in my face for some reason.
-
Warp's gonna go bat[dukar] on you for accusing him of trolling.
-
*cue sentence by sentence breakdown of my post to explain everything he disagrees with*
There WERE only two sentences, so...
-
TV Tropes and its userbase are a blight on this earth.
And I don't troll.
-
This Troper disagrees. TV Tropes is an excellent site for bringing the elements found in creative works under one roof. Its community is amiable and practices good grammar (a rarity on the Internet, but you knew that), and it can entertain you for hours on end (although if you have better things to do, that might make it a love-hate relationship).
-
You're biased. I don't need a Web site to tell me about the things I read, watch, and play. Its community is supposedly incredibly easy to be banned from and many of its members use terms from the site elsewhere (and, as seen earlier in this thread, sometimes use them to try to sound smart without actually having any idea what they're talking about) and make themselves look retarded, and spoilers are the opposite of entertainment.
-
The site's jargon is what irks me the most. Finding an article on a specific trope is almost impossible without knowing its TVTropes name beforehand (MacGuffin, Narm, nightmare fuel, etc...). Also, the community is cliquey to the point where several articles resemble forum discussions in their own right. That all being said, it's still often interesting.
-
For me, part of the fun of TV Tropes is seeing if I can guess the definition of a Trope/what a Trope refers to from the context and its name. If not, I've got enough time on my hands for now that I can afford to read up on whatever piques my curiosity. Maybe the fact that I have more time to burn on this sort of thing than the average high school student is the reason I don't mind the abundant jargon.
-
While the topic is still derailing full force, I really don't mind TV Tropes.
To respond to WarpRattler's post, I don't understand why you seem to be so defensive: "I don't need a site to tell me what's what" is what you're saying, in essence, which leads me to believe that you're basically saying you're "too good" for the site. To me, reading about tropes can be quite interesting like "The Computer is Cheating *******", for example. It's funny because I can relate to it and say, "Haha, yep, I know how that goes", and read about other instances of the specific trope outside of the games/shows/movies I experienced it from originally.
-
I generally hate TV Tropes' usage of all their invented terms. I don't hate the concept of the site necessarily although I find much of it exceedingly unnecessary.
-
For some reason I enjoy the terms, they seem to make sense. Besides, there's another way to find tropes. Type in the name of whatever it is you saw (movie, game, whatever) that has the trope you want to find, then glance through the big list until you find something that looks like what you recall. I mean, it's still a shot in the dark, but you might find it.
One trope I couldn't find for the life of me was the tendency for certain cartoon characters to have what looks like a bite taken out of one ear (Ronno (http://hollywoodhooligans.com/albums/Bambi-Meets-The-Prince-of-the-Forrest/ronno.jpg) from Bambi II, Furball (http://www.awn.com/files/imagepicker/1/goodman09_tinyToons-Furrbal.jpg) from Tiny Toon Adventures). So I went to the "Lost and Found" page of TV Tropes and asked about it ("registration" simply means picking a screenname. No password or anything needed). Someone replied that it was the Fashionable Asymmetry page I was thinking of. And I went there, and indeed that fits the description... it has Tidus from FFX on it.
Pokeymans!
-
TV Tropes sucks more than main-series Pokémon games, and nothing can really be done to fix it.
And Trainman, it's that last part there that really describes one of the biggest problems with the site: read about other instances of the specific trope outside of the games/shows/movies I experienced it from originally.
Spoilers (even when you don't know it's really a spoiler (http://themushroomkingdom.net/board/index.php?topic=9813.msg566648#msg566648)) are horrible. I don't need to go further than Heavy Rain or Harry Potter to show that spoiling something on purpose serves no purpose aside from ruining people's experiences, and that's what the site does. And don't try to bring up the spoiler tags - for many tropes, just knowing that something exists within a certain work is spoilers enough.
-
Personally, spoilers do nothing for me, because I hate surprises, fictional or otherwise. If I know what's coming before I read/watch/play something I enjoy it more.
And suppose you're never going to enjoy a creative work anyway, for whatever reason. TV Tropes gives you some semblance of knowing what it's all about (like with me and the upcoming Birth by Sleep, which I'll have no way of playing). In fact, you could easily find out about a highly enjoyable work you never would've heard of before had you not gone to TV Tropes.
-
I don't want to read TV Tropes for the same reason I don't really want to know how a magician does his tricks or the scientific explanation for love (which I did fully discover, per an English assignment, the other day): There are just certain things you're better off not knowing if you want to enjoy certain aspects of life.
-
TV Tropes sucks more than main-series Pokémon games, and nothing can really be done to fix it.
That made me laugh.
But I must agree with Warp. TvTropes is a total waste when its basically boiling everything down to cliches, and about half the entries are snarky, back and forths with members of the site. Oh, and don't better going to entries about attraction or fetishes or whatever, those pages are creepier than anything I've ever read.
-
Really, Mr. Wiggles, haven't you read the home page?
"On the whole, tropes are not clichés. The word clichéd means 'stereotyped and trite.' In other words, dull and uninteresting. We are not looking for dull and uninteresting entries. We are here to recognize tropes and play with them, not to make fun of them."
-
Except that isn't what "cliché" means.
-
"cli·ché also cliche (kl-sh)
n.
1. A trite or overused expression or idea: 'Even while the phrase was degenerating to cliché in ordinary public use . . . scholars were giving it increasing attention' (Anthony Brandt)."
-
'Even while the phrase was degenerating to cliché in ordinary public use . . . scholars were giving it increasing attention'
See: Know Your Meme.
-
So yeah, this again. I still stand by much of what I've said about the fourth generation, and I'm not big on having even more new Pokémon to deal with in fifth-gen. But I'm pretty much sold on triple battles (I guess I never said it here, but I've said in the chatroom a few times that they could really just make the game all double battles all the time and I'd like it, and this is the next best thing), and many of the rumors that have been floating around (like the games not following the gym structure) would just solidify that if confirmed to be true.
Anyway, the reason I'm bringing this thread up again isn't to do with that new stuff, but rather is best summed up in an excerpt from a post in another thread:
the regular physical attack in an RPG
Aside from Mysterious Dungeon, Pokémon games don't really have these. Fifth-gen could be a good opportunity to change this.
Now, before anyone says anything, this is an idea solely for the single-player aspect of the game. I will never take part in serious competitive play in a turn-based number-based JRPG even with triple battles potentially making things interesting, but I understand that there are people who like invisible numbers (and, bafflingly, some who think competitive Pokémon is more strategic than chess; thus far I've had no luck shattering their illusion), and I'd rather not deal with any of that here.
Anyway, here's the idea: for the single-player portion of the game, remove Struggle and add a move simply labeled "Attack." It wouldn't be a particularly viable move for fighting stuff of your own level - damage could be calculated as the user's attack (either standard or special, whichever is higher) minus the target's appropriate defense - but the key point of the move would be that it wouldn't have any elemental typing whatsoever, wouldn't count toward the traditional four-move limit, and wouldn't use PP. This would ideally be added in conjunction with (directly copying from MegaTen here) an autoplay mode (set by hitting, say, the X button, and easily stopped by hitting it again; it could even be disabled outright in the option menu if you're a purist or scared you might accidentally hit it) that just uses that basic "Attack" move - and skips combat animations entirely, making it move more quickly than actually fighting out battles (barring obvious things like how you might be able to OHKO something by using Surf versus needing three turns to take it down with "Attack"), but still slowly enough that you can still see how much damage you're dealing and taking, as well as things like status effects.
The main point of this? Well, it'd mostly be for the sake of convenience and faster combat when fighting Pokémon of a lower level, given that battles are probably going to take even longer now with full animation (though running away from wild Pokémon might still be faster). Ultimately, it'd be most convenient in a New Game+-type setting, which I still think would be a pretty sweet feature as well, but it could have uses in standard play.
Interesting idea?
-
Battle animations can be turned off from the Options menu. Just sayin'.
Interesting that you should bring this up, though: I always have my Pokemon know one relatively weak, inexpensive move which serves basically the same purpose as a basic "Attack" feature. For instance, my team-leading Lv.100 Dragonite still knows Wing Attack.
-
I don't know, I'm not sold on it.
You haven't given me a compelling reason as to why it should be there. "I'm too lazy to pick one of my four moves" isn't convincing me.
You could still do the MegaTen style Auto Battle by actually selecting the attack you want, ala Persona 1/2. Although, I'm not sure if that's really necessary to be grabbing features from other games and shoehorning them into this. MegaTen battles are pretty different than Pokemon's, and I'd have to consider whether or not I see much of a benefit in including it.
-
I was under the impression that the main motive was the desire to conserve PP (which may not be in abundance) for actual threats, and let a default "Attack" take care of nuisance-'mons.
-
So, "I'm too lazy to ration my four moves."
Same idea.
-
Again, it's just something that'd be convenient in certain parts of the game. Thinking about it more, the MegaTen-style auto-attack wouldn't be much faster than just selecting an attack in any case where it'd be over in one turn anyway; however, being able to set up tactics outside of battle so that a Pokémon would perform a pre-determined move as its first move in a battle against a wild Pokémon (and being able to easily toggle whether or not it would do so, and automatically not doing so against anything you don't have fully registered in your Pokédex) could be useful.
Ignoring how nice it would be in a potential New Game+ scenario, that sort of auto-attack could be useful for any sort of area with common wild Pokémon with Arena Trap (http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Arena_Trap_%28ability%29) or Shadow Tag (http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Shadow_Tag_%28ability%29) preventing you from just running away from pointless battles (Diglett's Cave in FireRed and LeafGreen being a past example). And for those who feel the need to do so, it'd also cut down on time spent grinding (though probably moreso for those who just want experience than those who are dealing with EVs).
A non-typed non-PP-consuming attack separate from the standard moves would ultimately be a bad idea, particularly given the way I described it as working - in my example, it'd be mostly useless unless you're fighting Pokémon several levels lower than the user, and in rare cases it could instead be overpowered against Pokémon of the same level or higher (basically, your Pokémon would need to have especially high attack and be fighting Pokémon with considerably low defense, leading to the free attack being more effective than standard moves).
Non-typed standard moves, on the other hand, could be cool, since they'd simply be attacks guaranteed to deal damage unaffected by resistances (at the cost of also not being affected by STAB or weaknesses). However, unless the only non-typed attacks had power similar to the likes of Scratch and Tackle, they could obsolete the concept of ineffective attack type match-ups (Poison vs. Steel, for example, or Normal vs. Ghost and vice versa), as no one would use the attacks that could end up doing absolutely nothing when there are viable alternatives guaranteed to work.
-
If Pokemon games had an EarthBound-style system of encounters, the game could just automatically defeat enemies who aren't actually a threat. That, too, would be a huge time-saver.
-
Right up until you want to capture one of those Pokémon for some reason or another.
However, some way of making battles not be entirely random (while still keeping the random encounter system rather than switching to a field encounter system a la EarthBound) might be cool. Unfortunately, I can't think of anything that would work well in a Pokémon game, where just turning to face a different direction counts as a step for purposes of triggering random encounters.
-
Do the Earthbound system, but as a toggleable option.
-
The EarthBound system just plain wouldn't work in a Pokémon game, though, because of that whole thing about seeing what you're going to fight before you actually fight it.
Unless you mean just the bit where you automatically defeat anything that isn't a conceivable threat, which doesn't work because of attacks using PP.
-
Why would they have to use PP? If they're not a conceivable threat, they wouldn't require PP to defeat. That kills both the "I hate the endless random encounters" and the "I don't want to waste PP on this nuisance" birds with one stone.
-
You all seem to be forgetting that you can run from weak battles.
-
That still requires entering the battle in the first place. It's only slightly quicker to run than to
kill defeat the wild 'mon.
-
And again, Weegee, there's no running away when Arena Trap or Shadow Tag (or any potential new ability with the same effect) is involved.
And Turtlekid, it just plain doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way now when your level 100 Pokémon would have to use 1 PP from some attack to defeat a level 2 Starly, and there's no reason to change it to work that way when one other JRPG works that way. This is what Black Mage was talking about with shoehorning features in, except that this isn't a feature that works with the Pokémon style in any way.
As it is now, the only move in main-series Pokémon games that doesn't use PP also damages the user. And you sure as hell don't want Struggle as an auto-attack.
-
one other JRPG works that way
Paper Mario: TTYD?
-
The reason to change it is because the way it works now is tedious and illogical. Automatically selecting a move wouldn't speed things up in the slightest, and making up a new non-typed non-PP move would unnecessarily complicate things... and still wouldn't speed things up in the slightest.
It doesn't work that way now when your level 100 Pokémon would have to use 1 PP from some attack to defeat a level 2 Starly, and there's no reason to change it to work that way when one other JRPG works that way.
A level 100 Pokémon shouldn't have to use 1 PP from an attack to defeat a level 2 Starly. At that level, he should be able to kill it by looking at it funny.
Since they should be whittling down the HMs anyway, have one of the gym leaders give you something that lets you switch on and off a mode where if you encounter a Pokémon that your Pokémon is ridiculously stronger than and couldn't possibly not defeat, you don't have to bother with going through the battle animation at all, don't use any PP, and you just have a little notification pop up that says you killed something and got the experience (get some use out of the bottom screen). Then if you need to go back and capture one of those, you can either switch to a weaker Pokémon or just switch the mode off. Or maybe a mode where it's assumed that you'll try to run away from any non-legendary encounters, and then when you trigger an encounter, you'll only go into battle if running away wouldn't have been successful the first time. Either (or both) of those would be a much less tedious alternative to running away, mashing the same attack, or buying hundreds of Repels.
-
Tedious and illogical? It fits perfectly narratively, even if that means the gameplay suffers. You seem to be forgetting a key thing:
YOU DO NOT PLAY AS THE POKÉMON.
Your Pokémon isn't the one being attacked by wild Pokémon; you are. Your Pokémon is a tool to defend you - easily comparable to a gun. And like it or not, a gun can't fire itself...
A level 100 Pokémon shouldn't have to use 1 PP from an attack to defeat a level 2 Starly.
...and a gun still uses bullets.
I'd love the games to be made faster just as much as the next guy, but wanting to throw away a decade and a half of narrative to do so is just silly.
The bit with an item that automatically attempts running away could be useful - but you could easily just equip your lead Pokémon with a Cleanse Tag. Besides, the point is to make battles faster, not avoid them entirely.
-
Maybe that's the point for you, but I'd sooner just outright remove battles that are just an utter waste of time than make negligible speed improvements to them. When I'm walking around with my level 60 Ho-Oh, I shouldn't have to spend thirty seconds and one of five uses of Sacred Fire every two steps to kill a level 2 Rattata that won't even give me a pixel of EXP. I mean, if you want stuff that fits the narrative, why would a level 2 Rattata even try to attack a level 60 Ho-Oh in the first place (or, if you want to get technical, attack a trainer who's being followed by a level 60 Ho-Oh)?
And like it or not, a gun can't fire itself...
...and a gun still uses bullets.
When your enemy is so weak and slow and your gun is so big that you could literally kill them by just physically hitting them with the gun, you shouldn't have to waste a bullet on them.
It fits perfectly narratively, even if that means the gameplay suffers.
That's not the way video games should be made, and it's certainly not the Nintendo way.
Making your character have to eat and poop would fit the narrative too. It would also make the game suck.
-
When your enemy is so weak and slow and your gun is so big that you could literally kill them by just physically hitting them with the gun, you shouldn't have to waste a bullet on them.
You say this as if the trainer who has a level 60 Ho-oh is somehow as big and muscular as a Machamp, when they're probably still just as physically weak as they were the day they started their journey. Once more, the trainer is the one being attacked, not the Pokémon, so determining how weak a Pokémon is based on the trainer's lead Pokémon is silly.
Think of it this way: you might have a level 100 Pokémon, but that's not going to do you a [darn] bit of good when that level ten Ekans has caught you off-guard and bitten your leg. You might be able to throw your Pokéball as you slowly succumb to poison.
Making your character have to eat and poop
(I've been playing JRPGs where you do in fact do these things. They don't suffer for it one bit. These games also have regular turn-based JRPG battles that play out at ungodly speeds.)
That's not the way video games should be made, and it's certainly not the Nintendo way.
Clearly it is the way Pokémon games are made, given that the series has been running fifteen years and has worked that way the entire time.
-
You say this as if the trainer who has a level 60 Ho-oh is somehow as big and muscular as a Machamp, when they're probably still just as physically weak as they were the day they started their journey. Once more, the trainer is the one being attacked, not the Pokémon, so determining how weak a Pokémon is based on the trainer's lead Pokémon is silly.
No, I'm saying it as if this is HG/SS, where your lead Pokémon is walking directly behind you and would be clearly visible to the Pokémon attacking you. Most Pokémon seem to have a pretty decent intelligence, and heck, even an antelope would be smart enough to know not to attack a human who's got a lion following right behind them. The antelope wouldn't say "Well, it'll be okay; I'm just attacking the human, not the lion, so I won't be in any danger." The antelope would say "Holy crap, if I attack that human, I will be less than five feet away from a lion."
Clearly it is the way Pokémon games are made, given that the series has been running fifteen years and has worked that way the entire time.
And what, now you like the way things have been done for the last fifteen years? Your whole conceit in this topic was that the way the games have been made for the last fifteen years sucks and requires major changes. Your very first point was that they're too slow. Then someone else comes up with an idea that would actually speed things up, and suddenly the way the games have been made for the last fifteen years is sacrosanct?
Or are you just trying to win some territory in the argument by factually disproving one of my points, regardless of how it affects your overall argument? Because the main series games aren't made by Nintendo. Game Freak is a second party (and they were apparently a third party as recently as 1999).
And to actually address the point, that's not the way the games have been made. They don't sacrifice gameplay for narrative. If they did, you could never use a Magcargo, because your character and everything around them would burst into flames from being within a few feet of something that's several times hotter than the surface of the sun. You couldn't send a fish into battle unless you were underwater. Only one person in the world (the real world) would be able to catch Arceus on their copy of the game. Everyone would be dead and no economies would exist, since the only way to get to many towns requires going through grass where Pokémon so strong that they can give a level 40 team a run for its money lay in wait.
Also this:
There are thirty-five legendaries in all, almost all of which can now be caught through regular gameplay throughout the five fourth-gen games (including some as part of the main storyline). Shouldn't legendaries be, y'know, legendary? In a way other than stats?
By that logic -- you shouldn't be able to do "legendary" stuff in "regular gameplay" -- 99% of people should never be allowed to beat any JRPG, and especially not the bonus bosses, regardless of how much they level up, because the odds against everything working out and you actually saving the world are astronomical in the narrative. Although I have a feeling you'd actually support that.
If Pokémon were an MMO, you'd have a point, but so long as they're considered to primarily be single-player JRPGs (and you said that you don't consider the multiplayer modes of Pokémon worthy of any consideration), everyone should be able to do everything in the game.
Oh, and this:
there's no reason to change it to work that way when one other JRPG works that way.
One other JRPG that was made by Creatures (back when they were Ape). Just sayin'.
(Not to mention that Paper Mario does it too.)
-
No, I'm saying it as if this is HG/SS,
where it still works the same way.
Your very first point was that they're too slow. Then someone else comes up with an idea that would actually speed things up, and suddenly the way the games have been made for the last fifteen years is sacrosanct?
My ideas hinged on changing the gameplay, not removing it entirely.
By that logic -- you shouldn't be able to do "legendary" stuff in "regular gameplay" -- 99% of people should never be allowed to beat any JRPG, and especially not the bonus bosses, regardless of how much they level up, because the odds against everything working out and you actually saving the world are astronomical in the narrative. Although I have a feeling you'd actually support that.
I support games requiring effort (preferably the sort that improves a player's ability) to finish. I do not support games being unwinnable.
And that argument is completely silly anyway. I was referring to how having one out of every fourteen Pokémon be designated "legendary" cheapens the idea, particularly when it's not only possible but downright easy to catch the majority of them within a single instance.
And if you read further within that post and in posts down the page, you'll see that I didn't say I didn't want people to be unable to do stuff. Quite the opposite - I proposed making it possible to catch every legendary Pokémon on a single copy of the game, though it would take a good amount of playtime to do so.
-
where it still works the same way.
...But it shouldn't, which is my point.
My ideas hinged on changing the gameplay, not removing it entirely.
I'm not saying all battles should be removed. I'm just saying that when you've been playing for over a hundred hours and you're walking around with your team of ubers, it would be nice if you were no longer required to take time out to kill a Zigzagoon every ten seconds.
-
I'm not saying all battles should be removed. I'm just saying that when you've been playing for over a hundred hours and you're walking around with your team of ubers, it would be nice if you were no longer required to take time out to kill a Zigzagoon every ten seconds.
What are your feelings on repels?
-
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fshrines.rpgclassics.com%2Fn64%2Fpapermario%2Fimages%2Fbadges%2Ffirstattack.gif&hash=6f1349f89f1ecd381ce7998ed1f557e2)
^
|
|
|
Where the hell is one of these when you need them?
-
Repels are a nice gesture, but 100 steps is really short. I think a Repel should last long enough that you can actually tell you're using a Repel. Going 100 steps without a battle just from luck, without a Repel, isn't all that uncommon.
And the price of Max Repel is just friggin' ridiculous.
-
Here's what Pokemon needs.
Te ability to fight Pokemans yourself, mano a mano, like a true man. And if you go the whole game without using your Pokemon to fight at all even once, you get an Achievement worth 1,000 Gamer Points.
-
Glorb's biting sarcasm aside, I personally think the Trainer should be able to do more than just cart the Pokémon around and bark orders at them. You'd think they'd be able to defend themselves against wild Pokémon even if all of their own are KO'd. One idea I had was to allow the Trainer to throw bait and rocks like in the Safari Zone if a wild Pokémon attacks you and you're defenseless. Other ideas included the elimination of HMs and instead give the Trainer tools, like a flashlight for dark caves.
-
I just want to know why having all your Pokemon pass out causes you to pass out.
-
Trainman: That doesn't look like the sort of badge a Pokémon trainer would ever be caught wearing.
CrossEyed: Super Repel is more cost-effective than Max Repel anyway.
Glorb and The Chef: Play Devil Summoner.
ShadowBrian: You faint from the realization that your ten-year-old self is now defenseless in a cave (or forest, or whatever) full of monsters and/or pedophiles.
-
I just want to know why having all your Pokemon pass out causes you to pass out.
Similarly, it's annoying to see that fainted Pokemon can be caught in the anime, but not in the games. I know it would make catching them too easy, but they've never given an in-game justification for it.
-
It would be unsporting. The people in the anime are a bunch of *******s.
-
CrossEyed: Super Repel is more cost-effective than Max Repel anyway.
Only slightly so, but yeah, that's part of my point. It's stupid. Neither of them are cost-effective by an absolute scale, of course, but the more expensive one should be more cost-effective relatively, or else it has no reason to exist. Sam's Club doesn't get by on selling loaves of bread with three extra slices for $10.
You know, you see Repel and later Super Repel for sale, and you get to thinking "Hey, if Repel is 100 steps and Super Repel is 200 steps, there must be a Hyper Repel that does 500, or a Max Repel that works like forever!" And then you find out the Max Repel is only 250 steps and costs $0.30 more per step. It has to be intentional mockery.
ShadowBrian: You faint from the realization that your ten-year-old self is now defenseless in a cave (or forest, or whatever) full of monsters and/or pedophiles.
That whole thing never made sense to me. You go unconscious, yet you can walk back to the Pokémon Center? And you're somehow lucid enough to apparently find a path back to there that avoids all battles? It can't just be the age, because plenty of the trainers you beat are the same age as you, and not one of them has ever blacked out as a result of being defeated, and I'd wager that the ~15-year-old protagonists of BWG will be just as fainty as the 10-year-olds.
The only explanation I can come up with is that a trainer, playable or not, slips into an alternate Hyde-like personality when all their Pokémon are fainted. They give money to whoever they lost to (even if it's a wild Pokémon) for some reason and then just hang out for a while, beating Pokémon with their bare hands along the way, eventually wandering into a Pokémon Center, where something snaps them back to reality. The main personality has no memory of anything that happened after they were beaten.
The other option is that every protagonist in the games is just a total wuss. Though that still doesn't explain the walking back while unconscious thing.
-
I've always assumed that someone finds you unconscious and hauls your pathetic derrierre to a Pokemon Centre.
-
Doesn't it say that your character was the one who carried the Pokemon back?
-
Glorb's biting sarcasm
You must be reading one of my other posts. I was dead serious as a heart attack, my friend.
-
TK: Maybe. I haven't whited out since 2002, so I can't remember.
-
In Gen IV, after "NAME paid out $XXX to the winner!/dropped $XXX" and "NAME blacked out!" (it was "whited out" in Gen II and III), the screen turns black in DPT or white in HGSS and says "NAME scurried to a Pokémon Center, protecting the exhausted and fainted Pokémon from further harm..." Previous generations didn't have an ingame explanation for why you ended up there, as far as I know.
I like the image of your character calmly paying out a precise amount of money and then promptly dropping to the ground.
-
Trainman: That doesn't look like the sort of badge a Pokémon trainer would ever be caught wearing.
Yeah, but it's the first attack badge from paper mario that would solve the problem you guys have been talking about for a bit.
Run into weak enemy, defeat it without having to go into battle. Problem soooolved.
-
That might actually work - have the option to toggle full wild encounters on and off depending on how many badges the player has - the more badges, the more routes that can be blocked, or repelled, or whatever. Like, with all eight badges, you would be able to block every route (maybe with the exception of Victory Road).
-
Or maybe an item which repels wild Pokemon that are less than half your party leader's level.
-
I heard an idea about RPG's in general that I thought would work really well in Pokemon..
As you catch or defeat creatures, their value and scarcity changes accordingly.
-
You mean like, a limited number of each Pokémon available to catch/defeat? Hmmm.....would accurately reflect real-world endangered species.....
-
Well, I didn't say it was a great idea..
-
I would kill Spindas just for [dukar]s and giggles.
-
Pokemon the Movie White ends its two-day run today! Debating whether or not to risk feeling like a freak and go see it. http://shigeruslist.com/2011/12/04/pokemans-let-your-local-theater-show-you-them/
-
So White gets to be in theaters and Black doesn't?
-
Black is playing in the run-down theatre across the street.
Did he seriously say B&W are the best games in the series?
-
What's wrong with that? I think they're the tied for the best with D&P.
-
But D&P sucks!
-
I would appreciate it if you would clarify why you don't like D&P. It introduced many awesome breeding features and I personally prefer the physical/special split.
-
B&W are the best in the series if you're not nostalgic for the older games.
-
I agree. The original three games were broken and imbalanced beyond belief and had no real sidequests aside from the usual completed Pokedex.
-
I'd like B&W much more if not for the time-restricted online features.
-
I hadn't really played a Pokemon game since Red/Blue, so all the extra stuff that were in Diamond/Pearl are awesome! The contests, the berries, the breeding, the.. well I have yet to try the Battle Tower (mostly because I keep forgetting where it is/getting distracted by other things).
-
Recent idea:
Dynasty Warriors: Pokémon
Or something similar enough.
-
So what's this I'm hearing about a Nobunga's Ambition crossover?
-
Apparently. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_%2B_Nobunaga%27s_Ambition)
I hadn't heard of Nobunaga before this, to be honest.
-
Pokémon + Nobunaga's Ambition doesn't really belong in this thread since it sounds pretty awesome in most regards so far.
I just hope they bring it to the US.
-
I guess this is similar enough.