Pokemon Changes for Pokémon

RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

World of Warcraft is not kind of a RPG, it's THE RPG. It has everything you want from a RPG game. Pokemon can't and shouldn't become like this, the focus of the game is not similar, nor is the idea or the target audience.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

I do like the idea, I really do but then again Cinesra and mostly Mitja are right about what they say and the conclusion is that either we get some spin-off more mature series or we'll get nothing. I've had this kind of discussion here when talking about a more mature anime and this is a reflection of the games so the conclusion is the same.
Yes, Gen. I had Pokémon being more like true Pocket Monsters than creatures with personalities and feelings and Team Rocket was very sinister because they had whips (like those Tamers), they were cutting Slowpoke tails, selling Pokémon as slot prizes and despite being Pocket Monsters, only those more or less heartless didn't felt sorry for them. Gen. I (and remakes) Oak was...oh, how I wished that Hydreigon was available back then in order to use one to wipe out Gary's team and have his head!! Silver was better (less obnoxious) namely by the end and since then all we had was cute (and more or less useless as trainers) friends as rivals. Still, I'll follow Mitja's words that a mid-"level" rival would be suitable, kind like Lance: really great but a nice person and capable without looking down on us.

Umbra said:
The point I'm trying to make is the fact that I do not want rivals who are assholes or to friendly. I just want normal people as rivals. I want the ability to say No. So it's like

"You're going to take down Team [whatever it is]"

And if you give me the option to say Yes or No, allow me to say No.
Click to expand...

Not only are we trainers but also mercenaries for badges and to fight evil teams! Yes, sometimes (less often in some games) it feels like we're nothing more than puppets of some Professor and Champion!
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

Pokemon is a one of a kind basic RPG. It is a great way as I said before to get into RPG games. If you have never played RPG. This is a great way to get started. It is not meant for hard core players.:)
 
RE: The Future of Pokemon

Umbra said:
I meant, I was the one who wrote that on another website. Pokemon X definitely got me back into Pokemon.

My first two games ever was Silver and Blue. I just couldn't get into Diamond and Pearl. Pokemon Black was okay.

Pokemon X was definitely a start in the right, imo. At least from a trainer customization standpoint. However! The Pokemon were uninspiring and just lacked the luster they usually have.
Click to expand...

lol this post is quite funny, because most of us realized that Pokémon X and Y were really attached to Gen 1, with the amount of throwbacks in the game.

Santalune Forest is Viridian Forest in terms of layout.
Route 2 holds that forced Pidgey a couple of steps into the route, much like in Gen 1.
The Gen 1 STARTERS appear, with mega evolutions.
The Snorlax blocking the path, which you can only clear away with the Pokéflute.
The Pokémon League is very near the starting towns.
Almost all generation one Pokémon are in the game in the wild, and the majority of early-game Pokémon are from generation 1. (Rattata, Meowth, Koffing, Porygon and Mew are the only ones unavailable in the wild from Generation 1)
Catching Mewtwo post-game.
Exp. Share --> Exp. All once again.
Pikachu is rare in Santalune Forest.
Caterpie and Weedle also appear there.
You can trade for a Farfetch'd.

There's probably more that I can't think of, too.

Pokémon X and Y was actually made with the older fans in mind, so I find it funny that just after their releases you call for even more catering to older fans. ORAS is coming out soon, so that's perfect for people like me who started in the third generation and/or think it is the best generation (my first handheld game was Diamond, but I had Pokémon Colosseum first, so I'm sort of in between my origins. However, Ruby/Sapphire are the best handheld game :p). After that, as much as I hate to say it, I feel like GameFreak should cater to the younger audience too. Then after that we can have another one catering to the older audience one again and the cycle continues! :p

Either that or the younger audience can just be content with Pokémon Pinball or something! :p
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

Im certainly hoping they go BW-style on gen 7 again.

They've been doing this cycle of fresh and nostalgia the whole time, and both parts are nice o:
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

I like Pokemon just the way it is. Even if I would like some of these changes, what's important to me is making my Pokemon happy with me always around them.

But travelling other regions, more trainer customization and and a choice of what you want to do? I'd like to see that in Pokemon as well.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

Mitja said:
Im certainly hoping they go BW-style on gen 7 again.

They've been doing this cycle of fresh and nostalgia the whole time, and both parts are nice o:
Click to expand...

I hope not, I'm sick of that cycle. I'm tired of them flip-flopping between two opposite extremes, can we have a new generation that is actually balanced for once?
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

I have noticed 1 thing about the Pokemon RPG's though. The storyline and the plots are different every version but the scenario's are always EXACTLY the same. What I mean is you battle the Gym Leaders the evil villains and you catch Pokemon. Yeah they need to change that format some time but how can we do that when we are supposed to do this as this is how Pokemon was designed? They can't just do that. If they did Pokemon would be dead in the water. All they can do is improve the regions and plots for the games. If they changed anything else that would sink Pokemon fast and real fast too.:)
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

xxashxx said:
I have noticed 1 thing about the Pokemon RPG's though. The storyline and the plots are different every version but the scenario's are always EXACTLY the same. What I mean is you battle the Gym Leaders the evil villains and you catch Pokemon. Yeah they need to change that format some time but how can we do that when we are supposed to do this as this is how Pokemon was designed? They can't just do that. If they did Pokemon would be dead in the water. All they can do is improve the regions and plots for the games. If they changed anything else that would sink Pokemon fast and real fast too.:)
Click to expand...

On the other side, it's a setting that allows for a lot of variation so it never feels really the same as last time.
The basis is always beating gyms one after another, but the ways to getting there, in other words the region itself, still has plenty of unexplored possibilities and themes, as do the interesting plots/villains/legends added on top of it.

So I personally can see myself exploring several more new regions before the excitement is gone lol.



It's the remakes like ORAS right now that are getting to close to being lame, because it's actually exactly the game we already played.. that's where I think the change is needed right now. The remake concept needs to be replaced with proper sequels. No DP remakes, at least DP2 next time please.

But then again, they seem comfortable to just copy&paste the whole thing... so the best hope we got is if there is a return to Kanto again. Because it was already remade, so they would HAVE TO do something new with it, whether its sequels, or epxanding it or improving or in general using the originals but making them how they would if they made an up-to-date new game.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

Mitja said:
On the other side, it's a setting that allows for a lot of variation so it never feels really the same as last time.
The basis is always beating gyms one after another, but the ways to getting there, in other words the region itself, still has plenty of unexplored possibilities and themes, as do the interesting plots/villains/legends added on top of it.

So I personally can see myself exploring several more new regions before the excitement is gone lol.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree here, at a certain point it just gets repetitive and stale to have the same "beat 8 gym leaders, defeat the evil team, beat the Elite 4, end" formula, it starts to feel like a chore. But I do think there's some tweaks they can make to the formula to make it more fresh, like if they had 12 gyms in the region and you only need 8 of them to go to the Pokemon League. It seems like they were starting to do this in 5th gen, with BW1 having an evil team that is a more direct threat to your goal of becoming the best trainer in the region and an ending that plays out completely different from past games, and BW2 introducing the concept of sequels which allows for bigger changes to mid gen games than what we've seen before. But now with XY and ORAS, it seems like they've thrown those improvements out the window and just want to do the same thing they've done before from now until the end of time.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

One thing they could do is make the regions combined like they did in gen 2 where Kanto and Johto were combined. Since then we have not had any games with the regions combined. If they combined 3rd gen with 4th gen that would be very impressive. If they combined 5th gen with gen 6 that would be more impressive since 5th and 6th gen actually are both like playing gen 1 with added features and different story lines. These 2 gens are so close to gen 1 that it is not even funny XD.:)
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

Combining regions only dilutes the story, the little story there already is, of course.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

professorlight said:
Combining regions only dilutes the story, the little story there already is, of course.
Click to expand...

Not just the story, but the gameplay content as well. The fallacy in asking for two regions is that people expect the game to have double the content of a normal game. What really happens is that you get the same content divided into two regions. Size, memory, and pacing restrictions don't magically go away with two regions, those are constant issues on any game. So while it seems like a great idea on paper, in practice it just doesn't work the way you'd want it to and cause all kinds of problems like the ones we saw in GSCHGSS.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

xxashxx said:
One thing they could do is make the regions combined like they did in gen 2 where Kanto and Johto were combined. Since then we have not had any games with the regions combined. If they combined 3rd gen with 4th gen that would be very impressive. If they combined 5th gen with gen 6 that would be more impressive since 5th and 6th gen actually are both like playing gen 1 with added features and different story lines. These 2 gens are so close to gen 1 that it is not even funny XD.:)
Click to expand...

Gens 1+2 were only combined because (iirc) Gold/Silver were meant to be the last Pokemon games, so they gave it 2 regions.
Making a game with all the regions in would only really fit as the last ever game, as it would seem really anticlimactic if they released this huge supergame with a whole load of content and then after that released anything different.

Not to mention it would be weird in terms of Pokemon training... since it would be possible to have a team of level 60s at the beginning of region 2, that would really take the challenge factor out.
Or they could have it so you don't get any access to your old Pokemon until a certain point in the game and before that have to start new to keep a challenge.
Or they could really numb the regions down and have say, region 1 peaking at level 25, region 2 at level 40, region 3 at level 50 etc., ending with a climactic battle against the final champions level 100 whatever.

For now, I think its really unlikely we'll end up having more than one region in a game, and the closest will probably be something like the Sevii Isles or the Battle Zone.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

If they were supposed to be the last games how did we get gen 3 and beyond? That does not make sense XD.:)
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

xxashxx said:
If they were supposed to be the last games how did we get gen 3 and beyond? That does not make sense XD.:)
Click to expand...

They decided to continue the series because it was so popular.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

Oh wow. I knew at some point they almost cancelled it twice but I never knew that was why though.:)
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

Back to the topic of the formula giving stale, I think one thing they could play around with is the mascots. I think it's a little limiting for the story if the mascot is always some kind of super powerful Pokemon that you only encounter at the end of the game. Maybe they can play around with this concept a bit and either have a nonlegendary mascot (something Lucario or Zoroark-esque) or a baby form of a legendary (with breeding restrictions of course to prevent you from obtaining duplicates) that you could obtain earlier in the game.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

Legendaries don't evolve by definition... but what could be done (one time only, of course, then they'd have to find another gimmick) is to have a much lesser form of a legendary; say, a pikachu-in-yellow like pokemon that you can't leave, is not too strong, doesn't evolve, and requires an item or something to change formes and become the legendary pokemon in all rights, maybe it could learn weak placeholder moves when unpowered and have those moves replaced in the new forme, like kyurem.

Anyway, it would be a one-trick pony, but it's still something.
 
RE: Changes for Pokémon (Opinion)

professorlight said:
Legendaries don't evolve by definition... but what could be done (one time only, of course, then they'd have to find another gimmick) is to have a much lesser form of a legendary; say, a pikachu-in-yellow like pokemon that you can't leave, is not too strong, doesn't evolve, and requires an item or something to change formes and become the legendary pokemon in all rights, maybe it could learn weak placeholder moves when unpowered and have those moves replaced in the new forme, like kyurem.

Anyway, it would be a one-trick pony, but it's still something.
Click to expand...

They don't evolve by definition or they just haven't evolved before? There's a difference there. At any rate, they could just get around this by stating that the baby Pokemon is not a legendary and only becomes one after evolving, which really wouldn't be that far off from a Phione/Manaphy or possibly a Carbink/Diancie relationship anyway. Your idea isn't too far off from what I was thinking either, make it a Pokemon obtainable fairly early in the game (maybe by the third gym or so), and then in order to evolve it you'd need an item or you'd need to fulfill some other requirement that can only be done once per game (maybe it would automatically evolve at the end of the game). And then you can breed down the baby form, but like with Manaphy, you could not evolve it into another one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top