Pokémon will always be aimed, first and foremost, at children. The whole promise of the game, the feeling — of getting to leave home at a bizarrely young age and travel the world having adventures with your monster friends — is tailor-made to appeal to children.
scare_crow was saying that people who decide that gen-one fans "aren't real fans" for not playing all the subsequent games are the gatekeepers, not the gen-one fans.
There is a real big difference between a Gen 1 fan skipping a game or two but overall keeping up with the series and a Gen 1 fan who feels the need to drive by shitpost the new Pokemon games 'suck' because you saw the IceCream meme Pokemon but they literally haven't engaged with the series in any way whatsoever for 20+ years but still demand GF to make games 'for them' at the expense of literally everyone else.
They have LGPE now. They can play that and finally leave us alone.
Ha, no no no. I was talking about the people who get so upset about generation one fans not being "real" fans. Kind of like... you, it seems.They aren't even gatekeepers because they haven't touched the games since the original R/B/G.
They just like to swarm every new Pokemon release and reveal with screams about how the designs are shit, Gen 1 was best and how the games are bad despite never playing them because of the aforementioned 'bad pokemon'.
They were at their worst with Gen 5 and now Gamfreak has essentially buried that take on Pokemon 50 feet underground.
'Icecream cone Pokemon' is now a general throw-away term for 'shitty Pokemon' now all because Gen 1 stans threw a fucking fit that they couldn't get slowpoke before endgame and GF attempted to let the game stand on it's own.
I didn't. And there was context.I mean, you're the one who got worked over the fact that I was unable to identify a tv show quote with no context.
Exactly.Nobody is doing that in this thread though.
It's just a bunch of people complaining about people doing that. I'm reminded of an old phone warz thread on BGR or something, where the article would be about Samsung doing something and the comments would be a bunch of Android users complaining about the wave of Apple users who were inevitably going to shitpost about it ("in before all the Apple fanbois claim Steve Jobs invented this!"), and zero comments from the alleged Apple loyalists actually shitposting.
Also, I don't think the people who "haven't engaged with the series in any way whatsoever" are also somehow "demanding GF to make games 'for them' at the expense of literally everyone else." If GF wants to go after lapsed fans, that's their prerogative, but that's different from people who don't follow the series somehow also...following the series and demanding that it suits their taste, which just seems contradictory.
How is this bait? The last two Gens of Pokemon have done this and have seen some great results. Theres no way they wont focus on Gen 1 in some capacity with a resurgence of lapsed players who recently got back into the series
Better than Gen 3 and 4. * Shrug *"Great results"????
Mega-Evolutions turned out to be ridiculously unbalanced (and given mainly to more popular/competitive Pokemon, which in turn only increased the power creep), and people were frustrated that the Alola variants were ONLY exclusive to Gen I. It especially didn't make sense because regional variants don't just apply to the original 151, they'd apply to living beings in general. There's also the matter of Gen VI and VII being some of the worst Pokemon games when compared to Gen I - V.
What they should do: celebrate Gold and Silver by having a surprising post game allowing players to revisit another region post-game. It's bizarre that they've never done this a second time.It's worth pointing out that this year marks the 20th anniversary for Gold and Silver, so it will be interesting to see how Game Freak opt to celebrate that.
I didn't. And there was context.
None of you are in a position to call anyone else worked up in this salt factory if a thread. All of my comments were playing off the saltiness of others.
"I mean, you're the one who got worked over the fact that I was unable to identify a tv show quote with no context."1. Where did I call you "worked up"
2. I have only responded to your post of a video your posted without context that itself had zero context as to what it was about.
3. You have since taken the fact that I didn't know a specific quote from the Brady Bunch (which I shared with a bunch of people my age (mid 20's) who had no idea where this was from) as an excuse to act like I've been saying nothing but "kill Gen I" when all my posts in this thread has not been that.
4. What the hell does that have to do with my quote? You want to drag Crazy Izanagi into this, do it with his quotes with you, not mine.
X and Y completely devalued their new starters by giving you a Kanto starter with a Mega Evolution before you even get to the second gym. This is a terrible idea.
This is still one of the dumbest things Game Freak has tried to pull recently. Introducing new Pokémon in USUM without patching them into SM was already kinda sketch, but trying to pass off a Pokémon that has never even cohabitated a game with other Gen 7 Pokémon as being Gen 7 itself and not having it be just a Gen 8 preview like spin-offs normally get is absolutely absurd.
"I mean, you're the one who got worked over the fact that I was unable to identify a tv show quote with no context."
Really?
they can't patch the game because they want people spending full price for what amounts to an expansion pack these daysThis is still one of the dumbest things Game Freak has tried to pull recently. Introducing new Pokémon in USUM without patching them into SM was already kinda sketch, but trying to pass off a Pokémon that has never even cohabitated a game with other Gen 7 Pokémon as being Gen 7 itself and not having it be just a Gen 8 preview like spin-offs normally get is absolutely absurd.
they gave up on teh idea of baby pokemon for whatever reasonAlso I'd really want a prevolution for Miltank/Tauros that explores a bit more of the story behind the differences between male and female. Maybe a calf with two variations too?
What? Most people who care about Gen 1 aren't exactly part of the fanbase, they're former fans that want to play them again.I think both GF and Nintendo are more than aware that there is a big part of the fanbase who only care about the Gen 1 Pokemon.
Ha, no no no. I was talking about the people who get so upset about generation one fans not being "real" fans. Kind of like... you, it seems.
Sorry, I can't take you seriously when you use the word "Stan." Have a good one. Hopefully you enjoy the next game.Gen 1 fans didn't get their reputation for no reason. Have you never asked yourself why the same ire isn't directed at Gen 2 fans?
For as long as I had access to an internet the SAME gen fans with the SAME background of 'I stopped playing after Red' have made a Heruclean effort to proclaim how bad the new Pokemon, and how they are too many of them and it would be great if it was just 151 again. They have done this since Gen 3- were at their worst at Gen 5 and were catered to on a golden platter to the detriment of Gen 6-7. I love it when that Genwunners are now saying they are 'prosecuted' because people who actually engage in the franchise are rightfully calling them out for being insufferable purists. Their ire is well earned in the community. They did it to themselves. No other gen Stan faces this animosity because gen 3 fans didn't make a conceited effort to drive by shit on any gen that came after Ruby.
If you were simply done arguing you could of not replied. But yeah dismiss an argument over Lexicon.Sorry, I can't take you seriously when you use the word "Stan." Have a good one. Hopefully you enjoy the next game.
Gladly! (Although, I have a feeling you think I'm one to the "GENWUNNERS!!!!" you keep referring to, which is funny.)If you were simply done arguing you could of not replied. But yeah dismiss an argument over Lexicon.
I know exactly why they did it. I just think not even patching them into the older games of the generation (they don't have to make them directly available, just make trading and battling fully work) is looking increasingly anachronistic now that they're on platforms that allow patching.they can't patch the game because they want people spending full price for what amounts to an expansion pack these days
You still sometimes see that kind of rhetoric here on resetera, but it's more common elsewhere. It was really bad back in the days of Gen 5. Anyway, the term isn't a recent thing and didn't come out of nowhere, it's just died down probably because of the term becoming popular. We just have different experiences with different groups of people.Maybe it's because I don't actually hang in Pokémon communities, but I pretty much exclusively see people who complain about genwunners, rather than these alleged genwunners themselves. I'm sure these people exist, but I lump 'em in with all the others who talk about how Pokémon was best when they were into the series the most, and how the new ones are worse.
The concept of Gen 1 pandering is interesting to me though. It's described here as some kind of cynical marketing ploy to lure in lapsed fans, rather than playing to the series' roots. Pokémon is an old enough franchise these days that the very people who grew up with the series could have grown old enough to join the workforce and work on actual Pokémon games.
Never referred to you as a Genwunner so maybe your the one making shit up.Gladly! (Although, I have a feeling you think I'm one to the "GENWUNNERS!!!!" you keep referring to, which is funny.)
Again, hope you enjoy the next game. Until then, keep fighting whatever fight you think you're fighting!
Maybe it's because I don't actually hang in Pokémon communities, but I pretty much exclusively see people who complain about genwunners, rather than these alleged genwunners themselves. I'm sure these people exist, but I lump 'em in with all the others who talk about how Pokémon was best when they were into the series the most, and how the new ones are worse.
The concept of Gen 1 pandering is interesting to me though. It's described here as some kind of cynical marketing ploy to lure in lapsed fans, rather than playing to the series' roots. Pokémon is an old enough franchise these days that the very people who grew up with the series could have grown old enough to join the workforce and work on actual Pokémon games.
Maybe it's because I don't actually hang in Pokémon communities, but I pretty much exclusively see people who complain about genwunners, rather than these alleged genwunners themselves.
The concept of Gen 1 pandering is interesting to me though. It's described here as some kind of cynical marketing ploy to lure in lapsed fans, rather than playing to the series' roots. Pokémon is an old enough franchise these days that the very people who grew up with the series could have grown old enough to join the workforce and work on actual Pokémon games.
Yuuuup. Also I cringe whenever I see someone use "genwunners" unironically.
That's a good point.
There are a lot of differing opinions as to what even counts as "gen-one pandering." Someone earlier in this thread complained about having Ratatta and Pidgey being early Pokémon. Is that pandering? Or does it just make thematic sense to have rats and pigeons be common, easy Pokémon? Would people be more satisfied if they made other rat and pigeon Pokémon for each region, or would that still be "pandering" since it would obviously still be based on the template of Ratatta and Pidgey?
That's an easy one. Are birds and rats exactly the same everywhere in the world? That's rhetorical because they aren't.
So why would it make sense to lock in Pidgey as the very first encounter everytime you start X/Y if it isn't nostalgia pandering?
They can show up but they shouldn't overshadow the new creatures, that actually belong in a region.
That's an easy one. Are birds and rats exactly the same everywhere in the world? That's rhetorical because they aren't. So why would it make sense to lock in Pidgey as the very first encounter everytime you start X/Y if it isn't nostalgia pandering? Plus Pikachu is a mouse anyway and guaranteed to show up. So yeah it's not crazy to want variety. They can show up but they shouldn't overshadow the new creatures, that actually belong in a region.
A good example of this was Corsola in Gen 7, they gave a good reason it was there in the region and tied it to a new Pokemon being Mareanie. It's part of the reason I don't mind Johto having a ton of Kanto pokemon, the regions touch so of course the biodiversity is similar. Disbelief has to be suspended pretty hard to convince me Japanese birds are in France.
Well you can get a lot of variety from the com mons, I'd say most of them are pretty distinct from each other. GF makes new com mons because birds and rodents and bugs are common, they're just the core for a new gen. Same reason you get new fossils for example.Thanks for the explainer.
Because Pidgey is established shorthand for a weak, non-threatening Pokémon?
I don't think anyone thinks Pidgey overshadows the new monsters.
This is what I mean by potentially anything from the original games being seen by somebody somewhere as "nostalgia pandering." Is a Poké Ball being red and white "pandering"?
Personally I wouldn't want them to reinvent the wheel and put an unPidgey and an unRatatta in each game. That just bloats the Pokédex without adding real variety. It's okay to just use Pidgey and Ratatta.
People who care about electric rodents that aren't Pikachu. People who care about Pokémon that aren't part of the 151. Catering specifically to one segment does not instill the idea that this is for everyone.How is including a Pikachu not making Pokemon for everyone? Who exactly is being shut out and how so? How are these games not for everyone?
Rattata, Sentret, Zigzagoon, Bidoof, Patrat, Bunnelby, Yungoose are all different Pokémon and work differently.
The concept of Gen 1 pandering is interesting to me though. It's described here as some kind of cynical marketing ploy to lure in lapsed fans, rather than playing to the series' roots. Pokémon is an old enough franchise these days that the very people who grew up with the series could have grown old enough to join the workforce and work on actual Pokémon games.
pidgeons and rats are common but they're not, like, everywhere, all the timeI don't think anyone thinks Pidgey overshadows the new monsters.
This is what I mean by potentially anything from the original games being seen by somebody somewhere as "nostalgia pandering." Is a Poké Ball being red and white "pandering"?
Personally I wouldn't want them to reinvent the wheel and put an unPidgey and an unRatatta in each game. That just bloats the Pokédex without adding real variety. It's okay to just use Pidgey and Ratatta.