-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Pokemon feels like the game series with the single most wasted potential of all time
- Thread starter Revolsin
- Start date
Yep. I think people need to boycott them and demand better IP treatment
No they're not and I rightfully complain about elements I didn't like from Sun & Moon, Let's Go and Quest.
However, you were twisting what I said and your arguments here have been flawed
It is AAA. The games definitely have huge marketing budgets
Then they would take years to make.
Barren landscapes and funneling you from one place to the next? I'd love to know.how you know all this from a 5 minute video lol. And why is DQ brought up? That game literally has the same turn based combat it's had for forever lol. Pokemon has changed plenty of mechanics over the years. Shit let's go was so polarizing because of how they changed the catch mechanic and got rid of random battles. But yea I see you're point on how it hasn't changed at all. They clearly can't win with anyone because when let's go was shown people were clamoring for random battles to return and now that it is people are bitching. Clearly you guys just need to move onto a different franchise
User Banned (Permanent): Consistent history of hostility and antagonizing other members over a series of posts; numerous accumulated infractions.
The elements you didnt like are minor. We are talking about the fundamental mistreatment of the IP. Enough with the same old crap every year. At least bring some innovation into the mold with an ambitious AAA undertaking. GF just seems to be a lazy, talentless studio.
The elements I don't like about Let's Go are a significant part of the gameplay loop but sure, let's go with that.
If it was such a fundamental mistreatment of the franchise, it wouldn't sell as well as it does and wouldn't be the biggest multimedia franchise of all time
enjoying a series of games is swallowing antiquated shit? for someone who says they're not attacking anyone you firstly tell someone they "have the mind of a pre teen" and now branding fans of these games as idiots. You seem like a nice person...
To me its not even about "open-world" Pokémon, i do not particularily care about that.
But i haven't played a Pokémon game since Diamond back when i was a kid, all the ones after didn't grab my attention.
I got pretty hyped when last month's Direct was announced, then i watched the Sword&Shield reveal and i was "Yep that's Pokémon alright", instead of "WOW THAT'S POKEMON? I WANNA PLAY IT" which to me is pretty telling.
But i haven't played a Pokémon game since Diamond back when i was a kid, all the ones after didn't grab my attention.
I got pretty hyped when last month's Direct was announced, then i watched the Sword&Shield reveal and i was "Yep that's Pokémon alright", instead of "WOW THAT'S POKEMON? I WANNA PLAY IT" which to me is pretty telling.
Ah yes, the avatar quote in an discussion thread. How tasteful.enjoying a series of games is swallowing antiquated shit? for someone who says they're not attacking anyone you firstly tell someone they "have the mind of a pre teen" and now branding fans of these games as idiots. You seem like a nice person...
Define a good story?
That's perfectly fine, people change so are their tastes, adults are hardly the main target of these games so I think that's fairly normal
Black and White are extremely well regarded for their stories and many of the complaints around Sun and Moon were that there was too much story.
I initially was following the usual "Eh, is Game Freak. Don't expect anything else but baby steps" mentality and I was actually telling people that if they were hoping for something like BOTW in Pokemon then they were going to be disappointed.
Then the Sword&Shield trailer happened and even with my low expectations I still got disappointed.
The problem is not that the game is visually unimpressive (which again, I saw it coming a mile away), the problem is that the character models seem out of place in the rest of the world and surprisingly Let's Go did a much better job at making the whole look much more cohesive.
The being said, the straw that broke the camel's back for me was that they went back to random encounters, something that THEY THEMSELVES already fixed in Let's Go. I was expecting baby steps as I've said, not REGRESSION.
So, now I'm in the camp that there needs to be an immediate change at Pokemon one way or another. One can only tolerate Game Freak's issues so many times.
Then the Sword&Shield trailer happened and even with my low expectations I still got disappointed.
The problem is not that the game is visually unimpressive (which again, I saw it coming a mile away), the problem is that the character models seem out of place in the rest of the world and surprisingly Let's Go did a much better job at making the whole look much more cohesive.
The being said, the straw that broke the camel's back for me was that they went back to random encounters, something that THEY THEMSELVES already fixed in Let's Go. I was expecting baby steps as I've said, not REGRESSION.
So, now I'm in the camp that there needs to be an immediate change at Pokemon one way or another. One can only tolerate Game Freak's issues so many times.
Staff Post: Tone down the hostility
Altering and enhancing the basics as rigorously as BoTW has done is precisely what I wish Pokémon would do. Pokémon Red/Blue seemed to really push the feeling of adventure and exploration as far as they possibly could at the time on the Game Boy. While each new game obviously introduced new mechanics, it just doesn't feel like these aspects of the franchise have evolved even half as much as the hardware allows.
Edit: to clarify, I don't want BoTW Pokémon. Just talking about the scale of the project.
Pokemon is a stagnant and repetitive series... but so is the gameplay itself.
Not much has changed because most people who buy Pokemon games like it the way it is and want no changes. They feel comfortable playing basically the same game they played 20 years ago. Nostalgia and all that.
There is a reason why Gamefreak don't put any of the changes of Let's Go in Sword&Shiekd., they don't want to alienate their user base.
Some people hope that Let's Go 2 will continue the route to modern gaming, but it will probably exactly like Let's Go again.
Yes, a Pokemon game with the style of the movie and modern gameplay could sell very well to a new audience, but Pokemon already sells well with seemingly little effort necessary.
Big changes to Pokemon games will not happen, so we are stuck with these games being the same over and over again.
Not much has changed because most people who buy Pokemon games like it the way it is and want no changes. They feel comfortable playing basically the same game they played 20 years ago. Nostalgia and all that.
There is a reason why Gamefreak don't put any of the changes of Let's Go in Sword&Shiekd., they don't want to alienate their user base.
Some people hope that Let's Go 2 will continue the route to modern gaming, but it will probably exactly like Let's Go again.
Yes, a Pokemon game with the style of the movie and modern gameplay could sell very well to a new audience, but Pokemon already sells well with seemingly little effort necessary.
Big changes to Pokemon games will not happen, so we are stuck with these games being the same over and over again.
I would argue neither of the Ni no Kuni games lived up to their potential, and they don't have the history and existing ideas to build from that Pokemon does. And more than that, Pokemon is a series that has evolved little by little over the past 20+ years, but in a lot of ways it still feels very similar to the early generations. Sure, more technical stuff has been added, QOL improvements have been made, but it largely feels like playing similar games. It's sort of like a Call of Duty in that improvements are generally made between iterations and the core of the game is very well done, but after a while it becomes repetitive.
It seems to me that you could have a more streamlined, multiplayer focused classic Pokémon game that's very reminiscent of current games for the people that love the competitive scene. I don't think it's crazy to suggest that the campaign portion of Pokemon is clearly lacking compared to what the rest of the industry is doing. By no means am I saying it would be easy, but I think there is undeniably untapped potential in the Pokémon franchise.
For some, they don't want to lose Pokémon as it is now. I get that. However, for a lot of people - even some who still play every Pokémon game - they would be really excited to see an ambitious Pokémon game. Honestly with how active the competitive scene is in various ways in a hypothetical world where Nintendo developed their best attempt at a truly ambitious Pokemon game the core fan base would have plenty of options to play the existing games. If it comes down to the current style of Pokémon games or a new, more ambitious version of Pokémon and they can't both coexist, I personally would prefer to see what can be done with the IP. I understand plenty of people just want what they've been getting for 20 years with small improvements and more Pokémon. I don't begrudge them, I just think Pokémon could be something different and something more exciting.
Claiming everyone who wants the series to stay as is biased and "gobble it up" is horseshit. I, and many other people, have a series of games I enjoy the way they are. It is not criminal to continue to enjoy them that way and them be made that way. Stop treating that like it's somehow a bad thing just because you're not interested in it.
My argument is that they make games people enjoy and do so safely. As long as people enjoy them, why is that an issue?
I was referring to SM and USUM actually. Too many and occurring cutscene that reuse stock animations and tired actions over and over. "Oh look the pokemon wants to get out of the bag for 20th time, and she doesn't want that. Cant wait to see this again in about ten minutes."
Can you honestly, genuinely, not take a step back and realise that you are incredibly biased on this issue? Do you honestly and genuinely think the average person thinks that the pokemon games are innovative when they are ostensibly almost the exact same game over and over and over for 20 years, where nobody in this thread even the most ardent supporters has managed to name a single series that has innovated/progressed less, even when compared to an annualised football game?
If you genuinely feel Pokemon is an innovative and progressive series that couldn't be significantly more refreshing, better and bigger then you really are suffering from Game Freak stockholm syndrome IMO - and at that point there is literally no point discussing this with you. You will happily gobble up and defend the same old game over and over for the rest of your life, and honestly good for you. The rest of us would rather be playing games like God of War or Breath of the Wild that push the envelope.
Last edited:
When i saw screenshots of Colosseum then played it i was blown away by the notion of a console pokemon adventure. Then i realized it was just a spin-off and yet it has more ambition than Game Freak has shown in the past 10 years.
Say what you want about Colosseum reusing stadium models or small pokemon pool. Its an inherently more interesting game.
I just want a game that feels like the show. At the time, GSC was it. Games have evolved since then and what's being done now is kinda meh. At this point, I just hope we can get a spin-off by monolith or something.
Because with that kind of attitude we wouldn't get amazing games. That is why it is an issue. With that kind of attitude games like God of War or Breath of the Wild wouldn't exist because those games would instead be the same old formula.
I would much rather have a Pokemon game that was as fresh and innovative as those examples in their respective series than play the same old "safe" game for the umpteenth time in a row.
This why I go out of my way to play other series in this genre. They're willing to change and challenge themselves in this genre.
Have you seen the sales of their games. Why should they want to change? Everyone keep buying it.
I always feel like I'm out of the loop in these conversations because I don't think Pokémon needs a shakeup or drastic revamp or anything.
GF would never allow that. They don't want to look bad/worse.
Everyone keeps buying Call of Duty too.
A MH-esque spinoff might actually be pretty neat, yeah. Not going to lie though, spin-offs aside, I'm intrigued about the idea of a main Pokémon game that would take certain particular cues from games like Monster Hunter as well. Like, imagine something like Pokémon Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee, with wild Pokémon visible on the overworld, right? But then imagine that instead of wild Pokémon just moving around on the overworld, certain ones could get into turf wars and stuff like in Monster Hunter, using their attacks to damage and inflict status effects and potentially even cause each other to faint/disappear just right there on the overworld, like seeing wild Pidgeotto actually attacking Caterpie and stuff, and then you can just walk up to the Caterpie and it turns into a normal turn-based battle and you can basically steal the kill so to speak.
Or alternatively, you get into the middle of that, and it's treated as a wild Double Battle with friendly-fire fully on for the AI so the Pidgeotto could still not only have the choice to go after the Caterpie like it technically can in normal double-battles but actively prioritize doing so, and you have to take care of it first and fast if its the Caterpie you want to catch and add to your Dex or Team or whatever. Something like that.
Point being, there are definitely cues Pokémon could take from Monster Hunter even without a MH-esque spinoff game that could be pretty cool to see how they would handle that, and that would definitely intrigue me. And in particular if they do end up making more games in the Let's Go subseries, I'd really like to see some kind of Turf War system worked into the games, because that would be really neat and make the routes feel much more lived in and much more like an actual, living ecosystem, actually seeing stuff like that going on and not just reading about it as something that apparently happens at times according the Pokédex but never actually seeing it yourself.
These threads are a little weird to me. People who say they haven't bought a game in the series in 10 years or more complain about where there series is and say it's lazy that they haven't made major changes to a series that 10-20 million people buy and enjoy.
I think a big reason Pokemon maintains it's popularity is specifically because it releases so frequently, which is something you can't do if you're making sprawling ambitious games that take twice as long to develop. When a large portion of the userbase is kids, if you have a three year gap between entries then you potentially miss getting tons of people interested in the series particularly because nothing released when they were the target demographic.
I haven't bought many Pokemon games and I'd definitely like to see a bit more put into them in terms of presentation/graphics, but calling it The series with the most missed potential seems silly since it seems like most people who complain that it doesn't do enough actually want something completely different (MMO, BOTW-open world) than what the series is.
I think a big reason Pokemon maintains it's popularity is specifically because it releases so frequently, which is something you can't do if you're making sprawling ambitious games that take twice as long to develop. When a large portion of the userbase is kids, if you have a three year gap between entries then you potentially miss getting tons of people interested in the series particularly because nothing released when they were the target demographic.
I haven't bought many Pokemon games and I'd definitely like to see a bit more put into them in terms of presentation/graphics, but calling it The series with the most missed potential seems silly since it seems like most people who complain that it doesn't do enough actually want something completely different (MMO, BOTW-open world) than what the series is.
I sound like a broken record and I apologize for that. But I suggest checking out other monster RPG series. Yokai Watch is on the 3DS and 2 or 3 is good places to start. Monster Hunter Stories is also on the 3DS and on mobile as well. They offer cool changes to gameplay and have great presentation.
It may not "need" it but it would be better with it. The argument it doesn't "need" it is a complete non argument. God of War didn't need a revamp, neither did Zelda. But because of revamps we got absolutely spectacular games that really push the envelope of their respective series and redefined what those series were - to make them something better than they ever were.
If you genuinely love a franchise you would want it to be better, not argue it doesn't "need" to change. The people criticising Pokemon in this thread actually love the games, and want them to be better. They want bigger scope, they want better mechanics, they want storylines and emotional investment. They want Pokemon to try to be the best it can be rather than rest on its laurels because it has the niche pretty much to itself.
Here's my viewpoint as a competitive player!
I think Pokemon has two sacred cows: the battle system being turn based, and the game heavily focusing on building a team to execute some sort of strategy. So when people talk about turn based battles being too old and needing to be removed, that feels pretty strange to me. That'd be like saying fighting games are old hat, so Street Figther 6 should be a first person shooter. That'd cause an uproar with Street Fighter fans, and making Pokemon an action RPG would cause similar reactions in the competiitve fanbase. I'd certainly be bummed out at least!
However, funnily enough, I'm personally pretty open to other changes as long as the deep PVP battle system remains intact. So I'd be totally open to say, Gen 9 being open world, or a different approach to story, or maybe all battles in the campagin being doubles, etc. As long as the core of competitive Pokemon is preserved, Gamefreak can go crazy with the changes as far as I'm concerned. Hell, the fact that there's even a competitive community for Let's Go of all things shows how Pokemon inherently encourages competition, even when the developer themselves may not for specfic games!
I think Pokemon has two sacred cows: the battle system being turn based, and the game heavily focusing on building a team to execute some sort of strategy. So when people talk about turn based battles being too old and needing to be removed, that feels pretty strange to me. That'd be like saying fighting games are old hat, so Street Figther 6 should be a first person shooter. That'd cause an uproar with Street Fighter fans, and making Pokemon an action RPG would cause similar reactions in the competiitve fanbase. I'd certainly be bummed out at least!
However, funnily enough, I'm personally pretty open to other changes as long as the deep PVP battle system remains intact. So I'd be totally open to say, Gen 9 being open world, or a different approach to story, or maybe all battles in the campagin being doubles, etc. As long as the core of competitive Pokemon is preserved, Gamefreak can go crazy with the changes as far as I'm concerned. Hell, the fact that there's even a competitive community for Let's Go of all things shows how Pokemon inherently encourages competition, even when the developer themselves may not for specfic games!
You know the fanbase, myself included, are equally vocal about actual flaws of the franchise. We just don't want a genre shift because it's un-necessary and would alienate a large portion of the userbase.
I still think they're never going to show you what a Pokémon is on the overworld and have you battle them, because the two design philosophies are completely at odds.
At best you get persona like black blobs on an overworld which will please nobody.