• 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.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

enkaisu

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,414
Pittsburgh
I'm okay with tradition. I've been playing the games since Yellow came out and I've loved them since. The main change I'd like to see is no more top down perspective. Gimme a third person, behind the back camera.

Edit: Oh, and I'd like to see deeper character customization as well.
 

Revali

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
1,395
Rito Village
I'd like the story quality from the Mystery Dungeon games to make its way to the mainline releases. Explorers of Sky and Super Mystery Dungeon had interesting stories that weren't bogged down by unskippable cutscenes, and are criminally underrated games in general.
 
Oct 25, 2017
56,663
I'd like the story quality from the Mystery Dungeon games to make its way to the mainline releases. Explorers of Sky and Super Mystery Dungeon had interesting stories that weren't bogged down by unskippable cutscenes, and are criminally underrated games in general.
On top of this I'd like a mystery dungeon game period too lol
 

lvl 99 Pixel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
44,700
I'd like the story quality from the Mystery Dungeon games to make its way to the mainline releases. Explorers of Sky and Super Mystery Dungeon had interesting stories that weren't bogged down by unskippable cutscenes, and are criminally underrated games in general.

Their scripts were sometimes good but sometimes really wack, especially Super which had all kinds of wtf scenes including something right out of advent children.
Compared to the main games its more intricate and heartfelt, but thats not really a high bar :S

Just like the Main games, they do weird and funny really well, but a lot of the dramatic stuff goes full troped out jrpg.
 

Serebii

Serebii.net Webmaster
Verified
Oct 24, 2017
13,126
Cant really tell with the guy, there isnt a single Pokemon thing he wont defend to the death. Plus look at the post he is qouting, he is comparing the advancements and innovation to the Pokemon series in Sun and Moon and comparing them to Mario and Odyssey, like what? they are in completely different leagues.
Yeah I don't do that. I criticise when criticism is necessary. Just because I don't blindly bash does not mean I defend it to death.

Check my Twitter, I bitch about a lot
 

Hoshigumi

Member
Dec 1, 2017
282
South Wales - UK
What do you mean by "better established"?

Idk, every game we get always seems to throw out the last games idea of end game PvP and try replace it with some new yet similar battle tower/tree and for PvE it's usually just about finding a couple legendaries & now ultra beasts.

I'd like to see the series establish something better in both directions, some kinda system that can be carried onward to the next instalments. I liked what they did with Ultra beasts but it felt kinda shallow.

That being said I haven't actually played U-SuMo so I'm not sure if they have moved forward with either area.
 

Lyonaz

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
492
I just want a really good character creation in the game, with a million fashion options with shops in the world, if I can't train/battle Pokémon looking like a hobo or a hipster I will be sad.
 

LJKO

Member
Nov 16, 2017
2,620
With so many people speculating Gen 4 remake instead of Gen 8 for Pokemon Switch, then how about we get Gen 8 post game Gen 4. Us Pokemon fan been waiting for 19 years for a Pokemon game to be like Silver/Gold/Crystal sucessor. If they want to follow how Zelda and Oddysey does it then 2 regions is a must for open world.
 
Oct 26, 2017
2,430
I don't understand why people are so hung up on the two regions thing?
I assume it comes from wanting a more expansive world to explore, but that wouldn't necessarily require two regions. Just a single fleshed out region would suffice.
 

McNum

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,195
Denmark
I don't want the game to be BOTW, but with Pokémon as such, but I would hope that they've at least giving it a run-through of ideas they can or cannot use for Pokémon. I would love to be able to use my Pokémon for more than just battles, but using them for exploration has been limited to specific moves that are very binary if they can be used. If shrub, then Cut. If water, the Surf. And so on. Sun and Moon side-stepped it with the rental Pokémon but that just made it even worse in my opinion. If I Fly, I want to use my own Pokémon, not some Charizard I borrowed. It would be interesting to see what a chemistry system like BOTW could do with the exploration. Ice block in the way? Call out any Fire type and have them deal with it. Or a Fighting type to punch it. Have obstacles with open solutions instead of if boulder, then Strength.

It's that part of the game that could use a facelift to me. I have a bird with wings literally made of knives, but it cannot Cut a shrubbery because it doesn't know the move. That's silly. The Pokémon themselves should have the HM-like properties. If it looks like it can cut things, it can cut things. If it can fly, it can fly. If it can burn things, it can burn things. And so on. Divorce field moves entirely from battle moves and let the player find their own solutions to the field obstacles. Even if that ends up with "Shrubbery? Gyarados! Hyper Beam!" Which, honestly, would solve a lot of overworld problems. But that's fun.

I'd also let the player blatantly cheat at puzzles. Or take their Gardevior to a game of chance. Future Sight really should be a field move... But basically, I want my Pokémon to be able to affect the world a whole lot more than they do. And stealing that from BOTW while keeping the gyms and Team Badguy as the main objectives would be fine with me.
 

Scanna

Member
Nov 27, 2017
177
I feel like they're gonna be lazy with it and just up-res the 3DS engine and do minimal work or changes, because it'll sell like crazy no matter what.

I'd love to see them take the opportunity kind of set back the clock and draw back in lapsed fans (like myself) who stopped keeping up with the series when they added hundreds of new Pokemon with every entry and the series went up it's own ass with more and more systems and meta nonsense. It could be a lot more than just another Pokemon game if they do it right. I feel like they could do a lot more if they don't feel so beholden to the series roots and tropes. Limit the number of Pokemon if it means they can get more out of the ones they do include. Improve the quality of battle animations so that they don't look so dumb and farcical, to where moves actually connect. I wanna go back to being a fan of the Pokemon games and get that same sense of wonder I had when I was a kid playing Red and Blue, but the series at this point just looks like a Frankenstein amalgamation of mechanics, dumb Pokemon, and convoluted systems stapled on top of the same core base that hasn't changed in 20 years. A real HD, console-sized Pokemon RPG is exactly the kind of pivot point the series could make use of to freshen things up.

I know a lot of people, lapsed fans like me, that are super exited about the prospect of this one. But if it's just a shiny 3DS game like they'll probably end up doing, then all the hype will be for naught.
My sentiment exactly.
 
Oct 26, 2017
8,734
Anyways, I always thought the argument for a Red and Blue 2 was clear. Gives you the opportunity to make substantial changes to the game, while holding on to the most commercially successful and familiar locations/monsters.

Red Blue 2 is this:

gold-silver-169-en.jpg
 

Aktlys

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,535
I've been wondering how a Pokemon game could work with Xenoblade 2's combat system.
Pokemon would probably work really well on the XC2 engine.

You have a semi open world that can have several areas with monsters running around.
In combat you have your 4 action commands, combat could either be turn based or interactive to give a better sense of action
Having Pokemans switch off each other to build combos would be neat too
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,251
Yeah, let's dump Pokemon's turn-based gameplay for real-time gameplay. While we're at it, let's make the next Counter-Strike into a top-down sh'mup, StarCraft III a hero shooter, and Street Fighter VI a turn-based tactics game.
 

Xtortion

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,650
United States
Current battle system is fine imo. They can tweak it some, but the core is solid - maybe have battles seamlessly occur on the field or something. Like I'm sure everyone else has said, though, I would want them to go all-out on creating a vast, open world where it feels like anything is possible. Basically take those iconic Breath of the Wild moments like the Lord of the Mountain, Eventide Island, seeing the elemental dragons, etc, but apply that level of surprise and wonder to Pokemon.
 

kaisere

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,283
Pokemon would probably work really well on the XC2 engine.

You have a semi open world that can have several areas with monsters running around.
In combat you have your 4 action commands, combat could either be turn based or interactive to give a better sense of action
Having Pokemans switch off each other to build combos would be neat too

Xenoblade's combat has it's place in that game and in WoW-style mmos. Pokemon doesn't need it.

I think a big change that they could make that would make sense with things they already do is make a majority of the game doubles or triples (or have options to). The battle system is great and they have a strong community around the games that exist, but doubles makes it much more dynamic and most casual players never interface with it so making it more prevalent might help people in search of something more complex while still staying true to the foundation that works really well. I think the majority of what needs "fixing" is everything but the combat. Bring back something like the Johto/Kanto combined region, but scale it right this time and don't force people down a hallway like SUM/USUM. Since they've added quest markers to the map they could let you choose between a series of towns to visit and do them in the order you choose.
 

Deleted member 4541

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,569
I want tradition, but I expect innovation.

Hopefully they can find a good mix of both & pull off something amazing.
 

Openrob

Member
Nov 5, 2017
636
They should make it cel shaded.
Like Pokemon Origins meets Dragon Quest VIII.

I think that new additions to the systems are convoluted at best, but a reshaping of how the game plays could be interesting.

I mean rethinking conventions is not a bad thing and going back to the heart of the game and looking at what makes an adventure with Pokémon fun.

They really should increase the difficulty though, and scale things back at times. Make Pokemon feel valuable.
 

Cuburger

Member
Oct 28, 2017
10,975
I know the simply by virtue of Game Freak being very traditional and conservative with how they've treated the series, too much innovation is bound to turn off some die-hard fans, but if Pokemon Go or entries like BotW have taught us anything, if you innovate in the right ways, the risk can pay off huge.

Personally, I think as long as they hone in on the things fans care about the most, they can do something really fresh and new, and fans should be able to appreciate that as well as creating the possibility to invite new fans to the franchise.
 

lvl 99 Pixel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
44,700
I know the simply by virtue of Game Freak being very traditional and conservative with how they've treated the series, too much innovation is bound to turn off some die-hard fans, but if Pokemon Go or entries like BotW have taught us anything, if you innovate in the right ways, the risk can pay off huge.

Personally, I think as long as they hone in on the things fans care about the most, they can do something really fresh and new, and fans should be able to appreciate that as well as creating the possibility to invite new fans to the franchise.

GO is a free mobile app that worked because of its social gimmick, which doesn't make any kind of sense to compare to an actual videogame (and id wager that even though it had a bigger user base than the actual games, the videogames for pokemon would have many more hours actually played)

BOTW happened not only because of critical and commercial dwindling in the Zelda series (which isnt happening with Pokemon yet), but because Zelda is still an action adventure that was both a series that excelled on having a fresh style and gimmick every iteration and made by a company where this was a viable business decision.

There is so much they can add without removing the things that make the series unique, and turning it into just another xenoblade or botw.
 

Council Pop

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,328
Reading this thread makes me feel so depressed. The Pokemon IP has such brilliant potential to really evolve (lol) into a fantastic, accessible yet deep, modern RPG. But Game Freak will never, ever let that happen, because they're too small, too conservative, and their development times are too short. It actually breaks my heart when I think about what one of Nintendo's in house teams could do with Pokemon, and how that potential will forever be wasted.

I sense that the people who shout the loudest about Pokemon are those who are into the competitive scene and the meta game, but I get the feeling that a lot of people don't give a shit about that and just want a Pokemon game with a deep, immersive world, good writing, and gameplay which is much more varied than it has been previously. If all Game Freak do is basically put the 3DS games on the TV, it's going to feel like a PS1 JRPG, and it will reveal how tired and stuck in the past Pokemon games have become. I honestly have no idea how on earth Game Freak are going to create a console experience, or at least convince people they've created a console experience. They'll be hoping that HD graphics will be enough, and if I'm honest I can't even imagine them removing the fixed top-down camera view, never mind building worlds to the scale of Xenoblade or something.

On another note- do people think there will still be two versions of each Pokemon game going forward? It seems more difficult to justify when the games will be sold at console game prices, and with the Switch we're somewhat beyond the 'kids trading Pokemon in the playground' stage.
 

lvl 99 Pixel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
44,700
Reading this thread makes me feel so depressed. The Pokemon IP has such brilliant potential to really evolve (lol) into a fantastic, accessible yet deep, modern RPG. But Game Freak will never, ever let that happen, because they're too small, too conservative, and their development times are too short. It actually breaks my heart when I think about what one of Nintendo's in house teams could do with Pokemon, and how that potential will forever be wasted.

I sense that the people who shout the loudest about Pokemon are those who are into the competitive scene and the meta game, but I get the feeling that a lot of people don't give a shit about that and just want a Pokemon game with a deep, immersive world, good writing, and gameplay which is much more varied than it has been previously. If all Game Freak do is basically put the 3DS games on the TV, it's going to feel like a PS1 JRPG, and it will reveal how tired and stuck in the past Pokemon games have become. I honestly have no idea how on earth Game Freak are going to create a console experience, or at least convince people they've created a console experience. They'll be hoping that HD graphics will be enough, and if I'm honest I can't even imagine them removing the fixed top-down camera view, never mind building worlds to the scale of Xenoblade or something.

On another note- do people think there will still be two versions of each Pokemon game going forward? It seems more difficult to justify when the games will be sold at console game prices, and with the Switch we're somewhat beyond the 'kids trading Pokemon in the playground' stage.

hey, some of the spinoffs are great, and theres always a chance more will pop up.
 

Marossi

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,997
Reading this thread makes me feel so depressed. The Pokemon IP has such brilliant potential to really evolve (lol) into a fantastic, accessible yet deep, modern RPG. But Game Freak will never, ever let that happen, because they're too small, too conservative, and their development times are too short. It actually breaks my heart when I think about what one of Nintendo's in house teams could do with Pokemon, and how that potential will forever be wasted.

I sense that the people who shout the loudest about Pokemon are those who are into the competitive scene and the meta game, but I get the feeling that a lot of people don't give a shit about that and just want a Pokemon game with a deep, immersive world, good writing, and gameplay which is much more varied than it has been previously. If all Game Freak do is basically put the 3DS games on the TV, it's going to feel like a PS1 JRPG, and it will reveal how tired and stuck in the past Pokemon games have become. I honestly have no idea how on earth Game Freak are going to create a console experience, or at least convince people they've created a console experience. They'll be hoping that HD graphics will be enough, and if I'm honest I can't even imagine them removing the fixed top-down camera view, never mind building worlds to the scale of Xenoblade or something.

On another note- do people think there will still be two versions of each Pokemon game going forward? It seems more difficult to justify when the games will be sold at console game prices, and with the Switch we're somewhat beyond the 'kids trading Pokemon in the playground' stage.
This is exactly how I feel, I feel that the series could be so much more in an console, stop with the conservative bullshit that the current game style is fine, I want new stuff, I want to see wild Pokemons in the overworld in their natural habitat ala Monster Hunter, I want an open world game where you're normally walking around and then there's like 1% chance you could spot Ho-oh flying past you in the sky, Shit like that would be magical, why do people think that the same thing is good? If they simply make another Pokemon game with their current engine only with updated graphics I will be so disappointed. I mean, hell, BOTW went open-world and was freaking amazing the transition from an Linear adventure game to an open-world adventure game, it was so good, I want to see something similar happening here with Pokemon, it has so much potential to be something special, but I doubt GameFreak will have the balls to do that.

The most depressing thing is people defending to death that the current style is perfect. We should always be looking for changes in games.
 

Cuburger

Member
Oct 28, 2017
10,975
GO is a free mobile app that worked because of its social gimmick, which doesn't make any kind of sense to compare to an actual videogame (and id wager that even though it had a bigger user base than the actual games, the videogames for pokemon would have many more hours actually played)

BOTW happened not only because of critical and commercial dwindling in the Zelda series (which isnt happening with Pokemon yet), but because Zelda is still an action adventure that was both a series that excelled on having a fresh style and gimmick every iteration and made by a company where this was a viable business decision.

There is so much they can add without removing the things that make the series unique, and turning it into just another xenoblade or botw.
If you can just explain away GO's success because it is free, why don't other free mobile apps succeed like GO did all the time? And for that matter, if it's success was simply due to a gimmick how come Niantic's first game, Ingress, that was similar to GO didn't take off or why doesn't other games with collecting "monsters" have the same success?

I'd argue that being free and unique helped GO spread widely, but it's uniquely the Pokemon brand that gave the AR gimmick the right hook (catching Pokemon) to get people interested. When Google had the Google Maps April Fools joke of Pokemon, it was a massive hit and it's success is what inspired Niantic to pitch the idea of GO to the Pokemon Company. They simply recognized how massive the Pokemon brand is, beyond it's die-hard fans that buy everyone version to people who grew up with it and later grew out of it to people that just like the idea of hunting for cute little creatures with different abilities. How often does has the fan idea of a Pokemon MMO been brought up throughout the years? Some people simply recognize the franchise does not simply exist due to tradition.

BotW may have been spurred on by critical reception of the franchise over multiple entries, but they didn't have to change much to cater to the same fans that buy all their games. The difference is Zelda doesn't aim towards a younger audience to constantly bring in new fans to replace the old the way Pokemon does, or the way another franchise does that they constantly reinvent despite continual great sales, 3D Mario. They didn't have to make Super Mario Odyssey to reinvigorate sales or regain critical success (as if Skyward Sword didn't get high marks from many outlets at the time), but they did anyways because innovation helps keep a long running franchise fresh and opens up the potential to find more fans that might not otherwise have given it a chance.
 

lvl 99 Pixel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
44,700
If you can just explain away GO's success because it is free, why don't other free mobile apps succeed like GO did all the time? And for that matter, if it's success was simply due to a gimmick how come Niantic's first game, Ingress, that was similar to GO didn't take off or why doesn't other games with collecting "monsters" have the same success?

I'd argue that being free and unique helped GO spread widely, but it's uniquely the Pokemon brand that gave the AR gimmick the right hook (catching Pokemon) to get people interested. When Google had the Google Maps April Fools joke of Pokemon, it was a massive hit and it's success is what inspired Niantic to pitch the idea of GO to the Pokemon Company. They simply recognized how massive the Pokemon brand is, beyond it's die-hard fans that buy everyone version to people who grew up with it and later grew out of it to people that just like the idea of hunting for cute little creatures with different abilities. How often does has the fan idea of a Pokemon MMO been brought up throughout the years? Some people simply recognize the franchise does not simply exist due to tradition.

BotW may have been spurred on by critical reception of the franchise over multiple entries, but they didn't have to change much to cater to the same fans that buy all their games. The difference is Zelda doesn't aim towards a younger audience to constantly bring in new fans to replace the old the way Pokemon does, or the way another franchise does that they constantly reinvent despite continual great sales, 3D Mario. They didn't have to make Super Mario Odyssey to reinvigorate sales or regain critical success (as if Skyward Sword didn't get high marks from many outlets at the time), but they did anyways because innovation helps keep a long running franchise fresh and opens up the potential to find more fans that might not otherwise have given it a chance.

Niantic had everything to gain, while GF have everything to lose. Yeah the brand helped get people playing GO, but then half the userbase dropped faster than anything because of how ultimately shallow the thing was.
Pokemon MMO is essentially a meme at this point, with not only it being completely unreasonable from a development standpoint, but also for reasons such as Nintendo wanting to completely disable chat with strangers entirely. Nobody even thinks about how an MMO or BOTW game would ultimately work and have staying power like the current games, but they still suggest it because it sounds better in their head.
 
Oct 26, 2017
8,734
and with the Switch we're somewhat beyond the 'kids trading Pokemon in the playground' stage

In fairness, we've been over that stage ever since the DS was introduced, and Pokemon DPPt moving to the internet to provide trading. Not to say that local wireless isn't a thing, but I notice people on the old forum pushing that argument and then forgetting that you could trade for any Pokemon from anywhere, and battle anywhere.
 

Doskoi Panda

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,968
This is exactly how I feel, I feel that the series could be so much more in an console, stop with the conservative bullshit that the current game style is fine, I want new stuff, I want to see wild Pokemons in the overworld in their natural habitat ala Monster Hunter, I want an open world game where you're normally walking around and then there's like 1% chance you could spot Ho-oh flying past you in the sky, Shit like that would be magical, why do people think that the same thing is good? If they simply make another Pokemon game with their current engine only with updated graphics I will be so disappointed. I mean, hell, BOTW went open-world and was freaking amazing the transition from an Linear adventure game to an open-world adventure game, it was so good, I want to see something similar happening here with Pokemon, it has so much potential to be something special, but I doubt GameFreak will have the balls to do that.

The most depressing thing is people defending to death that the current style is perfect. We should always be looking for changes in games.
That might be a dismissive take on the perspectives shared in this thread. I don't think people are saying that Pokemon's current style and audiovisual presentation is perfect. And I don't think that anyone is fighting against the prospect of any of what you just suggested, either. Based on how conversations go in other Pokemon threads on Era, I figured that most of the people who picked tradition over innovation wouldn't be opposed to any of what you suggested, because the kinds of things you suggested don't necessarily run contrary to what they consider important enough elements of the series to retain and carry forward. I'm one of those people - I want Pokemon to be an audiovisual spectacle, or at least a far more well-realized world. But I would also desire that the series holds to particular traditions - the core mechanics of its battle system, the emphasis on trading and carrying Pokemon forward, and the laid-back, low-intensity nature of its turn-based RPG gameplay.
 

jnWake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,108
Gameplay should be kept as it is. Maybe add some small innovations like the Z-Crystals or Mega Evolutions but I don't think we need anything major. They could just improve the presentation and people will like it.

Innovation should be important for the world and story building. They already improved in many areas with Sun and Moon so I'm excited to see what they do with better hardware that doesn't limit the world design. For example, I'd like some exploration cues to be taken from games like BotW where you can see huge interesting landmarks from the distance. Imagine seeing hints of a legendary Pokémon from far away, that'd be pretty cool.

I'd also personally want more rebalance to old Pokémon. Several are pretty bad and could use some rebalanced stats or even a new evolution/mega evolution.
 

Flame Lord

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,796
Keep the battle system the same, but everything outside of that has gotten old and could probably use changing.
 

RPGam3r

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,519
I think I would be interested in something like FFXII. If I can't get something interactive than give me something automated where I just gambit system each Pokemon.
 

Adventureracing

The Fallen
Nov 7, 2017
8,035
I'm really torn on Pokemon. I love Pokemon in its current state and if it released as a better looking more optimised version of the current game I'd be ok with that. On the other hand I totally agree with this post.

Reading this thread makes me feel so depressed. The Pokemon IP has such brilliant potential to really evolve (lol) into a fantastic, accessible yet deep, modern RPG. But Game Freak will never, ever let that happen, because they're too small, too conservative, and their development times are too short. It actually breaks my heart when I think about what one of Nintendo's in house teams could do with Pokemon, and how that potential will forever be wasted.

I sense that the people who shout the loudest about Pokemon are those who are into the competitive scene and the meta game, but I get the feeling that a lot of people don't give a shit about that and just want a Pokemon game with a deep, immersive world, good writing, and gameplay which is much more varied than it has been previously. If all Game Freak do is basically put the 3DS games on the TV, it's going to feel like a PS1 JRPG, and it will reveal how tired and stuck in the past Pokemon games have become. I honestly have no idea how on earth Game Freak are going to create a console experience, or at least convince people they've created a console experience. They'll be hoping that HD graphics will be enough, and if I'm honest I can't even imagine them removing the fixed top-down camera view, never mind building worlds to the scale of Xenoblade or something.

On another note- do people think there will still be two versions of each Pokemon game going forward? It seems more difficult to justify when the games will be sold at console game prices, and with the Switch we're somewhat beyond the 'kids trading Pokemon in the playground' stage.

I think there are few franchises in the gaming industry with as much potential as Pokemon and in many ways it has been hampered by GF being unable to capitalise on that.
 

Council Pop

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,328
In fairness, we've been over that stage ever since the DS was introduced, and Pokemon DPPt moving to the internet to provide trading. Not to say that local wireless isn't a thing, but I notice people on the old forum pushing that argument and then forgetting that you could trade for any Pokemon from anywhere, and battle anywhere.

I meant more that the Switch, in its current incarnation, is not the sort of console that kids will be throwing in their school bags in the way they did from Gameboy until 3DS, or in the way that Nintendo were pushing in that Sun and Moon TV ad about the Japanese boy moving to Hawaii. The Switch is a much more fragile console, and not really kid-friendly in the same way. And in my experience of working in schools in the UK, I can imagine schools being much more likely to ban Switches, which present themselves as higher end tech, than the cheap and cheerful 3DS. Pokemon is still a social playground experience for a lot of kids, but that will end with the 3DS.
 

Professor Beef

Official ResetEra™ Chao Puncher
Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,501
The Digital World
I'd love to see them take the opportunity kind of set back the clock and draw back in lapsed fans (like myself) who stopped keeping up with the series when they added hundreds of new Pokemon with every entry and the series went up it's own ass with more and more systems and meta nonsense.
that's what sun and moon was for
Gritty reboot in a post apocalyptic world destroyed by nuclear war, just so we don't have to talk to the "Technology is amazing" guy again
Screw you, he's my favorite NPC!!
 
Jan 2, 2018
10,699
My personal dream would be a second remake of the second generation in HD without Z-Moves and Mega Evolutions. Oldschool Pokémon in a fresh and nice look. Perhaps free camera control, a larger world and a few QoL improvments like how they handled VM's in Sun/Moon.

In a world in which every game has to be experimental and open world I would not mind if Pokémon stays what it is.
But in the end I am open for innovation because of the possibillity that GameFreak comes up with something I could not imagine.
 
Last edited: