| Onibaka said:
Pokemon in 1996:
Pokemon in 2011:
They just put uncreative new monster instead of improving the game itself. They certain are one of the most greedy developers. Slightly more than Activision. The fact is: they make A LOT of money and they don't reinvest that on the game itself. They could at least invest like 5% of the revenue that they get, instead of probably less than 1%. I think that Nintendo could modernize Gamefreak a little more. What would be cool is if Nintendo made a spin-off Pokemon with a Third-Party dev like Level-5. Another problem is the yearly releases for the franchise. A Pokemon game will never have the same personality and impact as the Blu/Red. It turned out to be a single-player experience instead of playing with friends. IMO Nintendo should make only 1 pokemon X/Y for 3DS. |
All companies are greedy. That's the point. I don't see what the problem is with giving consumers what they want, though, even if it is more of the same. Honestly, the money you put in a game doesn't necessarily affect its quality, save for its graphics and whatnot, which most Pokemon fans couldn't care less about. Also, there's no point in fixing what isn't broken -- I, and more than 15 million people, love Pokemon as it is, and wouldn't want the main series to be convoluted. Nintendo has experimented with the Pokemon IP in varying degrees with different games and, in them, they do generally change things around. Whether they're good or not is up to your opinion (some of them are awesome), but the point is that the franchise definitely gets lots of innovative and interesting spin-offs.
As for just having a single game for the 3DS, are you saying that they should make less money and please fewer people? Something tells me that that's not the best of ideas.
P.S. Using an old fake game screenshot really isn't the best way to illustrate your point.
“These are my principles; if you don’t like them, I have others.” – Groucho Marx
