| Wright said: I definitively agree that Pokemon can be so much more; for starters, not so mind-numbing boring. Your idea of hack n' slash is terrifying, though, since I tend to not like that genre; it would be far more desirable a solid RPG system. Only Pokemon game I've liked was Colosseum, and because it gave some sense of conspiracy and obscureness. Give more of that, and less remakes of previous games or new entries with your cookie-cutter plot and more more more pokemon to catch.
While your idea of adding more is enticing, I dislike the philosophy behind it. I don't want more, I want better. There's no need of 714+ characters and 500+ moves if with less you can achieve greater things. |
I think a lot of people took issue with my use of the term hack and slash, so I'd like to elaborate a little. I want Pokemon to ba Hack and Slash in the same way that many people, not including myself, consider Super Smash Bros to be a fighting game. There is supreme depth there, but just as supreme accessability. Pokemon's current battle system offers a depth and complexity that I don't want to lose, but at the same time, I find turn based battling extremely boring, and if it weren't for Pokemon, I'd never play it.
And 714+ Pokemon and 500+ moves isn't adding more just to add more. You need 714+ Pokemon, because there are canonically 714+ Pokemon, and it would be a betreyal of the fanbase to make a game where some of those guys were ignored. That's just the bare minimum. The adding more is the voice acting, compitent story arc, etc.
