| Wright said:
Death is an integral part of life. You can have a favourite character and such character can be killed in a subsequent entry on a franchise. Why do you demand this not to be just another turn based, top down, handheld Pokemon game, but then are so afraid of going to these lenghts I propose of?
A lot of people would purchase such game. You not entertaining the idea doesn't mean it has to be rejected. As I said, it worked in Advance Wars, and even if it pissed off people, no one complained about all the original characters from the series being killed. |
No, a title isn't just a title. Your first point doesn't even work. People buy Mario Kart because it's a Mario Kart racer. If the next installment suddenly had only planes for "more dynamic races," it would piss people off. Death is not an integral part of Pokemon, and mass extinction, which is what you were really talking about, is neither an integral part of Pokemon, or life.
The "lengths" you propose make absolutely no sense in Pokemon. It's like saying that Zelda should be a military FPS, or the next metroid should focus on, I dunno, swordfighting. The reason spin offs like Hyrule Warriors work is because they keep the spirit of the franchise in tact. A Pokemon game with no Pokemon doesn't do that.
No one would Purchase that game. Advance Wars is a franchise built around warfare. That's why it works there. Pokemon is a franchise built around Pokemon. That's why killing off half of them wouldn't work here.
