| Wright said:
If the next installment suddenly had only planes for "more dynamic races" and it's called Mario: Let's go Fly Together, no one would be pissed. Heck, people would go and purchase it. Death is an integral part of life. Pokemon developer once planned to have pokemon dying, only to switch it to "faint" because he was afraid kids could associate losing with death. We're beyond that point nowadays, time to make an step forward. The lenghts I propose are simply changes. You don't find sense in them because, again, you don't entertain the idea. But that doesn't extrapolate to real results. You claim that it is absurd as saying Zelda should be a military FPS, but people can find as equally absurd as depriving Pokémon from its RPG structure and make combat a real time hack and slash, almost Devil May Cry-meets-Legend of Zelda-like affair. Why do you think yours have substance and mine doesn't? Heck, I would even be respecting the original source even better than your idea by keeping the traditional RPG structure. You're the one propossing something as Zelda being military FPS.
It's not "Pokemon with no Pokemon". It's a Pokemon game. It has Pokemons. You can "catch them all". The ones surviving. That dark twist would be a welcome adition. It would be an interesting and daring move from the franchise, and I assure, it would sell units, based on the name alone. Call it "Pokemon Dark Days" or whatever you want.
Advance Wars was built around warfare; but trust me: the games were very happy-go-lucky. That completely changed in Days of Ruin, and I reiterate: no one complained about the change. It sold almost the same as the other entries. |
If it was called Mario: Let's go fly with planes, then it wouldn't be a Mario Kart game. What you're proposing is Pokemon: Less Pokemon, which would make it objectively not a Pokemon game. Changing the structure of it's combat doesn't change the core elements of the franchise. You're still a Pokemon trainer with a team of six Pokemon battling for whatever story reason. As long as you have the 18 types, and the complex arangement of attacks, it doesn't matter how those moves are portrayed. That's why Pokken Fighters works as a game. That's why Pokken Fighters is so anticipated. By stark contrast, giving Link a machine gun completely changes the world he's in, the way he interacts with enemies, and the way the lore of the series is percieved to something that is not at all Zelda anymore.
You aren't "catching them all." You're "catching half." That's not what Pokemon is. It would be a critically hated subtraction, and no one who understands the basics of the Pokemon franchise would ever suggest anything like it, because it goes completely against what the franchise is. Pokemon Dark Days can work, but it wouldn't be a game with less Pokemon. It would be a game with dark days. A darker Pokemon game would work. A reductive Pokemon game would not. Less options would not.
It doesn't matter if the Advance Wars games are happy go lucky. That's not what I'm criticizing. Advance Wars is a series where the permanent loss of a character wouldn't change the entire franchise. If one singular Pokemon dies in a Pokemon game, no one would be pissed. If a million Pokemon die in a Pokemon game, no one would be pissed. If 360+ entire species of Pokemon were sudden retconned out of existence for any reason at all, literally every single Pokemon fan would be enraged. I'm trying to be polite, but that is the exact opposite of sense with a game like Pokemon.
