| t3mporary_126 said: I truly believe that Gamefreak told people they won't make a console Pokemon game for this reason: so their fans won't skip out on the handheld RPGs for a bigger console version. Ever since, fans got used to main Pokemon games only appearing in handheld and Stadium games for home consoles. Now that GameFreak has developed cel shading and 3D polygons for Pokemon, they know their fans are less willingly to believe that Pokemon is better suited on handhelds. Did you know Masuda used to claim that Pokemon's success came from its sprite art? It's only a matter of time before they make a Pokemon 3D game on console that replicates the handheld experience with a bigger 3D world. You have a point about Assassin Creed but I'm not sure if we can compare the development cost of an annual 3D action-adventure game to a massive open world RPG game. Wouldn't it be better if we look at games with huge overworlds like Grand Theft Auto, Skyrim, or Xenoblade to guess how much this game will cost and how long it will take to develop? Just because top-down Pokemon game release every year since Black 2 (localization makes it seem like from Platinum in US) doesn't mean 3D Pokemon games will release just as quick. In fact, of the three Pokemon games that released from 2012-2014, X and Y are the only new ones in the past five years (Black and White was released in Japan in 2010). Black 2 and ORAS borrowed from an existing engine. What do you think about Nintendo treating Pokemon as Mario? |
I'd bet money that it costs more money to develop AssCreed than it did to make Xenoblade. It's still open world, even if it isn't as big as some of those other games. Especially Black Flag. The point is that AssCreed is pumped out so frequently because they have a system going. It's a very similar system to what Pokemon has been doing since they started annualizing the franchise, but on a much larger scale. The games still take a long time, but the work load is divided in such a way that different parts of the team work on different games.
And I'm not saying it has to release every year like it does currently; I'm saying that it doesn't have to mean one game every generation. If AssCreed can be released every year (and this year there were two), then a Pokemon game like what I described might be able to be released every two years following the same developement model. Once they've built the engine, they can pick up the pace on newer games.
Honestly, I don't want a new Pokemon game only once a generation like with Mario. The metagame (competitive Pokemon battling) would go stagnant very quickly. I used to be able to wait every two years, and I actually like that now we get one every year. Pokemon is not like Mario and Zelda. They aren't games you just play and put down when you beat it. Pokemon has always been a game that starts once it ends. You beat the story and then the game really gets rolling with competitive battling. If that isn't refreshed regularly, there's a problem. New games help with that, as well as make more Pokemon available that weren't available in the initial region, which is extremely important.
XY seem to imply that Pokemon will start doing half generations. There were much less new Pokemon in that dex then ever before, but there are hints that the next "third" game will be in another new region with the rest of the new gen 6 Pokemon, instead of a remake/sequel like Yellow/Crystal/Emerald/Platinum/B2W2 were. If they can do that on the next generation of Nintendo handhelds, I'll be fine with getting a new Pokemon game, then a remake, then the second half of that generation spaced two years apart if they are the scale that I described.
