| spemanig said: Wrong. To say that that is all I want completely ignores why people enjoy open world games. The behind the back camera is nessecary to enjoy a map with Xenoblade's scale. Having a behind the back camera in Pokemon XY would make the game less enjoyable, because the map is built for an over the head view. Pokemon has just as many "segmented non-linear bits" as Xenoblade. Stop putting words in my mouth and stop making things up. I don't dislike turn based battles just because I prefer real time combat. Random encounters are a flaw of any JRPG, including Pokemon. They aren't some unique design choice. They completely leave the ability to find the Pokemon you want to a random number generator, and harshly limits the believability and lived-in feel of any world. It turns what is supposed to be a vibrant ecosystem bursting with wildlife into a barren video game area with a random number generator for enemy encounters. Saying that I just "don't like top down views" harshly oversimplifies the issue, and there is an issue. ALBW is one of the best Zelda games, period. A 2D, top down game. That doesn't mean that ALBW wouldn't have been better if it was made to sport a larger 3D world, which would nessesitate a behind the back 3D camera, because it would have. Difference is, Zelda is already making those kinds of games. A top down view limits the scale of the world. It limits the detail. It limits the means of traversability. It limits the believability. It limits the explorability. And for absolutely no good reason other than technological constraints. Xenoblade Chronicles, the constant example, is a better game because it has all these things. Xenoblade Chronicles, if reformated to be a top down, 2D game, would be an objectively worse game because of all those things they'd need to limit because of it. Pokemon is, in essense, that top down, 2D Xenoblade. And unlike Zelda, it doesn't have a 3D, massively open world, nessicerily behind the back 3rd person equivilant to justify it's existance. And yes, I group them with being a better game. They make a better game. There's a reason why nearly every single JRPG that started top down on a console has evolved to be 3D, "behind the back," games. The MM fanbase was wrong if they ever thought a simple remake of an already niche game would somehow be supremely lucrative, just like any Pokemon fan who thinks that a new Pokemon Snap or Stadium game will make them a boat load of money. Exponentially increasing and evolving (sorry) the scale of what is arguably the most powerful video game franchise in the world, next to Mario, is an entirely different beast though. The two examples are not even remotely comparable. MM fans are a whisper compared to the outright uproar that is the Pokemon fanbase that actually wants this, and especially the audience that would have no intrest in Pokemon otherwise. The Pokemon games aren't "niche" games like MM is. Massively open world games aren't a "niche" concept. Pokemon may as well be Nintendo's GTA, only they're still stuck on GTA 2 and China Town Wars, when the majority of fans, and yes I did say the majority, would much rather be playing 3-5, especially now that it's finally technologically achievable. |
You say I put words in your mouth, then go on to reassert that you prefer real-time combat to turn-based, that random encounters are objectively bad, that behind-the-back 3D cameras are inherently superior to top-down, that a combination of these choices can be called "better" and left at that. My assessment was spot-on.
I don't know how on earth you came to the conclusion that Pokemon is "a top-down 2D Xenoblade." These are not the same games at all. Not even remotely. Both are technically role-playing games made in Japan, and the similarities just about end there.
If every Pokemon had a designated location it would appear in the game world, where it would appear without fail every time, it would be way too easy to find and catch whatever particular Pokemon you wanted. There would be no "rare" Pokemon, no feeling of excitement from stumbling upon one. They could make it so that Pokemon had a chance of being in a certain location or of not being there at all, but then you're fighting against the very same RNG the games already have. Xenoblade had RNG elements, too, and the workaround to them is saving, quitting, and reloading your file. That is not more fun or more engrossing than riding your bike through the grass, running from one random encounter after another.
The absolute ire with which you describe random encounters, your continued insistence that full-3D is outright better than top-down, and your preference for a completely different type of basic gameplay from what Pokemon offers once again compels me to ask exactly why you like this franchise to begin with, and why you continue to play it while expressing obvious disdain for so many core elements of its design.
The majority of Pokemon fans are children and/or Japanese. The former are very happy with Pokemon being the way it is, on a console they actually own that they can play at a relative's house on holidays or on the school bus or in bed under the covers while their parents think they're asleep. The latter are also very happy with Pokemon being the way it is, on a handheld. You are actually banking on millions of non-Pokemon fans suddenly jumping on board the franchise for one game.
Your comments about top-down games make me feel light-headed. It sounds like if you had your way they would be done away with entirely. Furthermore, they make me legitimately question whether or not you are even familiar with the concept of an opinion, of a personal preference. Because the way you talk about games makes it sound like you believe red and blue cannot be different and equal, that if you like red more than blue then red simply must be better, and everything that is blue should ideally be painted red. There can still be some blue things as long as those things are also available in red so that you don't have to deal with the color blue at all.
Variety is the spice of life. You should not be so eager to force the homogenization of games.
