By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Finally, the Pokemon game we've all been waiting for?

Ka-pi96 said:
Darwinianevolution said:

Why would you want less content in the games you play?

Why would you want the same content you've already got rather than more new content? Especially when a lot of that content you've already got isn't that good. IMO the vast majority of gen 1 Pokemon designs are crap, so all of the gen 1 pandering Gamefreak has done lately has been pretty annoying to say the least.

Plus variety is nice. I can't think of any other game that re-uses the exact same enemies in every single entry and I certainly don't want any games like that, it'd be boring.

That doesn't answer my question. Wanting new content is good, of course, but why would you want the old content to just go away, when it accomplishes a fundamental part of the game? Why not build over the already existing frame instead of starting from scratch over and over again?



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

Around the Network
Darwinianevolution said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Why would you want the same content you've already got rather than more new content? Especially when a lot of that content you've already got isn't that good. IMO the vast majority of gen 1 Pokemon designs are crap, so all of the gen 1 pandering Gamefreak has done lately has been pretty annoying to say the least.

Plus variety is nice. I can't think of any other game that re-uses the exact same enemies in every single entry and I certainly don't want any games like that, it'd be boring.

That doesn't answer my question. Wanting new content is good, of course, but why would you want the old content to just go away, when it accomplishes a fundamental part of the game? Why not build over the already existing frame instead of starting from scratch over and over again?

Pretty sure I already explained that, but it's not just "content". I like the Pokemon world more than I like the Pokemon games, I want it to be an interesting, varied world and I don't want that to be ruined just for the sake of quantity.

To compare it to our world, are Pigeons interesting? No, because they're everywhere. Pigeons are boring. Are Pandas interesting? Yeah, people love Pandas, they're exciting because they're only found in 1 place. That's what I want with Pokemon too. It's especially relevant when you take into account the geography of the Pokemon world. Kanto and Johto are literally right next to each other, you can walk from one to the other, so those two having a lot of overlap in terms of Pokemon species makes a lot of sense. However places that are distant from each other and are made to look exotic because of that should have minimal if any overlap. Going to new exciting exotic locations is interesting to me, that's what I want to do in the games. Going to those locations and just finding Pidgeys, Ponytas & Oddish all over the place takes away all of that excitement.



Ka-pi96 said:
Darwinianevolution said:

That doesn't answer my question. Wanting new content is good, of course, but why would you want the old content to just go away, when it accomplishes a fundamental part of the game? Why not build over the already existing frame instead of starting from scratch over and over again?

Pretty sure I already explained that, but it's not just "content". I like the Pokemon world more than I like the Pokemon games, I want it to be an interesting, varied world and I don't want that to be ruined just for the sake of quantity.

To compare it to our world, are Pigeons interesting? No, because they're everywhere. Pigeons are boring. Are Pandas interesting? Yeah, people love Pandas, they're exciting because they're only found in 1 place. That's what I want with Pokemon too. It's especially relevant when you take into account the geography of the Pokemon world. Kanto and Johto are literally right next to each other, you can walk from one to the other, so those two having a lot of overlap in terms of Pokemon species makes a lot of sense. However places that are distant from each other and are made to look exotic because of that should have minimal if any overlap. Going to new exciting exotic locations is interesting to me, that's what I want to do in the games. Going to those locations and just finding Pidgeys, Ponytas & Oddish all over the place takes away all of that excitement.

But that doesn't excuse the lack of pokemons. You want a region with new mons and new things to explore and interact with, right? Ok, but why does that have to come at the expense of previous content? Even if I decide to obtain them through transfering them from older games or through online trade, why not just program the pokemons in the game? Not being in the overworld is not the same as not being in the game.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

Darwinianevolution said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Pretty sure I already explained that, but it's not just "content". I like the Pokemon world more than I like the Pokemon games, I want it to be an interesting, varied world and I don't want that to be ruined just for the sake of quantity.

To compare it to our world, are Pigeons interesting? No, because they're everywhere. Pigeons are boring. Are Pandas interesting? Yeah, people love Pandas, they're exciting because they're only found in 1 place. That's what I want with Pokemon too. It's especially relevant when you take into account the geography of the Pokemon world. Kanto and Johto are literally right next to each other, you can walk from one to the other, so those two having a lot of overlap in terms of Pokemon species makes a lot of sense. However places that are distant from each other and are made to look exotic because of that should have minimal if any overlap. Going to new exciting exotic locations is interesting to me, that's what I want to do in the games. Going to those locations and just finding Pidgeys, Ponytas & Oddish all over the place takes away all of that excitement.

But that doesn't excuse the lack of pokemons. You want a region with new mons and new things to explore and interact with, right? Ok, but why does that have to come at the expense of previous content? Even if I decide to obtain them through transfering them from older games or through online trade, why not just program the pokemons in the game? Not being in the overworld is not the same as not being in the game.

No issue with them being available for transfer from other games, although that's something I don't really care about so I wouldn't really mind whether that was available or not.

Last edited by Ka-pi96 - on 01 March 2021

h2ohno said:

By far the most exiting thing announced during Friday's Pokemon presentation was Pokemon Legends Arceus.

This is a massive, open world Pokemon game where you venture out into the wild and explore and find Pokemon living in the world.  It looks like Pokemon meets Breath of the Wild, and the trailer was trying to give Breath of the Wild vibes with certain shots.  This seems to be the game many of us wanted Sword and Shield to be, from the graphics being a huge improvement to the freedom and openness of the game.

That said, there are some problems.  The world seems pretty barren, with very few Pokemon on screen at any one time and no large Pokemon shown off to give off a sense of awe.  In addition, the framerate is bad, with some Pokemon looking like they are moving in single digit framerates.  Hopefully this is because they showed off an early unoptimized build since the game is at least a year away, but given Gamefreak's history of being unable to push whatever hardware they were working on there's plenty of reason for concern with the graphics.

I wasn’t waiting for a Pokémon game, as I’m not a fan, but it looks super interesting.

Also, love or hate the game, that “Pokémon Legends” font/colour is sick! I dig.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network

However it turns out, I'm just glad they're at least attempting something interesting instead of another safe repetition of the old formula.
Bold risks don't always pay off, but without it we wouldn't have games like BOTW, Splatoon, etc.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

If it was a fan made project that I found by randomly scrolling in the internet, I would think it is good. But considering the actual context that this footage was showed, I think it is really embarrassing



 

 

We reap what we sow

Looks fun! Time will tell if it was worth the wait.



Darwinianevolution said:

I have to give it to GF, this is the most ambitious project they've taken on thus far. But ambition only gets them so far, they still haven't proven they can tackle anything of this scale (just look at SwSh performance and the state of the Wild Areas), so they really have to step up their game if they want this to be a success. Maybe that's the reason why they're outsorcing the DP remake, to focus on Breath of the Arceus, but how effective that will be, only time will tell.

Also, they better bring all pokemon back this time.

They struggle to make their more limited in scope games perform at a steady framerate, while they’re not even technically demanding titles, so I am absolutely not confident this will perform any better. 




It definitely needs more time. The promise is great, but early 2022 with what I saw seems a bit too ambitious. I think this game needs at least until late 2022.