Nice to see another person who totally, completely, exactly gets it.

I think if they want to make a truly great Pokemon game they need to focus on what drew people to it in the first place: catching and trading monsters.

The real question is how to make that formula feel fresh again.

Maybe Rune Factory meets Pokemon.... hm

I think that with a little thought it's fairly clear how they can almost instantly make the formula feel fresh again: completely refresh the Pokemon roster. That way, ever encounter feels new and unexpected, instead of having a diluted maybe 1 out of every 4 encounters with new Pokemon. From a practical standpoint that's one of the best decisions they could make, but from a realistic view they won't ever do it. They're far too afraid to eliminate the existing Pokemon that people may still like, and that don't require extra creative effort. This has led to every generation piling on new Pokemon and retaining all the old, creating the complexity that most likely shifted their focus to the metagame, since the strategic depth was naturally accumulating with their actions, so that was a place where they could actually improve things.

What we are seeing then, if what I said above is true (which it might not be, since this is pure speculation), is not so much rehashing of old formulas as it is dumping new content onto an existing system and not removing anything so that the complexity accumulates. Even this could have made the series better if not for the return to 8 badges that limited the single player with the same limitations that were imposed on the much simpler Red/Blue. Maybe this is what is causing all the complexity and newness to settle in the multiplayer, well out of reach of the vast majority of players - with the multiplayer so difficult to balance, they could not focus as much of their creative efforts on the single palyer.

Keep in mind this is just a thought experiment I do when I examine games and sales trends. I like to understand both the reasons a game might not sell as well as it could have, and the reasons developers made the decisions they did.

....De.... deleting the current roster?

My God.

Madness!

MADNESS

If feel exactly the same way !

they have to make a shift in the gameplay make it a action rpg or something

Hmmm, anybody play Pokemon Snap? You know how you have to lure/trick/etc some Pokemon into appearing?

Instead of random battles, battles should be triggered by actually touching on-field Pokemon sprites. Some just appear normally, but you have to figure out how to make the rarer ones appear.

Also a more open world map, HM's that actually lend to interesting gameplay, and maybe something of a more driving story.

It's strange, even though I'm not planning on buying it, Platinum's release has me ruminating on how Pokemon could be improved all over again.

Oh man, Pokémon snap was a blast to play! :p I really liked that game, even if it was kinda shallow.
I also think more open-world sandbox-like gameplay would do the series a lot of good, yes. So would changing the story. I mean, it's exactly the same story over and over and over again. And yes! Useful HM's that would actually make sense and create fresh and new gameplay opportunities, that's something that could improve the series a lot, too. And give the whole series a major graphical update already! I know graphics don't mean a lot without solid gameplay, but IMHO the Pokémon series has been incredibly lacking in the visual department for ages. With each new installment, we just get minor updates. D&P have the same basic look that Red/Blue/Yellow did, with added details and resolution. I know the buildings and such were semi-3D, but that was barely noticeable. Why make 3D that looks like 2d? :s Same goes for the music and sounds. They're so incredibly outdated. Why the hell do Pokémon still sound the same on DS as they did on the ancient 8-bit original Gameboy?

Just to expand a little more on this: Pokemon has a very large online metagame fanbase of tourney gamers and "hardcore" players.

You are a Pokemon casual (the OP, not you Khuutra). From the tourney perspective DP represented the largets balance upgrade in the series to date, with the separation of special and physical types. Pokemon isn't for someone looking for a deep plot or crazy gameplay mechanics.

It's for 2 audiences: Kids who can easily beat it because it's simple, or Tourney gamers who love it because it has an incredibly deep level of strategy in online multiplayer.

You are not a kid and you have no knowledge of the strategy, so you should not be playing this game.

PS: For those upset with the slow battle speed of DP (I know I was), Platinum sped things up back to nearly RSE combat speed.

And for the record, it's hilarious that anyone feels like they have the right to tell the 2nd best selling franchise in the history of gaming that they are doing it wrong.

I think Blaydcor's actually a tourney player - he slings around EV numbers well enough that I think he's at lest indoctrinated into the theory, if not the specifics.

I think, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, that he belongs to a subset of the adult hardcore who feel that the games have either become needlessly complicated (probably not, though, since you don't have to do anything crazy to get through most of the game - though I wish that you didn't need Nintendo events to get all Pokemon) or that the tourney scene is something almost apart from the game itself.

Not saying he's necessarily right in that, but I think the problem lies in the lack of invigoration in the game outside of the combat system. Outside of that it has become more potentially complicated rather than more fun - the fun ratio is exactly the same as it was years and years ago. That's enough for me! Might not be for some people.