Pokemon X & Y

[killer kirby]

Wow page 6 and already talk about how it should change everything it's about. Final Fantasy does that and it's been stronger than it's ever been in it's life as a series.

 

also Pokemon's overworld should be more like Xenoblades and Dragon Quest X more than anything if they want to improve.

 

 

Visible pokemon coming alive, while running around, hook that shit to my vein!

I don't expect a lot out of this pokemon in terms of how rich it'll be since it's their first attempt at 3D, but next gen pokemon I hope for the love of God they create a rich 3D world. (But then again, Dragon Quest VII remake is looking better than what I have seen so far for Pokemon X and Y gamefreaks need to step up their game.)

[-Dem0-]

From Tsunekazu Ishihara's Press Release

• In addition to existing Pokemon, there will be a large number of completely new Pokemon. The additions will bring the total number of Pokemon in the franchise from the current 649 to over 700.
  
• Because of Pokemon X and Y, the Pokemon anime, movies, card game, and merchandise will “break into a new dimension.”
  
• People around the world will be able to simultaneously experience “Real Play.” (I’m assuming this is referring to the game’s global October release.)
  
• The game will utilize the 3DS to its maximum abilities to leverage its overwhelmingly beautiful presentation.
  
• The game uses an innovative communication system that makes it feel as if you are playing with other players around the world.
  
• The bonds between players and Pokemon will deepen, and Pokemon will become stronger with the new battle structure.
  
• Everyone will enjoy the game’s scenario and music.
  

http://gematsu.com/2013/01/pokemon-x-and-y-to-boost-franchise-to-over-700-pokemon

 

Also here's some Fan Art for "Team Fennekin"

http://tinycartridge.com/post/40053666968/fave-fennekins-i-am-astonished-by-the-amount-of#disqus_thread

Edited January 9, 2013 by -Dem0-

[Serebii]

Wow page 6 and already talk about how it should change everything it's about. Final Fantasy does that and it's been stronger than it's ever been in it's life as a series.

 

also Pokemon's overworld should be more like Xenoblades and Dragon Quest X more than anything if they want to improve.

 

 

Visible pokemon coming alive, while running around, hook that shit to my vein!

I don't expect a lot out of this pokemon in terms of how rich it'll be since it's their first attempt at 3D, but next gen pokemon I hope for the love of God they create a rich 3D world. (But then again, Dragon Quest VII remake is looking better than what I have seen so far for Pokemon X and Y gamefreaks need to step up their game.)

The areas in the new games are more condensed. I prefer that to wide open areas of nothing

[Agent Gibbs]

I have to say i completely disagree with your stance on how games should evolve Oxygen_Waste.

 

You are advocating innovation for innovations sake which isn’t necessarily a good thing, a lot of industries attempt this and find the product is worse with the changes.

If the process you’ve suggested was applied to the games industry in say the late 80’s (we’ll go with this point given you mention Zelda 2 from that era) then it would have died out. Simply because if they did one game in an IP then changed it, then ip’s would generally survive only 2 games unless they were successful, at which point another sequel would mean further change which could see it as an IP flop. To put that point another way Say 80% of IP’s that got a sequel failed and 20% survived, using that same scale 80% of that 20% would fail on producing another sequel.

Sure the failure rate might not be as high as that, but we’d still have a fairly high level of shit being produced no doubt (look at the examples you made a lot of them are not as good as previous games), and Gaming wouldn’t be what it is today IF it had survived as long, because the popularity of formulaic IP’s in the 90’s made it so popular. Like it or not formulaic sells! a lot of gamers buy games because we like the game play and want new stories in that IP, take RPG’s an example of that.

Minor changes between games are fine as long as they improve series but to completely overhaul an IP for every game, keeping only the general mythos the same just could not work.

Side games are where you test radical changes, look at final fantasy for an example of radical and needless change, Dirge of Cerberus…. A complete divulging of the main game play elements and it bombed harder than the Germans bombed the UK in WW2, if they had done that sort of change for the main series we may never have had a continuation in the series and lost great games like 9, 10 and 12.

Can you imagine if they took an FPS series like COD and applied a radical change of gameplay keeping only the mythos and it became an rpg? a platformer? or the other way round Pokemon became an FPS.....just no

 

Not forgetting from a business point of view why do it? The old adage applies if it ain’t broke don’t fix it!

 

You also said that not all games should evolve every time as some mature and get better, but once they peak they should then change.....Who decides when they peak? you think pokemon peak at gen 2, a lot of us think it peak with B/W 2. So judging when a games peaked and it should move on is something that cannot be easily decided, you could alter a game because you thought it peaked and end up missing out! What if people judeged Legend of Zelda had peaked at ALttP and then moved to a turn based rpg, an FPS, an RTS, then we’d have missed out on Ocarina of Time, which agree or not is constantly voted as one of the best games of all time. Judging when a game has peaked or needs change is relative to the person viewing it, you think Pokemon needs change, well 99% don’t.

 

Pokemon has some very good side games that do not use the main game formula, that’s where radical changes should be trialled that way if they work, elements can be added and if the bomb, a side game fails not the whole IP.

 

Personally changing from 2d sprites to a 3D world system is quite revolutionary, it must be since everyone thought it was for every other 2D game that went 3D (see Mario, Zelda, Sonic etc etc)

Edited January 9, 2013 by Agent Gibbs

[Mandalore]

There's plenty of stuff they could do to keep it fresh without changing the fundamental formula. For example, why can't we start out in a large city for once? Every game it's the same old piddly little town, with just your house, your rivals and a laboratory.

 

My main gripe with the current games though is all the pre determined RNG stuff. Completely killed my interest knowing that nomatter how well I train my Pokémon, it'll probably remain crap forever because of stats that were set when I first caught it. Then there's loads of people abusing the RNG to get perfect stats by hacking the in game timer.

 

I think one of the reasons I enjoyed Red/Blue and Gold/Silver more is because I was completely oblivious to all the mechanics going on behind the scenes. Ignorance is bliss.

[Serebii]

There's plenty of stuff they could do to keep it fresh without changing the fundamental formula. For example, why can't we start out in a large city for once? Every game it's the same old piddly little town, with just your house, your rivals and a laboratory.

 

My main gripe with the current games though is all the pre determined RNG stuff. Completely killed my interest knowing that nomatter how well I train my Pokémon, it'll probably remain crap forever because of stats that were set when I first caught it. Then there's loads of people abusing the RNG to get perfect stats by hacking the in game timer.

 

I think one of the reasons I enjoyed Red/Blue and Gold/Silver more is because I was completely oblivious to all the mechanics going on behind the scenes. Ignorance is bliss.

Pokémon Black 2 & White 2 has you start in a city. The city has a Gym. It has no laboratory in it

 

I agree about RNG abuse. Thankfully, the 3DS isn't hacked yet so they'll be unable to do it

[M_rock]

The good news is though that 3DS games can't be hacked so far. So we'll keep more or less oblivious about the game mechanics of this game. I'm sure the major mechanics will be more or less the same, but I don't think people will be able to get the base stats for each pokémon etc. without hacking.

[Retro_Link]

The game will utilize the 3DS to its maximum abilities to leverage its overwhelmingly beautiful presentation.

Revelations and Mario 3D Land say Hi.

[Dcubed]

Revelations and Mario 3D Land say Hi.

 

To be fair, the battle scenes do look very nice. Considering that Game Freak have never made a fully 3D game before, it's really quite impressive!

 

Field needs work though. While I don't expect a huge jump in visuals for the field stuff, the framerate issues need to be sorted.

[Serebii]

To be fair, the battle scenes do look very nice. Considering that Game Freak have never made a fully 3D game before, it's really quite impressive!

 

Field needs work though. While I don't expect a huge jump in visuals for the field stuff, the framerate issues need to be sorted.

What framerate issues?

[Ike]

Then there's loads of people abusing the RNG to get perfect stats by hacking the in game timer.

 

I think one of the reasons I enjoyed Red/Blue and Gold/Silver more is because I was completely oblivious to all the mechanics going on behind the scenes. Ignorance is bliss.

 

Well it's not quite hacking, they are just manipulating the game's mechanics. I agree the whole IV thing kinda killed some of the enjoyment for me.

[Serebii]

You guys do know that IVs have existed since Red & Green in 1996, right?

[Blade]

I can agree what people are saying about the complications regarding IV etc. i find that pokemon games allow you to go the amount of depth that you want whether that is just getting a team of legendaries together levelling them up and then blitzing the elite 4 or spebding time breeding and catching pokemon to build up the best fighter so you can take them online.

[Mandalore]

Hmm I'd call it hacking if you're changing your 3DS's time and date to something like 16:34 25th May 2045 so you can catch a Pokémon with perfect stats. You are externally changing something in the game which is supposed to be a constant. You'd not have any issues calling it hacking if any other constant was changed, such as hit points or a moves damage.

[Oxigen_Waste]

I have to say i completely disagree with your stance on how games should evolve Oxygen_Waste.

 

You are advocating innovation for innovations sake which isn’t necessarily a good thing, a lot of industries attempt this and find the product is worse with the changes.

If the process you’ve suggested was applied to the games industry in say the late 80’s (we’ll go with this point given you mention Zelda 2 from that era) then it would have died out. Simply because if they did one game in an IP then changed it, then ip’s would generally survive only 2 games unless they were successful, at which point another sequel would mean further change which could see it as an IP flop. To put that point another way Say 80% of IP’s that got a sequel failed and 20% survived, using that same scale 80% of that 20% would fail on producing another sequel.

Sure the failure rate might not be as high as that, but we’d still have a fairly high level of shit being produced no doubt (look at the examples you made a lot of them are not as good as previous games), and Gaming wouldn’t be what it is today IF it had survived as long, because the popularity of formulaic IP’s in the 90’s made it so popular. Like it or not formulaic sells! a lot of gamers buy games because we like the game play and want new stories in that IP, take RPG’s an example of that.

Minor changes between games are fine as long as they improve series but to completely overhaul an IP for every game, keeping only the general mythos the same just could not work.

Side games are where you test radical changes, look at final fantasy for an example of radical and needless change, Dirge of Cerberus…. A complete divulging of the main game play elements and it bombed harder than the Germans bombed the UK in WW2, if they had done that sort of change for the main series we may never have had a continuation in the series and lost great games like 9, 10 and 12.

Can you imagine if they took an FPS series like COD and applied a radical change of gameplay keeping only the mythos and it became an rpg? a platformer? or the other way round Pokemon became an FPS.....just no

 

Not forgetting from a business point of view why do it? The old adage applies if it ain’t broke don’t fix it!

 

You also said that not all games should evolve every time as some mature and get better, but once they peak they should then change.....Who decides when they peak? you think pokemon peak at gen 2, a lot of us think it peak with B/W 2. So judging when a games peaked and it should move on is something that cannot be easily decided, you could alter a game because you thought it peaked and end up missing out! What if people judeged Legend of Zelda had peaked at ALttP and then moved to a turn based rpg, an FPS, an RTS, then we’d have missed out on Ocarina of Time, which agree or not is constantly voted as one of the best games of all time. Judging when a game has peaked or needs change is relative to the person viewing it, you think Pokemon needs change, well 99% don’t.

 

Pokemon has some very good side games that do not use the main game formula, that’s where radical changes should be trialled that way if they work, elements can be added and if the bomb, a side game fails not the whole IP.

 

We see things in fundamentally different ways, and there's no way around that. I respect and understand all of your points while literally agreeing with none (including the Zelda one, as I actually DO think the Zelda series peaked with ALttP ), because stability and foundation are completely irrelevant to me in the context of videogames (or any other type of fiction). You embrace the industry in it's current state, I lament it. I believe an IP dies as soon as it stops moving forward in any significant way, and I automatically lose interest in it. Take Pikmin 3, for example... I loved the first one, and Pikmin 2 was a solid sequel that pretty much perfected everything about the formula. Now, unless there's significant change in the formula when 3 deploys, the series will stop being interesting to me, as I'd much rather relive it's past greatness than revisit the same formula in a different context. And this happens to me with every single IP... Assassin's Creed stopped being fun for me when Brotherhood came out, Uncharted 3 made me completely lose interest in the IP, etc etc etc.

I don't see it as a business, at all. To me, gaming is an artform, and as such I demand innovation otherwise I lose interest in it, much like it happens with any other art form.

 

Personally changing from 2d sprites to a 3D world system is quite revolutionary, it must be since everyone thought it was for every other 2D game that went 3D (see Mario, Zelda, Sonic etc etc)

 

See... I don't think that's revolutionary at all! It was revolutionary with Mario and Sonic because it completely changed the way the game was played (for better or worse), but to this day I don't see anything revolutionary about Ocarina Of Time... it's ALttP in 3D, there's nothing really different about it, and I never really saw it as the revolution everyone else seems to see it as. It's a great game, and one that perfected the traditional Zelda formula, but Majora's Mask is a much more interesting and involving type of beast, and unquestionably superior, in my opinion.

 

In the context of X/Y, the 3D changes absolutely nothing except perspective, therefore there is no revolution at all... you seem to be doing the same things in the same way, and as such I really don't care about wether or not it's in 3D.

 

This is a hopeless discussion, though, as we simply have different ideals of what the industry should be like...

[Captain Falcon]

To be fair, in the land of the rising sun, it's like this

 

Platinum: 2008

HGSS: 2009

BW: 2010

B2W2: 2012

 

That's crazy, the games change loads, especially between generations

 

In what possible way is you applying the Japanese release schedule to me, a European customer, fair?

 

That's like saying me say the Wii U premium is expensive at £300 and then you trying to counter that with "to be fair, it's only £220 in America". How does that change my circumstance?

 

The fact remains that by the end of 2013, Nintendo Europe will have attempted to sell me 5 sequels in 5 years. And based on the current level of output, it will likely be 6 in 6 years come Q3 2014. Not that 5 in 6 years is even much better.

 

To name the more blatantly obvious changes that anyone should notice...

 

Gen 2: Two new Pokemon types (Dark & Steel), Separation of Defence and Special Defence, equipable items

 

The two new types where criminally under represented from a quality and quantity standpoint that they barely featured in that game - the only one of either type to be used was Tyranitar. Secondly, there were already 15 types to begin with so adding 2 more wasn't going to completely change the game. All it did was add a counter to the ridiculously over powered Psychics from the first game. The seperation of special into attack and defence and the equipable items did change the way battles were played but you could still plough through the single player quests without even knowing the change made.

 

Gen 3: Double Battles, Tag Battles, Abilities, Natures, addition of cups and rules during linked battles

 

Double battes barely featured in the single player that they could have been removed and no one would have noticed - it was a gimmick to show how much more powerful the GBA was over the GBC from a story campaign point and can be seen by the fact there were only about a dozen fights like that. Plus, because most of the fights were 1 on 1, there was zero need to build up a specific team to handle 2v2 fights like you would if doing it competitively because you could easily just mash your way through with your creatures designed for one on one battling. Tag battles wa just another way of doing 2v2 in multipler and hardly worth crowing about.

 

Abilities was the biggest change on your list and you did need to know those so I won't dispute that one.

 

Natures sound good on paper but again, for the single player, you can completely disregard them and it only comes into play competitviely. But even then, most creatures have a preferred nature depending on their use in battle that every ends up picking the same types anyway. Every sweeper will see it's owner use a Pokémon with a nature that raises it's chosen attack type at the expense of the other one - so raise attack for a physical sweeper and lower special attack since it won't be used ande vice versa. Same deal with creatures that tank - lower the speed and boost up the chosen area of defence. Everybody ends up with the same combination because they are proven to work best and in the end, it makes no difference since you're back to square one.

 

The biggest change in gen 3 after abilities was the reduction of the EV cap but again, it's high end stuff the game doesn't even bother to tell you about such is it's requirement to play and have fun.

 

Adding rules to multiplayer was just introducing the stuff people were used to from the Staduim games which had become offical tournament rules - players could have just as easily enforced them before in the older versions and most were already used to battling that way before this game came along.

 

Gen 4: Overhaul of Special/Attack damage system (It's not just based on type anymore, but rather is based on logic), Online battles, Auto-Levelling up/down

 

Whilst the split into physical and none physical moves made sense, most were already correct assigned in the first place that a lot of creatures didn't see that much change. Most normal attacks involved hitting an opponent with part of the body and so most carried on being contact moves - the notable exceptio being hyper beam which is a very specialist move anyway and doesn't feature much. Most of the fire moves invovled a creature spitting fire at an opponent that they were already correctly using the special attack stat. The biggest change here was that certain creatures that tended to have flamethrower opted for fire punch istead as it worked out marginally more damaging if the higher attack could offset the lesser move damage. Same for electric and ice.

 

Online battles is just the removal of the link cable and doesn't in anyway affect the fighting so it doesn't change the gamplay at all - it just gives more chances to be exposed to battling with other people. And auto leveling is just a means to make battling easier as no one is going to take their team of level 65 cretaures up against a squad of level 100 as they simply aren't very likely to win. They've basically made a way of cutting out the grind required to balance fights with other people. Doesn't change the fighting or exploring though does it.

 

 

Gen 5: Triple Battles, Rotation Battles, The Wonder Launcher, Online battling with randoms, Online Tournaments, TMs now have infinite use

 

I've not played this so I don't know what all them things are as someone who always founr 2v2 unnecessary, the thought of 3v3 again sounds like them trying to show progress via spectacle, and not design - I understand the different battle types were more fequent though so I will give them a gold star for that. Online battling with randoms is Nintendo moving out of the dark ages and has no bearing on atcual gameplay - it just makes it easier to find a fight but it doesn't change the fighting itself. Same deal with tournaments - it makes it easier but it doesn't really change anything.

 

Between the PokéMall, Game Corner, the Move Tutor, the Move Releaner and chain breeding, you could pretty much already get any movest you wanted on any tournament valid Pokémon without touching any of your TMs - making them unlimited has just again cut down the grind required to get to the same point. It doesn't change what happens from that point onwards though.

 

You say they are tip of the iceberg but they are still sold as headline features and thus whilst there are more changes, these are the ones they feel make the most significance and for me, plus a few others I gather, they just don't.

 

As has been said, it's not the number of changes that is important - it's the perceived level of change and for the most part, you can make your way through the stories on these games with no more knowledge than you'd have learnt by only playing the originals. On the surface to the casual player, most of these changes don't matter. It's only when you start focusing on the meta game that you even need to consider any of these differences and given that will represent much less than 1% of the players, it should be clear to see why certain people feel that the games haven't moved far enough along in terms of immediate, surface level, gameplay.

 

 

Ultimately, for every marginal twist the games introduce, only rarely have they given me any solid reason to actually learn it and adapt my play style since the games never demand it from it you.

 

Personally changing from 2d sprites to a 3D world system is quite revolutionary, it must be since everyone thought it was for every other 2D game that went 3D (see Mario, Zelda, Sonic etc etc)

 

It will be revolutionary if it has any impact on the actual gameplay but from what we've seen so far, it doesn't. FFVII went 3D after the six previous installments but did it change anything in terms of gameplay? Nope. It was natural evolution and nothing more. For me, Zelda wasn't that much of a revolution because ALTTP already has elements of 3D design to it - all that really changed was the camera angle.

Edited January 9, 2013 by Captain Falcon
Automerged Doublepost

[Serebii]

@Captain Falcon, you seem to be missing the entire point of these new battle systems. You just dismiss them as extras, but they add extra levels of strategy. Not only do the moves have to be targeted, some can't be targeted at others, if they hit multiple, they may hit your Pokémon plus the overall damage is reduced.

 

As for the list of Japanese releases, you were commenting on the release as per Ubisoft and Activision, who are developers. As such, I was pointing out the original releases of the game from the developer and thus showing there is a gap.

[Captain Falcon]

@Captain Falcon, you seem to be missing the entire point of these new battle systems. You just dismiss them as extras, but they add extra levels of strategy. Not only do the moves have to be targeted, some can't be targeted at others, if they hit multiple, they may hit your Pokémon plus the overall damage is reduced.

 

As for the list of Japanese releases, you were commenting on the release as per Ubisoft and Activision, who are developers. As such, I was pointing out the original releases of the game from the developer and thus showing there is a gap.

 

I'm not debating that some of them add strategy - I'm stating that the games never actually require me to make use of any of that extra depth they are providing me and they also never attempt to explain it either. Consquently, they predominately end up being something I have to personally seek out and I don't think that's the right way to go about it.

 

If anything, it was learning about the game mechanics that started to put me off as the single player felt completely seperate from the multiplayer in terms of what you needed to know to succeed.

 

Ubisoft and Activsion are publishers that house several dev studios - each year, CoD gets made by a different team and likewise, so does Assassin's Creed. So either Game Freak is multiple teams and it's still the same or they are just one team and they are shoving these out the door at Nintendo's request which would be worse. Take your pick...

Edited January 9, 2013 by Captain Falcon

[Ramar]

http://www.pokemon.com/pokemonxy/en-us/

 

"The names of Legendary Pokémon from Pokémon X and Pokémon Y have been revealed! Meet Xerneas and Yveltal!"

 

Fitting terrible names for the legendaries..

[Serebii]

I'm not debating that some of them add strategy - I'm stating that the games never actually require me to make use of any of that extra depth they are providing me and they also never attempt to explain it either. Consquently, they predominately end up being something I have to personally seek out and I don't think that's the right way to go about it.

 

If anything, it was learning about the game mechanics that started to put me off as the single player felt completely seperate from the multiplayer in terms of what you needed to know to succeed.

 

Ubisoft and Activsion are publishers that house several dev studios - each year, CoD gets made by a different team and likewise, so does Assassin's Creed. So either Game Freak is multiple teams and it's still the same or they are just one team and they are shoving these out the door at Nintendo's request which would be worse. Take your pick...

Still, their intent is for the Japanese launches. It's not their fault the western stuff was so screwed. Black 2 & White 2 had a fast localisation, based on previous localisations, it should have actually come out in the west this month.

 

However, that is now irrelevant as games will be worldwide now

 

http://www.pokemon.com/pokemonxy/en-us/

 

"The names of Legendary Pokémon from Pokémon X and Pokémon Y have been revealed! Meet Xerneas and Yveltal!"

 

Fitting terrible names for the legendaries..

How are they terrible?

[Agent Gibbs]

We see things in fundamentally different ways, and there's no way around that. I respect and understand all of your points while literally agreeing with none

 

(snip for scrolling's sake)

 

This is a hopeless discussion, though, as we simply have different ideals of what the industry should be like...

 

Thank you for the reasoned debate! i had a fear it could descend into some sort of flame war or worse still endless discussion like the sales figures of the Wiiu :p

 

I certainly respect you're views but don't agree with them all

 

ALttP is the best Zelda isn't it? OoT is third or maybe 4th best for me

 

As for changes to the formula, i'd love to see a main Pokemon game that doesn't solely rely on the 8 GYM/League formula, surely they could do a more ambitious RPG, more side quests, more akin to how the Anime progresses, where its the journey itself that is the main story, with Gyms, helping others etc becoming secondary to it, Pokemon conquest was a nice diverge for the series, if at all a little small in scale and brief

[Ramar]

How are they terrible?

 

X and Y shape, so lets give them awkward names beginning with those letters. My particular gripe is with Yveltal.

[Retro_Link]

I take it they're pronounced Zernees and Veltal?

 

Yeah the names are terrible, but there have been some stupid names over the years, and I've never liked the futuristic looking Pokémon (with 'energy' lines etc... on them). I do quite like the look of Xerneas though.

[Oxigen_Waste]

Thank you for the reasoned debate! i had a fear it could descend into some sort of flame war or worse still endless discussion like the sales figures of the Wiiu :p

 

Ahah, don't worry, I'm well aware that I'm the odd one here and have no problem admitting that you're, essentially, more correct in having your opinion than I am in having mine, as mine is too unrealistic and utopian... but I can't really choose how I feel about it, can I? There's no "wrong" opinion here, it's a personal thing, and as such the only way it can/should be handled/discussed is with mutual respect and understanding.

 

ALttP is the best Zelda isn't it? OoT is third or maybe 4th best for me

 

Personally, yeah, it's the one I consider to be both my favourite and best of the series. OoT is still a massive achievement though, and should never be underestimated. I've never played the oracle games and have yet to complete Skyward Sword or Zelda 2 (I think I'll never actually complete this one), but out of the rest my personal ranking would be ALttP>MM>LA>WW=OoT=TP>MC>TLoZ>ST>PH.

 

As for changes to the formula, i'd love to see a main Pokemon game that doesn't solely rely on the 8 GYM/League formula, surely they could do a more ambitious RPG, more side quests, more akin to how the Anime progresses, where its the journey itself that is the main story, with Gyms, helping others etc becoming secondary to it, Pokemon conquest was a nice diverge for the series, if at all a little small in scale and brief

 

See, now that sounds awesome.

[Jonnas]

I would like to see other games where pokémon are the protagonists themselves. I can't stand Mystery Dungeon gameplay, but the plot concept is feasible for much more.

 

Of course, Tactical RPGs are also a good fit for this franchise.

 

Side games are where you test radical changes, look at final fantasy for an example of radical and needless change, Dirge of Cerberus…. A complete divulging of the main game play elements and it bombed harder than the Germans bombed the UK in WW2, if they had done that sort of change for the main series we may never have had a continuation in the series and lost great games like 9, 10 and 12.

 

Final Fantasy is a weird analogy to make in this regard. Disregarding the spin-offs, the series feels the need to revamp itself with each main entry (including FF11 and 14, games that should've not been part of the main entries in the first place)

 

To me, Final Fantasy peaked in everything on FFIX, but it wasn't the culmination of an evolution as much as it was them tackling each entry with a different mindset (though keeping themselves within the genre)

 

See... I don't think that's revolutionary at all! It was revolutionary with Mario and Sonic because it completely changed the way the game was played (for better or worse), but to this day I don't see anything revolutionary about Ocarina Of Time... it's ALttP in 3D, there's nothing really different about it, and I never really saw it as the revolution everyone else seems to see it as. It's a great game, and one that perfected the traditional Zelda formula, but Majora's Mask is a much more interesting and involving type of beast, and unquestionably superior, in my opinion.

 

Yeah, sure, in the context of the series, OoT was very much like LttP in 3D, and it's easy to say it didn't revolutionise anything, but the truth is, the adventure genre barely existed at the time. OoT codified what a 3D adventure game should be

 

(And I think you're underestimating the little touches that were introduced in OoT, such as Day and Night changing the towns' and NPCs behaviour, or Deku Plants turning into Deku Sticks if you cut them just right. It made the game world feel more alive, and presentation is important in this regard.)