Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 @Serebii Actually I think you're being extremely narrow minded on the subject and ruin discussion. For such a 'great authority' I'm utterly bewildered that you yourself can't see the ways in which Pokemon could succeed on a home console, other than the crappy side-line games you relegate thoughts on it to. You and Nintendo, both set in your ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) @Serebii Actually I think you're being extremely narrow minded on the subject and ruin discussion. For such a 'great authority' I'm utterly bewildered that you yourself can't see the ways in which Pokemon could succeed on a home console, other than the crappy side-line games you relegate thoughts on it to. You and Nintendo, both set in your ways. Hey, nobody mentioned it being a spin-off. Spin-off titles I can see working on home consoles brilliantly well. However, what was being put forth was a main series game on a home console, and that has been shot down countless times Edited March 6, 2014 by Serebii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 What do you class as a spin-off? ... because I can't see why many people would want another half-assed adventure like Colosseum. That to me is what would be a waste of resources... something that is neither here no there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 What do you class as a spin-off? ... because I can't see why many people would want another half-assed adventure like Colosseum. That to me is what would be a waste of resources... something that is neither here no there. Spin-off being any non-main series game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 We're talking about something on a similar scale to the handheld games (lots of Pokémon to catch, large open world) but not simply a direct translation - some gameplay and social aspects could be quite different on a home console. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hero-of-Time Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 We're talking about something on a similar scale to the handheld games (lots of Pokémon to catch, large open world) but not simply a direct translation - some gameplay and social aspects could be quite different on a home console. Ah, but the social experiences won't be different due to being on a home console, they'll be less. The 3DS and X & Y have all the possible online things; constant connections, voice chat, interactions, instant battle & trade etc. What could a home console bring to this social experience that doesn't already exist? I also don't see how the gameplay could be different. Change it too much and it'd not be a main Pokémon game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Spin-off being any non-main series gameSo what if it was a home console RPG?... because that's different from the main handheld series. Honestly I think the sales of the N64 Stadium style games are misleading. 5.4m People bought Pokemon Stadium because it was their first chance to experience their Pokemon and Pokemon games in 3D. 2.73m, half of those people bought Pokemon Stadium 2... because it's just more of the same. 2.54m bough Colosseum. Quite likely this number would have been half again, however it provided 2.54 million people with their first chance to play a Pokemon adventure mode on their home console. A Pokmeon Stadium game is not the experience people are after IMO, people have been crying out for a home console Pokemon adventure ever since Pokemon Stadium 2 was just a sequel and Colosseum ultimately failed to deliver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I also don't see how the gameplay could be different. Change it too much and it'd not be a main Pokémon game. Exactly. It wouldn't be a main console Pokémon game, but it would be an epic home console Pokémon RPG. Perhaps it could have a bigger focus on character development, with you having a team of followers (all voice acted), with character-based choices and decisions, along with choices that affect the story. Mix it with elements from other popular home console RPGs and up the scale (possible world doom and all that) to create a more cinematic expedience, while still having the combat system (personally, I would love a real time action/platformer Pokémon RPG - a bit like Kameo on a bigger scale and a limited selection of Pokémon as hundreds in that kind of game would be unrealistic) and collect 'em all aspects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) So what if it was a home console RPG?... because that's different from the main handheld series. Honestly I think the sales of the N64 Stadium style games are misleading. 5.4m People bought Pokemon Stadium because it was their first chance to experience their Pokemon and Pokemon games in 3D. 2.73m, half of those people bought Pokemon Stadium 2... because it's just more of the same. 2.54m bough Colosseum. Quite likely this number would have been half again, however it provided 2.54 million people with their first chance to play a Pokemon adventure mode on their home console. A Pokmeon Stadium game is not the experience people are after IMO, people have been crying out for a home console Pokemon adventure ever since Pokemon Stadium 2 was just a sequel and Colosseum ultimately failed to deliver. If the gameplay is the same, then it's no different. There's an severely decreasing difference between handheld and home console devices in terms of capabilities. Just because a game is on a home console does not make it different to its handheld brethren. Masuda, Ishihara, Tajiri, Sugimori etc. have all stated that the core of Pokémon is the fact you take it with you to battle/trade socially in the real world. They have also all stated that a main game on a home console is not going to happen. At most we'll have side games like Stadium, but we'll never have a full RPG. Never. Exactly. It wouldn't be a main console Pokémon game, but it would be an epic home console Pokémon RPG. Perhaps it could have a bigger focus on character development, with you having a team of followers (all voice acted), with character-based choices and decisions, along with choices that affect the story. Mix it with elements from other popular home console RPGs and up the scale (possible world doom and all that) to create a more cinematic expedience, while still having the combat system (personally, I would love a real time action/platformer Pokémon RPG - a bit like Kameo on a bigger scale and a limited selection of Pokémon as hundreds in that kind of game would be unrealistic) and collect 'em all aspects. Then what you're asking for is a big spin-off game, which is different to what others, and most proponents of a home console game have been desiring. As such, it wouldn't be embraced well because it's not a main game. If, howver, it had the mechanics of the main series, then it'd be a main series one regardless of intent. Edited March 6, 2014 by Serebii Automerged Doublepost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) I've said it before but the home console games could be the equivalent of the big one off Pokemon movies, with much greater emphasis on telling a story. And the handheld games, just plodding along doing what they're good. Masuda, Ishihara, Tajiri, Sugimori etc. have all stated that the core of Pokémon is the fact you take it with you to battle/trade socially in the real world. They have also all stated that a main game on a home console is not going to happen. At most we'll have side games like Stadium, but we'll never have a full RPG. Never.Tbh I don't know these people and I don't really care what they think. I come on a Nintendo Gaming forum to have fun and discuss my ideas, not to be told the business opinions of people who are obviously too blinkered to see the entire gaming world asking for a game they refuse to make. Quite possibly they're just incapable of dreaming up and realising such ideas and therefore why it makes sense to hand such a project to a developer like Level 5. Edited March 6, 2014 by Retro_Link Automerged Doublepost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheikah Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Pokemon on a home console could be a very good idea which breaks from tradition. Which is exactly why Nintendo probably won't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I've said it before but the home console games could be the equivalent of the big one off Pokemon movies, with much greater emphasis on telling a story. And the handheld games, just plodding along doing what they're good. Tbh I don't know these people and I don't really care what they think. I come on a Nintendo Gaming forum to have fun and discuss my ideas, not to be told the business opinions of people who are obviously too blinkered to see the entire gaming world asking for a game they refuse to make. Quite possibly they're just incapable of dreaming up and realising such ideas and therefore why it makes sense to hand such a project to a developer like Level 5. That would be like Nintendo handing off the mainline Mario to another developer. It'd never happen. Spin-offs, sure, main stuff? Hell no. You need to remember that Pokémon is not a Nintendo franchise that they let GameFreak develop. It's a GameFreak franchise that Nintendo has a stake in, not a majority stake. Those people run the franchise. They are the Miyamoto, the Aonuma, the Tanabe etc. of the franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 That would be like Nintendo handing off the mainline Mario to another developer. It'd never happen. Spin-offs, sure, main stuff? Hell no.And if Nintendo had been releasing Mario as a 2D sidescroller throughout it's life then I'd hope to god they would! But no, we have both 2D Mario games, 3D Mario games, and well let call them a 2.5D Mario games in existence across both handheld and home console to appeal to as diverse range of gamers as possible. Pokemon... not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 BTW, @Serebii, it's "Game Freak", not "GameFreak". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Peeps Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Release a console version and handheld version like smash bros is doing. Job done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Exactly, the handheld Smash Bros is bringing nothing new to the gameplay experience and yet they're still doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zechs Merquise Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I just imagine Pokemon done on a scale like you see in Fallout or Skyrim. A huge seamless map, quests, sides quests, gyms, NPCs and so much exploration! Nintendo can't keep just ignoring the fact that technology, connectivity and gaming has changed. When the GC/GBA connectivity was announced it looked antiquated then as online was becoming the standard across home gaming. The fact Nintendo keep insisting on local multiplayer and ignoring the fact that many of us have broadband with insane download rates and tiny pings is destroying their credibility and limiting their games. When I played Nintendo Land I actually loved Zelda and Pikmin, but I couldn't play them as they were intended as I don't have access to 3 or 4 friends on a daily basis. What's the point in creating software that no one can get the most of because Nintendo close off the options? I played through parts of Pikmin 3's multiplayer with @Blade. It is amazing, but severely limited by the fact it is offline and split screen. Why can't I play with @Blade online and use voice chat? Back in 1995 I played Command & Conquer online over a 56k modem and it worked perfectly. Hundreds of units battling, base defences reacting and harvesters collecting ore. Are we now supposed to believe that in 2013 Nintendo couldn't have released Pikmin 3 with online? It's a joke. I view Pokemon in the same way. I'm a grown adult. I'm hardly going to walk around with a 3DS in my pocket trading Pokemon at lunch times with my colleagues. That's a ridiculous thought! Nintendo need to realise that times have changed and like in any ecosystem it's adapt or die. Nintendo seem to be willingly choosing the later option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I just imagine Pokemon done on a scale like you see in Fallout or Skyrim. A huge seamless map, quests, sides quests, gyms, NPCs and so much exploration! Nintendo can't keep just ignoring the fact that technology, connectivity and gaming has changed. This is where my action/platformer RPG idea stems from. A 3D open world Pokémon RPG would very much suit using the Pokémon to explore in a more interactive way, along with handicaps for certain things (for example, Pidgey would not be able to carry the player anywhere, even though it knows fly), so exploration would still be limited to start with, giving a sense of progression from walking everywhere to being able to fly around this entire 3D world (and I mean you can control the flying and not a fast travel) - the larger flying Pokémon would be some of the later Pokémon you'll encounter, and it would take you through a lot of the game (or grind a lot) before your Pidgey would evolve into a Pidgeot and be able to fly you around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) Yeah, and those ideas are good, and a good spin-off idea that I will support and do want. However, main series with main series mechanics? No, and I have explained why the developers and heads of the franchise have shot it down countless times @Zechs Merquise, you say that Nintendo are behind the times with gimped online, and that they should get with it for Pokémon. So, I must ask, have you seen the online functionality in Pokémon X & Y? Just because it's on the 3DS does not mean it's gimped. While yes, you are older and so won't carry it around, you forget that you and people your age aren't the only audience for Pokémon. It would be negligent of them to remove the main aspect of Pokémon and put it on a home console with no possible additional connectivity features just because people feel they should Edited March 6, 2014 by Serebii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I'd be interested in knowing what the age group percentages that play Pokemon actually are nowadays. Do today's kids really take it to school, battle and trade? and not just play games on their phones? I wouldn't be surprised to find that gamers over the age of 18 are actually the biggest audience, the gamers that grew up with the early Pokemon games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ike Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I saw a kid (13/14-ish I guess) playing Fire Red/Leaf Green on his iPhone the other day. A part of me died inside. Most my last game played Streetpasses I get from my journey to work are Pokemon X/Y and those tend to be from collage students (so about 16/17?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I'd be interested in knowing what the age group percentages that play Pokemon actually are nowadays. Do today's kids really take it to school, battle and trade? and not just play games on their phones? I wouldn't be surprised to find that gamers over the age of 18 are actually the biggest audience, the gamers that grew up with the early Pokemon games. I'll try and grab some figures off Nintendo. All I know is that the older portion is big, but isn't bigger than children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Gibbs Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Come on guys, you can question my statements about Wii U easily, but with Pokémon there is no greater authority on the Internet. I have to know all this, I have to know what the developers say, how they think, how things are decided etc.. It's essentially my job. I live and breathe Pokémon. Bulbapedia just messing with you (really was hoping for a page of them and i could go Name 27) Would you consider a NiNoKuni clone a main game or spin off? I'm thinking choose the best Anime series/movie and essentially create it into a game using the same style even battle system as NiNoKuni, hell have Level 5 partner up with gamefreak to create the greatest console RPG ever but then i'd consider that a spin off by being story driven and not catch emall/gym/league based with a sort of story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 ^ they could write an original story for it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts