Ronnie Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 It's not unreasonable to expect one of the biggest gaming franchises in the world to grow up a bit and join the rest of the top tier modern games in terms of polish, systems and development muscle. Well done them for animating 800 Pokemon, over the last decade, but that's not ambition, quite the opposite in fact. Introducing 100 or so new Pokemon each gen is the laziest way they can develop the franchise. The fact that people are excited about a free roaming camera (only in one section, mind), in 2019 says it all.
Glen-i Posted June 7, 2019 Author Posted June 7, 2019 So, I've been looking through the official Pokémon Twitter account. So yeah, it seems like random encounters have been tweaked to work exclusive like the rare encounter mechanic in Gen 5. And caves work like they do in Let's GO I'm not happy. I like random encounters, keeps me on my toes and it makes caves and such more challenging to survive through because I fight everything along the way. Being able to see Pokémon just makes me want to run around them. Dragon Quest IX kinda conditioned me to do that. Which is fine for Dragon Quest, but for Pokémon? I suppose I could run through stuff with my eyes closed to simulate the feeling of random encounters, but that opens up a whole different batch of problems. Let's GO's ruining everything... 1 1
Ronnie Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 I think the vast majority of people are going to be very happy with that, from what I've seen and heard, probably why they changed it to match Let's Go. For me, it's much more fun seeing Pokemon roaming around the world, and random encounters are a huge turn off.
Glen-i Posted June 7, 2019 Author Posted June 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, Ronnie said: It's not unreasonable to expect one of the biggest gaming franchises in the world to grow up a bit and join the rest of the top tier modern games in terms of polish, systems and development muscle. Well done them for animating 800 Pokemon, over the last decade, but that's not ambition, quite the opposite in fact. Introducing 100 or so new Pokemon each gen is the laziest way they can develop the franchise. The fact that people are excited about a free roaming camera (only in one section, mind), in 2019 says it all. I'd argue that open-world design is lazier than handcrafting levels anyway. You're also dismissing how much work goes into designing each Pokémon. Because seriously, it's a lot. One Pokémon probably takes 5 times the amount of time and effort than the average RPG monster gets. Oh yeah, and I'm only talking about battles. If you take into account the extra stuff Pokémon animate for (Like Nintendog side mode, Pokémon Amie), it goes up even further. If adding 100 Pokémon is lazy, then there's no bloody hope for game designers. Because there's no way they can win if that's the bar. Those Pokémon models have to also work for any potential spin-off's that might happen as well. So they have to be pretty universal to boot. If you think that adding more Pokémon is lazy, and man, do I hate that false reasoning, then you completely miss the point of Pokémon. The Pokémon are the biggest reason for Pokémon. You stop adding new Pokémon for people to discover just so you can chase the latest open-world trend, then you kill Pokémon. 2 minutes ago, Ronnie said: I think the vast majority of people are going to be very happy with that, from what I've seen and heard, probably why they changed it to match Let's Go. For me, it's much more fun seeing Pokemon roaming around the world, and random encounters are a huge turn off. The vast majority of people aren't always right. Focus testing like that kills creativity. It's a dangerous slope to go down. And some people like the surprise of not knowing what comes next.
Dcubed Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 (edited) Crap! That really sucks... Bloody Let's Go!! Fuck you! Caves are pointless now! They're supposed to be a gauntlet that you survive! Unless the Pokemon all chase after you when they find you (like in some other RPGs), then caves are no longer gauntlets and healing item management is totally pointless! People have no idea why they ask for these gameplay changes. Nobody even realises what the consequences are; hell nobody even realises what open world design even means, why it's actually easier to make than handcrafted design and why it absolutely sucks for a game like Pokemon. Nope; it's popular, therefore it must be in every game. Oh! Speaking of Pokemon animation... ... this is an excellent video on the topic (made by an animator that works on AAA titles in the gaming industry) that should give you a newfound appreciation for what Game Freak have done with the sprites/models and animations throughout the series history! Edited June 7, 2019 by Dcubed 2
Ronnie Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 21 minutes ago, Glen-i said: If adding 100 Pokémon is lazy, then there's no bloody hope for game designers. Because there's no way they can win if that's the bar. I never said adding 100 Pokemon "was lazy", I said that simply adding more Pokemon each gen is the laziest way they can develop the franchise. "Make a fully openworld Breath of the Wild style adventure? Nah let's just make 100 new Pokemon and do the same gym stuff we've been doing for decades" Neither "openworld games" nor "linear games" are inherently lazy, both can involve a huge amount of work. My problem is simply where Game Freak choose to put their efforts.
Dcubed Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ronnie said: I never said adding 100 Pokemon "was lazy", I said that simply adding more Pokemon each gen is the laziest way they can develop the franchise. "Make a fully openworld Breath of the Wild style adventure? Nah let's just make 100 new Pokemon and do the same gym stuff we've been doing for decades" Neither "openworld games" nor "linear games" are inherently lazy, both can involve a huge amount of work. My problem is simply where Game Freak choose to put their efforts. Open world games are inherently much easier to make than a handcrafted world, with intricate level design and meaningful gameplay. That's why everyone has moved towards them. It's much cheaper and easier to make; and people are hoodwinked by the approach because they're enthralled with their sheer size. Oh wow! Look at all this massive landscape with absolutely NOTHING in it! Woohoo! So Modern! So Impressive! So Exciting! Even you've been fooled by the open world approach here. Making a Pokemon RPG in HD is an enormous task. Look at what S-E did with the Final Fantasy series; even during the PS2 era, they simply had to give up on making interconnected world maps because it was too big of an ask for them. Eventually they devolved into a linear corridor (with nothing meaningful in it other than cutscenes), to a vapid and empty open world with nothing in it (and it took them a decade to make that!). Every major RPG developer gave up on trying to make traditionally styled RPGs when the PS3 era came around because it was just unviable to make that kind of game in HD anymore. Meanwhile, Game Freak have actually managed to keep making handcrafted Pokemon games, with handcrafted worlds. Something that more or less no other RPG developer has managed to do (outside of Monolith Soft; who took a very different approach anyway). This Wild Area would be the entirety of the game if anyone else was making it; here? It's just a hub area that you travel through to get to the real meat of the game... And yet Game Freak is the one who is being lazy apparently... I take a lot of grievance with the approach that Game Freak has taken with the past two Pokemon games (X/Y and Sun/Moon), but their commitment to making handcrafted experiences is one that I have nothing but applause for. Managing to fight back against the modern trend for procedurally generated worlds is something that I absolutely salute them for! Name another RPG on a console, released within the last decade, that has anything even close to the level of intricate world design, environmental interactivity, mini games and meaningful out-of battle (never even mind in-battle; where there have been countless new additions and changes throughout the series) gameplay as even the worst mainline Pokemon game? Go ahead, I'll wait... Edited June 7, 2019 by Dcubed 1
Glen-i Posted June 7, 2019 Author Posted June 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, Mandalore said: Any Yakuza game? Is that an RPG? 2 hours ago, Ronnie said: I never said adding 100 Pokemon "was lazy" You most certainly implied as such. Especially when you class it as the "laziest" way. When I get to a laptop, you are so getting a nerdy lecture on why thoughts like this... 2 hours ago, Ronnie said: The fact that people are excited about a free roaming camera (only in one section, mind), in 2019 says it all. ...are nothing but misguided thoughts that completely miss what Pokémon games set out to do.
RedShell Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Mandalore said: Any Yakuza game? 1 hour ago, Glen-i said: Is that an RPG? Action RPG, yeah. Lots and lots of action. The Yakuza series is amazing and one of my all-time faves. You might see an example later on when we play Smash Bros., if one of my latest custom stages shows up. Edited June 7, 2019 by RedShell
Ronnie Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Dcubed said: Oh wow! Look at all this massive landscape with absolutely NOTHING in it! Woohoo! So Modern! So Impressive! So Exciting! Try telling the devs of Assassin's Creed Odyssey that it's easy to make openworld games and that there's nothing in them. Come on. Edited June 7, 2019 by Ronnie
Ronnie Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Glen-i said: ...are nothing but misguided thoughts that completely miss what Pokémon games set out to do. It's a good job Nintendo didn't rigidly stick to "what Zelda games set out to do" on the NES, or else we wouldn't have had wildly different experiences like OOT (3D, time travel), MM (weird Groundhog Day mechanics), Wind Waker (world flooded, travel by boat, cel shaded animation), Skyward Sword (linear, story heavy), BOTW (openworld, make your own adventure, chemistry, physics engines), ALBW (dimension hopping), Spirit Tracks (touch screen sylus based input)... Change and evolution ARE ok. Doing the same thing over and over and throwing in 100 new Pokemon and saying "yep, that'll do for this gen", isn't. I get that creating 800 different creature designs isn't easy, but simply adding more creatures into the franchise isn't ambitious. Running through rigid Routes with absolutely nothing in them but characters spotting you and starting a training battle for the ten millionth time just gets boring after a while. Edited June 7, 2019 by Ronnie 1
Mandalore Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 The thing I find most repetitive is the story revolving around a new duo of super powerful Pokémon, and 2 teams hellbent on catching them for world domination. The legendary Pokémon in the original game were much more interesting without being centre stage. I'm resigned to the fact they're going to stick to that particular story trope, but the rest of the game looks very nice so far.
Glen-i Posted June 7, 2019 Author Posted June 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, Mandalore said: The thing I find most repetitive is the story revolving around a new duo of super powerful Pokémon, and 2 teams hellbent on catching them for world domination. The legendary Pokémon in the original game were much more interesting without being centre stage. Yeah, I kinda agree with this. Even though the cover legendaries have only been side things in one game. (Gold/Silver)
Sofiz Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 Assassins Creed Origins/Odyssey and Yakuza are some pretty good games in fairness, and they aren't lazy open empty spaces. I actually had a lot of fun exploring their worlds, which is a feeling I don't get from the 3D Pokémon games. When they were done as 2D sprites, the worlds felt bigger and more interesting somehow. I don't know if it's just me, but in Gens 6 and 7, you felt more like you were going down a set path than in the older games. I think it could be because when you play in 3D, your brain can more easily compare it to the real world, or maybe it's because sprites leave more to the imagination. Whatever the reason for it, 3D Pokémon feels like you're playing in a hamster cage at times. Lots of cool twists and turns, but still a set path, and everything feels bigger and more obvious, where sprites tended to look more intricate. Gens 6-7 are to Gens 1-5 what Mega Bloks are to Lego. - if this disastrous simile resonates with anyone other than me then I'm not crazy, yay. Good open world games work because there's lots of interesting stuff to do, AND interesting places to go. Now I don't think there is a single Pokémon fan out there who hasn't at some point wanted to have an actual real life adventure with their Pokémon, (Go absolutely doesn't count; you're just swiping at 3D models on a glorified google map) which makes the argument for a good open world game really strong. Pokémon is becoming dull and repetitive, and as much as I agree with @Glen-i's reasoning that crafted worlds take more effort, the games are at the point where I don't feel like they're doing a very good job crafting them anymore. I'd be perfectly happy with them not making open world games, if they could actually make a good game the usual way. But especially now after the popularity of Go/LGPE, this is looking VERY unlikely. I think it's perfectly valid to decry people wanting open-world for the sake of it, or because they somehow got the idea into their heads that BotW was an amazing game (ha), but I think that if it's for a good reason, and done right, I think I'd like to see them try to make one. It would be different, and it would give people a virtual way to experience that long held fantasy of every Pokémon fan. And I do enjoy a (well-made) open world game every now and then. I think it could actually work, though, and I'll explain why. Someone recreated the entire region of Sinnoh in Minecraft (hear me out ._.;; ) and I downloaded the map thinking it would be kinda cool to see a fun little reproduction of a game I love. But what I saw really shook me to my core. The parts of the map we don't see in game, weren't just left as empty void, they tried to reasonably fill in the gaps with what would have been there. Seeing how a river flowed from town to town, mountainous terrain slowly rising up out of the ground and cliff faces forming really sold me on the idea of having a 3D game where you could explore EVERY part of a place, and to have your Pokémon adventure unfold organically. It was only in Minecraft, but as a proof of concept I think it was pretty solid. I think to see a fully rendered Pokémon game like that would be great. As an example; Kalos is notorious for being a game full of pretty set pieces that were just winding corridors - now imagine them actually utilising the huge region beyond what small paths we can follow in game, we'd have had so much more to explore than what we got, and the region could have been more interesting and more full. You could also just want Pokémon games to be good again without needing to be open world, so... Either way, they won't pick either of the above, they'll stick to the new formula of: - cool looking set pieces for the trailer - obligatory tech demo area - remove good features from previous games - something about mobile games, keeping people's limited attention spans, normies have bad taste, Pokémon Let's Go Make More Money 1
Jonnas Posted June 7, 2019 Posted June 7, 2019 8 hours ago, Ronnie said: The fact that people are excited about a free roaming camera (only in one section, mind), in 2019 says it all. This comment reminds me of the common complaint from a few years back that Pokémon games were stuck in the past because you couldn't move the character diagonally. It was a really dumb complaint. My point being that focusing on a single mechanic of the game (or absence thereof) that was likely a conscious design choice isn't very deep a cut. They have a free roaming camera in Wild Area because it fits Wild Area, and they don't have it in other places because fixed camera angles fit those better.
Ashley Posted June 8, 2019 Posted June 8, 2019 21 hours ago, Ronnie said: It's a good job Nintendo didn't rigidly stick to "what Zelda games set out to do" on the NES, or else we wouldn't have had wildly different experiences like OOT (3D, time travel), MM (weird Groundhog Day mechanics), Wind Waker (world flooded, travel by boat, cel shaded animation), Skyward Sword (linear, story heavy), BOTW (openworld, make your own adventure, chemistry, physics engines), ALBW (dimension hopping), Spirit Tracks (touch screen sylus based input)... Change and evolution ARE ok. Doing the same thing over and over and throwing in 100 new Pokemon and saying "yep, that'll do for this gen", isn't. I get that creating 800 different creature designs isn't easy, but simply adding more creatures into the franchise isn't ambitious. Running through rigid Routes with absolutely nothing in them but characters spotting you and starting a training battle for the ten millionth time just gets boring after a while. You do make some odd points sometimes. Yeah, the first N64 Zelda game was going to be 3D. Not because Nintendo were steadfastly trying to break with Zelda convention at that point, but just because that was the console's selling point at the time. Would have been weird had it not been. But I know it wasn't your main point, it just struck me. Anyway, I see Pokémon as one of those franchises that it's okay to not get every time a new one comes out. Sometimes you might think "not enough new for me" and that's fine. It's like the 2D Marios, or Yoshi, or Kirby or Fifa or Assassins Creed or GTA or many other franchises. Yes, there may be unique things about those games compared to others in the franchise but the gist is largely the same so it's fine to sit it out and every now and then. The Pokémon franchise is what it is. There are some unique ideas within each game, some of which become staples and some of them are dropped quicker than Google drops apps, but the essence is never going to fundamentally changed between one game and the next. It's a slower evolution*. *yes I went there 1
Ike Posted June 8, 2019 Posted June 8, 2019 Not to mention ALttP, OoT, Wind Waker, and Twilight Princess all followed the same formula of get 3 things > get Master Sword > get more things. They are just dressed differently. A lot of themes are reused, Time travel is used in OoT and MM and OoA. "Dimension hopping" with ALttP and ALBW. Even BoTW attributes a lot from the original game.
Recommended Posts