This Old Neon Forum

But that kinda goes against what makes Pokemon so accessible, and arguably so well-liked. For better or for worse, the lack of a focus on story makes it so people who don't want to get invested in a story in a game, or would rather interpret the story in their own way (I actually like how much of the story in Pokemon is left implied), can enjoy it. It certainly makes it easier for people to go at their own pace, too. The combat is actually just what JRPGs need to be: Simple to understand, but offers enough complexity to reward hard work and thorough planning. I feel like if they add too much to it, they might actually make it too simple or even make it too difficult for newcomers to get into.

As for making the world "Fully realized", I think that's something they're working towards, but some of those things would actually work against it. Adding any skill-based element would probably make it more difficult for the child audience to get into it. Doing a open world would also be difficult, at least for current handhelds. Remember, that's something even big AAA developers struggle to get right on consoles and PCs. I think we'll see it someday, but it'll be gradually worked towards rather than a sudden overhaul.

Starmancer wrote:But that kinda goes against what makes Pokemon so accessible, and arguably so well-liked. For better or for worse, the lack of a focus on story makes it so people who don't want to get invested in a story in a game, or would rather interpret the story in their own way (I actually like how much of the story in Pokemon is left implied), can enjoy it. It certainly makes it easier for people to go at their own pace, too.

This is an important point. If you look at many of the game series which have long-lasting appeal, lack of emphasis on story is a commonality among them. If you look at Metroid Other M or Mass Effect 3, story becomes the thing that most alienates people. It's simply easier to develop a game that many different people will like without adding unnecessary story elements. And contrary to what many people in the games industry think, not everyone wants a heavy emphasis on story in their games. I highly doubt for example that everyone who picks up Assassin's Creed 79 really cares about all the events that lead up to it, and probably finds that stuff tiresome.

I can guarantee you if Pokémon had Final Fantasy-esque stories(just in terms of detail and emphasis), that series wouldn't be very popular. Sure there's a middle ground there, they could have more detail in certain areas of the Pokémon games without going off the rails, which is what Shoemaker is calling for here, but is anything like that really likely to improve sales? I doubt it. Fundamentally, people don't play Pokémon games for the plot. They'd rather have new Pokémon designs, that's where your development time and money is going to go. Or for another example, look how well Levels 5's Yo-kai Watch game is doing right now, and compare that to their financial failure that was Ni no kuni, which had much more detail and story.

One of the amusing things about all the talk about accessibility in relation to mobile gaming among the gaming press is how they have completely missed this point. They talk about accessibility in terms of simplified touch control schemes or dumbing down of mechanics. They usually do not bring up things like story, even though most of the popular "pick up and play" mobile games also have very little story, you don't watch a bunch of cutscenes or read a bunch of superfluous text(or even spend a bunch of time watching "realistic" animations which are supposed to make the game be more immersive or whatever bullshit), and this does indeed make the games more accessible, easier to "pick up and play," and have wider appeal. One could say the same about something like Minecraft. While stories in games certainly appeal to certain demographics, I think on the whole the necessity of having detailed stories in games is something that's completely overplayed.

Starmancer wrote:But that kinda goes against what makes Pokemon so accessible, and arguably so well-liked. For better or for worse, the lack of a focus on story makes it so people who don't want to get invested in a story in a game, or would rather interpret the story in their own way (I actually like how much of the story in Pokemon is left implied), can enjoy it. It certainly makes it easier for people to go at their own pace, too. The combat is actually just what JRPGs need to be: Simple to understand, but offers enough complexity to reward hard work and thorough planning. I feel like if they add too much to it, they might actually make it too simple or even make it too difficult for newcomers to get into.

As for making the world "Fully realized", I think that's something they're working towards, but some of those things would actually work against it. Adding any skill-based element would probably make it more difficult for the child audience to get into it. Doing a open world would also be difficult, at least for current handhelds. Remember, that's something even big AAA developers struggle to get right on consoles and PCs. I think we'll see it someday, but it'll be gradually worked towards rather than a sudden overhaul.

I definitely agree with you guys on the story point, I'm not sure if I'm saying it wrong but what both of you are saying sounds good to me. What I was saying is that if they're going to add in little stories about villians taking over the world, they shouldn't half ass it. What they should do is either drop that or keep it as a side story, and just enhance the fun for the player. That's what I mean when I say "the kid on an adventure" story. They should focus their time into making each town and area unique with unique things to do in them, that way you can have a grand adventure that's not grand through story but grand through your own experiences.

And I don't think Pokemon needs to be open world, just the world should be more open. While I'm not a developer, I don't think it would be a nightmare to design. At the beginning of the game instead of one path they could give you three separate paths and you chose which way you want to go. The paths would intersect at some point and eventually you'd see everything, but you'd feel like you're in control of the game and deciding where you want to explore next. Like how in Pokemon X the map leads you in a big circle, maybe in the beginning of the game you decide to go in the other direction instead, or right through the middle. If the goal is to see everything and beat all the gyms who cares what order you do them in? Again I feel like this adds to the adventure theme of the game. They could program it so that each area the wild Pokemon are for the most part equivelent to your level, that way no matter where you go and which path you take the progression feels natural.

I might be beating a dead horse here, but when I say stealth elements I don't mean every single time. If you could see the wild Pokemon roaming around you would just have to walk up to them to fight them. Only difference is you can see them so battle encounters aren't random. I just think it would be cool if you saw a really rare Pokemon and you had to sneak up on it to battle. Or if there was something you didn't want to fight you could choose to go around it. This wouldn't be a central mechanic, just something you could do if you wanted. More interesting (I think) than walking through grass and a battle screen pops up.

Also I think I forgot to mention this before but I don't find the battles to be clunky, I find the menu's to be slow and clunky. They lag a bit and it takes too many button presses to use an item.

TheGreatNads wrote: One of the amusing things about all the talk about accessibility in relation to mobile gaming among the gaming press is how they have completely missed this point. They talk about accessibility in terms of simplified touch control schemes or dumbing down of mechanics. They usually do not bring up things like story, even though most of the popular "pick up and play" mobile games also have very little story, you don't watch a bunch of cutscenes or read a bunch of superfluous text(or even spend a bunch of time watching "realistic" animations which are supposed to make the game be more immersive or whatever bullshit), and this does indeed make the games more accessible, easier to "pick up and play," and have wider appeal. One could say the same about something like Minecraft. While stories in games certainly appeal to certain demographics, I think on the whole the necessity of having detailed stories in games is something that's completely overplayed.

I agree with this as well. There have been many times where I've wanted to show someone a game or have them create their own file and they're forced to sit through 10 minutes of cut scenes and introduction that they don't even care about before they can start to play.

Double post.

Now I see what you're saying. I agree that those are good ideas, for the most part. It would take some work, but it's not like it can't be done. I will say that the "stealth" mechanic already exists with trainers, so I still think it wouldn't be a good idea for the actual Pokemon. It's difficult enough to avoid trainers just by going in the tall grass.

But the rest, I've probably banged on about myself a dozen times before.

Turai wrote: And the series getting stale? Each generation adds AT LEAST one thing to drop the entire competive meta on its head and change the game massively.

Gen 2- split special stat, 2 new types
Gen 3- Abilities
Gen 4- Special/Phys move split
Gen 5: Pre battle showcase of teams
Gen 6: New type, Mega Evolutions

As for features outside combat, each game has tried different things, like weird dress up things and marathon races etc, but I've never bothered with shit like that, I play pokemon to watch monsters crush eachothers skulls just like I play racing games to drive cars, don't need distractions.

Split special state, 2 new types - Good
Abilities - Honestly, I've always felt this just makes it more of a pain to hatch/catch a competitively viable pokemon. Overall, it's cool, though. Nature, on the other hand, is awful.
Special/phys move split - I'm baffled it took this long.
Pre-battle showcase of teams - Shrug
New type, mega - Well, since I've used Gengar in every game since Blue, I was glad my half Poison typing finally became almost useful. Megas, on the other hand, are often banned anyway, so meh. At least they look cool and are fun in single player. Wish finding the Pokemon-ites weren't such a task. Maybe it won't be in ORAS.

Really all I'm saying is that competitive meta, while cool to you and me, really isn't that appealing to the majority of the Pokemon audience. What's more, I really, really tend to agree with Shoe on the idea that there should be more to do with your Pokemon than fight them. There's over 700 of them, and only a modest chunk of that is actually viable in competitive play. If I want to be able to play with my Magikarp, I should be able to do so in a context in which he might actually be useful (since his Speed stat is actually not worthless). You mentioned that Pokemon has tried to do this before, and it has, but it has almost always been pretty half-assed. I'd love to see more time put into these other things because the battle system has been fine since Gen IV.

And trust me, I'd still spend 90% of my time battling, but I think Pokemon can be more than that, and I'd like it to be.

Starmancer wrote:Now I see what you're saying. I agree that those are good ideas, for the most part. It would take some work, but it's not like it can't be done. I will say that the "stealth" mechanic already exists with trainers, so I still think it wouldn't be a good idea for the actual Pokemon. It's difficult enough to avoid trainers just by going in the tall grass.

But the rest, I've probably banged on about myself a dozen times before.

Glad my point finally made it through! Not to keep arguing this point though, but I wouldn't have the Pokemon work in the same way the trainers do. I would think you'd get the option of running away if the Pokemon decides it wants to go after you, just like in any other RPG with the battle encounters aren't random. Point is I just want to see the Pokemon roaming around, regardless of what mechanics that entitles

Claytone wrote: Really all I'm saying is that competitive meta, while cool to you and me, really isn't that appealing to the majority of the Pokemon audience. What's more, I really, really tend to agree with Shoe on the idea that there should be more to do with your Pokemon than fight them. There's over 700 of them, and only a modest chunk of that is actually viable in competitive play. If I want to be able to play with my Magikarp, I should be able to do so in a context in which he might actually be useful (since his Speed stat is actually not worthless). You mentioned that Pokemon has tried to do this before, and it has, but it has almost always been pretty half-assed. I'd love to see more time put into these other things because the battle system has been fine since Gen IV.

And trust me, I'd still spend 90% of my time battling, but I think Pokemon can be more than that, and I'd like it to be.

Yeah I must say I never got into the online mode in X/Y. It just looked too daunting to me. The strategies are a lot different than the main game and it sounds like too much work to try and breed a good Pokemon. I know that's what's supposed to carry you through past the main game but I'm not really into that. That's another reason why I feel like there needs to be something else substancial to keep you playing. Because Pokemon has the hook where you feel like you can just keep going on and on, but once you realize there's not much beyond catching and training Pokemon the game doesn't hold you very long past the main story.

Claytone wrote:And trust me, I'd still spend 90% of my time battling, but I think Pokemon can be more than that, and I'd like it to be.

So basically...you don't want Pokemon to be a JRPG. :/

Starmancer wrote:
So basically...you don't want Pokemon to be a JRPG. :/

I don't see how wanting more content on top of the main game makes it any less of a JRPG. I want all the normal stuff to stay the same, and I want more to do as well. I've played every edition of the game except B2/W2, I have no problem with the series, and I'll continue to play it irrespective of its advancements or lack thereof. I just think there's a lot of untapped gameplay options.

That aside, JRPGs are also among my least favorite genres, but I've encountered exceptions here and there, Pokemon being one of them. Although I still consider Pokemon a pretty considerable departure from many JRPG mechanics as it is.

But JRPGs are 90% battles. There are no "more options" outside of Minigames, which you seem to think aren't good enough. Maybe what you need is to branch out. Have you played Rune Factory 4? That has plenty of stuff to do, including monster raising and collecting, and they help you out in the battles.