• Another exciting episode of Bulbacast has been uploaded to YouTube. Watch it here.
  • Grookey, Scorbunny or Sobble, which one do you love most? Want to show your support with a cool banner, check out the info here!

Change in Pokemon - Good or Bad?

missnavi

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2019
Messages
36
Reaction score
59
In my opinion, a big change to the battle system would feel like we were being cheated by Game Freak. I mean, it's been like this since Gen I, and that's the reason we keep coming back. If anything, I think they need to implement having to understand the mechanics of Pokemon battling as it is more into the storyline. You're able to complete the games without even knowing what IVs or EVs are - I think they should change that. I know they are trying to appeal to a younger audience (and more of this 'new' generation - those whose attention-span will only last so long) so they are scared of making it anymore 'complex'. But I feel like that's where the appeal of the games comes from, at least for me. I really am hoping they don't dumb it down - it will make it hard for me to justify the $60+ they are going to charge for it...

If anything, they could make an 'easy' mode for children and a 'normal' mode for anyone else.
 

Unown Seer

Silktree?
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
16,856
Reaction score
9,177
You're able to complete the games without even knowing what IVs or EVs are - I think they should change that.
I can't see how that would possibly be a good change except for a niche. I've known what IVs and EVs do since the get-go, but I don't want to bother with them in a playthrough. The options for those who care already exist, although IV training could be improved.

They should, however, clearly explain those mechanics in-game in a facility like an advanced Pokemon School.
 

missnavi

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2019
Messages
36
Reaction score
59
I can't see how that would possibly be a good change except for a niche. I've known what IVs and EVs do since the get-go, but I don't want to bother with them in a playthrough. The options for those who care already exist, although IV training could be improved.

They should, however, clearly explain those mechanics in-game in a facility like an advanced Pokemon School.
I feel like the recent games have just been getting easier, though. Almost to the point where they aren't even required knowledge unless you battle competitively, and I don't - I want at least one area of the game to push me to my limits and make me frustrated. Maybe not the initial playthorugh but post game? The difference between going through the story line in Gen IV vs. Gen VII is astonishing. I'm afraid they are going to 'dumb down' the series too much.

They could easily use an advanced trainer's school like you suggested - like make it an optional facility a player could use throughout the game.
 

Blast

捕まえてあげる
Joined
May 18, 2014
Messages
220
Reaction score
653
In my opinion, a big change to the battle system would feel like we were being cheated by Game Freak. I mean, it's been like this since Gen I, and that's the reason we keep coming back. If anything, I think they need to implement having to understand the mechanics of Pokemon battling as it is more into the storyline. You're able to complete the games without even knowing what IVs or EVs are - I think they should change that. I know they are trying to appeal to a younger audience (and more of this 'new' generation - those whose attention-span will only last so long) so they are scared of making it anymore 'complex'. But I feel like that's where the appeal of the games comes from, at least for me. I really am hoping they don't dumb it down - it will make it hard for me to justify the $60+ they are going to charge for it...

If anything, they could make an 'easy' mode for children and a 'normal' mode for anyone else.
Multiple difficulty levels would certainly require a lot more planning, as it would go beyond the scale of simply making the opponent's Pokémon higher levels. I for one would be down for more and more difficult challenges against NPC Trainers. However, I don't think it's necessary to add this into the main game until after becoming the Champion.

One of the great things about Pokémon is that you can play in various ways with different kinds of Pokémon combinations and make up your own challenges. For example, you can defeat the Champion with a full team of unevolved Pokémon if you like playing that way. I don't think GF should take away this room for creativity by making the main quest impossible to complete without carefully crafted teams and grinding for EVs. The reason the battle facilities are kept from the player until after they've finished the main game is not only to avoid overwhelming players with a sudden difficulty spike, but also to motivate those seeking a more difficult challenge to play all the way to end and experience the storyline. I think this is fine the way it is.

However, I would like more varied and difficult challenges to take on in the after game, such as the Battle Frontier or an equivalent. The Battle Tree is very simplistic and the Battle Agency wasn't excuted as well as it could have been. Maybe they could release it as DLC. After all, Generations 1,2 and 4 all had seperate games that focussed solely on battling.
 

missnavi

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2019
Messages
36
Reaction score
59
Multiple difficulty levels would certainly require a lot more planning, as it would go beyond the scale of simply making the opponent's Pokémon higher levels. I for one would be down for more and more difficult challenges against NPC Trainers. However, I don't think it's necessary to add this into the main game until after becoming the Champion.

One of the great things about Pokémon is that you can play in various ways with different kinds of Pokémon combinations and make up your own challenges. For example, you can defeat the Champion with a full team of unevolved Pokémon if you like playing that way. I don't think GF should take away this room for creativity by making the main quest impossible to complete without carefully crafted teams and grinding for EVs. The reason the battle facilities are kept from the player until after they've finished the main game is not only to avoid overwhelming players with a sudden difficulty spike, but also to motivate those seeking a more difficult challenge to play all the way to end and experience the storyline. I think this is fine the way it is.

However, I would like more varied and difficult challenges to take on in the after game, such as the Battle Frontier or an equivalent. The Battle Tree is very simplistic and the Battle Agency wasn't excuted as well as it could have been. Maybe they could release it as DLC. After all, Generations 1,2 and 4 all had seperate games that focussed solely on battling.
Maybe you're right. The last thing I would want is for them to remove any sort of functionality (such as the choice to play through the game different ways).

Bottom line I guess is I don't want them to completely do away with any of the mechanics in place (EVs, IVs, Breeding, ect.).

A more varied postgame seems to be the solution to make everyone happy - but my gut tells me that they won't do that (unless it's DLC like you said).
 

Jabberwocky

Gather round, people, I'll tell you a story
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
21,059
Reaction score
1,210
There's no need to reinvent the wheel for the sake of it when it rolls just fine. Improvements should be made to the presentation, story, and characters, not necessarily the core gameplay.
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
4,840
Reaction score
2,657
There's no need to reinvent the wheel for the sake of it when it rolls just fine. Improvements should be made to the map design, presentation, story, and characters, not necessarily the core gameplay.
Fixed that for you.
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
4,840
Reaction score
2,657
lol, what's wrong with the map design in Pokemon?
Too small and linear. The overworld feels way too small and corridor-like. And with them moving to console, this is only going to be more and more of an issue, console adventure games tend to be large and open ended and emphasize exploration. For Pokemon to really feel modern and console-esque, it's definitely going to need to move in that direction.
 

Jabberwocky

Gather round, people, I'll tell you a story
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
21,059
Reaction score
1,210
Too small and linear. The overworld feels way too small and corridor-like. And with them moving to console, this is only going to be more and more of an issue, console adventure games tend to be large and open ended and emphasize exploration. For Pokemon to really feel modern and console-esque, it's definitely going to need to move in that direction.
I don't tend to find linearity to be a problem, personally. Routes and caves in Pokemon tend to have a fair amount of exploration and branching paths as it is, so I don't see much need for improvement beyond expanding on what's already there - an ethos I hope GameFreak will try to subscribe to in most aspects of Gen VIII's design.
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
4,840
Reaction score
2,657
I don't tend to find linearity to be a problem, personally. Routes and caves in Pokemon tend to have a fair amount of exploration and branching paths as it is, so I don't see much need for improvement beyond expanding on what's already there - an ethos I hope GameFreak will try to subscribe to in most aspects of Gen VIII's design.
Eh, not really. The game constantly forces you in one direction the entire game now, and the "branching paths" are usually short detours that don't last long. There's little to no hidden areas to find, no mazes to navigate, no puzzles to solve, it's primarily a long slog from beginning to end. That really doesn't encourage a lot of exploration.
 

Jabberwocky

Gather round, people, I'll tell you a story
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
21,059
Reaction score
1,210
Eh, not really. The game constantly forces you in one direction the entire game now, and the "branching paths" are usually short detours that don't last long. There's little to no hidden areas to find, no mazes to navigate, no puzzles to solve, it's primarily a long slog from beginning to end. That really doesn't encourage a lot of exploration.
Like I said, an overarching linearity isn't a bad thing to me, and short detours are all I need. I liken exploration in Pokemon to taking a hike: sure, you might be only going in one direction, but the scenery is beautiful and you're discovering a bunch of neat things, so it's not really a problem.
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
4,840
Reaction score
2,657
Like I said, an overarching linearity isn't a bad thing to me, and short detours are all I need. I liken exploration in Pokemon to taking a hike: sure, you might be only going in one direction, but the scenery is beautiful and you're discovering a bunch of neat things, so it's not really a problem.
Maybe to you, but I don't think most people view exploration the same way. I view exploration as more like sightseeing in a large city. You have all of these landmarks spread all around you and you can experience them however you want. You could wander through the city, go towards the most popular attractions, look for lesser known attractions, whatever you want. Pokemon's current design doesn't really facilitate that, it's a scripted, cookie cutter experience.
 

Jabberwocky

Gather round, people, I'll tell you a story
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
21,059
Reaction score
1,210
Yeah. Pokemon doesn't need to be open world.
Not the main series, at any rate. A spin-off open world RPG where you play as a Pokemon would be fine, I think, but apply the design and aesthetic principles of main-series Pokemon routes to an open-world structure, and well... you kind of just get the Hinterlands from Dragon Age Inquisition. Or otherwise you have to alter the design and aesthetic principles to a point where it just becomes unrecognizable as a main series Pokemon game.
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
4,840
Reaction score
2,657
Not the main series, at any rate. A spin-off open world RPG where you play as a Pokemon would be fine, I think, but apply the design and aesthetic principles of main-series Pokemon routes to an open-world structure, and well... you kind of just get the Hinterlands from Dragon Age Inquisition. Or otherwise you have to alter the design and aesthetic principles to a point where it just becomes unrecognizable as a main series Pokemon game.
Um... how? Just take an open world, fill it with Pokemon to catch and trainers to battle. What's so hard about that? About the only thing that would really change is that there wouldn't be routes anymore, but are routes really necessary to the Pokemon experience? If you just had a seamless oveworld and divided it into sectors for different types of Pokemon to show up, what would be the difference?
 
Top