Give the player a love interest!

[Kick]

Even making relationship features purely optional changes the mechanic, focus, and feel of the game. That's simply not what Pokemon is.

I'd argue that making the protagonists older ,making the Evil Team want to liberate Pokemon from humans, and adding a guy like N who believes that pokemon and humans should be separate already changes the feel of the game. If it's optional it doesn't change the focus, the focus is still on the main plot.

And can you really say what Pokemon is and isn't? I'm fairly certain that's up to Gamefreak to decide, not us.

 

[Leonardo10]

The thing with adding a love intrest is that for it to make sense you would have to make it part of the storyline e.g. saving him/her form Team Plasma or battling alongside him/her to save all pokemon. Otherwise it would be a massive waste of space. Though it can also be optional whereby it won't be implemented into the storyline unless you want it to. This would please both parties.

I personally would choose to implement it in, mainly because i've always wanted someone to fight alongside me during the usual invasion of the villans "hide out"

 

[Ivysaur]

Their main target audience is 10-16

No, it's not. It's little kids, ages 6 to 11.

 

[Leonardo10]

No, it's not. It's little kids, ages 6 to 11.

No, its 10-16, mainly because the storyline is too complicated now and could you imagine how long it would take for a little kid to figure out how to get out of the Distortion World? They would be there awhile. Also at age 6 your reading ability is WAY below what is required to be able to enjoy playing the game.

 

[Ivysaur]

No, its 10-16, mainly because the storyline is too complicated now and could you imagine how long it would take for a little kid to figure out how to get out of the Distortion World? They would be there awhile. Also at age 6 your reading ability is WAY below what is required to be able to enjoy playing the game.

Pokemon has, from the very beginning, targeted little children. Have you ever noticed the childish dialogue, easy difficulty, overly-simple plots, and messages of friendship with Pokemon that plague the games? Did you ever wonder why Pokemon is primarily advertised through the anime, a show belittled by many for being too childish? Did you ever notice how the majority of Black and White's footage came from Pokemon Sunday, a morning show consisting of people dressing as Pokemon and over-reactive hosts screaming and shouting over every little detail of the footage?

Pokemon has older fans, but they make up an extremely tiny, insignificant fraction of Pokemon fans. You'd be wrong in suggesting anything else.

As for the Distortion World, it wasn't overly-complicated. Might as well throw out a few examples while I'm ahead. My little brother, who was 11, could do it himself. My dad's friend's son, who was 7, could do it himself. The process of pushing boulders into holes with neat little gravity effects throughout it isn't difficult. The battle with Cyrus was more difficult.

You're also forgetting most people don't play Pokemon to read through every line of dialogue put into the games. They play it to battle with Pokemon, which requires very basic, or even no reading ability whatsoever to enjoy. My proof? I enjoyed Diamond tremendously, despite the fact it was an imported Japanese copy.

 

[Leonardo10]

Pokemon has, from the very beginning, targeted little children. Have you ever noticed the childish dialogue, easy difficulty, overly-simple plots, and messages of friendship with Pokemon that plague the games? Did you ever wonder why Pokemon is primarily advertised through the anime, a show belittled by many for being too childish? Did you ever notice how the majority of Black and White's footage came from Pokemon Sunday, a morning show consisting of people dressing as Pokemon and over-reactive hosts screaming and shouting over every little detail of the footage?

Pokemon has older fans, but they make up an extremely tiny, insignificant fraction of Pokemon fans. You'd be wrong in suggesting anything else.

As for the Distortion World, it wasn't overly-complicated. Might as well throw out a few examples while I'm ahead. My little brother, who was 11, could do it himself. My dad's friend's son, who was 7, could do it himself. The process of pushing boulders into holes with neat little gravity effects throughout it isn't difficult. The battle with Cyrus was more difficult.

You're also forgetting most people don't play Pokemon to read through every line of dialogue put into the games. They play it to battle with Pokemon, which requires very basic, or even no reading ability whatsoever to enjoy. My proof? I enjoyed Diamond tremendously, despite the fact it was an imported Japanese copy.

Hmm, maybe its just me then cause I ahev this habit of always reading the dialogue, oherwise I'll have no idea why these people with crazy outfits and haircuts are storming a mountian LOL! But yeah, point well made mate. You should become a lawyer, i'd hire you.

 

[Marluxia]

It would be cool. But only if they gave you an option to say yes or no to whatever she asks you to do....

 

[It's Super Effective]

Pokemon has, from the very beginning, targeted little children. Have you ever noticed the childish dialogue, easy difficulty, overly-simple plots, and messages of friendship with Pokemon that plague the games? Did you ever wonder why Pokemon is primarily advertised through the anime, a show belittled by many for being too childish? Did you ever notice how the majority of Black and White's footage came from Pokemon Sunday, a morning show consisting of people dressing as Pokemon and over-reactive hosts screaming and shouting over every little detail of the footage?

Pokemon has older fans, but they make up an extremely tiny, insignificant fraction of Pokemon fans. You'd be wrong in suggesting anything else.

As for the Distortion World, it wasn't overly-complicated. Might as well throw out a few examples while I'm ahead. My little brother, who was 11, could do it himself. My dad's friend's son, who was 7, could do it himself. The process of pushing boulders into holes with neat little gravity effects throughout it isn't difficult. The battle with Cyrus was more difficult.

You're also forgetting most people don't play Pokemon to read through every line of dialogue put into the games. They play it to battle with Pokemon, which requires very basic, or even no reading ability whatsoever to enjoy. My proof? I enjoyed Diamond tremendously, despite the fact it was an imported Japanese copy.

see, this is why people are saying a love interest should be optional because there are people simply not interested in the idea, including children.

'Pokemon has older fans, but they make up an extremely tiny, insignificant fraction of Pokemon fans. You'd be wrong in suggesting anything else.'

i don't know, i think a vast majority of us who enjoyed Pokemon from the beginning and are now adults make up for a tremendous chunk of the fans. i think Game Freak makes a lot of its money on the older fans, considering they have more access and freedom to buy the games. have you seen a ten year old kid buy Diamond, Pearl, and Platinum all together? but i digress.

i'm not stirring up an argument, i just think there's some undermining to how many older fans there are. the game/franchise has already been 'too dark' for kids at points. i doubt an innocent and non-explicit love interest wouldn't be harmful at all, especially if it was an optional thing.

 

[Honchkrow Reloaded]

No, it's not. It's little kids, ages 6 to 11.

Really? Well, in FireRed/Leafgreen, they didn't care about the little kid's age when you ran into that girl whose bikini got stolen by some Pokemon. And I say that if you're allowed to see teenage girls with their bikinis off [which I don't exactly agree with], I'd say that you're probably old enough for a potential love interest. So let's just dump the arguments about age...hopefully?

 

[AuraSoul93]

Really? Well, in FireRed/Leafgreen, they didn't care about the little kid's age when you ran into that girl whose bikini got stolen by some Pokemon. And I say that if you're allowed to see teenage girls with their bikinis off [which I don't exactly agree with], I'd say that you're probably old enough for a potential love interest. So let's just dump the arguments about age...hopefully?

What are you talking about? And what's that got to do with a love interest?

 

[Honchkrow Reloaded]

What are you talking about? And what's that got to do with a love interest?

I'm trying to kill the arguments about age.

 

[Oak]

With a good strategy.

 

[WhimsicalBox]

I don't particularly oppose it but at the same time I fear the massive amount of fans who would whine and denounce the pokemon series just because of that ._.

 

[Marik]

I'd say make it optional. That way whining fans could shut up, and I could go on with it. I would avoid intertwining it with the plot or anything though.

 

[Luigibuster89898]

Four Words...........It's Not Very Effective.This is a pokemon game.What would we gain by doing such things in a kid friendly game like this.

 

[Iggyness]

I think a love interest would be better off in a spin off like Colosseum.

They could have made the Wes/Rui relationship more developed and deep, imo.

 

[Oak]

Really? Well, in FireRed/Leafgreen, they didn't care about the little kid's age when you ran into that girl whose bikini got stolen by some Pokemon. And I say that if you're allowed to see teenage girls with their bikinis off [which I don't exactly agree with], I'd say that you're probably old enough for a potential love interest. So let's just dump the arguments about age...hopefully?

Oh, when did that happen? that sounds so epic...

 

[The Outrage]

I'm trying to kill the arguments about age.

Still not killing the argument that this is a mon-catching game, and that the player character is supposed to be a player-avatar, hence the lack of characterization. Giving a love interest destroys that.

There are many games out there where you can try and get a love interest, Pokemon is not one of them despite what the rampant shipping community may suggest.

Besides, that was a dumb argument as you didn't even see anything.

 

[Oak]

Still not killing the argument that this is a mon-catching game, and that the player character is supposed to be a player-avatar, hence the lack of characterization. Giving a love interest destroys that.

No, it doesn't.

 

[The Outrage]

No, it doesn't.

Compelling argument, I'm not sure whether you're agreeing with the first part or disagreeing with the last.

I'll assume its the latter and respond:

So you're telling me, that as a player avatar, being forced into a love interest with a single character, heck, even if it isn't forced, only allowing you to have that one love interest even if you don't want them, or you want someone else.

Though I guess calling it a Player Avatar is misleading since its closer to this in nature than that.