BDSP Pokémon Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl General Discussion

[Bolt Strike]

I really don't know why you bring investment as a variable here. I never was 1 to buy a video game in the hopes of selling it 1 day.

Because that's the only context in which analyzing the value of a game now vs. down the road makes sense, if you're planning on reselling it. Otherwise, most players are probably not going to care about the value of a game in the long term, they'll either have moved on to something else or they'll want a remake/re-release.

That's because it does both. It's to increase the value of old games while bringing down the value of remakes.

Not really. It's the same game it's always been since it released, so the value doesn't increase.

And this brings us back to the question of why would you want to increase the value of the older game over the remake if you have no plans on selling the older game? The developer doesn't benefit from that because it drives people to seek out overpriced used copies of the original and they don't get a cent from that resale. The player is forced to pay the exorbitant price to acquire those few used copies floating around. The only party that benefits from that arrangement is the reseller who makes a huge profit by selling a used copy far more than what they bought it for. So what is Game Freak's logic in wanting a system that benefits a small minority of people that aren't them?

Europe laws make video games have to choose a rating which put GF as getting rid of gambling in the games. The last such games that had gambling was D/P/P. This puts another value into the earlier games, say, before something was made illegal. (Again, this is just an example, not looking for examples to prove or disprove something.).

I understand the point you're making, no need to keep creating new examples to make the same point.

If you mean that prevents people from buying a remake, because it didn't include something (like the Battle Frontier) this furthers my cause on value to old/original games.

Not so much prevent as discourage or disappoint them.

 

[Silktree]

I don't know about going back to lets go, but I don't see legends becoming the norm for the main games. I think legends will be its own subseries while we continue with the same battle styles and gym challange in the primary series.

I didn't imply otherwise. New generations will stick to the usual formula, but they might have more open world elements. LA itself isn't really an open world game since the biomes seem to be separated, though.

 

[NealIRC]

Because that's the only context in which analyzing the value of a game now vs. down the road makes sense, if you're planning on reselling it. Otherwise, most players are probably not going to care about the value of a game in the long term, they'll either have moved on to something else or they'll want a remake/re-release.

What about the concept of having something in an older game you don't have now?

Not really. It's the same game it's always been since it released, so the value doesn't increase.

Sure it does. If there is only a something that is in R/S but not in OR/AS, then it means I have to go back to R/S in order to get that something.

And this brings us back to the question of why would you want to increase the value of the older game over the remake if you have no plans on selling the older game?

To make the game worth it.

The developer doesn't benefit from that because it drives people to seek out overpriced used copies of the original and they don't get a cent from that resale. The player is forced to pay the exorbitant price to acquire those few used copies floating around. The only party that benefits from that arrangement is the reseller who makes a huge profit by selling a used copy far more than what they bought it for. So what is Game Freak's logic in wanting a system that benefits a small minority of people that aren't them?

Heh. Not everything is about money. Yet you keep bringing it up.

And since you keep bringing up money, then what about the people who sold Emerald long before OR/AS came out? Then it means... the people who didn't sell Emerald, have access to Battle Frontier that everyone else who sold it didn't. Hence the value.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

If these remakes are supposedly marketed toward people who have never played DPPt before (including those who weren't born then).... would the missing Battle Frontier matter to them?

People who knew about the Battle Frontier would miss the feature. But what about people who never played DPPt before and therefore doesn't have an attachment to it to begin with? We can talk about how awesome the Battle Frontier is and everything... but in the end, its just a post game feature.

They’re also clearly marketing it to people who have played DPPt due to the nostalgic promotion and showing the game dialogues and all.

 

[Norzan]

If these remakes are supposedly marketed toward people who have never played DPPt before (including those who weren't born then).... would the missing Battle Frontier matter to them?

Aren't these games being purposely made because people actively asked for them? And by people, i mean the people that played the originals. I very much doubt people that never played them asked for them, and if they did, i highly doubt there are many. They are more likely interested in brand new games like Legends Arceus or Gen 9 more than remakes of older games. If these remakes were never made, i doubt they would be upset.

The entire line of remakes is entirely driven by nostalgia.

And if we go by your logic, would people that never played the originals be upset that there was no Underground? No Super Contests? They might be in the main game but they were entirely superflous to the main story progression. So, why those two deserve to be in the game but not the Battle Frontier? Because it's postgame? Is that the criteria for something to not be in the game? Then why put anything in the postgame then? Why have the Battle Tower?

 

[Silktree]

Personally, Contests and Super Contests being included in remakes for which the Battle Factory wasn't good enough, offends me. But they're obviously using the excuse of third version elements being optional.

 

[FinnishPokéFan92]

Third versions, including Emerald, tended to sell less than the "main pairs" of games. So while popular amongst those who have played those games, I have a feeling the Battle Frontier is a feature mainly desired by the loud minority.

 

[Norzan]

Third versions, including Emerald, tended to sell less than the "main pairs" of games. So while popular amongst those who have played those games, I have a feeling the Battle Frontier is a feature mainly desired by the loud minority.

Without any hard concrete evidence, this is just an assumption. How do we know from the people that bought the first pair of games actually like Super Contests, the Underground and other features from those games? They could well be a minority, but Gamefreak still puts them in the game.

Everytime Gamefreak puts a feature in a game it's a gamble if people will use it. But does it matter? As long the game sells, it doesn't matter.

 

[FinnishPokéFan92]

Without any hard concrete evidence, this is just an assumption. How do we know from the people that bought the first pair of games actually like Super Contests, the Underground and other features from those games? They could well be a minority, but Gamefreak still puts them in the game.

Everytime Gamefreak puts a feature in a game it's a gamble if people will use it. But does it matter? As long the game sells, it doesn't matter.

I do have evidence. Third versions and remakes sell less than games that start a new generation.

Spoiler

 

[Daren]

I mean, Masuda said the BF was left out not because it was from a third version or to add value to Emerald but because the BF is hard.
That fits what we've seen from the games since; Sword/Shield are some of the easiest RPGs I've ever played, and even the Battle Tower was made easier. BD/SP is probably gonna tone Mars and Cynthia down significantly for the same reason.

 

[Minya_Nouvelle]

Just in case anyone wasn't sure, I have confirmed that there are more than four outfits for Lucas; meaning the the selection screen with four outfits is not showing everything.

Spoiler: Image of all outfits

Also; it seems like all outfits will have a corresponding male/female version. We will probably get a 'Leather Style' for Lucas and a 'Cyber Style' for Dawn.

Lucas's selection screen showed a "Gengar Jacket Style" and Dawn's Showed an "Eevee Jacket Style" (That we don't get to see her wear). But We do get to see Lucas in an jacket with an Eevee on it that has a very similar style to the Gengar one. We also get to see Dawn in an outfit very similar to Lucas's Gengar Jacket even though it wasn't listed on her page.

Edit: Along with: Everyday, Gengar Jacket, Eevee Jacket, Winter, Cyber, and Leather; I noticed in the presents there is also a "Casual" outfit listed but not specifically shown, but I was thinking the Pikachu hoodie might belong to the Everyday or Casual outfit.

 

[FinnishPokéFan92]

I mean, Masuda said the BF was left out not because it was from a third version or to add value to Emerald but because the BF is hard.

True. I was just saying that the demand for it to return is not as universal as its biggest fans might think.

 

[SlowGinFizzzz]

Okay I need that Pikachu hoodie. Like, in real life.

 

[Esserise]

I mean, there's inevitably going to be different ideas about what features have value and what determines that value. You can't objectively say that Emerald having the BF means it has more "value" than ORAS, when ORAS themselves have lots of elements that both RS and Emerald lacked. If you've got someone like me who is going to be more directly impacted by features like Soaring and DexNav and Mega Evolution, and who doesn't give a toss about battle facilities and thinks Emerald's storyline was a garbled mess, then obviously there's plenty of reason for that someone to buy ORAS instead of "going back and replaying Emerald."

Besides, how many people really do that, anyway? Super-fans obviously do, and it's not that there aren't plenty of those, but personally I think the vast majority of Pokémon fans likely have a far more casual relationship with the series and their memories of past games. Many probably don't even still own their original GBA or DS, or their copies of those games, but their nostalgia can be appealed to by remakes that are made for a new, more accessible gaming system. Maybe I'm talking completely out of my ass here, but I just seriously doubt that a meaningful portion of the audience for these kinds of games' first impulse is to grab a microscope and start analyzing the map art for signs that a particular feature (from a version of the game that they may not have even played themselves) is still included, or to create tit-for-tat lists of which games offer what and which is the better deal, especially when the older games are, well, old, and out of print, meaning there's not even really a choice to be made unless they do happen to still own their original copy. (Or are willing to hunt one down on the secondary market, but I would think that the number of people who are willing to do that is even smaller, especially when you can just emulate the game for free if you really do want to replay it.) I feel like most people just care about the game being nostalgic and fun. LGPE have a very mixed reputation in online circles from people viewing them as inferior to FRLG or because they find the catch mechanics off-putting, but man, those games are still moving copies, even with a much more robust Pokémon RPG available for the same system.

Plus there's just, you know, different schools of thought when it comes to game design. One, for instance, certainly is that a remake should try to be everything and more, in order to create a "definitive" experience. And that's not a bad way of thinking, or a wrong way of thinking, but it's also not the only way of thinking. I feel like it can be just as valid an approach to look back at the thing you're recreating, and to excise things that either just didn't really work out, or that, if included, would serve little to no purpose, especially if we're talking about game development, where time and resources need to be managed carefully. Like, if Black & White 2 remakes ever came around, but omitted Funfest Missions (a feature I love to death) because they failed to really engage people, I'd get it. I wouldn't be happy about it, necessarily, but I'd see where they were coming from. And the absence of that element wouldn't mean that I'd suddenly lack any real reason to check out those remakes in favor of the originals, either - the remakes could still have many other things to offer.

Also, the distortion world in Platinum was kinda meh, I'd rather have a distortion world biome in Giratina's room than include the whole section from Platinum, unless they can improve on what Platinum had.

I think the Distortion World was pretty cool for its day, but in retrospect... yeah. Like, it definitely is better than the UB worlds in terms of gameplay depth, but it's not a very complex dungeon on its own merits, and aside from that I think it really does feel like little more than a short spree meant to show off some nifty 3D tricks.

 

[Minya_Nouvelle]

I feel like it can be just as valid an approach to look back at the thing you're recreating, and to excise things that either just didn't really work out, or that, if included, would serve little to no purpose, especially if we're talking about game development, where time and resources need to be managed carefully.

To add to this, I feel like there's also a mentality that, even if a feature is brought back, it should be different or updated in some way; especially for remakes. We already can see how, even though Secret Bases, the Underground and Super Contests were brought back; they way they function is not identical to the originals.

Secret Bases seem to be a way to display statues that can be found from mining; instead of furniture. The underground was expanded to have wild pokemon. Super Contests focus more on the Rhythm section with a hype meter (that i don't fully understand).

If a feature like the Villa was cut; maybe it is because the dev team were not able to think of a way to update it in a meaningful way. Also; looking through it, there's a lot of dialogue that references things that have changed, so they wouldn't be able to just copy over the dialogue.

 

[Boss1708]

My biggest problem with ORAS was how they openly teased stuff that wasn't in the game.

And I don't just mean that infamous sign at the Battle Resort saying "the Battle Frontier project has started!" That one was by far the worst kick in the nuts, but there was more... I also mean other teasers like:

- Gym Leaders telling you they would love to rematch you in the future (gym leader rematches are not in the game)

- The Game Corner, instead of being replaced with something usable, just appears closed for ever.

- The game tells us Kalos has strong ties with Hoenn, but Trainer Customization is not in the game.

- The Berry Blending minigame was cut from ORAS, but you can get a berry blender decoration for your Secret Base

- Etc.

I just hope that there are ZERO such teasers in BDSP, because they really ruin the game enjoyment for me. Sofar, BDSP are certainly going in the right direction. Instead of a closed Game Corner in Sinnoh, we see it was replaced with something useful (a Trainer Customization Shop). It definitely seems that ILCA are better at this than Game Freak.

 

[Bolt Strike]

What about the concept of having something in an older game you don't have now?

Again, that is likely not a consideration for whoever's buying the game.

Sure it does. If there is only a something that is in R/S but not in OR/AS, then it means I have to go back to R/S in order to get that something.

This would defeat the entire purpose of a remake then. They create ORAS so you don't have to go back to RS in order to get that. If you don't want to remake something to make it unique and valuable, then just port the games so the younger players can still have access to that "value".

To make the game worth it.

Why are you so focused on making sure an old, obsolete game is "worth it"? The developers aren't selling it anymore and the players won't really want to buy it because it's an old, outdated experience, so what is the benefit to having an old game that has some unique feature when they're considering a remake? This is very backwards logic.

Heh. Not everything is about money. Yet you keep bringing it up.

It is to Game Freak. The whole reason they're making Pokemon games is to make money, so they're making decisions that make enough money to keep them in business and maximize how much profit they take home.

And since you keep bringing up money, then what about the people who sold Emerald long before OR/AS came out? Then it means... the people who didn't sell Emerald, have access to Battle Frontier that everyone else who sold it didn't. Hence the value.

All the more reason to want ORAS to have those missing features, so they can experience it again without having to shell out an exorbitant fee..

Plus there's just, you know, different schools of thought when it comes to game design. One, for instance, certainly is that a remake should try to be everything and more, in order to create a "definitive" experience. And that's not a bad way of thinking, or a wrong way of thinking, but it's also not the only way of thinking. I feel like it can be just as valid an approach to look back at the thing you're recreating, and to excise things that either just didn't really work out, or that, if included, would serve little to no purpose, especially if we're talking about game development, where time and resources need to be managed carefully. Like, if Black & White 2 remakes ever came around, but omitted Funfest Missions (a feature I love to death) because they failed to really engage people, I'd get it. I wouldn't be happy about it, necessarily, but I'd see where they were coming from. And the absence of that element wouldn't mean that I'd suddenly lack any real reason to check out those remakes in favor of the originals, either - the remakes could still have many other things to offer.

Eh, I don't think this is really as subjective as you think. Ideally a remake should strive to be a definitive experience to try and maximize its appeal and audience and to give people that bought the originals a reason to double dip, so outright cutting the features feels like a step too far. Modernizing them yes, and there would've been better ways to do that (such as replacing some of the older facilities with ones that had more modern battling styles such as Triple Battles, Rotation Battles, and Inverse Battles. And yes I know that Mauville had them but they were a lot more limited than full Battle Frontier facilities), but cutting them leaves the game feeling lacking.

I think the Distortion World was pretty cool for its day, but in retrospect... yeah. Like, it definitely is better than the UB worlds in terms of gameplay depth, but it's not a very complex dungeon on its own merits, and aside from that I think it really does feel like little more than a short spree meant to show off some nifty 3D tricks.

Not very complex? I get a lot less confused than other players seem to be and even I found the Distortion World to be very overwhelming. Or at least the Mt. Coronet section you traverse through during the main story, the post game section in Turnback Cave to get the Griseous Orb was pretty simplistic and disappointing though (sadly though, if we're getting any part of the Distortion World in BDSP, that's probably what we're getting). The Mt. Coronet section was very sprawling, full of one way paths, and required you to solve complex Strength puzzles

I do think that Pokemon games do need some sort of complex, puzzling maps like that and the newer games feel like they're missing something by not having dungeons like that. But I can see where they might want to tone it down for casuals, I just think they should compromise by having some of the more puzzling dungeons be optional (and luckily, there's more where the Distortion World came from in Sinnoh so it's not a huge dealbreaker, but the Distortion World definitely had a unique design and atmosphere).

 

[SinnohEevee]

I'd say back then they didn't plan on having remakes long term. Frlg was for nostalgia sales and gen 2 pokemon, yellow content was left out because it was minor changes anyway. Hgss was because gen 4 needed the rest lf the pokemon and ho-oh and Lugia were really hard to get (always thought these reasons were dumb though considering they could have just put them in diamond and pearl when it was coming out)

Oras was fan demand and I assume bdsp is aswell. At this point fans expect remakes, so gamefreak is in for the long haul the second they confirmed hoenn. I suspect thats why they handed the remakes to illca, they didn't want to be stuck in remake hell forever.

Now not many people will ask for Unova remakes.

 

[FinnishPokéFan92]

Now not many people will ask for Unova remakes.

I bet that will change once the Sinnoh remakes are out and they hype has had time to die down.

 

[SinnohEevee]

I bet that will change once the Sinnoh remakes are out and they hype has had time to die down.

BDSP seems to be close to a 1:1 remake, so maybe no.