Trainer Customization

[Muur]

Pretty sure I'm going to end up being Serena.

She will also have my name and no one in game will wonder why a girl has the name Marcus.

A character like Yancy would change my mind though~.

 

[Proxima Centauri B]

They let you change eye color with color contacts in Animal Crossing, but it seems like we're getting so many options that one little thing like that isn't that big a deal for me. It would be nice if you could though.

I definately also want to see new clothes distributed as well.

 

[Zoro]

Anyone else is worried that the customization of your character may be related to paid downloadable content? I hope not... it just occurred to me.

Been discussed a lot I actually suggested months ago to have sets as DLC, have those clothes ingame to customize but I'm fine paying lets say 5 euros for a set of heroes outfits or evil team outfits, I personally want Gold, Green clothes and Alder/Benga.

Being a fire type lover I wouldn't mind having a team Magma outfit either.

 

[Crowhogan33]

No DLC for XY:

PG: As Pokébank will be a paid service, have you ever thought of going down the microtransaction or free-to-play route with the series?

JM: Definitely not with X & Y, we feel it's really important to have this complete game that can be played as is, so we don't have any plans to have additional DLC.

PG: Not even as an idea for future releases?

JM: [Laughs] Maybe! But not as long as I'm director. One thing I always say about the Pokemon games is that you want to make it something you can give to a kid - of course adults also play it too - and they have a complete experience.

Personally, I could easily put the game into a 2DS when it comes out and give it to a kid and leave them to play. I wouldn't want to give a kid my iPhone and do the same.

You can read more here.

 

[NoirGrimoir]

I'm thinking that Matsuda isn't considering things like wifi distribution pokemon and the C-Gear skins as DLC. Probably if we get more clothing distributions, they'll be through similar avenues as the pokemon and skin distributions we currently get, as in through game stores and Global Link, rather than the Eshop.

 

[Drey]

I find this feature to be addicting and awesome. I'm definitely going to spend most of my time customizing my character's clothing.

 

[The Outrage]

JM: Definitely not with X & Y, we feel it's really important to have this complete game that can be played as is, so we don't have any plans to have additional DLC.

"But we don't mind removing features that have been present in other games, and then adding them back into the third version to boost sales and maximize the differences between them! Or implementing a key system, and having initially planned to make two third versions for that! What? Difficulty levels should be set within the game itself and not between games? Where did you get that idea."

Honestly, the way he talks about DLC is reflecting what's wrong with DLC nowadays in the first place. He seems to be under the impression that should DLC be included, that things should be missing from the game (considering their practice with third versions, not surprising). Has it not occurred to him that he could make a complete and functional game and then add additional content beyond what they initially envisioned over the game's lifespan? They couldn't implement the Pokemon Translator, but given enough time, that could have probably made it as DLC.

Spoiler

Things removed between Crystal and RS that were added back in Emerald:

• Moving sprites

Things that disappeared between RSE and DP and was added back in Pt:

• Gym leader rematches
• Battle Frontier

But at least they got better at it...doesn't help that Masuda said the exact same thing ages ago when he was still doing the above practices

 

[Cute Charm]

JM: Definitely not with X & Y, we feel it's really important to have this complete game that can be played as is, so we don't have any plans to have additional DLC.

"But we don't mind removing features that have been present in other games, and then adding them back into the third version to boost sales and maximize the differences between them! Or implementing a key system, and having initially planned to make two third versions for that! What? Difficulty levels should be set within the game itself and not between games? Where did you get that idea."

Honestly, the way he talks about DLC is reflecting what's wrong with DLC nowadays in the first place. He seems to be under the impression that should DLC be included, that things should be missing from the game (considering their practice with third versions, not surprising). Has it not occurred to him that he could make a complete and functional game and then add additional content beyond what they initially envisioned over the game's lifespan? They couldn't implement the Pokemon Translator, but given enough time, that could have probably made it as DLC.

Spoiler

Things removed between Crystal and RS that were added back in Emerald:

• Moving sprites

Things that disappeared between RSE and DP and was added back in Pt:

• Gym leader rematches
• Battle Frontier

But at least they got better at it...doesn't help that Masuda said the exact same thing ages ago when he was still doing the above practices

I think you're missing the point. The two third versions were pretty much meant for sequels for two games set in alternate realities. Up until then the games weren't in alternate realities and were just different versions of each other with no connection. With B/W, that changed two games, two universes, two sequels.

Also going by the production of B/W being right after D/P/Pt but before HG/SS, that could explain a lot of why a lot of things were removed and put back in at random intervals or in the third games. Maybe the other games were like that too. Who knows how many pokemon related projects they have going at the same time anymore. Those R/S remakes everyone wants so bad? They'll probably put a damper on the first two Gen VII games' content. The remakes will have have great features that will disappear between them and VII's first couple games, making a bunch of people angry because one went into production before the other. Third versions generally make up the difference. There is really no need for DLC to complete the "unfinished game". The third versions already complete the unfinished game during their lifespan.

Besides, you missed the "I wouldn't want to give a kid my iPhone and do the same." comment. That right there also states why he doesn't want DLC stuff. The target audience is little kids, and frankly little kids don't understand that the majority of DLC out there costs money.

Imagine if you were a little kid and heard about some super secret costumes to customize your character with and lets say your parents had a annual subscription that automatically took money out of their bank account. Each costume costs about $1, but there's literally thousands of items in the cash shop. Financial disaster ensues. They don't want that. They just want the kids to enjoy the game as it is without worrying about them getting waste deep in trouble.

 

[The Outrage]

@Cute Charm;
It was specifically stated that until Satoru Iwata told them that if they plan on releasing another game on the DS, it had to be different, that Masuda finally considered sequels. I have my doubts that he would have done it without prompting, and the fact that he even considered two of anything before considering sequels for that key system is astounding. Here's the part of the interview in question:

Masuda
I'm Masuda from GAME FREAK⁷. As for why we're releasing two, we thought of a game mechanic to put in when we were developing Pokémon Black Version and Pokémon White Version, but we didn't have enough time to do it. We needed two games for that, so this time we decided to make two

Iwata
So that's why you made two.

Masuda
Yes. A little later, we thought of making them sequels. When you told me that if we were going to release something for the Nintendo DS system, we had to come up with something new, I was really worried. (laughs) Then I thought, "How about sequels?"

Tells us two things. One, they left a sequel hook in BW, but didn't have a sequel in mind when making it (which explains why BW2 lacks at some points) and two, he was willing to have people pay for two games (regardless of what they were) for a simple key system. Given that the key system is the only thing that requires both versions, its quite clear that's what he's referring to. It was such a limited system as well that it really didn't warrant being the reason to create a set of two games.

Also going by the production of B/W being right after D/P/Pt but before HG/SS, that could explain a lot of why a lot of things were removed and put back in at random intervals or in the third games

I don't actually see how that explains anything for DP. It could explain why HgSs was lacking (though I thought it had the best implementation in a lot of things including the menu and making up for what was lost in GSC) but not DP. Here's the thing, they went into production after they completed DP, not during. So no, I really don't see how DP could have come off worse than HgSs, especially when HgSs was the one made during BW's production. It also doesn't explain Crystal to RS, but that was minimal enough that you could overlook it.

Besides, you missed the "I wouldn't want to give a kid my iPhone and do the same." comment. That right there also states why he doesn't want DLC stuff. The target audience is little kids, and frankly little kids don't understand that the majority of DLC out there costs money.

Yet I see kids who aren't even out of their strollers navigating touch screens better than their parents. People should stop assuming kids can't comprehend things. Maybe that's why they don't know about the world....because you won't tell them? But onto the issue if they didn't understand that:

Imagine if you were a little kid and heard about some super secret costumes to customize your character with and lets say your parents had a annual subscription that automatically took money out of their bank account. Each costume costs about $1, but there's literally thousands of items in the cash shop. Financial disaster ensues. They don't want that. They just want the kids to enjoy the game as it is without worrying about them getting waste deep in trouble.

Well, first of all, that's why I've said that *maybe* Game Freak should consider DLC for worthwhile updates that expand the games, and not tiny things that are there to clearly grab money like clothes in-game.

But onto the main point. I've heard of many "free apps" that trick children into buying more crap (like an app with a virtual fish pet who died and you can pay to bring it back to life) and it's as simple as clicking a button. Any normal game developer that has that concern wouldn't make it as simple as pressing a button to buy something. I'm fairly certain you can make the eShop password protected.

It's honestly not Game Freak's problem if they've taken the proper precautions (i.e., not making buying something at the click of a button) and parents still give their children the equivalent of their credit card. And regardless, its not solely Game Freak's problem then, is it? There are many other games that could potentially do that. The games shouldn't be baby-sitting the child.

And now I have to wonder whether the eShop even allows for the scenario you've described.

 

[Zeta]

Besides, you missed the "I wouldn't want to give a kid my iPhone and do the same." comment. That right there also states why he doesn't want DLC stuff. The target audience is little kids, and frankly little kids don't understand that the majority of DLC out there costs money.

Imagine if you were a little kid and heard about some super secret costumes to customize your character with and lets say your parents had a annual subscription that automatically took money out of their bank account. Each costume costs about $1, but there's literally thousands of items in the cash shop. Financial disaster ensues. They don't want that. They just want the kids to enjoy the game as it is without worrying about them getting waste deep in trouble.

I don't think people want microtransaction DLC for Pokemon they want mid-generation expansion packs that are the only DLC, and adds say - 30 new Pokemon and Battle Frontier style sidequests to your game for 20 dollars. Something reasonable like that.

And now I have to wonder whether the eShop even allows for the scenario you've described.

It does not.

 

[NoirGrimoir]

In the E-shop, basically you load money onto it, and you buy apps and such with what's on the account. You can save your Credit Card number I believe, but you still need a password or account number, something like that. Besides, I would think most Parents aren't stupid enough to give their kid control over their credit card information, and if they are then that's their problem, really. There is absolutely nothing like an 'annual subscription' that I'm aware of.

 

[Zeta]

If there's DLC for mario games, I don't see any argument behind keeping DLC out of Pokemon for the sake of the kiddies. Mario targets more or less the same demographic, if not a bit younger depending on the game since it requires no reading.

 

[Akromatic]

If there's DLC for mario games, I don't see any argument behind keeping DLC out of Pokemon for the sake of the kiddies. Mario targets more or less the same demographic, if not a bit younger depending on the game since it requires no reading.

Maybe Nintendo is fine with Mario having DLC, but Junichi is apparently not feeling like it at the time.

 

[Zeta]

The only problem Pokemon poses with DLC is that it has PVP and trading - at least if we're talking about entirely new Pokemon. There are ways around that - a lot of MMORPGs deal with the same issues. But they might not want their player base to deal with them. There's really nothing holding back the addition of sidequests like Battle Frontier, PokeThlon, or whatever via DLC though.

 

[Akromatic]

I wonder if Game Freak is going to hold a design contest. Maybe people from across the world (or at least Japan) could create their own drawings of costumes for trainers, and 10 could be picked; 5 for the boys and 5 for the girls.

 

[Zeta]

I hope there's Pokemon-based outfits like in Battle Revolution.

 

[Rainbow]

There was a Pancham or Pangoro hat wasn't there? Maybe it's a part of a Pokemon costume.

 

[Cute Charm]

@Cute Charm;
It was specifically stated that until Satoru Iwata told them that if they plan on releasing another game on the DS, it had to be different, that Masuda finally considered sequels. I have my doubts that he would have done it without prompting, and the fact that he even considered two of anything before considering sequels for that key system is astounding. Here's the part of the interview in question:



Tells us two things. One, they left a sequel hook in BW, but didn't have a sequel in mind when making it (which explains why BW2 lacks at some points) and two, he was willing to have people pay for two games (regardless of what they were) for a simple key system. Given that the key system is the only thing that requires both versions, its quite clear that's what he's referring to. It was such a limited system as well that it really didn't warrant being the reason to create a set of two games.

Well, in that case if you look at the big picture, making two other games makes a lot more money then putting up patches. It also makes said patches more readily accessible to people who can't pay more than $38-$40 once for the game. Then again maybe I'm being too optimistic.

Also that still doesn't say the reason he chose the two games wasn't because of the whole alternate realities thing. Sequels or no, they kind of built up the two games taking place in two different realities based on what dragon the hero chose.

I don't actually see how that explains anything for DP. It could explain why HgSs was lacking (though I thought it had the best implementation in a lot of things including the menu and making up for what was lost in GSC) but not DP. Here's the thing, they went into production after they completed DP, not during. So no, I really don't see how DP could have come off worse than HgSs, especially when HgSs was the one made during BW's production. It also doesn't explain Crystal to RS, but that was minimal enough that you could overlook it.

What I'm trying to say is D/P Could have started production by the time R/S was in post production and before Emerald and FR/LG. Before that R/S could have started after they realized G/S wasn't going to be the end of the series.

Yet I see kids who aren't even out of their strollers navigating touch screens better than their parents. People should stop assuming kids can't comprehend things. Maybe that's why they don't know about the world....because you won't tell them? But onto the issue if they didn't understand that:

[...]

Well, first of all, that's why I've said that *maybe* Game Freak should consider DLC for worthwhile updates that expand the games, and not tiny things that are there to clearly grab money like clothes in-game.

But onto the main point. I've heard of many "free apps" that trick children into buying more crap (like an app with a virtual fish pet who died and you can pay to bring it back to life) and it's as simple as clicking a button. Any normal game developer that has that concern wouldn't make it as simple as pressing a button to buy something. I'm fairly certain you can make the eShop password protected.

It's honestly not Game Freak's problem if they've taken the proper precautions (i.e., not making buying something at the click of a button) and parents still give their children the equivalent of their credit card. And regardless, its not solely Game Freak's problem then, is it? There are many other games that could potentially do that. The games shouldn't be baby-sitting the child.

And now I have to wonder whether the eShop even allows for the scenario you've described.

I don't think people want microtransaction DLC for Pokemon they want mid-generation expansion packs that are the only DLC, and adds say - 30 new Pokemon and Battle Frontier style sidequests to your game for 20 dollars. Something reasonable like that.

Even if they did take all the necessary precautions to make the kids not buy a $1,000 worth of pixels, there's going to still be little kids bitching about not being able to get the 30 new pokemon and side quests because their parents have to pay extra money that they don't have.

Also, I was using clothes as an example to keep this on topic. Someone should really split this DLC discussion up in it's own thread.

In the E-shop, basically you load money onto it, and you buy apps and such with what's on the account. You can save your Credit Card number I believe, but you still need a password or account number, something like that. Besides, I would think most Parents aren't stupid enough to give their kid control over their credit card information, and if they are then that's their problem, really. There is absolutely nothing like an 'annual subscription' that I'm aware of.

It was just a random generalized scenario. Even so, if the kid's crafty enough they can get their parents password and buy points and waste money that way.

If there's DLC for mario games, I don't see any argument behind keeping DLC out of Pokemon for the sake of the kiddies. Mario targets more or less the same demographic, if not a bit younger depending on the game since it requires no reading.

It might be targeted towards them, but not marketed towards them. What kid who doesn't have parents that played it says "Mommy! I want the new Mario game!" There's no anime, show outside of the 80s or other readily available side promotions like there is with pokemon. That is other than maybe toys and clothes but that doesn't cast a wide enough net for kids who never thought of playing it or know where the cute green dinosaur came from.

Maybe Nintendo is fine with Mario having DLC, but Junichi is apparently not feeling like it at the time.

I pretty much agree with this.

 

[The Outrage]

@Cute Charm;

Well, in that case if you look at the big picture, making two other games makes a lot more money then putting up patches. It also makes said patches more readily accessible to people who can't pay more than $38-$40 once for the game. Then again maybe I'm being too optimistic.

So it's cheaper for consumers to charge the entire retail price for a game you've already played rather than the $15-20 for the exact same additions.

And of course it makes Game Freak more money to resell the same game, that's why they do it, and that's why I don't feed into Masuda's crap regarding DLC considering their past practices.

Also that still doesn't say the reason he chose the two games wasn't because of the whole alternate realities thing. Sequels or no, they kind of built up the two games taking place in two different realities based on what dragon the hero chose.

It does say the sequels weren't planned, and he explicitly states that the reason for considering two "third versions" was for that key system....for all we know they would have just reconciled the differences the same way Emerald reconciled the differences between who the villain was in RS

Even if they did take all the necessary precautions to make the kids not buy a $1,000 worth of pixels, there's going to still be little kids bitching about not being able to get the 30 new pokemon and side quests because their parents have to pay extra money that they don't have.

Which is different from little kids bitching that they can't buy the new Pokemon games because their parents can't afford the much more expensive $30 for the game, how?

It might be targeted towards them, but not marketed towards them. What kid who doesn't have parents that played it says "Mommy! I want the new Mario game!" There's no anime, show outside of the 80s or other readily available side promotions like there is with pokemon. That is other than maybe toys and clothes but that doesn't cast a wide enough net for kids who never thought of playing it or know where the man in the cute green dinosaur came from.

You should really stop using these ridiculous scenarios as an attempt to prove a point. I'm one of those kids. I found Mario and Zelda without the internet needing to tell me it was good. My parents aren't gamers. And its ridiculous to say "It's targeted toward X, but they clearly don't market it toward X". Who cares how it gets to it? Point is, it gets to the kids, it has DLC. There's no reason Pokemon shouldn't if Mario can manage it without destroying their parent's wallet.

It was just a random generalized scenario. Even so, if the kid's crafty enough they can get their parents password and buy points and waste money that way.

And if you want to make a proper point, you should stick to scenarios that actually exist.

What's stopping a child from simply stealing money from their parent's wallet to buy a Pokemon game? Why is no one concerned that a child would do that, but we're suddenly concerned they're going to go behind their parent's back and get their passwords or credit card information (because again, why on earth would you have ti saved on a system your child uses; that option is clearly meant for adult users)?

 

[Berrenta]

Looking forward to dressing up my character. Would be more awesome to dress as a past Gym Leader/E4/etc. :XD:

I wouldn't mind if we could 'buy' DLC clothing with play coins. It gives us something to work for without having to cough up the IRL monies.
It would also be a nice way to burn play coins.

But more importantly, what I really want is the option of getting color contacts. What if I want brown eyes on my default Serena? Gray eyes on pale Serena?
What if I want crazy anime color eyes?

I know I may be asking for too much, but with the extent of customization already available to us, not being able to change our eye color alone seems like it'd be a bit irritating.

I have 160 play coins and I will have more before release; this solves my problem.

Same here. All that walking around at my college is racking up play coins. Even with the limit of 10 coins that can be obtained in a day, it's piling up! Would be nice to put them to use.