>>43250635Just because a character or concept wasn't created for a child in mind, doesn't mean they can't be used in a product advertised at kids. Comics and Cartoons weren't made for children, but as adult entertainment, and look what happened?
Since the 80s, Nintendo has directly marketed these games at kids in both Japan and America, while also throwing bones to older audiences. Miyamoto has always been called the Walt Disney of video games, and both hold the philosophy that the content they produce should be good enough to be enjoyed by all audiences.
When released, Pokemon was the same boat. Satoshi Tajiri didn't just decide 'I want a game that children will obsess about!' but that he wanted a game that expressed his boyhood fascination of fighting bugs with friends. He saw Miyamoto as his mentor and rival. Look at the history of GameFreak before Pokemon, they were a company that breathed gaming and revered it.
Now look at the franchise, and it's depressing it's no longer a series that both kids and adults can enjoy. The games have always been directed at the same age demographics, so why with each iteration, do they get easier and easier? Because they don't care. They just want kids to look at the screen long enough to get them to want Pokemon merchandise now.
Compare this again to Mario, where I see all ages playing it, with the games being easier or harder depending on how you want to play, even including easy or challenge modes. At the same time, I constantly see Mario merchandise on kids and adults. So, if Nintendo can have the main-line Mario games being called consistently good by the majority of all audiences, have each game improve in game play and graphics, and still cash out on merchandise? Because they still put effort in. Game Freak could; they just don't.
