/vp/ - Pokémon » Thread #39359946

[26 / 2 / ?]

18KiB, 250x250, pwhirl.jpg

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 22:54:49 No.39359946 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>39360018 >>39360022 >>39360075 >>39360094 >>39360517 >>39361072 >>39362281 >>39364125

Random though,
Would you be OK with the dex being cut if the game's looked good? If the animations were amazing, the new generation gimmick looked fun as hell and the graphics pushed the console's boundaries?

Personally, I would. I think a cut was necessary at some point. But with that should come a overall better game. SWSH looks like ass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:01:04 No.39360018 Report

Quoted By: >>39360046

>>39359946
maybe if we got an actually significant postgame

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:01:22 No.39360022 Report

Quoted By:

>>39359946
Yes, but the games won't be amazing hence the pessimism. Ask yourself, compared to other JRPGs you've played doesn't Pokemon seem barebones?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:03:27 No.39360046 Report

Quoted By: >>39360059

>>39360018
It's pokemon, of course will have postgame

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:04:31 No.39360059 Report

Quoted By:

>>39360046
We meant a good postgame, unlike XY/RS/Almost any first version.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:06:32 No.39360075 Report

Quoted By:

>>39359946
No.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO hitmonchad.webm, 810KiB, 464x578

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:07:55 No.39360092 Report

Quoted By:

I think the notion of cutting Pokemon from a Pokemon game is inherently wrong, however if Gamefreak delivered animations like this and promised to patch the other Pokemon in later I would be extremely forgiving.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:07:57 No.39360094 Report

Quoted By: >>39360219 >>39360766

>>39359946

>Full dex
>good campaign
>great graphics/animations
>post game
>A little more balanced battles

ONE. JUST ONE OP. I'D BE OKAY WITH JUST ONE OF THESE. WHY CAN'T I FUCKING HAVE JUST ONE.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:18:15 No.39360219 Report

Quoted By:

>>39360094
This enrages me so much. I already knew SS was fucked up but this post makes it even more absurd. Fuck game freak.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:39:34 No.39360475 Report

Quoted By:

I mean, on one hand a lot of similar games don't carry over the entire roster between different games, but on the other hand the fact that pokemon DOES carry over the entire roster to each game has been one of the main appeals of the series.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Jul 2019 23:43:07 No.39360517 Report

Quoted By:

>>39359946
If there was actual effort put into the animations and content, as well as making Home a decent service to invest money into?

Absolutely.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 00:01:27 No.39360766 Report

Quoted By:

>>39360094
BW2 and USUM exist

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 00:23:42 No.39361072 Report

Quoted By:

>>39359946
that + good and lengthy postgame, then I would indeed be fine with it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 02:06:35 No.39362281 Report

Quoted By: >>39362399

>>39359946
In principle, if the rest of the game were good enough to make up for it - like, mind-blowingly amazing in a way that, if Duke Nukem Forever had been that good when it came out, people would've said it was worth the wait - it might be tolerable, but given a choice between cutting graphical quality and gameplay features or cutting pokemon, the former should always be the first to go.
Anything that's too ambitious to implement while keeping the full dex can always be used in the next game, but once you start cutting people's favorite pokemon in the name of shinier graphics or dumb battle gimmicks you start burning the fanbase's good will and eating away at the likelyhood of there BEING a next game.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 02:15:54 No.39362399 Report

Quoted By: >>39362591

>>39362281
I disagree. I think the franchise needs to move in different directions. I don't know why GF is so hellbent on sticking to the same formula for years. There has always been the meme of 'one foot forward two steps back' with GF. And its true. I mean, they are just now, in 2019, making an "open world area," but even then its just one area in the game and barely meets criteria other, lesser prestigious games have met half a decade ago.

In my opinion, if they are going to start cutting things, they need to go all the way with it. Re-evaluate what the game is at its core. What is it that the fans want from a Pokemon game? What kind of experience do they want to make? It just seems like they are doing it by the numbers at this point. And, after a while, people are going to catch on and realize these games are slow, boring and not easy on the eyes. Thats why sales have been dropping almost consistently since the franchise began. Zelda does it and BOTW is the best selling game in the series, why can't Pokemon?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 02:28:26 No.39362591 Report

Quoted By: >>39362940

>>39362399
My favorite Zelda games are the ones that mix things up and have nothing to do with the usual Ganon/Zelda/Triforce malarky - Majora's Mask, Link's Awakening, etc. - but GF's stated intent regarding future mainline Pokemon games is like if henceforth Nintendo were planning on making Zelda games like that all the time, with future games having nothing in common with previous ones except for the gameplay style, protagonist, and maybe a different handful of items like the Master Sword or hookshot or whatever each game.
As much contempt as I have for how hard the series leans on rescuing Zelda and stabbing Ganon in the face every single game, the franchise just wouldn't be what it is without those elements, just like Pokemon won't be the same without the possibility, however remote, of catching them all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 02:50:58 No.39362940 Report

Quoted By: >>39363761

>>39362591
> is like if henceforth Nintendo were planning on making Zelda games like that all the time, with future games having nothing in common with previous ones except for the gameplay style, protagonist, and maybe a different handful of items like the Master Sword or hookshot or whatever each game.
Is that not how it already is? I don't know, I never really felt as if 'catching them all' was something Game Freak reeeaaaaaalllly cared about. I know all the marketing and slogans say differently- but there is not a SINGLE Pokemon game where you can actually 'catch them all' without the use of several other peripherals...

I think the main aspect of Pokemon- what makes Pokemon what it is- is catching, training and battling monsters and exploring. Whether or not you can catch all +1000 monsters that have ever been made ever is secondary, imo.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 04:00:00 No.39363761 Report

Quoted By: >>39363872

>>39362940
>I think the main aspect of Pokemon- what makes Pokemon what it is- is catching, training and battling monsters and exploring.
That's precisely the issue: hundreds of pokemon that people might like to catch, train, and battle have been unpersoned (they aren't coded into the game, so for the purposes of SwSh there's no distinction between a pokemon that isn't in the Galar regional dex and a fakemon you drew in your grade school math textbook) to free up development time for shinier graphics and novelty battle mechanics that'll probably have as much staying power as Z-moves and Mega evos did.
It's a sacrifice of substance for surface, of the core for the preiphery - of the trunk for the branches.
Cutting pokemon is no different from cutting attacks, or status effects, or natures, or reducing the breadth and depth of any other core gameplay feature.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 04:09:14 No.39363872 Report

Quoted By: >>39364078

>>39363761
I disagree. Are Pokemon Red/Blue any less 'Pokemon' experiences because the have less Pokemon in them than succeeding games? No. It not about how many Pokemon... its about what you can do with them. At that point you might as well have a game that's nothing but Pokemon-Amie. There has to be more depth to the experience other than the capturing of Pokemon to make it a worthwhile experience.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 04:28:48 No.39364078 Report

Quoted By: >>39364107

>>39363872
RB is, if anything, the *most* Pokemon experience because it's just the core gameplay with none of the peripheral stuff that later games added.
You just catch pokemon, train them, and battle them; you can't pet them or enter them in beauty contests or breed them or any of that crap.
What GF is doing with SwSh is like if they released Yellow with only 76 pokemon and no way to trade with RB and used the debugging they did and the anime tie-in events they added to the game as an excuse for not having time to draw new sprites for the other 75.
It would have been bullshit then and it's bullshit now.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 04:33:17 No.39364107 Report

Quoted By:

>>39364078
Oh yeah, I definitely think what GF is doing now is complete shit. But if reducing the amount of Pokemon to 76 means we get more content in the game, with animated sprites, better balance, etc. I'm OK with it. The problem is that Game Freak is doing neither. Literally cutting things but not fixing the core gameplay at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 04:34:49 No.39364125 Report

Quoted By: >>39364158

>>39359946
No.
No one who would be okay with this should be allowed to post here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 04:38:00 No.39364158 Report

Quoted By: >>39364323

>>39364125
It has to has to happen eventually. There's no way that they can keep expanding the pokedex while keeping the same gameplay model. Resources are limited and even if Game Freak poured hundreds of millions of dollars into it there's still the limitations of hardware. At some point they had to cull the amount of pokemon in each game or just stop adding new Pokemon altogether. I can tell you which timeline I'd rather be in.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 04:56:32 No.39364323 Report

Quoted By: >>39364374 >>39364407

>>39364158
No, it didn't. What has to change is the incompetent fucks in charge.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 05:01:59 No.39364374 Report

Quoted By:

>>39364323
Sure, I didn't technically have to happen *now* but it still has to happen. What will happen in 10 years from now when we're approaching 2,000 Pokemon? They can't just keep adding the for infinity.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Jul 2019 05:05:51 No.39364407 Report

Quoted By:

>>39364323
Yeah. But they are putting fucking james turner as the artist head.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches