[43 / 16 / 23]
Quoted By: >>53664450 >>53664453 >>53664494 >>53664552 >>53664712 >>53664889 >>53664905 >>53665009 >>53665933 >>53667226 >>53669989
Let me explain.
My first game was crystal on the GBA. I recently bought a switch (late to the party I know) & Legends: Arceus (Which I'm enjoying immensely). I am an old school gamer. Meaning it's mechanics that draw me into a game, not graphics or art style (within a reasonable spectrum). If anything, good graphics sometimes make up for lack of mechanical depth, but without them as a clutch, the game can only be judged on its merits gameplay wise, un-obfuscated.
I legitimately think the mechanics of pokemon make it one of the best RPGs ever. They are perhaps not always implemented right, but the concept was always great.
The amount of skill going into competitive is phenomenal. In terms of game theory it hits all the sweet spots. So much so that I decided to get into it. But goddammit the art style is garbage. Imagine the same mechanics, but instead of a pink ball fighting a trashbag with eyes, in the artstyle of a mangaka filling quotas it was something like a blue eyes white dragon fighting an xenomorph.. Most pokemon seem like they were drawn in 30 seconds. (Yes there are many great looking ones, I ain't denying that)
Problem is, if anyone made such a game, it would just be called a pokemon clone and wouldn't have the same commercial success. Only if the pokemon company did it themselves it would avoid such criticisms.
Same mechanics, different presentation. Just imagine. Or perhaps an adult version with even more complex mechanics. After all they have learned from their mistakes and starting afresh with such a game would be phenomenal and adults like me wouldn't be embarrassed for liking it. I hate pokemon because it's so good.
Anyone else share this opinion?
My first game was crystal on the GBA. I recently bought a switch (late to the party I know) & Legends: Arceus (Which I'm enjoying immensely). I am an old school gamer. Meaning it's mechanics that draw me into a game, not graphics or art style (within a reasonable spectrum). If anything, good graphics sometimes make up for lack of mechanical depth, but without them as a clutch, the game can only be judged on its merits gameplay wise, un-obfuscated.
I legitimately think the mechanics of pokemon make it one of the best RPGs ever. They are perhaps not always implemented right, but the concept was always great.
The amount of skill going into competitive is phenomenal. In terms of game theory it hits all the sweet spots. So much so that I decided to get into it. But goddammit the art style is garbage. Imagine the same mechanics, but instead of a pink ball fighting a trashbag with eyes, in the artstyle of a mangaka filling quotas it was something like a blue eyes white dragon fighting an xenomorph.. Most pokemon seem like they were drawn in 30 seconds. (Yes there are many great looking ones, I ain't denying that)
Problem is, if anyone made such a game, it would just be called a pokemon clone and wouldn't have the same commercial success. Only if the pokemon company did it themselves it would avoid such criticisms.
Same mechanics, different presentation. Just imagine. Or perhaps an adult version with even more complex mechanics. After all they have learned from their mistakes and starting afresh with such a game would be phenomenal and adults like me wouldn't be embarrassed for liking it. I hate pokemon because it's so good.
Anyone else share this opinion?
