Topic: Pokémon Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee!

@Bolt_Strike You are missing the larger context of my original comment. This would be changing the game to accommodate camera controls on an open world setting, with the consequent redesigns to the map that stem from that direction. That might be too big of a change for plenty of kids that just aren't used to such a thing—or at least that might be what the powers that be think.

The switch would offer an additional joy stick allowing for better camera movement like mario and zelda.
If you had it on the 3ds, I would agree it would be clunky, almost mario 64, using the D-pad to adjust the angle

I can kinda see where you're coming from with the whole camera argument because, for example, a link between worlds and whole design of the game was heavily dependent on the top down perspective that they were aiming for

@MarcelRguez I concur. I know some people who are very casual gamers. They play Animal Crossing and a bit of Pokemon, but the idea of using a second stick to control the camera is completely alien to them.

Besides, it's not like the gameplay changes if they implement one. I just want them to focus on what's important for once: The battles, good level distribution, good AI without giving them overpowered EV-trained Pokemon. Fix the movesets, nerf some Pokemon, just balance the game. That's way more important than trivial story elements or a controllable camera.

Dear God, let there be less cutscenes. Amen.

Exactly that. Pokemon is one of the games where the graphics don't matter to me all that much. Sure, I'd like some scaled up textures, especially when I play on my 48" tv. But gameplay is what matters most. And if I may add to your list: I'd prefer adjustable difficulty over a harder game in general; just to please both the core gamers ánd casual gamers.

@toiletduck Like a beginner and expert mode? I'd be up for that. I believe B2W2 did something similar, but I've never played those. Just make sure it's available from the beginning.

But yeah, just like I still think there's a market for 2D sidescrolling games, or 2D top-down games, I don't really have an issue with the way they're currently handling. I personally don't think GameFreak is capable of a ''full'' 3D game anyway. And it would only distract them from the core gameplay. It's already happening with the story elements, I don't want them to have another thing to worry about.

Again, not something younger players should be having problems with. Mario and Zelda don't rely on linear, "North/South" level design either, so Pokemon has no excuse for remaining linear. Game Freak is just stereotyping the market, if this was as much of a problem as you claim games like the 3D Marios and Zeldas would see lower sales than they have.

@Bolt_Strike it really seems like you think little kids have no problem with BOTW and MO's mechanic. Where did you get this impression? I can confirm that you're wrong. Sure, certain kids won't have any problem with the camera movements, but my cousins for example can't get the hang of it at all. They're about 8-9. I don't consider them motorically stupid...

@Octane The gameplay wouldn't change if you think of it just as the actions you're performing (on the overworld, that would be running around, basically), but the difference between exploring a 2D space and exploring a 3D space with full camera control can't be overstated. Even if what you do doesn't change, how you do it would. More importantly, how you discover and explore places would enhance the experience for me and others.

The battle system is fine, they know what they're doing on that front, but the regions just keep getting worse gen after gen, at least for me. I don't believe they need to implement an expansive open world for the next games to be interesting, but having full control of the camera would help with that. It's just more liberating from a design perspecive.

@Bolt_Strike I really don't know what to tell you. Children play more Pokémon than 3D Mario and Zelda combined. This shouldn't be such a challenging notion. And it's not like Zelda and Mario have historically sold as well as Pokémon. You're comparing them as if the opposite is true, if anything that data helps my argument, not yours.

@sillygostly This too. The Alola games are just ridiculous in this regard. It doesn't help how unengaging the cutscenes are, both from a writing and a technical perspective.

with full camera controls, I'd argue that, though pokemon is still pandering to a young audience, these are switch owners and many most likely have already played mario odyssey, breath of the wild, or splatoon 2 because they're the hottest games for the system thus far. I could see some people purchasing a switch just to dive into the new pokemon game and get thrown for a loop. Still, children are quick to learn and can adapt to that change a tad better

@Tsurii Can we avoid both extremes please?

Less MGS4 and the start of SM, and maybe more substance like BW. Easy.

@Tsurii Forgive me, I didn't play US/UM: did these games lessen or eliminate Sun/Moon's tendency to interrupt the gameplay constantly with cutscenes and non-player initiated dialogue?

@Ralizah Lessen. Significantly.

Thw game actuslly starts within an hour.

@Tsurii When I say within an hour you get your starter as you go up Route 1 for the first time, not after going up route 1, mahalo trail, and a series of cinematics.

Much better paced. I think SM has the worst intro in the series.

Its the kind of the balance zelda struggles with: The freedom vs the story. Considering these later games, they so linear because of the focus on story. What it sounds like is the frustration of waiting to catch and battle wild pokemon which I can agree with. I go to pokemon for gameplay, the story for me is on the side. Thats my preference

@YummyHappyPills @Tsurii Awesome. I might actually have to pick one of these games up at some point. I liked the increased difficulty and some of the changes made to S&M (not having to rely on unlearnable HMs to navigate the overworld is absolutely fantastic), but the constant cutscenes just killed me. I wouldn't mind too much if they lessened after the start of the game, but it never felt like it was cutting loose and letting me do my own thing.

For the record, I don't care about breeding and pretty much never battle online. But I also don't care too much about the stories. If GF doesn't go the BotW route of allowing extreme player freedom, then I wouldn't mind more of an emphasis placed on cool locations and dungeons. But story and character development? In a Pokemon game? Nah.

B&W are the only Pokemon games I've played that had decent narrative/character writing.

All Ill say about USUM is that after the final boss you do one more Trial, Grand Trial, and then the League.

@Haru17 "much more disperse, sparse, non-interactive environments and gameplay with double the walking between actually doing anything, depending on the particular game.":

That's kind of my point though, your description of those environments is precisely why they don't represent a significant amount of the added time and cost of modern overbudget AAA games. You're looking for the causes of the increased expense in production, and that open aspect isn't one of the most significant factors to that. The openness creates some new minor expenses, while resolving some old expenses. It's a mostly neutral addition. The bogeyman for expense lies elsewhere.

@MarcelRguez "So yes, I don't think it's unfair to say the term "open world" carries some expectations from the consumer's end in terms of amount of authored content and player's freedom of choice (among other things), and the games that fail to implement those things end up facing criticism, like MGSV, Fallout 4 or FFXV."

True, but I think my point here is that whether the game were open or not, the consumer would carry the same expectations in terms of amount of authored content, freedom of choice, etc for a heavily marketed game. In fact expectations for authored content are likely to be greater if the game is not open world as the "sandbox" hours would be less existent.

"Pokemon"

Pokemon really has always been open world....that's kind of the charm. Backtracking and going anywhere at any time (unless gated) has been essential to "catch 'em all"....one could say that really Pokemon started that phenomenon. Fixed camera aside. Personally I don't see how a fixed or adjustable camera affects the design of open or not.

@NEStalgia Pokemon has only really been open world in the post-game, which makes it not really open world in general. Open world games allow you to go anywhere at any time like in BotW you can go straight to Hyrule Castle if you wanted to but in Pokemon you have to go things in a certain order before going to Pokemon League. Before Sun/Moon you had to get all 8 badges of which the 8th badge would be unobtainable without stopping the evil group's plans.

Don't know about Gen 7 but I'd assume that you have to do all the trials to unlock the Pokemon League of which you can't do the final trial until you've defeated the evil group.