Forums

Topic: Pokémon Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee!

Posts 781 to 800 of 2,359

Harmonie

-Green- wrote:

Climbing 'broke' Zelda because they wanted it to.

(Note: I have no idea what stance you were taking here, so I'm not meaning to argue with you here) And that 'breaking' it, helped Breath of the Wild feel like I was on an actual adventure in a vast land as opposed to just playing a limited video game with limited spaces to walk through.

Pokemon games are supposed to be adventures. So I definitely feel like it's an evolution Pokemon should take, too.

Harmonie

toiletduck

Octane wrote:

@Bolt_Strike So if you go around with a bunch of low level Pokemon, but you still keep a strong Pokemon around, just in case, you still encounter strong Pokemon? I dunno, that system doesn't make a lot of sense at all.

Have you even read my comment? I wonder what you think about that, haven’t read any comments against it yet:

toiletduck wrote:

Equip/unequip badges or with other special items? It would work something like this: all pokemon would have a minimum and maximum level at which they can appear for every route you could encouter them - levels typically increase within these limits if you have more badges - if you unequip badges, the levels of wild pokemon become lower. Something like that? Should probably be refined a bit, but I guess you could make this work.

toiletduck

Octane

Bolt_Strike wrote:

navigate the overworld like BotW's physics system

Why is everyone so obsessed with turning Pokemon in an action/adventure game? It's an RPG, it doesn't need physics, a jump button, etc.

@toiletduck I have, but... unequipping badges... apart from the fact that it doesn't make a lot of sense (why would their levels suddenly drop), it's also unnecessarily complicated I think. I mean, it's a solution. But it's a solution to a problem that shouldn't have to exist in the first place.

Octane

Bolt_Strike

Octane wrote:

Bolt_Strike wrote:

navigate the overworld like BotW's physics system

Why is everyone so obsessed with turning Pokemon in an action/adventure game? It's an RPG, it doesn't need physics, a jump button, etc.

It allows for more realistic and complex ways to interact with the environment. Things like being able to Cut down a tree and then using Strength to push around the fallen log, using Dig to tear caves a new one, using a fire type field move to light up caves or burn bushes, etc. I also want to be able to cut down any tree, move or smash any rock, climb any cliff, etc. All of this would really enhance the exploration and puzzle solving allowing you to really get creative with how you navigate the overworld, which are elements that have been sorely lacking in recent games.

Edited on by Bolt_Strike

Bolt_Strike

3DS Friend Code: 4725-8075-8961 | Nintendo Network ID: Bolt_Strike

MarcelRguez

@Octane It's the general trend, isn't it? The only old, mainstream JRPGs series that still preserve turn-based combat are Dragon Quest and Shin Megami Tensei.

I blame the late 90s/early 00s trend of slapping RPG elements onto everything. The genre doesn't have an identity anymore.

MarcelRguez

3DS Friend Code: 3308-4605-6296 | Nintendo Network ID: Marce2240 | Twitter:

NaviAndMii

When IGN published their list of '100 best RPGs of all time', they apparently received a number of complaints that no Zelda games featured in the list - their explanation for their omission was that they define an 'RPG' as a game with some sort of levelling/progression system - and so, as Link doesn't 'level up', Zelda games weren't considered. One of their editors, Sam Claiborn, argued that Link's ability to gain hearts in the Zelda series was a form of 'levelling up' - so games from the series should've been allowed - which seems fairly logical to me, but (for some reason) the consensus in the office was that they should leave them out.

I suppose you have to draw the line somewhere - but the line between what defines a game as an 'RPG' or an 'Action/Adventure' title is extremely blurry...when you strip them back, Zelda and Pokemon have far more shared elements in common than they don't - you could easily take mechanics from one and add them to the other without overly changing the core experience - we're not so much comparing apples with oranges here, I'd say it's more like comparing apples with round pears!

Edited on by NaviAndMii

🎮 Adult Switch Gamers: Thread | Discord | Guilded

Switch Friend Code: SW-0427-7196-3801 | Twitter:

toiletduck

Octane wrote:

Bolt_Strike wrote:

navigate the overworld like BotW's physics system

Why is everyone so obsessed with turning Pokemon in an action/adventure game? It's an RPG, it doesn't need physics, a jump button, etc.

Totally agree on that btw. I was just thinking out loud that if they decided to go all BOTW-ish, it could work (about) the way I proposed.

toiletduck

MarcelRguez

@NaviAndMii The confusion with Zelda stems entirely from its fantasy setting. If it was reskinned into a sci-fi game, nobody would be calling it an RPG. IGN's line of thinking makes sense to me: character progression is not a trait exclusive to RPGs. We don't call games like Metroid, Bayonetta or No More Heroes RPGs just because you can get health expansions and new tools for combat/traversal.

NaviAndMii wrote:

you could easily take mechanics from one and add them to the other without overly changing the core experience

Not so sure about this. Skin aside, the only verb they share is "walk", so their only common trait is a focus on exploration. I'm not seeing it.

Edited on by MarcelRguez

MarcelRguez

3DS Friend Code: 3308-4605-6296 | Nintendo Network ID: Marce2240 | Twitter:

NaviAndMii

@MarcelRguez What I was meaning was that they considered Zelda games to tick all of the boxes for their definition of an RPG, except the character progression system - and they didn't even reach a full consensus on that element (with Sam arguing that 'gaining hearts' = 'levelling up') ..otherwise, they're pretty similar experiences

Edited on by NaviAndMii

🎮 Adult Switch Gamers: Thread | Discord | Guilded

Switch Friend Code: SW-0427-7196-3801 | Twitter:

MarcelRguez

@NaviAndMii Oh, you're right. I was thinking of Sam Claiborn's point, and I attributed it to the staff at large.

Maybe the staff's consensus is a bit simplistic, but I agree with it. I can't really think of a game that's widely considered to be an RPG that doesn't feature a number-based progression system. And in other games, the moment people at large see numbers going up, that's when they go "oh, RPG elements".

MarcelRguez

3DS Friend Code: 3308-4605-6296 | Nintendo Network ID: Marce2240 | Twitter:

NaviAndMii

@MarcelRguez Yeah, sorry - I could've written it more clearly!

I don't know whether he was alone in thinking that (he just mentioned it on an episode of their 'Game Scoop' podcast when they were dissecting the list) ..as I say, I suppose they had to draw the line somewhere - but Sam's point did make me think about how blurry that line can be at times!

You're absolutely right though - if Zelda had a sci-fi skin, it'd likely be classed more in the 'shooter' category than Action/Adventure - and they'd probably only use the term 'RPG' to describe certain elements of the game (if at all) ..the definitions are pretty loose really!

I just can't get my head around this idea that a game can be one thing and not another - ie. Pokemon is an 'RPG' so can't borrow elements from an 'Action/Adventure' game like Zelda - those games already have a lot of things in common - they're certainly not in clearly defined boxes, offering completely different experiences...what IS an RPG anyway? - I don't even think that's clear!

Edited on by NaviAndMii

🎮 Adult Switch Gamers: Thread | Discord | Guilded

Switch Friend Code: SW-0427-7196-3801 | Twitter:

MarcelRguez

@NaviAndMii

NaviAndMii wrote:

I just can't get my head around this idea that a game can be one thing and not another

Yeah, it's not worth thinking that hard about. Genres are just shorthand terms to understand what we're talking about, not a series of boxes a game has to check. I'm all for using tags like "exploration" or "third-person" instead.

What I'm saying though is that I don't really see that many similarities between Pokémon and Zelda other than "they have caves and forests". So do countless other series, so the comparison just seems arbitrary to me.

MarcelRguez

3DS Friend Code: 3308-4605-6296 | Nintendo Network ID: Marce2240 | Twitter:

Snaplocket

@MarcelRguez Legend of Heroes has turn-based battles although it isn't exactly mainstream. So does Octopath, Bravely Default and several Final Fantasy games like World.

Switch FC: SW-0930-5375-7512
3ds FC: 3539-8977-1109

MarcelRguez

@Snaplocket Those series are obscure (Trails), new (Bravely Default) or a combination of the two (Octopath).

And sure, some FF spin-off series try to cater to those that like turn-based combat, but that's only because Final Fantasy as a whole is so gargantuan that it can put out a bunch of turn-based spin-offs without putting the value of the IP at risk. The main series isn't going back to turn-based combat any time soon.

Edited on by MarcelRguez

MarcelRguez

3DS Friend Code: 3308-4605-6296 | Nintendo Network ID: Marce2240 | Twitter:

NaviAndMii

I'd say that the core experience is pretty similar, personally...you walk around, explore, collect things, chat to people, go on quests, venture in to 'dungeons', progress the story, gain abilities, strengthen your character/team, get side-tracked, solve puzzles, battle stuff - aside from one favouring a turn-based battle system to a more 'action' based variety, the main gameplay elements are essentially the same, I feel.

The main difference between the two, to me, is that turn-based games allow you to pause for thought to consider your next move (without having to physically push a 'pause' button) - and more action-based battle systems require a greater level of button coordination and 'on the fly' thinking - so one is perhaps better suited to a casual audience than the other.

In my view, if Game Freak were to borrow some elements from Breath of the Wild - so long as they kept the casual player at the forefront of their thinking when designing the game, I think that many of the mechanics would lend themselves perfectly to a Pokemon game.

🎮 Adult Switch Gamers: Thread | Discord | Guilded

Switch Friend Code: SW-0427-7196-3801 | Twitter:

Snaplocket

I think a quasi turn-based battle system could work. Any bets it'll be revealed at E3?

Switch FC: SW-0930-5375-7512
3ds FC: 3539-8977-1109

NaviAndMii

@Snaplocket That's something I'd like to see, personally. Something that allows you to button-mash if you've memorised all of the moves and want a more 'fluid' battle - but also allows you to pause for thought it you favour a more considered approach - if done well, a system like that could allow for the best of both worlds

(..they could also get rid of the text boxes that tell you things like 'critical hit' and just have those messages automatically flash up on the screen instead - could help speed the battle system up a bit and further add to its fluidity)

Edited on by NaviAndMii

🎮 Adult Switch Gamers: Thread | Discord | Guilded

Switch Friend Code: SW-0427-7196-3801 | Twitter:

darkfenrir

I feel like any changes to battle system should be stuck on the spin offs, tbh.

Especially with the tournaments and such, it might work if Pokemon has always been single player games- but... Pokemon also has a really robust PVP, especially the tournaments. Changing it will really change things up and I feel it's not going for the better :X

darkfenrir

Switch Friend Code: SW-0242-3593-1338

MarcelRguez

@NaviAndMii You also do most (when not all) of those things in:

  • Fallout
  • Mass Effect
  • Red Dead
  • Bravely Default
  • Tomb Raider

...to name a few. Nobody is saying "the next Pokémon should be a bit more like Mass Effect", but that's because they're very different series aesthetically, whereas Zelda is a handier comparison.

With this I'm not trying to say the Zelda comparison is stupid or anything, just that the traits from Zelda games that people want in the next Pokémon games are not intrinsical to Zelda or, more specifically, BotW. Except "climbing everything", I guess.

I think the more productive conversation would be "what elements that are associated with adventure games you would like to be implemented in the next Pokémon games", without focusing on Zelda in particular. And I say this mainly because, as these last pages show, we just end up talking about Zelda. Which hey, guilty as charged.

@darkfenrir Definitely agree with that. I also mentioned a couple of pages ago that the real problem is that we're not getting much in terms of spin-offs with their own twist in Pokémon's combat, and I would like to see more of that.

Edited on by MarcelRguez

MarcelRguez

3DS Friend Code: 3308-4605-6296 | Nintendo Network ID: Marce2240 | Twitter:

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic