Pokemon needs to stop being afraid of innovation.

[immortalfrieza]

*EDIT* Please read my other posts on this thread before presenting your arguments. *END*

There are several long running problems with the Pokemon that needs to be solved if the Pokemon francise is to be more than just a kid's game, this Zero Punctuation video below pretty much states several of them:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/3008-Pokemon-White

To sum that video up and name a couple more:

1. The stories of Pokemon games need to be better, not necessarily more mature, but need to be more immersive and detailed. There needs to be plot holes to be answered in other installments, there needs to be plot twists, surprises, revelations. In other words, Pokemon games need all the building blocks of a great story, and Pokemon games rarely have ANY of these things.
This article is a good example of something they are refusing to do that if they did would greatly help breathe life into this stale francise:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109149-Game-Freak-Wont-Let-Pokemon-Players-Be-Bad

2. The overall plot of Pokemon games needs to change, with the exception of 2, (Colosseum and Pokemon XD: Gale of Darkness)ever since the first generation the goal of each Pokemon game has been exactly the same, go to a town, beat the Gym Leader, get a badge, go to the next town, rinse and repeat, while encountering an evil organization that isn't really evil or menacing at all that you take out, beat the Elite Four or whatever they're called that generation, become the Pokemon champion. Your mileage may vary, but this formula was done to death a LOOOOONG time ago.

3. This is something 1&2 would help with, people like me (I'm 24 BTW) that grew up with Pokemon are being completely ignored, no attempts are being made to keep us hooked. They never need to change anything because they market to little kids. This is for the same reason children's stories have been around for centuries without a change, it's because for every one person that grows out of it, there are countless more children that are growing INTO it. They need to find a way to serve all ages, not just kids.

4. The mechanics of Pokemon battles need to change, at least in the main game where the Pokemon's levels don't have to match, as long as your Pokemon CAN damage their opponents, all they have to do is power-level to beat anyone easily. This results (and I'm guilty of it too) in people just using one,two, or three (depending on if there are double/triple battles or not)Pokemon in every battle throughout the entire game, because it is a LOT less tedious than leveling up 6 Pokemon at once. The rest of your roster is just there to get you through obstacles. Also, all Pokemon in your roster should recieve XP for just being there, not just the ones that have been out, and it would be the full XP, as if they had been the only Pokemon out, and modifed by level so the lower level ones can catch up to the higher level ones.

5. Pokemon battles especially against the computer need to become much more engaging and not repetitive. They need to finally remove the turn based combat, which only required the player to know how to press the A button repeatedly, and change it to a action RPG, like Kingdom hearts or the Tales series, which even during really easy fights require you to pay attention.
*EDIT* If they can make the Pokemon turn-based combat engaging, tension-filled and adrenaline pumping, they can keep it in for all I care, but they haven't even tried to make that happen.

6. Capturing of Pokemon should NOT be insanely tedious, the biggest problem here being that for no reason whatsoever Pokemon that faint cannot be captured, despite the fact that it would be much easier to do that way and that it happens in the Anime. Also, I know that rare Pokemon should be in there, but does that mean that I have to take out 100 small fry JUST to find that one Pokemon?!? Simple fix here, just have a system which would cause the odds of finding a rare Pokemon in an particular area to increase the more common ones you took out, eventually becoming all but certain.

7. Unless it's an extremely rare or story event Pokemon, you should be able to choose ANY Pokemon from that game's roster as your starter. I can't tell you how annoying it is to want a particular Pokemon at the start, but not be able to get it until almost the end of the game.

*EDIT* To clarify I mean only the base forms of Pokemon, and they'd have to make several Pokemon that are largely useless until they evolve more useful, which no one could argue would certainly be a plus.

8. Evolution should be forcable to ALL Pokemon, as well as via level, so that people that just want to evolve a Pokemon could just do so without having to spend hours leveling it up, and if they were actually going to use it, they would be rewarded with much higher overall stats.

9. Finally, one of the most important, stop releasing 2 games and eventually a third every generation. It wouldn't have to be easy to do, but there should only be 1 version where all the Pokemon from that generation could be caught in one game. The reasons for this are simple, many gamers may NOT have many friends which actually play Pokemon games, because trading is a long and completely unnecessary process that, if you don't have somebody else to link up with, you'll be forced to purchase 3 versions of the game, another of whatever handheld it is on, and a link cable, and most people that play these games and their families are NOT made of money. Linking should be solely for Pokemon battles between players and nothing else

I could go on endlessly, but this post is already really long as it is. I would like to hear what YOU think of the problems I posted and to post your own problems with the Pokemon francise you've noticed.

 

[Jordi]

1&2: Agreed.
3: Well, what do you think of those children's tales. Should they be updated to accommodate adults as well? Pokemon (just like MLP and DBZ) is made for kids, but adults may also like aspects of it. But does that mean that the series needs to grow with its audience, like a lot of the gritty reboots of super heroes nowadays, or should the series just remain for kids, so that new kids can also enjoy it? I think something can be said for both, so I don't think it is necessarily bad that Pokemon is still primarily catering to children.
4: I agree that it would be nice if they could provide some incentive to use more than a few Pokemon. However, I also think that this is somewhat similar to choosing a class and skills in an RPG. Part of what can make a game interesting is that you don't have certain skills, and have to make due with what you do have. Also, not being able to do everything on your first run adds replay value. What you are suggesting would be equivalent to an RPG where you are every class, and all skills are always at (approximately) the same level. Personally I wouldn't mind that, since I hate to replay games anyway, but I think a lot of people would hate it.
5: I agree that the fights could be more engaging, but I don't know Kingdom Hearts or Tales. I don't necessarily mind turn-based though. It would be nice if there was some strategy in the fights.
6: Sounds alright.
7&8: I don't know if this would actually be that much better. A lot of your suggestions suggest making the games easier and less tedious, but sometimes having to work for something adds to the satisfaction that you get when you finally achieved your goal. This seems like one of the occasions where it would just take away from the specialness of Pokemon.
9: Yeah, I hate that too.

I also think that it might not be absolutely necessary to change this Pokemon series all that much, but I would like to see more (other) Pokemon series as well. All the "Pokemon Thing-That-Is-Kind-Of-A-Color" games have a certain style and follow a certain pattern. I think that's fine and they can make more games for that if they want. But I also think that in addition to that, a lot more can be done with the Pokemon universe (e.g. Pokemon RPG, beat 'em up, etc.).

 

[Zantos]

Pokemon can do whatever the hell they want because people continue to buy it in huge numbers every single time. I'm just sticking with Red until they release a pokemon game where in the fights you get to control the pokemon directly OTS style.

 

[Gxas]

Sell millions of copies of a game on every release without huge changes in formula for fourteen years?
Or change a working formula and risk losing your entire customer base?

I think the numbers speak for themselves. Yahtzee is the very last person I would take video game advice from. His job is to nitpick every game he plays. A working formula is a working formula. When Game Freak stops selling millions upon millions of copies of Pokémon games, then we can talk about innovation. Until then, stop disliking what I like.

 

[vrbtny]

Any employee at Nintendo gets fired if they say the word "Innovation"....

 

[Dexiro]

Have you played Black/White? Yes they should innovate more and they know this, Black and White made some pretty big innovations already so they're getting there.

 

[Gazisultima]

You have to consider the consumer's reaction to innovation. Whenever a developer changes their formula, they are basically walking a plank. People may shout for change now but I would bet money on the fact if pokemon did go through a radical change, people would go nuts and ask for Game Freak's head. It happens so often, so it's no wonder so many games turn out the same, the consumer has frightened the developer from doing anything different.

 

[Pedro The Hutt]

I'm with Dexiro, Black/White is the most fresh feeling Pokémon game I've played in years. And really, it doesn't need to change, personally I enjoy the familiarity, and well, let's not ignore the target audience, children. Today's children buying Black/White have probably never played the original Game Boy ones so to them it feels fresh anyhow. To us it might all feel very familiar because we're twenty somethings who have tackled the games five times over by now.

And isn't your #6 pretty much already fixed in Black/White? Just skirt around a patch of grass until one starts shaking, pounce it and wham, a rare Pokémon is there to fight.

 

[Not-here-anymore]

Some of your innovation goes a little too far. Kind of into the 'I don't actually want to play pokemon' side of things.

Some of the things you mentioned were already done in black/white though. For example, there is now a level modifier on experience - lower level 'mons get more experience than higher level ones.
And there was fractionally more of a story, with a hint of immersion in it. I can't be the only one who felt sorry for N at the end.

The rest? The turn-based combat, the difficulty of catching pokemon, the limited pool of them in each location, the rarer creatures... That's part of what makes pokemon pokemon. You'd remove most of the challenge and almost all of the compulsive collector's glee if you took those away.

EDIT: Woah, when did I pass 3000 posts? Huh. Completely missed that.

 

[immortalfrieza]

3: Well, what do you think of those children's tales. Should they be updated to accommodate adults as well? Pokemon (just like MLP and DBZ) is made for kids, but adults may also like aspects of it. But does that mean that the series needs to grow with its audience, like a lot of the gritty reboots of super heroes nowadays, or should the series just remain for kids, so that new kids can also enjoy it? I think something can be said for both, so I don't think it is necessarily bad that Pokemon is still primarily catering to children.

The Pokemon series just needs to be something that is more accessble to all ages, it can still be marketed to kids, it just needs to have material that older people can relate to. For example, anyone that grew up watching Animanics found the show enjoyable and funny as a kid, but there were several jokes that had more adult subtext to them that you didn't get until you grew up, which made the show more accessble to adults (hint: if Yakko said "Goodnight everybody", THAT was one of them). Animanics is a pretty extreme example, Pokemon doesn't need to go THAT far to please teenagers and adults, it just needs to go somewhat further than it has.

4: I agree that it would be nice if they could provide some incentive to use more than a few Pokemon. However, I also think that this is somewhat similar to choosing a class and skills in an RPG. Part of what can make a game interesting is that you don't have certain skills, and have to make due with what you do have. Also, not being able to do everything on your first run adds replay value. What you are suggesting would be equivalent to an RPG where you are every class, and all skills are always at (approximately) the same level. Personally I wouldn't mind that, since I hate to replay games anyway, but I think a lot of people would hate it.

Of course a lot of people would hate it, blind fans always hate even the slightest changes to a francise, even if (or possibly ESPECIALLY if) they're good changes for the francise. These are the types of people that sustain francises that never change like Pokemon, but they are also what eventually destroys these kinds of francises. Things that never change (for the better obviously) die, people and francises alike.

5: I agree that the fights could be more engaging, but I don't know Kingdom Hearts or Tales. I don't necessarily mind turn-based though. It would be nice if there was some strategy in the fights.

Action RPG styles would probably only be possible with 3-D games anyway, it would be something like say, Super Smash Brothers with health bars, no bottomless pits, and dodges, blocks, etc. If they continued with Turn-based combat, I don't mind it either, it just needs to be fast paced and much less of a no-brainer how to win.

7&8: I don't know if this would actually be that much better. A lot of your suggestions suggest making the games easier and less tedious, but sometimes having to work for something adds to the satisfaction that you get when you finally achieved your goal. This seems like one of the occasions where it would just take away from the specialness of Pokemon.

I was mostly just talking about getting a particular Pokemon that you like from the start, and getting the Pokedex entries for the evolved versions of Pokemon that you didn't really intend to use more easily and quicker. It doesn't necessarily have be THAT much faster and easier, just somewhat. For instance, actually getting the type stones to evolve a Pokemon (which could be used as many times as you wanted) would be expensive, difficult and take hours, but overall it would be faster and easier than leveling up dozens of Pokemon to get their evolutions.

I also think that it might not be absolutely necessary to change this Pokemon series all that much, but I would like to see more (other) Pokemon series as well. All the "Pokemon Thing-That-Is-Kind-Of-A-Color" games have a certain style and follow a certain pattern. I think that's fine and they can make more games for that if they want. But I also think that in addition to that, a lot more can be done with the Pokemon universe (e.g. Pokemon RPG, beat 'em up, etc.).

This I agree with (Super Smash Brothers has Pokemon in a beat 'em up already, and I've never heard anyone complain about Pokemon being in a fighting game), however, I don't know that you mean by a Pokemon RPG, it's already an RPG. I must clarify 2 things, 1st, I have heard of Pokemon Black and White (I haven't played them myself, I'm waiting for the eventual 3rd game first) and that they have made a least a little progress with some of the things on my list, this game is a perfect example of how they should fix these issues without pissing off the fans, with baby steps. 2nd, they don't need to fix everything on this list all at once, or even completely. Game Freak just picking one different problem on my list every generation and fixing it only somewhat would result in long-time fans NOT getting pissed and after a few generations a much better overall francise.

 

[AetherWolf]

Have you played Black/White? Yes they should innovate more and they know this, Black and White made some pretty big innovations already so they're getting there.

Agreed. I was a bit surprised by how much Black and White strayed from the traditional formula.

In a very good way, of course.

 

[HontooNoNeko]

I'm not really interested in any of the Pokemon games anymore so it hasn't innovated enough to catch my attention but then again the game isn't made for me. The fans seem to enjoy it so let em have at it and Nintendo doesn't seem to be disappointing their target audience so I'm cool with them.

Although maybe Nintendo could use a little innovation to bring in some more people. Pokemon battles on motorcycles anyone?

 

[emeraldrafael]

Hunh.

Pokemon is a KIDS game. its made FOR KIDS. its nintendo knowing to attract young and get them hooked quick. They cant do something complex and make it harder for 8 year olds. The way it is now, its intro rpg.

As for is it appealing to adults, go to the metagame. Tons of strategy, thought, and material to keep adults into it. Just figuring an IV alone is enough, then you add the EVs, the natures, and all that jazz.

and I dont know why it would be a good idea to let us choose any pokemon. Everyone would pick the final evolution of common pokemon (like Nidoking, or Vaporeon, or Gengar) and just rape everything int he game. Unless the first trainer you want to fight that isnt your rival has an Alakazam or something.

 

[Lizardon]

I think having the NPC's on a system where there Pokemon level relative to the players would remove grinding, as you'll never be able to just crush trainers with your overpowered Pokemon and would encourage a wider, more varied team with more focus on strategy.

Pokemon is part of the group of games "easy to learn, hard to master". Children can play it and enjoy it simply using the "paper scissors rock" type approach, but the amount of strategy involved in the metagame is appealing to adults.

And I don't think letting us have any Pokemon and evolve it whenever we want is a good idea. I like finishing the story portion of the game, and get to look at all my powerful monsters who were all cute little animals when I started.

 

[Jordi]

Any employee at Nintendo gets fired if they say the word "Innovation"....

Right, because the Nintendo 64, Wii, DS and 3DS aren't innovative... Besides, Nintendo doesn't even develop Pokémon.

4: I agree that it would be nice if they could provide some incentive to use more than a few Pokemon. However, I also think that this is somewhat similar to choosing a class and skills in an RPG. Part of what can make a game interesting is that you don't have certain skills, and have to make due with what you do have. Also, not being able to do everything on your first run adds replay value. What you are suggesting would be equivalent to an RPG where you are every class, and all skills are always at (approximately) the same level. Personally I wouldn't mind that, since I hate to replay games anyway, but I think a lot of people would hate it.

Of course a lot of people would hate it, blind fans always hate even the slightest changes to a francise, even if (or possibly ESPECIALLY if) they're good changes for the francise. These are the types of people that sustain francises that never change like Pokemon, but they are also what eventually destroys these kinds of francises. Things that never change (for the better obviously) die, people and francises alike.

Ugh, I hate this "haters gonna hate" mentality. Just because people don't like a particular change doesn't mean that they don't like change at all. If you'll notice, I gave some reasons as to why people might dislike this particular one. Instead of addressing those, you just go straight to calling them "blind fans who hate ANY change, especially good changes".
Newsflash: the change you proposed is not good. Not objectively anyway. Nor is it bad. It is completely subjective whether you like it or not. People wanting a change like this are exactly as legitimate as the ones who don't. If you want to argue about it, address people's arguments, and don't say "well if you don't agree then you must be a stupid fanboy and there is no pleasing you anyway".

7&8: I don't know if this would actually be that much better. A lot of your suggestions suggest making the games easier and less tedious, but sometimes having to work for something adds to the satisfaction that you get when you finally achieved your goal. This seems like one of the occasions where it would just take away from the specialness of Pokemon.

I was mostly just talking about getting a particular Pokemon that you like from the start, and getting the Pokedex entries for the evolved versions of Pokemon that you didn't really intend to use more easily and quicker. It doesn't necessarily have be THAT much faster and easier, just somewhat. For instance, actually getting the type stones to evolve a Pokemon (which could be used as many times as you wanted) would be expensive, difficult and take hours, but overall it would be faster and easier than leveling up dozens of Pokemon to get their evolutions.

I don't think grinding and having to work for your rewards are necessarily a bad thing, because they can increase the feeling of accomplishment you get when you achieve a goal. If you have too little or too much of it, the game will suffer. I don't really know where the Pokémon series is currently at in this regards, so if your proposed changes move it closer to "just enough grinding" then I'm all for them.

I also think that it might not be absolutely necessary to change this Pokemon series all that much, but I would like to see more (other) Pokemon series as well. All the "Pokemon Thing-That-Is-Kind-Of-A-Color" games have a certain style and follow a certain pattern. I think that's fine and they can make more games for that if they want. But I also think that in addition to that, a lot more can be done with the Pokemon universe (e.g. Pokemon RPG, beat 'em up, etc.).

This I agree with (Super Smash Brothers has Pokemon in a beat 'em up already, and I've never heard anyone complain about Pokemon being in a fighting game), however, I don't know that you mean by a Pokemon RPG, it's already an RPG.

Maybe it wasn't the best example, but there is no reason why there can't also be another Pokémon RPG. My point was basically that you can have multiple Pokémon series run at once. As other people have pointed out, the current franchise is extremely profitable for Game Freak and making too much changes to it is a huge risk. Some points can probably more easily be incorporated without risk (e.g. better story and tweak the amount of grinding a bit), but others would change the entire game (e.g. other combat system, leveling up all Pokémon at once, and letting you have all of them easily).
So basically there is a lot of incentive for Game Freak to continue with this Pokémon Color series. But that doesn't mean that they (or other developers) can't also make other games in addition to that. Games that are in the same universe, but that are otherwise completely different. Look at Mario for instance. You have 2D platformers, 3D platformers, RPGs (Paper Mario), race games (Mario Cart) and party games.

*EDIT* Read my other post below to more or less destroy any arguments against what I'm saying. *END*

Don't you think it is a little arrogant to say that you have pre-emptively "destroyed" any arguments that one could possibly make against any of what you're saying? Besides, you obviously didn't, unless you think that calling people who disagree with you is the epitome of argumentation.

 

[varulfic]

Pokemon needs to stop being afraid of taking my money and just make a damn mmorpg already.

 

[immortalfrieza]

4: I agree that it would be nice if they could provide some incentive to use more than a few Pokemon. However, I also think that this is somewhat similar to choosing a class and skills in an RPG. Part of what can make a game interesting is that you don't have certain skills, and have to make due with what you do have. Also, not being able to do everything on your first run adds replay value. What you are suggesting would be equivalent to an RPG where you are every class, and all skills are always at (approximately) the same level. Personally I wouldn't mind that, since I hate to replay games anyway, but I think a lot of people would hate it.

Of course a lot of people would hate it, blind fans always hate even the slightest changes to a francise, even if (or possibly ESPECIALLY if) they're good changes for the francise. These are the types of people that sustain francises that never change like Pokemon, but they are also what eventually destroys these kinds of francises. Things that never change (for the better obviously) die, people and francises alike.

Ugh, I hate this "haters gonna hate" mentality. Just because people don't like a particular change doesn't mean that they don't like change at all. If you'll notice, I gave some reasons as to why people might dislike this particular one. Instead of addressing those, you just go straight to calling them "blind fans who hate ANY change, especially good changes".
Newsflash: the change you proposed is not good. Not objectively anyway. Nor is it bad. It is completely subjective whether you like it or not. People wanting a change like this are exactly as legitimate as the ones who don't. If you want to argue about it, address people's arguments, and don't say "well if you don't agree then you must be a stupid fanboy and there is no pleasing you anyway".

I was never talking about the people that hate one change but embrace another, I was talking about the people that steadfastly refuse ANY change whatsoever in the formula of their beloved francises, even ones that are positive. Reasonable people that are willing to accept SOME changes I don't have a problem with.

Personally I wouldn't mind that, since I hate to replay games anyway, but I think a lot of people would hate it.

Since here you said that you didn't really care about the issues that you mentioned personally, this was the only part of your message I bothered to address.

Instead of addressing those, you just go straight to calling them "blind fans who hate ANY change, especially good changes".

Ok then, I'll address them here: Replay value comes from the things you aren't able to do the first time true, but Pokemon does not give really any replay value. The differences between Pokemon are largely cosmetic, as stated in Point #4 as long as a Pokemon can damage it's opponent all that is needed is leveling to beat anyone, except in battles with someone else, then actual strategy can be involved. I never got a feeling of having "to make do" at any point in a Pokemon game. Pokemon also have NO personalities whatsoever, (well, neither are you ever given a chance to have one either) people have personalities, Pokemon don't, which is largely why the choice of Pokemon is mostly cosmetic. This is mostly because Pokemon can't talk, even after centuries of living with them no one has tried to learn their language or develop a translator device, which I think makes no sense. Imagine it, you walk into a cave or town and turn around and talk to them and they give you a response based on the area you're in or they fight a Pokemon or trainer of a particular type (which you should be able to turn off, because it would eventually get annoying), both based on their breed. natures, condition they are in, day of the week, etc.
THAT would give you reason to choose a particular Pokemon, and combined with point #7 restart many times. Oh, and a choice system for your character so THEY could have a personality and have a effect on the story would help too.

7&8: I don't know if this would actually be that much better. A lot of your suggestions suggest making the games easier and less tedious, but sometimes having to work for something adds to the satisfaction that you get when you finally achieved your goal. This seems like one of the occasions where it would just take away from the specialness of Pokemon.

I was mostly just talking about getting a particular Pokemon that you like from the start, and getting the Pokedex entries for the evolved versions of Pokemon that you didn't really intend to use more easily and quicker. It doesn't necessarily have be THAT much faster and easier, just somewhat. For instance, actually getting the type stones to evolve a Pokemon (which could be used as many times as you wanted) would be expensive, difficult and take hours, but overall it would be faster and easier than leveling up dozens of Pokemon to get their evolutions.

I don't think grinding and having to work for your rewards are necessarily a bad thing, because they can increase the feeling of accomplishment you get when you achieve a goal. If you have too little or too much of it, the game will suffer. I don't really know where the Pokémon series is currently at in this regards, so if your proposed changes move it closer to "just enough grinding" then I'm all for them.

I just want collecting Pokemon and grinding to be much less tedious than it has been. While I'd prefer it if the tediousness was removed entirely, I realize that people like this a great deal, so as you said, "just enough grinding" is what I'm mostly looking for. My view is that a game should not be a grind, it should have enough content that grinding wouldn't be necessary to add hours to the game, or at least it shouldn't feel like it, even the grinding should be enjoyable.

I also think that it might not be absolutely necessary to change this Pokemon series all that much, but I would like to see more (other) Pokemon series as well. All the "Pokemon Thing-That-Is-Kind-Of-A-Color" games have a certain style and follow a certain pattern. I think that's fine and they can make more games for that if they want. But I also think that in addition to that, a lot more can be done with the Pokemon universe (e.g. Pokemon RPG, beat 'em up, etc.).

This I agree with (Super Smash Brothers has Pokemon in a beat 'em up already, and I've never heard anyone complain about Pokemon being in a fighting game), however, I don't know that you mean by a Pokemon RPG, it's already an RPG.

Maybe it wasn't the best example, but there is no reason why there can't also be another Pokémon RPG. My point was basically that you can have multiple Pokémon series run at once. As other people have pointed out, the current franchise is extremely profitable for Game Freak and making too much changes to it is a huge risk. Some points can probably more easily be incorporated without risk (e.g. better story and tweak the amount of grinding a bit), but others would change the entire game (e.g. other combat system, leveling up all Pokémon at once, and letting you have all of them easily).
So basically there is a lot of incentive for Game Freak to continue with this Pokémon Color series. But that doesn't mean that they (or other developers) can't also make other games in addition to that. Games that are in the same universe, but that are otherwise completely different. Look at Mario for instance. You have 2D platformers, 3D platformers, RPGs (Paper Mario), race games (Mario Cart) and party games.

Can't argue with this one, the Pokemon colors series may be a lost cause but other types of Pokemon series could give the innovation that would be too risky for the colors series to do, and if the innovations of the other series turned out to be successful they could edge over to the colors series.

*EDIT* Read my other post below to more or less destroy any arguments against what I'm saying. *END*

Don't you think it is a little arrogant to say that you have pre-emptively "destroyed" any arguments that one could possibly make against any of what you're saying? Besides, you obviously didn't, unless you think that calling people who disagree with you is the epitome of argumentation.[/quote]

Yeah you're probably right, I'll reword it, I just didn't want people to not read all my posts and have to answer things that I've already dealt with over and over.

 

[immortalfrieza]

Pokemon needs to stop being afraid of taking my money and just make a damn mmorpg already.

It would make a lot of sense if they did wouldn't it? There's probably some already but I doubt any of them are official ones.

 

[Plinglebob]

I apologise for the lack of quote references, but I'm far to lazy to go through all that, so I'll just reference your points by their numbers.

1&2) The point of the Pokemon games isn't the story. Pokemons story as always been a thinly disguised Skinner Box to encourage people to keep playing the game. The point of the games is in the tagline of "Gotta Catch Em All". Playing Pokemon for the story is like reading Pride and Prejudice for the action scenes.

3) Of course you're being ignored. By being 24 and still playing Pokemon (for reference, I'm 26 and still have my original imported Pokemon Red cart) you are the very definition of a "Perifery Demographic" like the adults who collect Barbie dolls. The point of each generation of Pokemon games isn't to please the existing fanbase, but to provide a oppotunity to get children who were too young last time around to start playing.

4) This means there are 2 ways to play the game depending on the person involved. If you try hard enough, 1 or 2 high level pokemon will eventually get through the Elite 4, but a balanced team 5-7 levels lower will also work. People complain about there being less choice in games, but here your saying they should remove the choice of how you play it.

5) Turn based gaming is not a bad thing, otherwise chess would have died out years ago. Even though you may not like it, others do and it is still a valid way to play a game. It rewards different skills to ARPGS such as foward planning and strategic thinking instead of just quick reaction times.

6) This is to make the game harder and to force you to make a choice. Do you go flat out and kill the pokemon for the xp, or do you play conservatively with the aim to try and capture it? Re: Rare Pokemon welcome to the world of the random number generator. The point of the rare pokemon to because they know that people will keep playing in the attempt to capture them and by setting it to be random instead of predefined, it keeps people playing trying to get them as well as possibly giving someone the surprise of it appearing 1st time.

7) Too much choice is a bad thing. Remember, each game is designed primarily for new players. If you're brand new to the game and have no idea how things work, you would look at a roster of 400 choices all with diffrent type combinations and switch off. The 3 starters are choice as the 3 primary and best balanced types to help introduce people to how things such as type weaknesses work. You couldn't have the 1st gym in Black & White if the player could chose any Pokemon they wanted to start.

8) The point of evolution is as a reward for staying with and levelling a Pokemon. Take that away and what would be the difference between levelling a Pokemon and just getting new pokemon at various points of the game?

9) There are 2 reasons for this. The first is because it has never been a game you're supposed to be able to play and complete on your own. The aim of the game is that friends get together to help each other out by trading. I have fond memories of sitting around with my best mate in R&B days and with my girlfriend in G&S days shunting Pokemon around to complete our Pokedexs. While it may seem harsh, its not Game Freak's fault that you don't have friends who like Pokemon. The second is that Game Freak are neither a charity or stupid. They know that by releasing 3 slightly different games, they will be able to increase the number of overall games sold and so increase profits.