Should there be more choice of starter pokemon?

[Giles Margerum]

Weve all gotten pretty used to the beginning of any pokemon game where you are given the choice of accepting the fire, water or grass type pokemon as your starter (excluding yellow obviously). I love pokemon (up until black and white in which the pokemon were stupid and the map lazily linear, but thats another rant) and I love how the strter pokemon are assigned but, could'nt there be more choice? Like fire, water, grass, electric, rock and ghost? Or pperhaps the choice of one starter for each type?? I know it's more work for the developers but think of how much more varied the gameplay would become, not to mention how much the replay value would multiply by. Maybe its just me. Thoughts?

 

[Antitonic]

It depends on how dependent the starter areas are. It's accepted that the initial types you face are Normal, then maybe some Bug. Which, in turn, gives the three difficulties of starter. There's one that's "Easy Mode" in disguise, one for "Medium", and one for "Hard".

As long as they could keep the balance, I don't mind what they do. It might make the beginning gameplay a little challenging though. Having the different initial enemies to account for multiple types that haven't been quality-tested could ruin a new player. Not to mention all the extra work on the developer side of things. Basically, I feel three is the right number. It gives choice, without overwhelming.

Now, if they decided to change the starter types while maintaining the balance of three...?

EDIT: Also, no more Fire/Fighting, please. It's overdone.

 

[MajorTomServo]

Or offer a magikarp for those who like a challenge.

 

[Giles Margerum]

Love the Magikarp idea. Ok Antitonic I hear what you are saying... What would be your preffered three possible starter types then? ignoring the first pokemon you face.

 

[Justanothergamer300]

Maybe if they give you three different type started. I remember hearing about some rumor that pokemon diamond & pearl would start you out with a fighting, dark, or psychic type. Now the rumor has been proved untrue now but it still can be done it just matters on what gym leader comes first/what pokemon are available to catch/battle early on. Maybe they can do what they did in black and white we're you the first gym picks your weakness but you can get another pokemon to cover the weakness.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

honestly i'd like to see it as a new game+ option (obviously you only have to beat the elite four and that snazz and not catch every single pokemon to get the new game+ option)

and maybe even have the gym leader types change according to which pokemon type you do end up picking, to make it harder so you really gotta strategize around other pokemon other than your starter

 

[Lilani]

-snip-

Nah. The concept of Pokemon is you start with one simple thing and slowly accumulate more things that are more complicated as you go. First-time players (yes, believe it or not there ARE people who are trying pokemon for the first time with every new game that comes out; youngsters, mostly) will hardly have a clue what the difference between Rock, Steel, and Ground are, so there's no point throwing it all at them at once. Let them learn over time and build the team they need to as they're able to. Plus too many choices can be overwhelming. Even as an experienced player I always spend way too long deliberating over which starter I want. Can you imagine if that were boosted up to seven or ten choices, and you had no idea what the difference between all of them were? You'd feel like you missed something during the first tutorial. No, I think three is just fine.

 

[Giles Margerum]

I see where you are coming fom except I feel like the people that would feel as though they had missed something with the choice of lots of starters would feel the same with three and would eventually have to do what most people I know do, try one and see how it turns out, it would quickly become clear that it is simply a choice at the begining and while having a big effect on your game none of them are positive or negative. Once they have this knowledge if they dont like the pokemon they chose (very strange for a first time player) then they can dlete their save data and pick another without the worry.

 

[Lizardon]

I feel the fire/grass/water line up is a good system. It's simple so you don't spend ages deciding who to pick, and the type effectiveness is obvious to everyone.

Another problem I see is with more starters, comes more different games you will need to trade with to complete the Pokedex.

I also don't think it would do much for the replay value. Would having a Ghastly or Cubone at the start of Pokemon Red or Blue really change that much? All the wild Pokemon would still be the same so I don't see where the added challenge is coming from.

 

[StorytellingIsAMust]

The current set-up works fine. Three classes allows for a triangular, rock-paper-scissors balance of power and difficulty as far as type advantages, stats, and movesets are concerned. The only time picking one starter ever gave me a huge advantage over another starter was Pokemon Emerald, since picking up a Torchic meant that I could also get a Marill and a Shroomish before the first gym and breeze through the rest of the game, no problem. Third gen had no balance as far as the main story is concerned.

That being said, this balance would be much better achieved if there were no dual-type starter evolutions ever again.

 

[Whateveralot]

Well, I always thought that having an option is cool. That there's a pretty big part of the game before actually getting a pokémon, like travelling to another town on your way to get your first pokémon. During this time you would propably be introduced to the vilains and your nemesis.

During the journey, there is a lot of open ends. Like a lot of quests laying around which you might bump into. Like finding a wounded pokémon, which you'll bring to the pokémoncenter and will stay with you as your friend. Another trainer might help you catch one or .. yeah. that's about all I can think of right now.

I imagine this would be pretty cool.

 

[Yosato]

honestly i'd like to see it as a new game+ option (obviously you only have to beat the elite four and that snazz and not catch every single pokemon to get the new game+ option)

and maybe even have the gym leader types change according to which pokemon type you do end up picking, to make it harder so you really gotta strategize around other pokemon other than your starter

THIS - I've thought this since Silver/Gold. Pokemon loses a lot of its appeal after beating the Elite 4. Sure there's lots to do nowadays but it really only amounts to another couple-dozen hours of gameplay that's nowhere near as good as getting badges. And training at high levels becomes a nightmare.

 

[Giles Margerum]

honestly i'd like to see it as a new game+ option (obviously you only have to beat the elite four and that snazz and not catch every single pokemon to get the new game+ option)

and maybe even have the gym leader types change according to which pokemon type you do end up picking, to make it harder so you really gotta strategize around other pokemon other than your starter

THIS - I've thought this since Silver/Gold. Pokemon loses a lot of its appeal after beating the Elite 4. Sure there's lots to do nowadays but it really only amounts to another couple-dozen hours of gameplay that's nowhere near as good as getting badges. And training at high levels becomes a nightmare.

I agree! This is a perfect adaptation of what I mean. And to the people who are syaing outright no to it, I understand what you mean but that is a matter of opinion, it is simply an idea.

 

[badgersprite]

It doesn't really make a difference, because you're going to end up catching tons of pokemon within the next few areas. The starter pokemon can be totally irrelevant to the game, if you choose to train other pokemon instead of it. What difference does it make if you start with a ground type pokemon or if you catch one at level five?

Having a wide diversity of starter pokemon would actually probably detract from the game more than add to it by negating a lot of the challenge. Like, the core of the game is rock, paper, scissors, and the fact that other characters do take the pokemon that is stronger than yours. Adding a different starter pokemon would probably turn rock, paper, scissors into rock, paper, scissors, gun.

 

[spartan231490]

I think rock or electric could fit into the starters pretty well. Def not ghost or psychic though. Ghost would be too hard of a starter in areas that are almost always pure normal. and Psychic would be a really powerful starting pokemon.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I'd leave it in as an "Expert Option", personally.
Have some deviation from the regular opening that lets players (who know what's about to happen) acquire a starter from a different set, and shuffling the other set into the wild/game later on.

Dragon starter FTW.

 

[Deadyawn]

I personally don't have a problem with it. grass water fire is the classic sissors paper rock example and it's quite effective at explaining type advantages early on. I think more varied catchables near the starting areas would be nice but that's a different kettle of fish. Oh, I'd also appreciate the ability to obtain the other two starters without having to trade, it's annoying.

 

[emeraldrafael]

No, not really. I mean, it would be ncie but this is the established formula. Its like that for any game in any series like pokemon. Besides, there's not many good types that wouldnt make the starting game either ridiculously easy or ridiculously hard. the only thing I can really think of is maybe have an electric type option (but this is just from yellow) or maybe a a normal pokemon like Eevee. Besides that, what three elements would you pick that would make it a challenge? the point of your rival is to give you an early and constant in game challenge that you have to train and work towards to overcome. Without that weakness to their starter, the game gets WAY to easy.

now, what I would like is more options in the evolution. We've had three fire/fighting types to date, and the best was the first anyway. Water/Steel was a great leap in this, and I felt that they really missed the chance to make oshawotts second and third tier forms water/fighting. Snivy's upper tiers (whether it be both second and third or just third alone) should have been Grass/Dragon.

... so I guess Im saying we should have more dual type starters if the situation is appropriate.

EDIT:

...

Dragon starter FTW.

you'll never see that. there's always too few dragon pokemon in the game, and they're all OP'd and pseudo-legendary. If you saw dragons as a starter, you'd either see them completely debuffed and their stats very much lowered, or they'd gain more weaknesses and the NPCs would constantly be several levels over you and in all likelihood also have dragon types or ice types.

 

[Danny91]

just....please...no more fire/fighting...I can't take it anymore!