Why do people buy Pokemon games?

Recommended Videos

subtlefuge

Lord Cromulent
May 21, 2010
1,107
0
0
To an extent I understand the argument against the new games, but I don't agree with it at all. Between versions there may only be minor changes, but the difference between Gen I and Gen IV is staggering. It's gotten way better and way more competitive.

I'm cautiously optimistic about Gen V, I've read and seen a lot about it and it looks...interesting.
 

RandallJohn

New member
Aug 21, 2010
797
0
0
I can see what you mean. I still play, though, because a) I'm a collector at heart, and b) because I enjoy the depth in the pokemon themselves (breeding, evs, finding the best teams.)

Lately, though, I've been playing online with battle programs instead of playing the actual games, though.
 

emeraldrafael

New member
Jul 17, 2010
8,589
0
0
IamSofaKingRaw said:
I've played Sapphire and Fire Red and seen footage of the rest. THEY ARE ALL THE SAME DAMN THING!
Well, there's really nothing new anymore. And no they're not, but I'll go into why below.

Start in a small town, mom tells you to see professor, someone tells you professor is on trouble, ave professor ten you get your pokemon.
Sounds like any RPG really, though not always with the professor part.

After that their nephew/niece becomes your rival.
Actually, in G/S/C and HG/SS it was a thief with no relation to anyone (though I've heard rumours he was related to Lance).

In D/P/Pt it was a childhood friend. The Professor's nearest Kin didnt really battle you, because she picked the pokemon weak to yours. She was more there for Misc help.

Now, I havent played/looked extensively into Black and White yet, but I'm pretty sure your rival isnt related to the Professor. In fact, I think the rival and the girl who chooses the pokemon weak to yours are only you're best friends.

Get all badges rinse and repeat.
Oka, I'll give you that. But then again the Zelda games are the same way, with items collected instead of badges. Mario is on a linear path with no real deviation allowed (I know the warp tubes, but unless you know they're there, you're not going to skip worlds). ANd most any game that requires you to level up or not allow you to pick your path is the same way, where you have to overcome one goal and can not move on without choosing which path you'd like to take.

To add to the milking why do they release tow versions of the game on the same platform with the only difference being ONE damn pokemon?
Actually, most games only allow you certain pokemon to catch. I think in FR and LG, you could only catch growlithe in FR and Vulpix in LG (or vice versa). But in this game the physical world itself is entirely different (white forest and something else in white vs. Black city). There's still version exclusive pokemon and yes, the main one on the box is the real difference that most people will base their decision on. But even the gym leaders are different (Iris in White, Shaga in Black).

While yes, you can wait for whatever game they will release as the third game (pokemon Gray?) to get everything as well as a new pokemon that you may not get or where the focus isnt so much about getting it, each version itself has those nice little quirks that make them special. You can say nintendo is only doing it for money, and Hey, I wouldnt disagree. They are business. But the version exclusive encourages trade and getting together to complete the game, as well as building a nice joined fan base, which they can sell more games without the riots that might arise over "oh, Black is better cause it has Reshiram," and "nah uh! White is better cause it has Zekrom" that would cause bad blood when fans wanted to purchase the games.

People talk about COD, Halo etc. but THIS is the most milked franchise EVER
I wouldnt say ever. There's always Mario and LoZ. And FPSs on the whole are the same and overly milked. If its not Halo or CoD, then its a Halo or CoD clone. Besides, this is one of Nintendo's most solid corner stones. No matter what you do to a pokemon game, if it has the same basic formula that you seem to have an issue with, its going to be a solid game that will sell. Again, every game company is a business, so if it aint broke and its making you butt loads of money, why stop it or fix it?

Now, as to it being always the same, I dont think I've ever seen two games in different generations that were exactly the same. Since pokemon has come out, here's some of the changes we've seen:
- Introduction of pokemon
- Separation of the Special category into Sp. Attack and Sp. Defense
- Separation of the bag in terms of items and categories
- The night and day change based on real world time
- Friendship level (though this was seen in Yellow, it wasnt extensively brought out until G/S/C)
- Ability to set items to select
- Introduction of IVs, EVs, and Priority Movies
- Double Battles
- New types and variations of them (we've seen the addition of the new types Steel and Dark)
- Weather Conditions
- Triple battles
- Sprite Animations (both Trainer and Pokemon)
- Abilities
- Natures
And finally
- the difference between a Physical and Special attack and arena moves like Spikes/Stealth Rock/Toxic Spikes

Finally, the Dream World is a major change that is going to pretty much break the game, especially with the new Type combinations and the math involved in perfecting a competitive battle team.


Now, if you wnat to complain about Pokemon sprites and ideals, I do want to point out that GameFreak has gone from Myth to germ to otherworldly to extraterrestrial, and even the mechanical human made world. So stopping short of making religious deities pokemon (God vs Allah, or Moses vs Jesus and such), I would honestly like to know where anyone who says the designs are garbage would like them to go. People seem to think that all the money goes into the design, and the rest is just after thought, when really that sprite is meaningless. I'll quote myself from another thread:

This was in the Non Canon thread, but it relates to this:
emeraldrafael said:
goldendriger said:
Probably because you're (we're) not the target demographic. Pokemon isnt for our age, its for young kids. And lets not forget, these people that are "designing these crappy pokemon" are also designing new looks for old pokemon.
Charizard used to look like this:
http://www.smogon.com/download/sprites/rb/6.png
Reminds me of a down syndrome dragonite

Magmar used to look like this:
http://www.smogon.com/download/sprites/rb/126.png
Reminds me of those water head babies you're not supposed to laugh at.

Mewtwo used to look like this:
http://www.smogon.com/download/sprites/rb/150.png
Constipated?

Zapdos used to look like this:
http://www.smogon.com/download/sprites/rb/145.png
Oh noes, someone pissed off Big Bird

The original designs werent that great, even back then. So when you go and say that these designers are making crappy pokemon, remember they're making older pokemon new sprites. If they had just left the original 150 as their original sprites, everyone would be pissed. So its a little hard to be original, when you have to appease people who are far to old for the game so they dont whine and ***** that their favorite old pokemon look dumb.

And you're going to tell me that Weavile, Dialga, Electivire, Empoleon, Arceus, Darkrai, Giratina (either form doesnt really matter, though Giratina-O looks cooler in my opinion), And Lucario dont all look cool? Plus Garchomp.

And in the new generation, you get Kojondo, Jalorda, Mebukijika, Shibirudon, Zeburaika, Ononokusu, Sazandora, Pendoraa, Genosect, and Victini all are bad designs?
So knowing that GameFreak has to also work on the old pokemon, its hard for them to also make new pokemon. Besides again, everyone's complaining about a game that odds are, if you're on the Escapist you are beyond the target age audience. Pokemon is the standard intro RPG. its what you play when you want to get into gaming and have the choice of mindless fun ona linear level, or complex though provoking strategy through math that I've seen expressed as Mathematical Calculus problems that High School and even a College professor didnt want to look at and try and explain to me why someone would put this much effort in or how they came to it all. What with Probability and countering being so big of a margin, especially with the multitudes of sets you could run with a pokemon team, from Walls to tanks to passers to supporters to sweepers.

So yeah... thats probably why. If you odnt like it, stop complaining, other people like it, its there right. Who are YOU to decide what is and isnt played?
 

johnnyLupine

New member
Nov 19, 2008
160
0
0
Madara XIII said:
IamSofaKingRaw said:
I've played Sapphire and Fire Red and seen footage of the rest. THEY ARE ALL THE SAME DAMN THING! Start in a small town, mom tells you to see professor, someone tells you professor is on trouble, ave professor ten you get your pokemon. After that their nephew/niece becomes your rival. Get all badges rinse and repeat. To add to the milking why do they release tow versions of the game on the same platform with the only difference being ONE damn pokemon?

People talk about COD, Halo etc. but THIS is the most milked franchise EVER

I think it's mainly because of Childhood memories and at times the games can be a persons first introduction to an RPG style game that is simple and user friendly. Nostalgia and simplicity are what makes these games so addicting and easy to sell.


1. Introduce the first versions of Pokemon games
2. Introduce the kids who played it to the show, manga etc
3. Keep on selling as it passes from generation to generation.

Shoot back in my days all we had were 151 Pokemon and only 4 Legendary ones (counting mew)
and by God we were grateful for them!
i agree with this completely, hell if i knew where my gameboy and cartriges were i might still play red or gold, im unwilling to even concider playing the new ones because they arent MY pokemon, its wierd but that series is the only one where i feel resentful about it changing and moving on or whatever. maybe it hasnt, im just not willing to check!

The torch has been passed on.

bugger..i appear to have quoted someones quoting of the origional..
 

SilverUchiha

New member
Dec 25, 2008
1,604
0
0
You're comparing shit to oranges (Halo and COD being shit).

Gameplay between the Pokemon games (at least Generation to Generation) changes a lot. Sometimes drastically. This will be the third time I've said this today... on this forum! But go check out the differences on Bulbapedia by reading the different articles on the generations. It's really evolved a lot (no pun intended). What has Halo done? A few new weapons and maps. A rather bland story. The latest game adding upgrades like jetpacks and special-armor or whatever. But that's like adding new characters, items, and weapons to a fighting game. It doesn't completely change how the game is played. It just adds a few things to a game while everything is generally the same.
 

Grey_Focks

New member
Jan 12, 2010
1,969
0
0
Eh, I grew out of them after Crystal, but I can still see the appeal. Honestly though I just can't stand the goddam grinding. That, and I thought the actual monster designs really did take a downward spiral.

EDIT- And god dammit Escapist, can we have one thread that doesn't contain Halo and/or CoD bashing? They're fine to flame to all hell and how they're "the same thing", but someone says the same about Pokemon and everyone flips shit. Nobody else sees the hypocrisy there?!?
 

Supp

New member
Nov 17, 2009
210
0
0
crudus said:
Onyx Oblivion said:
Because they still fucking rock, and have some of the best competitive play and endgame content in the business on top of that.

People who think it all went downhill after R/B/Y or G/S/C are just fooling themselves.

The improvements made with each game in the series are mostly seen in the battle system and endgame content.

The Battle Tower was the best thing to happen to the series, imo. And not the shitty Crystal version one.

The Physical/Special split between individual attacks, rather than just types, introduced in Gen 4 was brilliant, too. It made elemental punch Alakazam less utterly broken, and made Hitmonchan...Well, he still sucks, actually. Just much less. He's now viable, at least.

Don't get me started on the epicness of the Battle Frontier...
Despite the improvements I still say it went downhill after G/S. It wasn't the games themselves, but the pokemon. They started to look weird and unreal. In B/R and G/S they looked like actual animals. After that they looked completely stupid. I can get behind the game mechanics they have changed which is why I play FR/LG. Although I can't play HG/SS because the graphics hit the uncanny valley for me (the graphics didn't make it feel like a pokemon game).
The artwork for R/B/Y was NOTHING like any of the the games after it, because after R/B/Y they started copying the art style of the games off of the anime.

For instance, compare gen 1 weezing



to gen 5 weezing



Personally, I liked the art style of the first gen more then the rest because it was more gritty as opposed to being more cartoony, but for a lot of pokemon, there has definitely been an improvement from the first gen (I'm looking at you, squirtle)
 

chunkeymonke

New member
Sep 25, 2009
173
0
0
i think people aren't getting that he's not talking about the overall idea of pokemon but more on the fasct that they haven't had any real change
halo has new modes maps and guns
cod is the same mods maps guns storys
but in pokemon you get your stuff battle the gyms fight some legendary face thed four and you win same every single game
you can say small stuff changed but nothing in the substantial form has
 

Semudara

New member
Oct 6, 2010
288
0
0
If there's a new world to explore, new characters to meet, and a new story to unfold, coupled with tried-and-true beloved gameplay, people will buy it. Sequels don't always have to improve anything-- if it's AS GOOD, people will be happy. It's like buying endless expansions of your favorite game that never seems to get old.

That's it. The minimal changes are just enough to keep things fresh. The new games might be little more than glorified expansion packs, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
 

Madara XIII

New member
Sep 23, 2010
3,369
0
0
LittleChone said:
This.

Is where all video game rivals spanned from.
Ah, the idealist and optimistic hero who would do whatever he could to help those in need despite losing potential progress in his journey (Ash) vs The do whatever it takes to be the best, Troll who accomplished everything worthwhile before you did (Gary)


U MAD ASH!?




 

Taunta

New member
Dec 17, 2010
484
0
0
Arkvoodle said:
Because Nintendo has developed technology that beams a subliminal signal to the addiction centers in your brain.
Time to get out the tinfoil hats!

OT: But seriously. Because it's a game that anyone can enjoy, and people still enjoy. Think about it: 20 year-olds can play it and beat the game, and 9 year-olds can play it and beat the game. You can play it at its simplest level and get enjoyment out of it, or theorycrafting nerds can mine it for all its team-building, stat micromanaging goodness. And well, it's not the same game repackaged every time. They add more functionality with every release. Platinum is infinitely more evolved (lul, accidental pun) than Red/Blue.

Part of it is also nostalgia. It's also part of the reason why people keep buying Nintendo's Top 5 franchises.
 

bluemew1234

New member
Oct 26, 2010
19
0
0
Fanta Grape said:
To be honest, there are really only a few completely different pokemon games.

Red/Blue/Green/Yellow/Fire Red/Leaf Green
Gold/Silver/Crystal/Soul Silver/Heart Gold
Emerald/Ruby/Saphire
Black/White

So... four pokemon games
Thats actually ignoring quite a few games.
Unless Snap, Stadium, the Ranger games, Rescue Team, etc. dont count. Then you're right.

Oh, and Im to lazy to quote the people who said these things, the theif is actually related to Giovanni, not Lance, and Snivvy is supposed to be based off a snake.....kinda.....just, look at its evolutions.....
 

PurplePlatypus

Duel shield wielder
Jul 8, 2010
592
0
0
Well some people like that game play and don?t get bored with it. Also there's always a new generation of gamers to pick up these things, whether they were just born or it took them till a little later on to find games or even just to find those specific games.

So they keep getting made and people keep on playing them.
 

Fanta Grape

New member
Aug 17, 2010
738
0
0
bluemew1234 said:
Fanta Grape said:
To be honest, there are really only a few completely different pokemon games.

Red/Blue/Green/Yellow/Fire Red/Leaf Green
Gold/Silver/Crystal/Soul Silver/Heart Gold
Emerald/Ruby/Saphire
Black/White

So... four pokemon games
Thats actually ignoring quite a few games.
Unless Snap, Stadium, the Ranger games, Rescue Team, etc. dont count. Then you're right.

Oh, and Im to lazy to quote the people who said these things, the theif is actually related to Giovanni, not Lance, and Snivvy is supposed to be based off a snake.....kinda.....just, look at its evolutions.....
Oh, that's right. Pardon me. Although admittedly, I don't believe any of them were very good except the Pokemon Stadium games
 

GingerCactus

New member
Jul 14, 2010
65
0
0
After watching the "Skinner box" episode of extra credits, I've finally realised it myself. I finally understand why I love pokemon so much
After playing through diamond, I remember thinking: "Wait, I've already played this game 3 times before! They're not getting me next time!" Cut to now, and I'm ridiculously hyped for Black and White.
Why? Well, in the episode they demonstrated alternatives to simply putting a reward at the end of a repeated action to make games engaging, and pokemon provides some great examples:
1) Mystery. By adding 100+ new pokemon and a brand new world each time, Game Freak allow the player to investigate their surroundings and make discoveries. The curiosity of the player becomes a driving force for starting the game, but, however, not necessarily for finishing it. That's where 2 comes in.
2) Mastery. With all of those pokemon, and the catchy slogan of "gotta catch 'em all" players are driven to obtain all 493 pokemon (650+ as of Generation 5) and to master their favourites. Pokemon has a HUGE online community, with plenty of depth and strategy. Regular tournaments are held, allowing players to pit their skills and prove who is really a pokemon master.
3) Mental Challenge. Not initially a strong point to a first time player, but play to the end, and eventually all of the deep mechanics need to be weighed out in decision making. What's your opponent's pokemon weak against? What's your pokemon weak against? Is your pokemon a physical or special attacker? Is your opponent a physical or special defender? How will the pokemon's abilities come into play? All of these decisions provide great mental stimulation, and beating a tough battle can be as satisfying as solving a tough mental puzzle.
Now 4, narrative, isn't a strong point in the series, but 5, Novelty, Is something it excels in. Just look at the roster of pokemon and you'll see what I mean. There is more character in the pose on a psyduck, the pattern on a togepi, or the eyes on a garchomp than there are in a Spartan's visor or a Blops avatar. It may not hold you 'till the end, but hopefully it will hook you long enough for the game to grow on you.
I don't truly understand number 6, flow, yet, but hopefully the 4 reasons above are good enough.

Thanks for reading, I hope I've been helpful.
 

LittleChone

New member
May 17, 2010
403
0
0
Madara XIII said:
LittleChone said:
This.

Is where all video game rivals spanned from.
Ah, the idealist and optimistic hero who would do whatever he could to help those in need despite losing potential progress in his journey (Ash) vs The do whatever it takes to be the best, Troll who accomplished everything worthwhile before you did (Gary)


U MAD ASH!?




True.
 

Tirusr

New member
Jan 18, 2011
2
0
0
subtlefuge said:
To an extent I understand the argument against the new games, but I don't agree with it at all. Between versions there may only be minor changes, but the difference between Gen I and Gen IV is staggering. It's gotten way better and way more competitive.

I'm cautiously optimistic about Gen V, I've read and seen a lot about it and it looks...interesting.
Yea, I didn't play gen 2. But I played gen 3 and really liked it. Now I'm waiting for gen 5. Differences should be interesting.

And some other stuff I forgot to mention.

You can now have your pkmn unlearn HM moves. AND you can have them learn old moves. This strangly lets evolved pokemon learn attacks their previous forms did not. Not sure what gens they added each feature.

And no matter what game you play, grinding is involved. A game is ALWAYS a task that is repetitive. Can't be avoided or you don't have a game, just something to poke at.