|
no, it needs an alternate evolution named Alakaslam
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
Chill Penguin posted:Actually, it's a good idea. In past generations, maybe it would've been bad, but I think it's cool how you can go a couple different ways at certain points in Generations 1 & 2. It worked really well in BOTW. There's no reason they couldn't make the gyms scale/change based on how many badges you have. As for wild Pokémon, I don't think there's anything wrong with Route 1 always having level 2 Pidgeys and Route 50 always having level 65 Mienfoos, or whatever. Yes, please destroy the level curve again like Gen 2 did for an illusion of freedom. That worked really well, I loved the completely flat level curve that made the Elite Four an absolute joke and the game lazily tried to make up for with gigantic spikes late Kanto with no way whatsoever to get your Pokemon up to the right level because even the wild Pokemon were terribly low. There's a lot wrong with Route 1 always having level 2 Pidgeys and Route 50 always having Level 65 Mienfoos. If you want a non-linear game, congratulations, you ruined it. You literally can't go anywhere but Route 1 because you'll get destroyed because - and I'm not sure how this is this hard to understand - levels matter. A lot. You can't do poo poo if you're 50 levels lower. You have the exact same thing as you would normally, only you can now go die if you really feel like it, I guess? Also, this is a little thing people keep forgetting about Pokemon that makes it literally impossible for it to go open-world, non-linear or whatever. You can make the Gyms scale, sure. Have eight different teams for each, it's a gigantic amount of labour for no payoff, but let's pretend GameFreak have infinite time and this would actually make for a better game. You can make Pokemon in random routes scale up as you gain badges, why not, it'd just be a matter of increasing levels...so long as you have about, what, three species? Five? Ten, if you're feeling generous? Because that matters too, you know. Gotta catch 'em all may not be the series slogan anymore but it's still something you're encouraged to do. You want variety in routes, and that means having more difficult, more evolved encounters later. You'd need that to change accordingly to your badges too, meaning that now you need several different encounter lists for every single route. But hey, we pretended time is infinite before, let's do it again. This brings another problem, one time can't stop: you can permanently lock yourself out of specific Pokemon. You got too late to a route and now the scaling means that a Pokemon can't appear anymore? Too bad. You can trade it, I guess! And that's only some of the reasons why this is a bad idea. Pokemon is too forcefully linear to ever change. You can't even use actual skill to make up for statistical difference, because it's a turn-based RPG so numbers matter far more than anything else. This is an example that'll get me some hate, but if you watched SAO, there's an episode where a bunch of guys try to cut Kirito to pieces and fail because he's a terribly-written invincible overlord, but also because the level difference is just so big that he can't be harmed. He's protected by literal number difference, and that will happen here too, even moreso because you have no movement or anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 00:49
|
|
|
maybe they would structure the game around non-linearity instead of doing the stupid thing that stupid people assume they'll do and arbitrarily port all systems one-to-one to a completely new structure without giving a second thought to how those things would interact with each other
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
Well, first of all, I can't come up with a design for it in three minutes of posting, so obviously that's impossible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 01:02
|
|
|
Bleck posted:maybe they would structure the game around non-linearity instead of doing the stupid thing that stupid people assume they'll do and arbitrarily port all systems one-to-one to a completely new structure without giving a second thought to how those things would interact with each other I mean yeah it could be good, but they've tried it before and wasn't done well. Hell, they remade gen 2 and had a chance to fix it and it's kind of more busted. Gen 5, their first attempt at XP scaling, was also really not done well. The next game just said gently caress It and gave to a key item early on to give everything xp constantly to just ignore dealing with level curve tuning. They clearly aren't skilled at it and are kind of doing their best to just try to ignore it best as possible. I honestly would rather make a good game with a structure they're getting really good at actually doing in favor of freedom because they've just never done that well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
Eox posted:no, it needs an alternate evolution named Alakaslam 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
Eox posted:no, it needs an alternate evolution named Alakaslam Finally, a worthy Hawlucha tag partner.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 01:26
|
|
|
Blaze Dragon posted:Because that matters too, you know. Gotta catch 'em all may not be the series slogan anymore but it's still something you're encouraged to do. You want variety in routes, and that means having more difficult, more evolved encounters later. You'd need that to change accordingly to your badges too, meaning that now you need several different encounter lists for every single route. But hey, we pretended time is infinite before, let's do it again. This brings another problem, one time can't stop: you can permanently lock yourself out of specific Pokemon. You got too late to a route and now the scaling means that a Pokemon can't appear anymore? Too bad. You can trade it, I guess! That problem could be easily solved by items that change the encounter table for a certain period of time. I just think it's possible to find solutions to these problems. Maybe the game doesn't have to be completely open. Maybe you start in the centre of the map, and thus the outer areas will not have a need for low level encounter tables. Perhaps only a third of the map is open at a time, and reaching a certain stage in the story triggers more areas to open up and a change in encounter tables. That might bring it down to a maximum of 3 encounter tables per area. Maybe the earlier areas of the game only go to a maximum of level 25, middle areas to level 45 and outer areas to level 65. Even just allowing a moderate level of choice in how you progress on the map would be a welcome change. You can give the illusion of having an open world game without making it completely open. I think what people want in their open world games is simply a lot of interesting areas to explore with lots of secrets to find. One thing that really struck me about the Let's Go trailer was how compact and narrow the routes look, like they're practically hallways for the player to travel down, even when they aren't a literal hallway. It definitely pegs it as a game for small children who could easily get lost. It could be fun to get lost in a Pokemon game. I'd just like to go exploring with my Pokemon friends without worrying about annoying random encounters every 15 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
Yeah a game where you beat the first two gyms, the game opens up and you can do gyms 3 and 4 in either order, then 5-6-7 in any order, then the inevitable evil team plot, then the final gym, would rule.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 01:37
|
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:I mean yeah it could be good, but they've tried it before and wasn't done well. Hell, they remade gen 2 and had a chance to fix it and it's kind of more busted. Gen 5, their first attempt at XP scaling, was also really not done well. The next game just said gently caress It and gave to a key item early on to give everything xp constantly to just ignore dealing with level curve tuning. They clearly aren't skilled at it and are kind of doing their best to just try to ignore it best as possible. I honestly would rather make a good game with a structure they're getting really good at actually doing in favor of freedom because they've just never done that well. consider; just straight up don't have exp
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 01:44
|
|
|
Eox posted:no, it needs an alternate evolution named Alakaslam 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 02:12
|
|
|
Lotta people itt expressing extremely complicated changes to a massively popular children’s game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
Nessa posted:One thing that really struck me about the Let's Go trailer was how compact and narrow the routes look, like they're practically hallways for the player to travel down, even when they aren't a literal hallway. It definitely pegs it as a game for small children who could easily get lost. It could be fun to get lost in a Pokemon game. I'd just like to go exploring with my Pokemon friends without worrying about annoying random encounters every 15 seconds. They're compact and narrow because they're literally Gen 1 routes with no changes whatsoever beyond graphics. That's what the Gameboy could do, and that's what we're getting, because exploiting nostalgia is more important than actually modernizing something for a remake. Or rather, you can modernize, so long as it isn't Kanto, Kanto is sacred and untouchable, despite being outdated as hell. Bleck posted:consider; just straight up don't have exp Considered, tell me what you'd replace it with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 02:20
|
|
|
Blaze Dragon posted:Considered, tell me what you'd replace it with. skill and high-level 12th dimensional chess prediction, just like in my pokemon showdown dot com
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
Bleck posted:consider; just straight up don't have exp they have plenty of spinoffs if you want to play Pokemon as a different genre then rpg
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Yeah a game where you beat the first two gyms, the game opens up and you can do gyms 3 and 4 in either order, then 5-6-7 in any order, then the inevitable evil team plot, then the final gym, would rule. I have also played Gens 1 and 2 yeah.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 02:45
|
|
|
they should make pokémon a metroidvania but all the gates are psyducks blocking the way
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
gen 2 was good thank you
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
Gen 2 reremake thats botw style and developed by platinum, but also a battle royale.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
Zore posted:I have also played Gens 1 and 2 yeah. Only Gen 1 played like that. Gen 2 was 1-2-3-4 (need 4 and surf to progress)-5 or 6 or 7-8.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
Hi it’s me I’m the player who does not want an open world and is ok with the same formula the series has always had. Seriously, I hope gen 8 is just incrementally different than USUM Not everything should be open world. Pokémon does not need to be
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:33
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:Hi it’s me I’m the player who does not want an open world and is ok with the same formula the series has always had. Seriously, I hope gen 8 is just incrementally different than USUM 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:34
|
|
|
The problem with GF is the total refusal to fix and retcon things that only made sense in their respective generations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:41
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:Hi it’s me I’m the player who does not want an open world and is ok with the same formula the series has always had. Seriously, I hope gen 8 is just incrementally different than USUM Same. The people who want a complete overhaul are the minority, the majority of players are fine with the game evolving but staying true to the formula it's succeeded with for seven generations. Changing it into something completely new works for series' that are always trying new things, not for games that have been improving upon the same formula.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:43
|
|
|
qnqnx posted:The problem with GF is the total refusal to fix and retcon things that only made sense in their respective generations. I mean even that's getting inconsistent. Gen VI and VII had them do stat adjustments and some pretty huge move adjustments and they've added new evolution methods for things they stopped supporting (Milotic) etc. Which makes a bunch of the stuff they don't mess with more baffling. Fix the evolution levels for Gen V pokemon u fuks
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 03:45
|
|
|
I’d like gen 8 to mostly be the same but to continue to get rid of tediousness. Axing random battles would be nice and help with that. Let me see Pokémon in the world before confronting them like in Let’s Go. I’d be fine with every single other aspect being the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:06
|
|
|
SeANMcBAY posted:I’d like gen 8 to mostly be the same but to continue to get rid of tediousness. There's still a lot of low-hanging fruit they could pluck to make the games better before getting into radical change territory!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:14
|
|
|
-Remove location-based evolution -Change all Mega Stones to a single Mega Stone held item to lower collectible-obtaining tedium -Just get rid of all the Memories, they're pointless, let Silvally use Plates and Z-Crystals -Have a specialized bag slot for the Mega Stone and Z-Crystals -Change Politoed, Remoraid and Octillery to their far superior beta versions -Lower handholding in the beginning of the game -Postgame, with a challenge that's challenging but fair and fun (something Game Freak is terrible at) -Stop discarding good stuff, expand upon existing things like Mega Evolution and Regional Forms instead of adding a new gimmick that'll last a single gen -Maybe a properly-implemented hard mode? I dunno, those are the things at the top of my head I want far more than change for change's sake. I think SM did well on the changing by replacing Gyms with something new (though that's something that could have greater implementation too), adding proper boss battles in Totems and finally removing HMs. Do not bring HMs back.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:20
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:they have plenty of spinoffs if you want to play Pokemon as a different genre then rpg Maybe the problem is that there's basically no way to actually make an "RPG", which in this case I am taking to mean "press the A button until your numbers are high enough", that is actually, like, you know, good? Like, put succinctly, the reason Pokemon has had so much trouble improving on its "RPG" mechanics is because RPGs are pretty crappy. Like, literally nobody has fond memories of Pokemon because of the wonderful time that they spent murdering one million Digletts so that their starter could be strong enough to gently caress up Blue. Of all the valuable things that Pokemon brings to the table, its boring bullshit numbertron nonsense is not one of them. Blaze Dragon posted:Considered, tell me what you'd replace it with. I don't know, man - all I know is that the only reason experience exists is to gate me from experiencing the actual fun parts of the game (catching new pokemon, trainer battles, exploring new areas, etc.). Just make evolution and move learning tied to a flat number of battles won instead of experience points, keep stats at a basic flat number based on species, keep Let's Go's wild pokemon mechanics where you just throw poo poo at them after you find them (or maybe something more interesting), and I'm set.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:44
|
|
|
Bleck posted:Maybe the problem is that there's basically no way to actually make an "RPG", which in this case I am taking to mean "press the A button until your numbers are high enough", that is actually, like, you know, good? Maybe you just don't like Pokemon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:45
|
|
|
Bleck posted:Just make evolution and move learning tied to a flat number of battles won instead of experience points,
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:Maybe you just don't like Pokemon. Those are all pretty reasonable suggestions. No one likes Pokémon for that stuff. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:47
|
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:Maybe you just don't like Pokemon. I love Pokemon. I'm just also capable of recognizing that the things that most people like about Pokemon are not things like "math" and "extremely repetitive tasks". Funky Valentine posted:This is completely and totally different than EXP because............. The flat stats, dude. The difference between "I lost this battle because my strategy was less good than my opponents" and "I lost this battle because I did not murder enough Digletts beforehand". Like, people can't complain about the games not having 'good progression' or being 'too easy' and then scoff at the suggestion that the systems that cause these problems should be altered.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:50
|
|
|
SeANMcBAY posted:Those are all pretty reasonable suggestions. No one likes Pokémon for that stuff. I mean his idea to replace Exp a number you get after battles is to replace it with a slightly differently presented number you get after a battle. If that's your idea for reasonable I'm not exactly sure you should be worrying about mechanics so much
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:50
|
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:I mean his idea to replace Exp a number you get after battles is to replace it with a slightly differently presented number you get after a battle. If that's your idea for reasonable I'm not exactly sure you should be worrying about mechanics so much The idea is to alter the progression so that it's based on success rather than a grind. With the current system, battles get easier the more you do them, and as such anyone who wants the game to be remotely challenging has to actively avoid playing the game to do so. If you instead make the battles have basic difficulty progression - e.g, once you've completed a certain number of battles and/or defeated a gym leader or etc., you and your opponents gain access to more complex moves and more powerful pokemon - then the challenge of the trainer battles can remain a constant.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:55
|
|
|
Bleck posted:I love Pokemon. I'm just also capable of recognizing that the things that most people like about Pokemon are not things like "math" and "extremely repetitive tasks". Flat stats would be loving awful. You'd be condemning most pokemon to trash tier status without even the ability to use whatever pokemon you like. Like I took a Gumshoos to the E4 in Sun and Moon cause I like Gumshoos. He was even able to contribute fairly well because he outlevelled a number of their pokemon. If he was on an even plane he'd have been loving deadweight. Sometimes you want to beat up Red with a Spinarak (I have done this in Gold).
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 04:56
|
|
|
Zore posted:You'd be condemning most pokemon to trash tier status without even the ability to use whatever pokemon you like. I do not know why it's so difficult to understand that they can just change that. They can restructure the entire system however they like. There's literally no limit to what they can do while physically creating this video game, but everyone's first instinct is to assume that fuckin' Sunkern or whatever's base stat total is totally canonized and cannot possibly be altered at any point for any reason? Don't look at it as changing the game from the bottom up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 05:00
|
|
|
Bleck posted:I do not know why it's so difficult to understand that they can just change that. They can restructure the entire system however they like. quote:Don't look at it as changing the game from the bottom up. quote:They can restructure the entire system however they like. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
Please note that "but that would be hard" is not a good reason to attempt to fix problems with something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 05:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
Bleck posted:Please note that "but that would be hard" is not a good reason to attempt to fix problems with something. Not everyone sees it as a problem considering they're massively successful and popular. I personally do not. Also the games would probably be a lot less popular if you rip out one of the core number feedback loops  people love seeing numbers go up. Everything has levelup mechanics now for a reason.
Zore fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Jun 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 05:07
|
|