PSP or NDS

Wait guys, what is the purpose of the PSP Go?

 

There's a difference between fact and opinion. I suggest you learn it. If you don't like Pokémon, fine. Doesn't mean, even for a second, that Pokémon is a bad game. Plenty of people, myself included, have happily enjoyed Pokémon since the series first came out. Yeah, okay, so the mechanics could do with a reboot. But why bother when there's nothing actually wrong with them? If people are happy to buy the same sports games and the same shooters each and every year, then fans of Pokémon shouldn't be judged for being happy to buy the same Pokémon each year.

To be an overpriced piece of useless rubbish that means Sony can say "We can do an Apple too!".

 

I would have to say Mario is just as worn out, if not more. I would also have to say Final Fantasy is reaching that point, ever since X-2 and on, it's been rather disappointing.

Why change the mechanics if it works? I was pissed when the last few FFs came out that weren't turn based. Dirge of Cerberus? What the hell was that? Crisis Core is of course, the exception.

 

Yeah, that's true. They do only add new mechanics, new Pokémon and new sprites each and generation. But isn't it, then, a testament to the whole "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" concept? If there aren't any major gameplay changes they can apply to keep the game the same, but fresher... Isn't that a testament to the almost perfect gameplay for its type? I could understand if the games were boring, or generic, but Pokémon is Pokémon and you can't get the same experience anywhere else. There's nothing quite like Pokémon, is there? Whether or not that's a good thing is entirely subjective. I applaud them for not having changed the formula, since I don't WANT to play another generic RPG - I want to play Pokémon.

 

But there is no real difference between playing Pokemon Red, Pokemon Fire Red, Pokemon Sapphire, Pokemon Gold, and Pokemon Pearl... you do the exact same thing, so why not just play Red half a dozen times?

It's like instead of releasing a new game, they just re-release the same game.

The real reason they don't change it is not because of "If it ain't broke don't fix it". It's because if they changed it, it would confuse and frighten their 5-10 year old crowd and they wouldn't sell as much.

 

Anyone can see there's a massive difference between the original Red and Platinum - there are 343 more Pokémon, for one, and Wi-Fi multiplayer, and Abilities, and Natures, and the Battle Frontier and all sorts. There are more changes per Pokémon game than there are per ANY sports game, for example. If Madden, FIFA, all those games can come out every year with basically no difference whatsoever, why can't Pokémon? Especially when it DOES change everything except the core mechanics of battle and the Pokédex?

 

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean that it makes Pokemon GOOD for doing it. Madden, FIFA, etc. Their new copies every year are stupid. 08 or 09, they updated a roster maybe? Big deal.

You'd have a point if I were worshiping the ground Madden walked on while dissing Pokemon. But guess what, that feature sucks for both games.


And 343 "new" pokemon. Ha. 343 Clones of existing pokemon with a pallet change.

 

They're not palette swaps. It's not hard to see they're not palette swaps. What gives with the over generalisation? I'm merely saying that people can't use that as an excuse to whine about Pokémon when many, many, other games do it. What does Call of Duty 4 do that Call of Duty 5 doesn't? Nothing. They're just set in different regions locations, with different Pokémon guns. Just because Pokémon is a little more straightforward in the lacking differences doesn't mean it should be singled out for it.

 

You use the same palette for each graphic data to save vram of course Doesn't mean they're clones. Even if they are the same, they each have their differences. This is why I will continue to play them.

 

I agree with Wintrale as "one person's poison could be another person's cure". I see not much problem with people liking the Pokemon even if the franchise is being heavily re-used. Tell me which game does not? What is the diff between each God of War that you all worshiped so much differ from each other? More violence and nudity and that's what you all would call change or addition? How about other successful games like Halo or Monster Hunter and a lots more. Thats the idea of the whole gaming franchise. Even Dragon Quest stay with it's root till now and it's still sell like hot cakes. If Pokemon is being overused sure the reviewer in all mags or web will say it but you can still see it garners positive reviews and score everywhere. Can you name a game that is as successful as Pokemon? It singlehandedly brings GB sales to over the top, generate more than 5 movies so far (and counting but from Final Fantasy ...2 including the Advent Children), a successful TCG(Trading Card Game for those who do not know) that even challenged MTG at one time, and the series went all the way to all Nintendo Portable top seller list. IF its being overused or being over repetitive the sales will not be that encouraging right? IMHO, to bash a game one have to try the game first then only bash.

You may have try one or few and get bored with it but there are a lot others who don't so let it be. Everyone have their own taste.

I am not a Pokemon fan but I like to based my arguments on facts and numbers.

 

God of War, Halo and every other game changes the story in each game. That is a fact. The Story is a Huge piece of the puzzle when making a game.
If you are a fanboy of a franchise any little change will be enough to buy a new installment. ie pokemon, its not a bad thing i guess, but they should really try something new.

 

problem with Pokemon games is that every new release, the most distinguishable change is the number of new Pokemons. The gameplay's still the same, the graphics are very slightly upgraded, and the hero still walks like a turtle (at least on my preferences).

if that's the only changes to every release, why don't they just put it as an update or something? i know every Pokemon release is getting more sales than the past ones (which is probably the main reason why they're releasing each one as a different game each time), but come on, that's basically the same game i played a decade ago.

 

I had yet gone into the story of each Pokemon other than the GB versions which I played all of it. The stories does feel diff at then no sure of it for the later expansion. But as per explained by Wintrale, there is some significant additions and some which I knew is the Dual Pokemon battles, Wi-Fi play and to name a few. But if one to justify Pokemon is nothing new due to gameplay is same, graphic is not upgraded or items in the game then I will say its a bit unfair as all other game series tend to do the same. The famous Dragon Quest remains the same until now. The well-known Megaten series used the same gameplay, spells and monsters but its still sell well. To me the mechanic is not the gameseller alone. Things to consider would be like the story (not sure if later Pokemon offer this) and if the game is fun.

ps:- Pokemon does make the collecting items/monsters to be fun again in RPG so much it help to the trend into all our current RPG not to mentioned a few clones.

and I love this active thread

 

If it's simply just a repeat of game mechanics, and it sells well, why change it?

On a very basic level, the latest generation of pokemon is really the same from the original. The latest ones have sold rather well due to the added wifi features. You can trade/battle with anyone that has an established internet connection. The added player vs. player aspect is one of the strongest selling points, in my opinion.

WoW is very much the same, except that WoW works in expansions, not "entirely different games." There is not much difference between WoW Classic compared to TBC compared to WoLtK. The key differences are the many patches that attempt to balance classes, extra regions, new bosses, and stronger gear. The idea is still the same. Quest, grind, farm, raid, all to obtain one goal...to be better than your opponent. Once the road to 80 is done, it's simply just badge farming and tier tokens. Once the raid gear is all obtained, people will PvP until they obtain the PvP gear, and then PvP some more to get the Arena gear. Then another expansion comes out and the process starts over.

 

does anybody know how to get homebrew things on a ds lite?

 

If a game like Call of Duty which you have alluded to, did the same thing as pokemon then it would be the exact same missions on the exact same maps, but they just added 10 new weapons. So comparing pokemon sequels to call of duty or most other games is not only wrong it ridiculous. Comparing Pokemon to sports games like Madden is right, because it appeals to the fanboys who want to own every installment of the franchise. Although the updated rosters means a whole lot more in the game especially if your a fan of a team whose roster got updated with s star player.

 

A few things...
If you are comparing pokemon sequels (not versions), then your comparison is wrong. There are new regions, and no they are not the same. Even if you wanted to compare Kanto from the first generation to the second, it is really a "new" region because of the progression of time.

If you are comparing versions, not sequels, then an appropriate comparison would be like Allies to Axis, Terrorists to Counterterrorists, or Alliance to Horde, except that pokemon versions are entirely separate games. In Pokemon Red, you get Growlithe, in Blue, you get Vulpix, same types but different pokemon, but serve the same purpose.

If you're referring to the same exact maps persay, like Kanto in Pokemon Red to FireRed, that is considered a remake. Even then, those are completely different games. Updated graphics, different movesets, as well as anything else 3rd gen.

With the addition of platinum, even with the minor changes that they did...it has changed the entire metagame around, some of which I'm not thrilled on...

Halo 1 to Halo 2 was a success, but Halo 2 to Halo 3 was not. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Oh, and for the record, Call of Duty was only good during United Offensive and COD4. 2 and 3 sucked. Anything past 4 I haven't played.

 

Totally agree with you man, good point there and it seems to be very hard to let them know that every Pokemon is different don't it?