VGCollect Forum
General and Gaming => General => Topic started by: Warmsignal on October 22, 2019, 01:32:26 pm
-
I don't know if this has been discussed before. But I've always noticed a lot of hardcore gamers and collectors tend to own a lot of Pokemon games. Admittedly I did play Pokemon Red back in the day, but I was also still young and I was totally bought into the whole Pokemon fad that was going on at the time. However, the Pokemon games did not stop coming, even after the fad died out (to my knowledge). Every console generation has seen at least 3 or 4 installments of (Pokemon this color or that color). Once they ran out of colors, they started just picking random objects and naming the after those things (Pokemon Sun, Pokemon Moon, Pokemon Cheese, Pokemon Doorstop).
To me, this stuff is like Assisin's Creed or COD. It's the same thing over and over every year. What is different? The roster of Pokemon on each game? Why do people (primarily the older crowd) still care about Pokemon enough to own all of these installments? Is it just that fun to collect random Pokemon and level them up in random battles that doesn't matter how many times they rehash it? Is it pure nostalgia for the era when Pokemon was cool? Is it OCD? Gotta catch em all? Why so many Pokemon games, and why are they still so relevant 20 years later?
I own zero Pokemon games and have no desire to, although I could probably justify owning one. I don't see the point in owning 4 or so, per console generation. I could only see that if you were super into the Pokemon universe still. Which outside of games (and I never hear anything about the actual games either) it seems like nobody is, over the age of 12. But everybody owns them all. So, what it is?
-
I think a huge contributor is the lack of franchise fatigue. Mainline Pokémon doesn’t get a new release every year, unlike CoD or AC. It’s usually years between. I’m not certain, but there have probably been as many CoD releases in the last decade as there have been Pokémon in the last two (if you consider the dual releases as a single title).
Note that this is just pure speculation on my part as I have never played a Pokémon game, and don’t really get it either.
-
there is a new pokemon game every 1 or two years never longer than that as far as the main series go. no long breaks there. longer than 2 years is a nono for pokemon.
also getting a game every year does not give a series fatique.
Last time i checked call of duty mobile had even more downloads than mario kart tour in it's first week. main series is as popular as ever same goes for sports games
a ton of people want more of the same thing some things are just needed and them companies give it to them. why change something if it ain't broke for the majority.
as far as pokemon games go some games are for sure better than others.
emerald, platinum, heartgold soul silver and black & white 2 are the best mainline pokemon games. with good story and great content
however in recent years the games got more child friendly kiddy art style more easy dumb after each release thanks to pokemon go.
Haven't played a new pokemon game since x and Y no desire to really especially with them influences of pokemon go in every new release.
new creatures do not make a great pokemon game it's usually the extra content and characters that make or break the game.
also kinda sad that the mystery dungeon series is gone after going downhill in quality on the 3ds and ofcourse pokemon ranger series and the single pokemon conquest game wich never got a sequel.
-
I love me some shiny Pokemon.
-
for the casual crowd it's all about catching them all new creatures
pokemon go is the perfect example crappy game crappy music crappy everyhing only about catching pokemon. what trash game that was.
for me personally
pokemon had great soundtrack newer games not that much. the soundtrack can be absolutely fantastic in some games.
puzzle solving especially in the old era to unlock some pokemon or reading for example braille to unlock the message in what you need to do to capture the regies. back in the day there where so many people speculating about that stuff the puzzles where hard only few people knew what to do. everything in general in them gba and early ds era was kinda tricky storywise for most people.
the world and the people in them games. hidden jokes some nsfw messages mysteries that never get solved in wich you can only guess what might have happened etc etc fun stuff to explore it's not only about catching stuff it's an rpg after all a pretty big one as far as the world goes.
strategies in battle changing in each generation.
in gen 1 for example a weak move such as wrap with only 20 power was better than hyper beam with 150 power only because in gen 1 certain moves where broken. and bind would damage a pokemon every turn and the pokemon in the move could not use a single move. being frozen in gen 1 as also broken. being caught by either one just means being dead. pokemon like dragonite used wrap not hypebeam kinda crazy if you think about it.
or gen 5 with dark void to name one example. an 80 accuracy move that would put multiple pokemon to sleep on a super fast pokemon. fighting against friends with your best team was fun especially if you had pokemon battle revolution for wii to get epic battles wich have better battle animations than even current gen games poemon let's go and pokemon sword & shield giving it actually a console experience. them side games where made by a different company though so that's probably the reason why it was better. pokemon ranger games for example where made by hal labaratory and creatures
creators of kirby and earthbound. totally different creators than for the mainline pokemon games
same goes for pokemon colloseum and xd gale of darkness.
-
I don't think they are remotely the same games each time. It has the same formula sure but all video games keep the same formula. The plot, the characters, the setting, the pokemon, the catching style, the accesories and UI all change. The only thing that stays the same is that it's a turn based RPG where you catch pokemon. They do just about as much leg work as most Turn based RPG franchises do now. Same as a Mario. It's the same old formula we know and love but not by any means are the games the exact same.
Same applies for Call of Duty. I disagree very much with the notion that it's a rehash. I've heard that statement since 2007 regarding Call of Duty. The game is over a decade old and still sells more than almost any other game. And it's because it changes enough to warrant another buy. Call of Duty changes immensely every year which is why people still come back. Outside of becoming a tennis game, they do all they can to make it feel fresh. The setting, theme, guns, modes, era, war, costumes, story, plot, side modes, UI. All change. The only thing that is the same as the old call of duties is that it's a first person shooter.
Theirs not much else they didn't change over the years. It changes about as much as Mario Kart does. But Mario Kart doesn't get the same hate because it's Mario Kart. Picking up Mario Kart 8, outside of minor nuances, it's Mario Kart Wii. But it has new tracks, new power ups, new kart customzing. It's very much different.
Last year COD tried the royale thing. This year they are doing hoarde modes and going full ground war with huge lobbies like battlefield. They heard for years that every call of duty was the same. So then they changed it to sci fi jet pack crazy stuff with wars in outer space and people got mad. Saying they wanted the old COD back. So they try to stay more grounded lately with WW2 games and now people are saying they are being boring and predictable again. I don't envy their dev team. Balancing on that tight rope must be draining.
As a whole, I think it's still popular because it's still a great game. Same reason you can repackage Tetris a bunch of different ways and still sell copies. It's a timeless classic that all ages can pick up and enjoy :D. And so long as Pikachu exists, little kids will always want a Nintendo in their hand lol.
-
I agree with you marvelvscapcom
it's usually only the hardcore people that play them games allot that spot the differences in each release.
wich usually also include different game mechanics.
from the outside a ton of casual people would say it's the same while it's clearly not
you could say that for call of duty or the brand new fifa games wich come out each year. it's definitely not the same for the people who play those games allot.
Just like with smash ultimate in wich a ton of people say it is the same as smash 4 wich it isn't by a long shot. gameplay has changed by quite allot.
-
Boiling it down to just bare RPG elements, it has the largest casts of party characters of any RPG and arguably the best soundtracks of any RPG.
-
I don't think they are remotely the same games each time. It has the same formula sure but all video games keep the same formula. The plot, the characters, the setting, the pokemon, the catching style, the accesories and UI all change. The only thing that stays the same is that it's a turn based RPG where you catch pokemon. They do just about as much leg work as most Turn based RPG franchises do now. Same as a Mario. It's the same old formula we know and love but not by any means are the games the exact same.
Same applies for Call of Duty. I disagree very much with the notion that it's a rehash. I've heard that statement since 2007 regarding Call of Duty. The game is over a decade old and still sells more than almost any other game. And it's because it changes enough to warrant another buy. Call of Duty changes immensely every year which is why people still come back. Outside of becoming a tennis game, they do all they can to make it feel fresh. The setting, theme, guns, modes, era, war, costumes, story, plot, side modes, UI. All change. The only thing that is the same as the old call of duties is that it's a first person shooter.
Got to disagree with that. With the mainline Mario or Mario Kart series you get maybe one all-new game per console generation, sometimes two. With Pokemon it's more like four or five, with CoD it's more like six or seven. However with Mario, and even with CoD, you don't get multiple versions of essentially the same release. That's what makes the Pokemon series feel so over-done. Instead of buying just one new game, you have to get two or three every time to get all of the content.
When you saturate the market with very similar games every year or every other year, it's going to get hate from all of the people that last year's game didn't win over. It also feels cheap, like a cash grab. Having technically less than a year to develop a sequel to a game doesn't bode well for the integrity of any series, even if it's multiple companies making the games. It's like, why couldn't that just be an expansion pack? Why couldn't the multiple versions of Pokemon just be a download within one big game with all of the content?
Last year COD tried the royale thing. This year they are doing hoarde modes and going full ground war with huge lobbies like battlefield. They heard for years that every call of duty was the same. So then they changed it to sci fi jet pack crazy stuff with wars in outer space and people got mad. Saying they wanted the old COD back. So they try to stay more grounded lately with WW2 games and now people are saying they are being boring and predictable again. I don't envy their dev team. Balancing on that tight rope must be draining.
What they need to do is stop putting out a CoD every single year, or even every other year but Activision says give me MOAR. Risks? Fresh IPs? Different genres? What's that? To hell with that, give the masses CoMFD and get me PAID! Back to the dungeon at once code monkeys! And so we get another CoD this year.
As a whole, I think it's still popular because it's still a great game. Same reason you can repackage Tetris a bunch of different ways and still sell copies. It's a timeless classic that all ages can pick up and enjoy :D. And so long as Pikachu exists, little kids will always want a Nintendo in their hand lol.
The only reason to re-package Tetris is to make it more accessible on modern consoles. It's always the same game BUT, at least it's not Tetris 19' with Tetris 20' already in the works. It's also not Tetris Red, along with Tetris Blue and Tetris Green.
-
I gave up after the sprite-based games. I've bought X and Sun, but haven't finished either. It's taking every ounce of my strength just to not buy Let's Go and Sword/Shield. I'll probably still get them... I think it's just nostalgia. I still play through red/yellow every once in awhile (last time for the 20th anniversary when yellow was on 3ds). They're just good little RPGs.
But, they've totally lost me in terms of the actual games. Just waaay too much fluff and the stories just got weird and goofy. I mean, the old stories were a bit goofy too, but limited by 8 bit hardware. I'm not in to the competitive/meta game. I tried to do the collect them all thin when pokemon bank was a just starting out. Played through all the games and loaded them in there. Then forgot to change my credit card info and lapsed the account and lost them all... that pretty much marked the end of that goal.
-
That whole "Catch 'Em All" aspect is something that keeps appealing to folks. Every gen offers up a bunch of new and quirky Pokemon to collect and battle with and it's generally a pretty easy game so kids will always like it and there's the long term fans who've kept up with due to that aspect and the deeper elements the series has always had.
I personally didn't keep up with the series after Yellow because it was a portable only series, so I didn't get burnt out on it like some did, so Let's Go Pikachu was a nice time, though basic, but the nostalgia got me good (Even if capturing Pokemon kinda sucked) and I'm looking forward to Pokemon Sword and Shield.
-
What they need to do is stop putting out a CoD every single year, or even every other year but Activision says give me MOAR. Risks? Fresh IPs? Different genres? What's that? To hell with that, give the masses CoMFD and get me PAID! Back to the dungeon at once code monkeys! And so we get another CoD this year.
you clearly have a biased opinion about the cod series.
You don't need to like the game but cmon why wouldn't they bring out a new call of duty game each year? it prints money your argument is so flawed it always is one of the best selling series it's the reason why many people buy a console in the first place. a ton of hardcore gamers only play this game series or at least for the majority of their game time.
Heck even my dad who doesnt like games plays call of duty once in a while there something about most men WWII and weapons playing as realistic soldiers that is appealing as far as the more casual crowd goes who normally arent into games. same goes for especially modern sports games.
also as far as hardcore players of these series go there are differences that affect gameplay new modes etc so it's not the same stuff every year. it's pretty easy to critize a series if your not really into it. for a ton of people this series is a day 1 buy every year. And heck why shouldn't they be excited if it's the one game they play the most when they play on pc or console.
As a whole, I think it's still popular because it's still a great game. Same reason you can repackage Tetris a bunch of different ways and still sell copies. It's a timeless classic that all ages can pick up and enjoy :D. And so long as Pikachu exists, little kids will always want a Nintendo in their hand lol.
The only reason to re-package Tetris is to make it more accessible on modern consoles. It's always the same game BUT, at least it's not Tetris 19' with Tetris 20' already in the works. It's also not Tetris Red, along with Tetris Blue and Tetris Green.
first of all your not supposed to buy both pokemon red and blue your supposed to trade with other players. the game are basicly the same and should be treated as a single release your just missing a few pokemon some things are a bit different. sure there are some hardcore fans crazy enough to buy both but that's not really what one should do. you clearly lack the knowledge if you think your missing out on a ton by not buying both versions not to mention that with trades friends and from the ds era onwards online you could easily get the other pokemon by online trade. always some noob who would trade a legendary for trash. also in them gameboy releases before online trade all the exclusive pokemon could be bred and where normal non legendary pokemon you could easily trade them with others they could be gotten unlimited times on a single file. but even withouth that your not missing anything of value honestly.
Pokemon yellow on the other hand and platinum and emerald the series that where released after the dual release have a ton of extra content usually a different story different music etc etc. especially for the people who are into these kinds of games there is tons of new content especially post game.
saying that every pokemon game with each passing generation being the same that's just not true. Some are worse some are excellent and the newer ones being super kiddy but definitely not the same.
-
you clearly have a biased opinion about the cod series.
You don't need to like the game but cmon why wouldn't they bring out a new call of duty game each year? it prints money your argument is so flawed it always is one of the best selling series it's the reason why many people buy a console in the first place. a ton of people only play this game series.
I basically said that yes, it prints money. That's good if you're Activision, bad for the integrity of the franchise and probably video games at large. If CoD is the reason systems sell, then I'm out of touch and I feel for the dying art of video games as I once knew them.
Heck even my dad who doesnt like games plays call of duty once in a while there something about most men WWII and weapons that is appealing as far as the more casual crowd goes who normally arent into games. same goes for especially modern sports games.
also as far as hardcore players of these series go there are differences that affect gameplay new modes etc so it's not the same stuff every year. it's pretty easy to critize a series if your not really into it.
Yes of course, I love to complain about games I've never played on a message board! Except, I have played one of them. Wasn't impressed enough to ever consider buying another one. But in all honesty, I wouldn't wish the one installment per year scheduled on any of my favorite series. That would effectively kill them.
first of all your not supposed to buy both pokemon red and blue your supposed to trade with other players. the game are basicly the same and should be treated as a single release your just missing a few pokemon some things are a bit different. sure there are some hardcore fans crazy enough to buy both but that's not really what one should do. you clearly lack the knowledge if you think your missing out on a ton by not buying both versions not to mention that with trades friends and from the ds era onwards online you could easily get the other pokemon by online trade. always some noob who would trade a legendary for trash.
Pokemon yellow on the other hand and platinum and emerald the series that where released after the dual release have a ton of extra content usually a different story different music etc etc. especially for the people who are into these kinds of games there is tons of new content.
saying that every pokemon game with each passing generation being the same that's just not true. Some are worse some are excellent and the newer ones being super kiddy but definitely not the same.
I still feel like that's some kind of marketing genius to sell more games. The content, even if it's just characters shouldn't be split apart.
-
it is a marketing scam. it's like an early collectors edition/ or dlc. your getting double value from one person. the content difference is minimal you can basicly treat red/blue diamon/pearl etc etc as a single entry in the series.
even to this day the dual release sells since hardcore collectors who need every biggest release of a game buy it and pokemon will profit from it and why shouldn't they profit from ocd people who want all content no matter how small it's not like other games aren't guilty with especially micro transactions wich is even worse.. some people have the ocd to need it all it affects some people but for the majority just get your favourite part and move on your not missing out on not getting the 2nd release.
they absolutely went all out this time to make a collectors edition that contains both games since they know there are a ton of ocd collectors who need both.
https://www.vooks.net/img/2019/06/steelbook-dual-1000x560.jpg
(https://www.vooks.net/img/2019/06/steelbook-dual-1000x560.jpg)
if the catch em all mentality was really that big of a deal you could easily trade with others to complete the dex. and with the early ds era it was even more easy to get everything withouth getting both releases.
also it's not like them games are the biggest offenders to be honest 2 or 1 games per year man. that's like only 50 to 100$ a year.
ever seen pokemon card collectors?
2 to 4 sets are released every single year. obviously you won;t get all card even if you spend hundreds. now that's a money sink. pokemon cards or any card game to be honest.
that's like 500 to 1500$ a year and you probably won't have em all unless your buying them seperately on ebay from resellers.
hardcore pokemon fans spend a ton of money it's insane the pokemon games people who buy both releases that's just like a small puddle in an ocean for them
-
I'm not up enough on the Pokémon to really comment on its staying power, but I must correct one thing.
The games are not named after random objects- they're named after random SETS of objects! Pokémon cheese & Pokémon doorstop? Never happen. But Pokémon cheese & Pokémon cracker? Now we're talking! And the third release can be Pokémon salami! :P
-
I'm not up enough on the Pokémon to really comment on its staying power, but I must correct one thing.
The games are not named after random objects- they're named after random SETS of objects! Pokémon cheese & Pokémon doorstop? Never happen. But Pokémon cheese & Pokémon cracker? Now we're talking! And the third release can be Pokémon salami! :P
seems to me they are named after valuables. i get that people like to joke about them names but it's never going to be that bad.
saphire emerald, sapphire, gold silver, heartgold soulsilver. pearl diamon platinum.
sun & moon sword & shield. it's not that far fetched from the others and red blue and yellow just being named as popular colours.
I'm thinking pokemon heaven pokemon hell pokemon god being the third release or pokemon jungle pokemon sandstorm pokemon oasis as the third release.
I think pokemon arrow will be the third release or maybe pokemon armour for sword & shield.
-
you clearly have a biased opinion about the cod series.
You don't need to like the game but cmon why wouldn't they bring out a new call of duty game each year? it prints money your argument is so flawed it always is one of the best selling series it's the reason why many people buy a console in the first place. a ton of people only play this game series.
I basically said that yes, it prints money. That's good if you're Activision, bad for the integrity of the franchise and probably video games at large. If CoD is the reason systems sell, then I'm out of touch and I feel for the dying art of video games as I once knew them.
Heck even my dad who doesnt like games plays call of duty once in a while there something about most men WWII and weapons that is appealing as far as the more casual crowd goes who normally arent into games. same goes for especially modern sports games.
also as far as hardcore players of these series go there are differences that affect gameplay new modes etc so it's not the same stuff every year. it's pretty easy to critize a series if your not really into it.
Yes of course, I love to complain about games I've never played on a message board! Except, I have played one of them. Wasn't impressed enough to ever consider buying another one. But in all honesty, I wouldn't wish the one installment per year scheduled on any of my favorite series. That would effectively kill them.
first of all your not supposed to buy both pokemon red and blue your supposed to trade with other players. the game are basicly the same and should be treated as a single release your just missing a few pokemon some things are a bit different. sure there are some hardcore fans crazy enough to buy both but that's not really what one should do. you clearly lack the knowledge if you think your missing out on a ton by not buying both versions not to mention that with trades friends and from the ds era onwards online you could easily get the other pokemon by online trade. always some noob who would trade a legendary for trash.
Pokemon yellow on the other hand and platinum and emerald the series that where released after the dual release have a ton of extra content usually a different story different music etc etc. especially for the people who are into these kinds of games there is tons of new content.
saying that every pokemon game with each passing generation being the same that's just not true. Some are worse some are excellent and the newer ones being super kiddy but definitely not the same.
I still feel like that's some kind of marketing genius to sell more games. The content, even if it's just characters shouldn't be split apart.
10-20-19
-
One thing I'm seeing not touched on is the multiplayer aspect of the games, which really helps cement the series' longevity. While the the games themselves are simple, once you stop playing against ai opponents and against humans, you'll discover a much more complicated system complete with a shifting meta.
In the single player game, you can win with basically anything as since the games are designed with younger players in mind, practically everything can be brute forced by gaining levels and using healing items to overpower and outlast anything the AI can throw at the player. Go into multiplayer and there's so much more to keep track besides type matchups to secure a win. Rather that asking yourself "Do I want to use this pokemon or not?", it becomes a series of questions: "What role in my team is this pokemon going to be?" "What nature best supports it's position?" "How shall I allocate my stat points?" "Which ability is best" :What moveset should I use?" "What item should I attach?" and so on.
And then there's the metagame in the battles themselves. In single player, opponents tend to have the tactical capacity of a wet potato, so very little thought beyond "They have a fire type, I'll use water!" is needed. In multiplayer, you actually need to think tactics. People aren't just going to keep smashing their 'mons together at full force until one side gives; No, they are going to do things like swap their pokemon, create setups and traps and so on. And you also don't know what your opponent's pokemon are capable of (Is this charizard a special or a physical attacker? Does it have a move to counter a rock-type? etc.) The game becomes more trying to figure out what your opponent's team is capable of and how to best counter it with your team before it becomes too late.
And each game does greatly shake up the meta. New mechanics and changes from generation to generation will cause many pokemon to bounce around the tier lists or find their ideal roles changed around from one game to the next.
In short, the games have a very complicated and robust battling system, but a person can beat the game without understanding anything beyond the most basic elements.
-
One thing I'm seeing not touched on is the multiplayer aspect of the games, which really helps cement the series' longevity. While the the games themselves are simple, once you stop playing against ai opponents and against humans, you'll discover a much more complicated system complete with a shifting meta.
In the single player game, you can win with basically anything as since the games are designed with younger players in mind, practically everything can be brute forced by gaining levels and using healing items to overpower and outlast anything the AI can throw at the player. Go into multiplayer and there's so much more to keep track besides type matchups to secure a win. Rather that asking yourself "Do I want to use this pokemon or not?", it becomes a series of questions: "What role in my team is this pokemon going to be?" "What nature best supports it's position?" "How shall I allocate my stat points?" "Which ability is best" :What moveset should I use?" "What item should I attach?" and so on.
And then there's the metagame in the battles themselves. In single player, opponents tend to have the tactical capacity of a wet potato, so very little thought beyond "They have a fire type, I'll use water!" is needed. In multiplayer, you actually need to think tactics. People aren't just going to keep smashing their 'mons together at full force until one side gives; No, they are going to do things like swap their pokemon, create setups and traps and so on. And you also don't know what your opponent's pokemon are capable of (Is this charizard a special or a physical attacker? Does it have a move to counter a rock-type? etc.) The game becomes more trying to figure out what your opponent's team is capable of and how to best counter it with your team before it becomes too late.
And each game does greatly shake up the meta. New mechanics and changes from generation to generation will cause many pokemon to bounce around the tier lists or find their ideal roles changed around from one game to the next.
In short, the games have a very complicated and robust battling system, but a person can beat the game without understanding anything beyond the most basic elements.
first of all tactical knowledge wet potato. you can even win withouth type advantages just overlevel your stuff and win even withouth type advantage that's how most people do it, not by type advantage except maybe early on. not to mention revives hype potions etc. you can just heal your way to win.
anyways as far as challenging single player goes.
actually in pretty much every instalment starting from ruby sapphire there is a battle tower of some sort in wich all pokemon are of equal lvl. a ton of people who can't beat those. the leaders after a ton of win streaks either have pseudo legendary or myhical legendary pokemon that are not banned in competitive play not to mention pretty strong trainers from time to time in the middle as well. and you obviously can;t use the legendaries that are banned. if you lose you have to redo hours of gameplay and you can't cheat by saving after each battle it's brutal.
The most challenging of them all is the battle frontier in pokemon emerald wich aside from challenging battles had a ton of variety in the overworld aside from battles in the battle frontier. battle pyramid seviper doom etc. if you beat the battle tower you get points and symbols/badges. thanks to the variety outside the battles the battle frontier in emerald is the most fun ofthem all. later ones never got as creative as battle frontier sadly. but it was hardcore stuff casuals did not enjoy battle frontier and probably never even reached the stage 1 leader for each dome. you can play for hours withouth getting any progress if you lose.
obviously all heal items are banned in every battle frontier/ tower just like in competitive you can only use a single hold item per pokemon. not to mention that some op items such as soul dew are left unaffected in pretty much every installment. an item that normally even at legit competive against actual people in battles at the time gives latios a 50% boost to spec att spc def. such an awesome item to use against friends in pokemon battle revolution.
fairly sure that the majority of pokemon players quit the battle tower after just a few battles and never beat it. there is no overleveling and it comes close to meta at times. no lack of good moves and the best pokemon.
also as far as the normal game goes. gen 5 in pokemon black & white 2 introduced a hard mode wich you can unlock only pokemon game that did that. in wich all trainers are higher lvl'ed trainers having more competitive moves and items. not to mention that thanks to gen 5 exp system you can't over lvl unless your grinding a shit ton you get less exp from lower lvl mons. it already starts from the very first rival battle wich is lvl 6 compared to your lvl 5 making even the normal game to have some spice as far as difficulty in pokemon games go.
there is also this whole thing about breeding and getting perfect competitive stats for each pokemon. some people spend hours days before they get the perfect natures and iv's and you can actually manipulate it after each generation of pokemon. there is a ton of stuff to do in them games.
-
I haven't Pokemon'd since the era of Gold/Silver. So that was like 2000? 2001?
The transition from Red and Blue to G&S offered more than I thought possible. "Shiny" Pokemon, new legendary Pokemon that were pretty bad-ass (Suicune is dope), Pokemon eggs, a brand new region to explore, and the ability to return to the Kanto region. Like I said, I haven't touched the series since the start of the millennium so my memory might be a bit fuzzy.
My guess is that each new mainline entry offers more. You get more stuff to see, do, collect, and what-not. As consoles get more powerful, I'm guessing the graphics are looking better, too.
I'm not interested in the series anymore since there are tons of other franchises I'd rather play. But, that sense of "more" is probably what keeps the series so popular.
-
Let me preface this by saying, I have no nostalgic connection to Pokémon; I was already out of college when the first game came out.
But, I bought Pokémon Blue and enjoyed it. Enough that I got Gold and Sapphire too. Didn’t play a game after that until my kids recently really got into the cards. I went back and played through Sapphire again, and still enjoyed it to the point where I went to my local retro game store and got Pokémon White. Playing through it now, and it’s still fun.
Pokémon is like a simplified RPG, but the collection and elemental attribute aspects are what make it fun for me. It’s neat to see what you’ll run into, which Pokémon will become an integral part of your team, and learning all the secrets. I don’t obsess over catching them all.
Every iteration introduces new Pokémon, a new land to explore, new moves, and altered battle mechanics. They certainly change a lot more from game to game than, say, the classic Mega Man series.
As others have said, getting both games of a particular Pokémon generation is only for the hardcore; the games are almost identical save for minor plot points and a handful of game-exclusive Pokémon (which is meant to encourage socializing and trading with others to obtain them).
So, it’s not like they’re putting out the exact same game every time. It’s the same formula, just tweaked in some ways, and with brand-new Pokémon to catch.
-
I'm not up enough on the Pokémon to really comment on its staying power, but I must correct one thing.
The games are not named after random objects- they're named after random SETS of objects! Pokémon cheese & Pokémon doorstop? Never happen. But Pokémon cheese & Pokémon cracker? Now we're talking! And the third release can be Pokémon salami! :P
seems to me they are named after valuables. i get that people like to joke about them names but it's never going to be that bad.
saphire emerald, sapphire, gold silver, heartgold soulsilver. pearl diamon platinum.
sun & moon sword & shield. it's not that far fetched from the others and red blue and yellow just being named as popular colours.
I'm thinking pokemon heaven pokemon hell pokemon god being the third release or pokemon jungle pokemon sandstorm pokemon oasis as the third release.
I think pokemon arrow will be the third release or maybe pokemon armour for sword & shield.
Oh, I know it'll never get as bad as cheese/cracker/salami, just having a bit of fun.
I do think heaven/hell/god would never come up- too religious. jungle/desert/oasis could be a thing. I'm betting game 3 for sword/shield is gonna be spear, personally.
-
I'm not up enough on the Pokémon to really comment on its staying power, but I must correct one thing.
The games are not named after random objects- they're named after random SETS of objects! Pokémon cheese & Pokémon doorstop? Never happen. But Pokémon cheese & Pokémon cracker? Now we're talking! And the third release can be Pokémon salami! :P
seems to me they are named after valuables. i get that people like to joke about them names but it's never going to be that bad.
saphire emerald, sapphire, gold silver, heartgold soulsilver. pearl diamon platinum.
sun & moon sword & shield. it's not that far fetched from the others and red blue and yellow just being named as popular colours.
I'm thinking pokemon heaven pokemon hell pokemon god being the third release or pokemon jungle pokemon sandstorm pokemon oasis as the third release.
I think pokemon arrow will be the third release or maybe pokemon armour for sword & shield.
Oh, I know it'll never get as bad as cheese/cracker/salami, just having a bit of fun.
I do think heaven/hell/god would never come up- too religious. jungle/desert/oasis could be a thing. I'm betting game 3 for sword/shield is gonna be spear, personally.
Game Freak has dropped the third game thing in favor of doing direct sequels. The third follow up game hasn't been a thing since Platinum.
-
I was in 6th grade when Pokemon Red and Blue came out in the US and from about 1998 until 2001 I was obsessed with it. Even though I was in my late childhood and early adolescents during this time, it was still very impactful for me at the time and remains one of my fondest childhood memories. I loved trying to find people who were willing to trade Pokemon with me I didn't have. I loved going to places like Software Ect, Toys R Us, and KB Toys to find Pokemon cards and plastic Pokemon figures from Japan. I religiously watched the anime on Kids WB every Saturday morning, and before that it used to be on during the week at like 6am on Fox, and I used to force myself out of bed to watch it even if I could have got an extra half hour of sleep before school. Yes, I was obsessed with it lol.
However, I remember around the time the third Pokemon movie came out in the US I began to lose interest in it, and while I never completely lost interest it was diminished enough to where I was no longer watching the anime, collecting the cards, or playing any of the games. I did buy Ruby and Sapphire when they came out, but remember having a really hard time getting into them and never beat either game until years later when both were remade on the 3DS. However, around the time I began collecting games in the late 2000s, I got on a huge Pokemon kick again. My girlfriend bought me a DS and Pokemon Platinum and I remember getting really into Pokemon again, albeit not to the degree I did back when Pokemon first came out. To this day I still mostly enjoy Pokemon and all things having to do with it, although I do have some very big gripes about the series that have decreased my enjoy of the franchise.
For one, I feel like he quality of Pokemon hit its peak with gen 2, and then slowly got worse and worse. I struggled to get through Black/White, and I did enjoy X/Y a fair amount, but a lot of the new Pokemon from that gen were pretty bad save a few exceptions. I actually really disliked Sun/Moon and was the first main Pokemon game I didn't like. I hated that they removed gyms, again the new Pokemon were not that great, and just overall the game felt like a shadow of what it used to be. On top of that I realized a few years ago that I'm not really into the newer Pokemon anime, nor do I care that much for the cards like I used to.
As for Pokemon Sword and Shield, I actually have very high hopes for it. Most of the announced new Pokemon look good, the region and open world look fun, and I've been anxiously awaiting what the starter evolutions look like before getting properly hyped. The only thing so far that really turns me off about Sword and Shield is the kaiju Pokemon forms or whatever the hell they're calling it; it looks like another stupid gimmick like Mega Evolutions and Z-Moves that if anything have just made Pokemon feel like it's running out of ideas. Still, I'll buy it when it comes out and hopefully I'll enjoy it, at least more than Sun/Moon.
-
Obviously I'm painting in broad strokes here but I think the general consensus among hardcore Pokemon fans is that the series peaked with gen 4, culminating with HG/SS. There's a reason why those games and the original Gen 2 games still run $40-50. Ever since Sun and Moon however, there has been a new Pokemon game every year, and I think a lot of people (myself included) are actually feeling a little burnt out by the constant yearly string of Pokemon games. And that burnout is also translating into Sword and Shield's development which from my opinion, feel and look very rushed.
These thoughts are based on my activity in Pokemon fan forums as an administrator for Bulbagarden. I've seen a lot of discussion and increased negativity towards USUM, Let's GO, and Sword/Shield.
For me, my interest in the series comes in spurts. I was huge into it as a kid starting with Crystal version, and played LeafGreen and Emerald version heavily. 100% completed the Pokedex in LG, for example. Then like many people my age, Pokemon started becoming "uncool" around the time I was finished Junior High and my friends and I moved on to different franchises with a similar theme (for me, it was Mega Man Battle Network).
After a couple of years towards the end of high school, people started replaying their old Pokemon games, and my interest in the series was rekindled. I bought HeartGold day one and clocked over 500 hours into it, and played White version about 200 hours as well. Got the black trainer card in HG, everything. Also got more into competitive battling around this time too because gen 4 was when that started becoming a big part of Pokemon. As you can probably guess, after playing those two games for that long I got pretty sick of Pokemon at that point and took another hiatus when B2/W2 were announced.
I took a 4 year break from the series and didn't get back into the games with Pokemon GO. And now I'm going back and playing all the games I missed (Platinum, ORAS last year, X/Y this year). I probably won't get Sword/Shield for the main reason that I don't have a Switch. But it also doesn't really interest me at this time.
To get to the OP's contention, I think there's nothing wrong with utilizing the same formula with different mechanics added in/spiced up every year. Think about any major sport, like football or basketball. Same game played year after year. But for many people the new players and coaching that are changed around means every year is a different experience. Pokemon and COD continue to add new wrinkles to their really addicting and fun core gameplay and that's what keeps me enticed.
-
It's popular, as some have already stated, to me, it's easy to understand what to do.
I love pokemon but don't have any games sadly I would like to play them on a tv console any recommendation for a GameCube or Nintendo 64 Pokemon game?
I really wish my GameCube Pokemon games were not so beat up and actually still worked, they were played to death by my sister, but I don't mind.
The problem with those old GameBoy Color and Original cartridges is the battery, I heard stories of the battery dying in the old games.
-
The problem with those old GameBoy Color and Original cartridges is the battery, I heard stories of the battery dying in the old games.
That’s the problem I’ve encountered.
When my kids started getting into the cards, I got out my old Blue, Gold, and Sapphire carts to show to them. The only one where the battery still worked was Gold, and it died a couple weeks later.
Sapphire is still playable without the battery, because your game data is stored using flash memory. The only things the battery affects are time of day and time-based events like tides, making it impossible to catch certain Pokémon.
There are methods to replace the batteries, including soldering them onto the board yourself. I’m probably not going to bother doing it though.
-
I'd say the peak of pokemon designs was at gen3. Gen 4 and 5 weren't bad. but gen 6 and onwards now that was rough sure there are very few good ones and than gen 7 with ultra beast aliens that look like lifeless objects?
and in terms of overworld quality especially music gameplay and character designs it was at it's peak at gen 5. Afterwards all of that went to the shits. aside from the gameplay part should still be decent but the damage has been done. mega evolutions was the only good thing.
also in terms of remakes pokemon let's go was the worst it was an insult to older fans
At least pokemon x & Y to ultra sun and moon the 3d character models represented the art. but pokemon let's go it's an abomination compared to the original games they just changed everything to be kiddy shitty chibby art style.
i know pokemon is a kids game but they absolutely went all out on let's go. than again looking at the current anime art style switch not all old fans will return to the series.
the pokemon go catch mechanics where just the cherry on top to destroy the game
(https://image-cdn.hypb.st/https%3A%2F%2Fhypebeast.com%2Fimage%2F2018%2F11%2Fpokemon-lets-go-trailer-red-green-leaf-twtr.jpg?w=960&cbr=1&q=90&fit=max)
heartgold soulsilver was how a remake should be done. tons of extra's 2 regions wich means 16 gyms including new area's all towns etc it's like 2 whole games to explore in 1. not to mention the best 2 gens in terms of iconic characters in the entire series. to top it of also many legandaries to catch from other gens. and all grapics and sprite work represent the old stuff.
and as extra nostalgia you could unlock the GB sounds key item
this item would change the overworld and battle music to the original gameboy color sounds or at least simular re arrangements one of the best unlocks in any pokemon game. pokemon let's go didnt even have that option. including new chip tune soundtracks in for example the battle frontier.
the content and replay value in these games was very high tons of post game. soulsilver heartgold where arguably the best pokemon games ever made. that or either black & white 2 but platinum and especially emerald are not far behind.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/MYQHFyOjNFY/hqdefault.jpg)
-
The new COD is worst than typhus. First game to make me contemplate an arrestable offense. I think maybe warmsignal was right. This is rushed garbage. I have destroyed the case so none of you will buy it anymore. But hopefully some poor sap will give me 20 bucks for it. I hang my head in shame.
-
Game Freak has dropped the third game thing in favor of doing direct sequels. The third follow up game hasn't been a thing since Platinum.
So toasted cheese/cracker, then? :D
-
Game Freak has dropped the third game thing in favor of doing direct sequels. The third follow up game hasn't been a thing since Platinum.
So toasted cheese/cracker, then? :D
Ugh now I'm hungry!
If Game Freak made a smoked Brie Pokemon I'd eat that shit up literally
-
Each generation is different, almost always improving on the last, plus it also introduces newer creatures that also draw in the crowd, especially the hardcore fans. The competitive scene is still strong, so that also adds to the status quo of the franchise. Pokémon is Pokémon, as insipidly dull as that may sound. Just like Mario and Zelda, most everyone knows the name; older generation of gamers that grew with the franchise introduce their kids to it, and little kids are often attracted to this sort of games. Not to mention the cartoon/animé that also adds to the series’ popularity. Then you also have the trading card game, which also has a sizable fan base with a healthy competitive scene. And then there's also all the other related merchandise sprinkled about.
Even if the games introduce one-off gimmicks, they know how to attract their audience, and we always bite, hook, line and sinker. I'm not ashamed of it.
The new COD is worst than typhus. First game to make me contemplate an arrestable offense. I think maybe warmsignal was right. This is rushed garbage. I have destroyed the case so none of you will buy it anymore. But hopefully some poor sap will give me 20 bucks for it. I hang my head in shame.
Don't beat yourself over it; at least you can warn others, and hopefully that cleanses your soul and makes up for the travesty that the game seemingly is. Right?
-
The new COD is worst than typhus. First game to make me contemplate an arrestable offense. I think maybe warmsignal was right. This is rushed garbage. I have destroyed the case so none of you will buy it anymore. But hopefully some poor sap will give me 20 bucks for it. I hang my head in shame.
from what i've heard this COD is the darkest most realistic wargame the series has ever been.
your doing some fucked up stuff in single player isnt that a good thing that they achieved this realism that the game makes you feel bad for killing some people in the missions.
unless ofcourse they made multiplayer bad. in terms of the rest they did a good job from what i've read it's a bit to dark for some people but they delivered on a realistic wargame experience.
also considering the massive complaints when pretty much all new call of duty games come out and that those very same people will still end up puchasing and enjoy playing the games afterwards anyways as their main time investment I'm kinda unsure what i have to say to those people. ::)
-
The new COD is worst than typhus. First game to make me contemplate an arrestable offense. I think maybe warmsignal was right. This is rushed garbage. I have destroyed the case so none of you will buy it anymore. But hopefully some poor sap will give me 20 bucks for it. I hang my head in shame.
from what i've heard this COD is the darkest most realistic wargame the series has ever been.
your doing some fucked up stuff in single player isnt that a good thing that they achieved this realism that the game makes you feel bad for killing some people in the missions.
unless ofcourse they made multiplayer bad. in terms of the rest they did a good job from what i've read it's a bit to dark for some people but they delivered on a realistic wargame experience.
also considering the massive complaints when pretty much all new call of duty games come out and that those very same people will still end up puchasing and enjoy playing the games afterwards anyways as their main time investment I'm kinda unsure what i have to say to those people. ::)
The biggest issue I had is that they made one of the modes outright PS exclusive. So PC and Xbox players who are paying full retail price for the same game get 1/3 of their game completely removed for a year. And it's not really announced going in properly. My case even says "spec ops" on it. It even has achievements for Spec Ops. A mode I don't even have. That was my biggest dissappointment. It was a huge slap in the face. And it came from greed. Which is worst of all. But then they also took out Hardcore free for all. Which has been a constant in the series since the earliest of entries on 360. It's the only mode I play competitively and have practiced for years. And hardcore mode in general has really taken a backseat. So in a sense. Multiplayer and Spec ops are both completely ruined on Xbox or PC.
The campaign is very fun. Very dark. Probably among the best campaigns it has had. They definitely didn't censor things as you said. Not to spoil anything, but you do some twisted stuff. And see some twisted stuff. It's a step into the boots of a modern soldier. Not sugar coated. Not gimicky. But pretty raw. And honest with itself. I love it very much :)
As a whole. Call of Duty did everything I tried defending them for never having done. They made a game that is pay to play, rushed, half missing, patch to fix, lameness. I started off being depressed. Still sorta am because I can't really sell it. Campaign is certainly one of them. I just can't stand by a developer making a huge chunk of the game console exclusive and not just making the game console exclusive totally. If Sony paid them enough to give console exclusivity to a mode. The whole game should have went with it. But you can't play keep away in some console war tug of war.
I really hope the next patch adds Hardcore free for all. Hardcore kill confirmed was added in the last patch. Things seem to be getting more stable play wise. Could use a few more maps.
All and all I exaggerated. But i'd say IGN's biased review is very generous to the new call of duty.