Social DGames Social | V/LA |

[Evil Eye]

My favorite Pokémon is Captain Falcon.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

Captain Falcon would be, yet another, Fire/Fighting type

 

[Handorin]

Glaceon is the best. Dibs.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

I never really got into Pokemon after finishing the original red. Hell, even the first game of Pokemon was kind of disappointing. Gym leaders are still the skeleton structure of the game with some side plots of dragons or cultists trying to raise some super powerful type of mega-Pokemon to rule the world. The game just blatantly ignores the very likely situation that if Pokemon existed, everything would be raised to the ground. It's like if you gave the chance for every kid to own an AK47. Do you really think the world would be a safer place if everyone had an AK47. Suspension of belief, sure, I could do that for the first game. But when you have an entire franchise that doesn't bother to devote a game to touch on the reality of the situation that is kind of pathetic to me. I mean really, the game is market pandering to youths if it chooses not to address some realities to its now more mature audience.

 

[Raziek]

Glaceon is the best. Dibs.

Agreed, but not in Generation 3

I never really got into Pokemon after finishing the original red. Hell, even the first game of Pokemon was kind of disappointing. Gym leaders are still the skeleton structure of the game with some side plots of dragons or cultists trying to raise some super powerful type of mega-Pokemon to rule the world. The game just blatantly ignores the very likely situation that if Pokemon existed, everything would be raised to the ground. It's like if you gave the chance for every kid to own an AK47. Do you really think the world would be a safer place if everyone had an AK47. Suspension of belief, sure, I could do that for the first game. But when you have an entire franchise that doesn't bother to devote a game to touch on the reality of the situation that is kind of pathetic to me. I mean really, the game is market pandering to youths if it chooses not to address some realities to its now more mature audience.

Are you serious right now?
This is a game made to appeal to both children and teens/young adults (who grew up with it).
Like, you even acknowledge that in your posts. So..... what do you even?
This is like criticizing Bob the Builder for not accounting for Production Costs and Business Management practices.

ACTUALLY LEMME JUST BACK THIS UP EVEN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

You're ok with Pokemon as a concept, but not with the societal structure within it?

They have a Pokemon literally equivalent to God, for crying out loud!

 

[Xivii]

So Blaziken is taken right? If so then I'm pretty sure I'm the only one in the galaxy that likes Jumpluff.

 

[Xivii]

lolwut Acrostic just no

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

I don't understand why such a large majority of this board finds such an obvious cash grab to be so endearing. Nintendo literally just smears new feces on it and then repackages it for sale to retailers. The competitive side to the game is its own meta-culture for stat play stratagems that exist well above the intended skill level of the game itself. What I see is a community that has evolved past the game itself, while Nintendo refuses to grow up with the gamers who have carried it throughout generations because they are afraid that changes will trash their bottom profit. Which is true. Why change your product when you're making good returns. The question is why people, like you I presume, continue to feed a game that panders to a generation that likely hasn't played their third or fourth repeat installment of the game.

 

[Raziek]

Because it carries fond memories for us.

Because I don't feel the game NEEDS to explain every detail of its canon, because I appreciate it for what it is.

Because I enjoy the feelings of attachment that I usually develop as I grow with a Pokemon. (Try a Nuzlocke sometime, if you haven't)

Nintendo is not being ASKED to grow up with us, so why should they? Every new game releases to an audience that includes children who grow up with it for the first time. Personally, I don't feel it at necessary for the game to do what you seem to think it should, because I look at the game case and think, "It's Pokemon!" and enjoy the feelings of nostalgia brought back with each new iteration in the series.

The people who desire what you're looking for are a very small minority, I would imagine. And while I cannot disagree with your assessment that the series is re-hashed, that's why people are still BUYING IT. They found a formula that works. They give us a new coat of paint each time, as we go through the motions again. The people who are buying it, buy it because they desire that.

So why should it change?

Even then, Nintendo works to innovate something new with each generation, refining the formula and trying new things.

 

[BarDulL]

Acrostic is hilarious.

Spoiler

But yeah, **** Legend of Zelda; teleporting places with an Ocarina is unrealistic. And think of all the problems that would arise with people being able to teleport and change the time space continuum to their discretion. Society would just end up ultimately collapsing on itself if someone did something REALLY stupid. What a terrible game for being unrealistic.

Agreed with Raz though that realism isn't what sells games.

Well, actually, I should say not ALL games. Some people like lots of realism in games I suppose. Personally, I don't.

 

[Circus]

@Acrostic: I agree with the idea of trying to attack the idea of pokemon training and breeding in this universe from different angles. That's actually one of the reasons BW was probably the best generation since RB or GS, because they introduced an antagonist whose whole MO is separating pokemon from their trainers. Not because he wants them for himself, but because he considers the practice to be immoral (and outside of the game's own, twisty, pokemon-love-fighting-because-friendship-and-personal-growth logic, I'm inclined to agree!). I would really like to see that idea taken even further in a future game. Maybe a more grassroots movement that doesn't really recruit people into a uniformed cult like Team Plasma, but just creates general dissent in society. Some citizens are pro-Pokemon training; others protest. I think they still have to do some youth pandering for a franchise like this, so I don't think bombing pokemon gyms is the way to go, but something a couple notches lower could be cool. Especially considering how many times villains have openly tried to take over or change the world through the manipulation of powerful pokemon, you'd think that, at some point, some people would start crying for a ban on pokemon training in general for the sake of safety. Suddenly, the line between the motives of the player character and the motives of an organization like Team Rocket seem a lot blurrier. Pokemon politics!

On a more fundamental gameplay level, I've said for a long time (mostly to no one other than myself), that it would be really neat if the gym leaders for a region would break with tradition and follow themes other than type specialties. Having some kind of signature battle method or strategy for each one would be good, but limit the teams that can get wiped out with just Surf. And they can be really different. From something as simple as a leader who just really likes dogs so all of their pokemon, regardless of type, are dogs (Growlithe, Herdier, etc.) to more complex things, like having a team that is just designed to make one strategy work. Like maybe a gym leader that tries to chip your health away little by little with poison, so they've got a pokemon that knows a move that automatically poisons you, and then they switch to a Chansey or something that's just really difficult to kill, or something that will debuff your stats so you can't hit/finish them or whatever. Meanwhile, your pokemon are all slowly withering and you only have so many antidotes (this would probably work best as an early gym, when you don't have nigh unlimited money). Maybe there's a gym leader whose whole deal is just status effects. So you've gotta worry about burns and paralysis and confusion and all that **** at any time. Maybe there's a gym leader who only does double battles and their whole team is built around this concept (all moves are assist moves, or multi-protect moves, or terrain change moves that help each other in battle).

I think that would be a cool way to change things up while still giving each of the gym leaders some kind of identity. But I know it won't ever happen.

 

[Xivii]

Their target audience is the same age group as it was when it first came out. It's not meant to age along with its previous audiences. Sure as people age they are still more than welcome to be into it. It's mofon pokemon. But to change the core of the game is unnecessary seeing as there will always be a new generation of kids. When there's a new generation, you rebut with the same structure, but with different pokemon. Otherwise the new generation would not get the same out of it. Part of the excitement of pokemon is the discovery/release of new pokemon. Yes, for us that have already been through it, they are just carbon-copies. But for new generations they basically get to experience the same thing we did every time a new set of pokemon comes out.

 

[Raziek]

I can agree with what Circus says, particularly with respect to mixing up the formula a little bit in terms of the flavors of things.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Before I go into other posts, I'm not here to debate. I'm here to understand. I can see how someone can really see new features like breeding, duo fights, and AM/PM features of the newer games to be sufficient enough to see 'growth' in the series. I'm sure that basic mechanics wise there are new capture methods beyond the original which only involved fishing, trading, and casino buying as alternative methods to get Pokemon aside from raw capture. I think that Pokemon itself as a game is most vulnerable on the story front because it is a game marketed to young children. And I wrote my original posts from a plot angle, even though I'd agree that games aren't something I'd use for a literature equivalent. I found the game play to be tedious and saw the story as the reward with SylphCo and the ghosts being the most entertaining parts of the original series. I don't think that being subjective here is going to help since the fact that Pokemon still comes as a bifurcated package model rubs me off as being the epitome of a market gimmick cash grab. Objectively breaking down components of the game itself is key to a mutual conversation.

 

[Xivii]

I don't know. I've always enjoyed simplicity. It's what Nintendo is all about. All Nintendo games maintain the same outline of their franchise presented in new colors. Mario, Metroid, Zelda (probably the most complex). There's no need to change it if people enjoy it.

Wagahai wa neko de aru

 

[Xivii]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMgGowLgb_0

 

[Circus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMgGowLgb_0

 

[KevinM]

I don't understand why such a large majority of this board finds such an obvious cash grab to be so endearing. Nintendo literally just smears new feces on it and then repackages it for sale to retailers. The competitive side to the game is its own meta-culture for stat play stratagems that exist well above the intended skill level of the game itself. What I see is a community that has evolved past the game itself, while Nintendo refuses to grow up with the gamers who have carried it throughout generations because they are afraid that changes will trash their bottom profit. Which is true. Why change your product when you're making good returns. The question is why people, like you I presume, continue to feed a game that panders to a generation that likely hasn't played their third or fourth repeat installment of the game.

The irony of you saying this on a competitive super smash brothers site is literally killing me.

 

[Xivii]

Acrostic why does your avatar have Teen Titans graphics?

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Note that what I'm saying is not from a Pokemon Master's point of view having not spent money on newer versions of Pokemon, but by going from the scraps of cursory information I have been exposed to on chat and forums. If I'm wrong on something, tell me. Any piece of updated information is a game changer.

Because it carries fond memories for us. Because I don't feel the game NEEDS to explain every detail of its canon, because I appreciate it for what it is. Because I enjoy the feelings of attachment that I usually develop as I grow with a Pokemon. (Try a Nuzlocke sometime, if you haven't)

I didn't age well with games. Caveat, I don't age well with anything.

Nintendo is not being ASKED to grow up with us, so why should they? Every new game releases to an audience that includes children who grow up with it for the first time. Personally, I don't feel it at necessary for the game to do what you seem to think it should, because I look at the game case and think, "It's Pokemon!" and enjoy the feelings of nostalgia brought back with each new iteration in the series.

I have a huge grievance with this and I can't attack it. If you look at a Mario game, it always adapt to the newest system because it is a flagship game that is supposed to sell the console. Mario sells because it is an interactive game that continually adapts. I understand why Mario sells, it is innovative and interactive. It experiments and risks failure. I can't compare Mario to Pokemon because Pokemon's gameplay is locked to using a d-pad to select four/five pre-set choices and then commanding your Pokemon which has pre-set move sets. It is impossible to connect this to the motion control of the Wii or Wii U, because Pokemon isn't intended for either of those systems. It might have games on these systems, but it is only because they are cash grab extensions from the original hand held variants. I brought up the Mario example to discuss 'growth' in a gameplay dimension. Pokemon has gradually added in new features as I mentioned previously to 'expand' its scope of gameplay. But it isn't fair to compare Pokemon with Mario, because Pokemon has branded itself as a static product. Mario has branded itself as continually being a renewed and fresh product. Does stale sell? Of course it does. Is it fresh? Of course not. Can kids tell the difference between something stale or fresh? Of course not, their palate is biologically inhibited by an undeveloped sense of taste and a conservative dependency to food they already have established as being tasty.

Nintendo is a business that sells something very stale to kids and makes it visually enhancing. The handheld systems don't led themselves much to adaptation due to their confining hardware limitations. Is there even a Pokemon 3D game that has come out? Now that would be a development that would cause me to do some recourse on this train of thought.

The people who desire what you're looking for are a very small minority, I would imagine. And while I cannot disagree with your assessment that the series is re-hashed, that's why people are still BUYING IT. They found a formula that works. They give us a new coat of paint each time, as we go through the motions again. The people who are buying it, buy it because they desire that.

See. Now there are intrinsic points that I can't refute. Let's say that soup/Nabe are people who intrinsically like Pokemon and SMT3/4 games because they like the whole Pokemon-like four-choice d-pad move feature of pre-set commands where you exploit the exposing enemy monster's weakness and then get a story as a side-dish. If they like that whole cotton candy, I can't rationalize or argue with that. In the same way that I like to sit on my front porch and watch cars passing by, there are just things that some people find annoying and they happen to be the same things that other people enjoy. I never saw the original game as something that should have spiraled into such a huge-repeat success.

So why should it change?

It should change to entertain me. Because I'm bored. Market wise, it should only change when the game is seeing slow profits with risk of going negative. Kids are a gullible market, if you're making several million by selling candy to baby why would you change it when you're taking the dough from the pocket of the parents. The game is called Pocket Monsters in Japan, isn't it.

Even then, Nintendo works to innovate something new with each generation, refining the formula and trying new things.

This should be the focus of the conversation.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Acrostic why does your avatar have Teen Titans graphics?

Because Sportsmaster is a villain who fights super heroes using sports equipment. How awesome of a villain is he when it comes to marketing him as a toy.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

@Acrostic: I agree with the idea of trying to attack the idea of pokemon training and breeding in this universe from different angles.

Breeding was a really great idea. Am I right to assume though that it wasn't really a mechanic that was used in the main story line?

That's actually one of the reasons BW was probably the best generation since RB or GS, because they introduced an antagonist whose whole MO is separating pokemon from their trainers. Not because he wants them for himself, but because he considers the practice to be immoral (and outside of the game's own, twisty, pokemon-love-fighting-because-friendship-and-personal-growth logic, I'm inclined to agree!).

This is the green-haired guy iirc. If this was his MO then I will admit that I'm warming up to see where they go with this in the next game.

I would really like to see that idea taken even further in a future game. Maybe a more grassroots movement that doesn't really recruit people into a uniformed cult like Team Plasma, but just creates general dissent in society.

The sense of structure in the game is just unrealistic imho. The game always revolves around there being absolute structure and firm established organizations, when pandemonium and carnage would be the more likely case in a Pokemon-esque type world.

On a more fundamental gameplay level, I've said for a long time (mostly to no one other than myself), that it would be really neat if the gym leaders for a region would break with tradition and follow themes other than type specialties. Having some kind of signature battle method or strategy for each one would be good, but limit the teams that can get wiped out with just Surf. And they can be really different. From something as simple as a leader who just really likes dogs so all of their pokemon, regardless of type, are dogs (Growlithe, Herdier, etc.) to more complex things, like having a team that is just designed to make one strategy work. Like maybe a gym leader that tries to chip your health away little by little with poison, so they've got a pokemon that knows a move that automatically poisons you, and then they switch to a Chansey or something that's just really difficult to kill, or something that will debuff your stats so you can't hit/finish them or whatever. Meanwhile, your pokemon are all slowly withering and you only have so many antidotes (this would probably work best as an early gym, when you don't have nigh unlimited money). Maybe there's a gym leader whose whole deal is just status effects. So you've gotta worry about burns and paralysis and confusion and all that **** at any time. Maybe there's a gym leader who only does double battles and their whole team is built around this concept (all moves are assist moves, or multi-protect moves, or terrain change moves that help each other in battle).

If there is still the view-point-engage AI on the overland map, adjacent trainers in the same area should be able to have some sort of accumulated experience on which Pokemon were used by the trainer and the strategy they used in order to counter the player repeating the same plays repeatedly for the same map. I think that strategy wise you're always going to come up with difficulty seeing as how the game allows the player to simply over-level and over-extend the level of their Pokemon to compensate for the strategy aspect of the game. Therefore lending itself to more RPG element type of play than anything else. I think that a core weakness in the game is the elemental affinity and weakness which tends to polarize the game into being one-dimensional. I'm not sure if this aspect of the game got patched in later versions, but in the original I mostly just 1HKO'd my enemies on affinities alone.

Talking about Pokemon withering interests me though because it would be interesting to have Pokemon age and have their stats just accordingly. This actually plays more into how I feel the breeding aspect of the game can add more to gameplay and as a whole be notched up a little bit to add more strategy to the game that also plays into the whole personal aspect of building your own team. Theme battles are interesting and would add well to the story. The biggest problem at its core sadly isn't going to be what tactics the boss trainers use, but the fact that their Pokemon will have static levels that won't adjust according to the other players stats accordingly. Also, the player likely has a stock of potions and other items that they can use in the middle of battle to counter a decent strategy model on the part of the AI, as you mentioned with antidotes countering a poison and tank strategy.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

The irony of you saying this on a competitive super smash brothers site is literally killing me.

Compounded. I never joined this site for smash (or mafia).

 

[Gova]

I don't know why anyone here is expecting games to be realistic.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

I don't know why anyone here is expecting games to be realistic.

No one is expecting the game to change. :x

 

[Gova]

Edited, Edit, Will Edit.

If things not being realistic bother you, you probably won't enjoy my mafia game.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Edited, Edit, Will Edit.

If things not being realistic bother you, you probably won't enjoy my mafia game.

Surrealism doesn't bother me though.

The crux of what I've been talking about is the overlapping interest of personal appeal and market appeal when it comes to Pokemon. For me, the two are diametrically opposed while other people have explained why the game appeals to them in both categories. I'm not targeting dislike for the first game. Rather, I'm expressing my own surprise at the popularity of the franchise when I didn't think the game itself would be so popular and spawn repeat games. What I'm surprised at is the psychology and thought behind the consumer culture more so than the video game itself.

 

[Gova]

Well, I'm not that interested in that. I just don't think you can assume that in the Pokemon world, things would devolve towards chaos.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Well, I'm not that interested in that. I just don't think you can assume that in the Pokemon world, things would devolve towards chaos.

Edit: I mean you're right though. Just because people have weapons doesn't mean they'll use it. There's going to be that one asshole who gets pushed over the deep end and ends up using his Pokemon to engage in a mass murder spree of everyone in the town. But that doesn't mean that an entire society will crumble.

Given the recent news of a 5-year old Kentucky boy shooting his 2-year old sister, 4-year old Tennessee boy killing a 48-year old women, and a 6-year-old NJ boy shot by 4-year-old play mate this month alone. And compounded by the Sandy Hook shooting and Boston Bombings incident. Internationally, weapons development by North Korea, Iran's uranium operation, and Lebanese rocket attacks on Israel. I don't believe that unregulated weapons of potentially mass destruction would lead any human society closer to order. Granted its hypothetical. But...

 

[Gova]

Yeah, okay.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

D-Games! I'm playing Mystery Dungeon Blue and want to name Pokemon after people.

What's your favorite (386) Pokemon?

Can't do duplicates, so taken already:
Torchic (Partner), Eevee (Starter)

Ryker - Hitmonchan
Armor - Larvitar
Juu - Sandslash
Raziek - Absol
PJB - Medicham
Soup - Heracross or Gengar

Charizard.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

I had only played Red/Blue for a large portion of my pokemon career. I played them back when they were the hot new thing, and I played the **** out of them. I even had the N64 Pokemon Stadium, and I played the **** out of that too. I can honestly say I enjoyed Pokemon, but I had no real strong desire to revisit it. I felt it had run it's course.

A few months ago, I decided to download a DS emulator and give one of the new games a try. I first tried downloading Black, but I soon realized my efforts to play it would be futile, as there was an anti-piracy measure taken within the game's coding. If your copy was bull****, you would not gain Exp. I tried to find a fix for it, but after only a little research, I found that trying to fix it would be more trouble than I cared to deal with, and I just downloaded Diamond instead. Everything seemed fine with that one, so I played it. I made a point to avoid using any Gen1 guys in my team, and I was pretty impressed with the new shenanigans they had introduced. My favorite thing they added was Doubles Battles. I enjoyed the game, and if they continue adding little features like that with each installment, I'm fine with it. I won't play them all, I'm not enough of a fanatic, but I'm not ashamed to admit that I like the series, and hope it continues on, soulessness and all.

 

[Evil Eye]

I don't get this ****, if you apply logic to literally almost any of the big first party Nintendo franchises they totally fall apart, especially the worldbuilding aspects. The Mushroom Kingdom et al ad nauseum were reached by a plumber accidentally flushing himself down a toilet or whatever? Why? What sort of sorcery is this? Why can Mario fly through outer space and not immediately asphyxiate and/or freeze to death? For that matter, what does Mario's planet hopping in later games mean about the Mushroom Kingdom worlds? Are they just a distant planet? Did that toilet contain a portal like the one from Being John Malkovich, except instead of being a crawlspace that leads you into John Malkovich's brain it's a ****-pipe that transports you to a distant planet? Why this why that why this why that?

Who cares? Nintendo is all about whimsy and imagination and life over stuff like plot or logical cohesion, or what have you. Even as a guy who has literally only owned and played Sony or Microsoft consoles in the last more-than-a-decade, I can understand and appreciate that. If you apply excessive scrutiny to any of the franchises they will start to fall apart because standing up to such scrutiny is entirely secondary. StarFox is about a fox. In the stars. Want worldbuilding and logic in your sci-fi? Play the first Mass Effect game. Legend of Zelda is about using classic archetypes of fantasy and adventure, with a largely blank slate avatar for the player. I've never played a single Zelda game other than about 90 total minutes of OoT and I can still understand and appreciate that. For a fantasy game with dungeons and temples to explore and yet also extensive worldbuilding considerations and so forth I will load up my Shadow Man save and **** my pants for a few hours.

Nintendo isn't trying to mirror our world with almost any of their products, nor human nature or anything else. They create whole other worlds. That's the point. That's the longevity. They have their own rules. It's normal to live in a town with like three buildings in Pokémon and hike for miles and miles through ludicrously dangerous brush full of animals that have awesome powers and attack you on sight just to get to the store and buy some damn groceries. It's normal to send a freaking prepubescent child out into the world to literally become a hobo so that they may encounter adventure, acquire independence, and face peril at almost every turn when they are one of their many very long hikes through dangerous territory. People are by and large trustworthy and trusted, allowing you to just walk into a random guy's house and start a cheerful conversation instead of being shot because he lives in rural Texas. It's different to the point of being totally unlike our world, another world entirely with its own human nature and ideas of internal logic. Applying our expectations of reality or "what would/should/will happen" allows for hilarious conversations, some of which I've indulged at length and enjoyed, but they're totally not a valid criticism. I only ever played Red, I quite enjoyed it, and while I"m aware that little is new or different from one adventure to the next they are, at least, distinct adventures despite their archetypal familiarity. Just like Mario games, Donkey Kong games, and so on.

I hardly play Nintendo games but I feel that this total shirking of conventional logic in their worldbuilding is super refreshing and fun

 

[Handorin]

That conversation was boring.

Back to the source of contention:
Oh, I didn't realize it was only 3 gens. I'm going to go the lazy route and try not to think to much, and I'll steal gengar from soup an let him have his other choice.

 

[Orboknown]

D-Games! I'm playing Mystery Dungeon Blue and want to name Pokemon after people.

What's your favorite (386) Pokemon?

kecleon or kangiskhan

 

[Circus]

I'm so mad I can't even see straight.

Smashboards logged me out while I was making an epic post for Acrostic and now it's gone.

Ughhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

 

[Circus]

Also, I see I've been Zen'd.

 

[#HBC | Nabe]

Also, I see I've been Zen'd.

That feeling of having been violated will pass, with time.

 

[#HBC | Nabe]

Pokemon: Chansey/Blissey



Also I am obligated to point out that I play games on the internet and you're all invited
(Or, fondle the butt under my posts)

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

D-Games! I'm playing Mystery Dungeon Blue and want to name Pokemon after people.

What's your favorite (386) Pokemon?

Can't do duplicates, so taken already:
Torchic (Partner), Eevee (Starter)

Ryker - Hitmonchan
Armor - Larvitar
Juu - Sandslash
Raziek - Absol
PJB - Medicham
Soup - Heracross or Gengar

Probably Blaziken because that was my favorite pokemon back in that day

I remember having difficulty facing the elite 4 in D/P, so I just migrated that blaziken and started doing laps around them.

And not a single tinge of regret whatsoever