Social NintenZone Social 2.0: Remember That Time Candle Jack Visited Swa

[Arcanir]

Er, no. People give Mario games flak because they usually follow Mario 3's level design. Pokemon adds new battle mechanics, finetunes the fighting system, adds new things outside of actual battling from time to time and adds new Pokemon and moved to spice stuff up. Not to mention spinoffs are pretty frequent for both Mario and Pokemon, we have Mystery Dungeon, Ranger, Pokepark, Conquest, Pokken and a few others. There's a larger difference between the two, especially when both Mario and Pokemon can innovate and improve stuff

The thing is, Pokémon falls into the same traps as you're implying with the Mario 3 level design and the NSMB subseries. When you think about it, what do you do in a major Pokémon game? You get your starter, get badges, beat evil team, beat league, enjoy post-game (if there is one). None of that really changes with the new Pokémon or mechanics, whether you have a Pikachu or you have a Garchomp facing Wulfric, it's the same basic formula that we've seen in multiple games and it hasn't changed that much over time aside from a couple here and there that mixed it up a bit (and it never sticks). You do add those new Pokemon, mechanics and the like, but then in the same vein, Mario also adds new items, mechanics like wall jump and basic improvements and the like to its gameplay as well. So in that sense, both are formulaic franchises that while they add improvements to the gameplay, they don't truly advance what their core was.

As for adding new things outside of battle, we do get things like contests and the like, but think about how the franchise typically treats those features. The vast majority of the features that GF adds tend to be removed not too long after, and no matter how popular they are, how much they add to the game, or even that they could improve by the next game, they're kicked off for the next thing. Granted, not all features can stay, but that type of philosophy doesn't really help it evolve as many of the features that could add so much to the games end up being ignored. So those new things just end up being just that: That new thing that we got in Gen 3 that didn't make it into Gen 4/5/6 (ignoring remakes of course).

Even as a fan of Pokémon and not really Mario, the former does have its share of problems with formulaic gameplay that I do see in the NSMB games and that is a flaw that it barely has addressed. I don't think time and age necessarily changes that problem, it's just a core flaw in the nature of the franchise.

 

[Chandeelure]

I hope they balance some Pokemon in the new game, they modified the stats of some bad Pokemon in X/Y... most of them are still bad, but it's something.

 

[Z25]

So I guess that "leak" of Pokemon Z (but not Z) is false?

Probably, I am still giving it, to midnight tonight before saying it is indeed fake. I hope the leaker reacts to it...

 

[A Distant Demon]

You want to know what is funny? piggy back leakers that become more vague than the original
http://boards.4chan.org/vp/thread/24215131#p24215131

*sigh*

 

[AreJay25]

http://gonintendo.com/stories/242203-smash-bros-wii-u-seeing-online-maintenance-tonight

More maintenance tonight.

Get ready for more 1 stock FG tournaments.

 

[vaanrose]

And also shockers of shockers but Zelda, Final Fantasy and Metroid have mainly kept the main gameplay styles and have had different entries in the series add new things, so why isn't Pokemon allowed to keep its gameplay style?

Final Fantasy completely overhauls everything every time, I don't see how you could possibly compare it to Pokemon. If you've played one Pokemon game, you've played them all. This isn't a bad thing, but the mechanics have changed so gradually over the years that you can go from classic RGBY to X/Y, without playing any of the games in between, and not even need a refresher on the rules.

Meanwhile every Final Fantasy has a brand new method of leveling up your characters, from the fan favorite Materia system in VII (which despite being a fan favorite, was never reused) which allowed you to spec anybody as any type of character, to the weird board sphere thing in X which locked you in to certain archetypes with only a little bit of freedom, to the more classic job/class system found in the older games, which became the cornerstone of so many unrelated rpgs despite being all but abandoned by FF itself. And the battle system, despite being called the same thing thing since VII, has always been different every game, from subtle changes like allowing you access to your entire party at once in X, to huge sweeping changes like tossing turn based gameplay almost completely out the window in XIII. Final Fantasy has never been afraid to shake things up and diverge from what a'ready worked wonderfully. Fans have cried out for a game with VII's materia system and X's battle system, but Square has never given it to us, because Square isn't interested in giving us what we've had before,

This isn't to say GameFreak should completely change how battling works in Pokemon. They shouldn't. Pokemon's simplicity works wonderfully. But there are certain improvements that can be made to core design of the game that wouldn't change anything but for the better.

Take, for example, the move limit. Pokemon can only remember four moves. This was done chiefly due to the memory limitations of the Game Boy, but it's been carried through to better hardware simply because that's how it was originally. A four move list keeps things balanced well, however, and makes it easy to predict what tricks an in-game opponent might have up his sleeve, so it can argued they shouldn't add access to more moves at a time. And I'd agree with that. But is there any inherent reason we have to find a specific person in a specific town just to relearn a forgotten move, and travel back there every time we feel like changing a Pokemon's moveset? No, it's a holdover from the older games, kept for nostalgia more than for game balance.

I'd suggest they take a page from Ni no Kuni. Your monsters had a limited 'active' movepool, just like Pokemon, but any time you weren't in battle, you could pull up a simple menu and make a new movepool out of every move that monster had ever learned. No move was forgotten, there was just a limit to the number you could have active at once. Adding something like this to the Pokemon games would fix so many of the more annoying aspects of the game without doing anything to the core battle game balance. No longer would you teach your Pokemon a new move with an interesting name that turned out to be worse than the move you replaced it with. Now you could try every new move that your Pokemon learns without having to worry about messing up your existing moveset. No longer would you need to carry an HM slave, or belabor an otherwise good mon with a terrible move like Cut. You'd reach a bush, quickly swap out the moves, and go right back on your way.

There's a lot of room for improvement in the Pokemon mechanics.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

The thing is, Pokémon falls into the same traps as you're implying with the Mario 3 level design and the NSMB subseries. When you think about it, what do you do in a major Pokémon game? You get your starter, get badges, beat evil team, beat league, enjoy post-game (if there is one). None of that really changes with the new Pokémon or mechanics, whether you have a Pikachu or you have a Garchomp facing Wulfric, it's the same basic formula that we've seen in multiple games and it hasn't changed that much over time aside from a couple here and there that mixed it up a bit (and it never sticks). You do add those new Pokemon, mechanics and the like, but then in the same vein, Mario also adds new items, mechanics like wall jump and basic improvements and the like to its gameplay as well. So in that sense, both are formulaic franchises that while they add improvements to the gameplay, they don't truly advance what their core was.

As for adding new things outside of battle, we do get things like contests and the like, but think about how the franchise typically treats those features. The vast majority of the features that GF adds tend to be removed not too long after, and no matter how popular they are, how much they add to the game, or even that they could improve by the next game, they're kicked off for the next thing. Granted, not all features can stay, but that type of philosophy doesn't really help it evolve as many of the features that could add so much to the games end up being ignored. So those new things just end up being just that: That new thing that we got in Gen 3 that didn't make it into Gen 4/5/6 (ignoring remakes of course).

Even as a fan of Pokémon and not really Mario, the former does have its share of problems with formulaic gameplay that I do see in the NSMB games and that is a flaw that it barely has addressed. I don't think time and age necessarily changes that problem, it's just a core flaw in the nature of the franchise.

I didn't mention the story in both situations as both are guilty. A single new power up isn't as noteworthy as all the additional moves and pokemon. Hell, if anything, the only Mario game that got flak for being samey that was generally considered meh at the least was NSMB2

 

[Z25]

You want to know what is funny? piggy back leakers that become more vague than the original
http://boards.4chan.org/vp/thread/24215131#p24215131

*sigh*

Lol, the only non safe parts are 5 new pokemon and a surprise megaa you never saw coming from either unova or johto.

http://gonintendo.com/stories/242203-smash-bros-wii-u-seeing-online-maintenance-tonight

More maintenance tonight.

Get ready for more 1 stock FG tournaments.

Why more maintenance? How bad are the servers Nintendo?

 

[Chandeelure]

Are you talking about the leak that said something about 50 megaevolutions?
I think that's too much...

http://gonintendo.com/stories/242203-smash-bros-wii-u-seeing-online-maintenance-tonight

More maintenance tonight.

Get ready for more 1 stock FG tournaments.

RIDLEY! OMG! IT'S RIDLEY!

 

[Ivander]

Screw it. Pokemon Zero.


A prequel to RBGY games where you play as a young Professor Oak.

Spoiler

So this:

Curses! Beaten to the finish!

 

[Schnee117]

http://gonintendo.com/stories/242203-smash-bros-wii-u-seeing-online-maintenance-tonight

More maintenance tonight.

Get ready for more 1 stock FG tournaments.

Hatsune Miku confirmed because her game came out today on 3ds!

 

[AreJay25]

Why more maintenance? How bad are the servers Nintendo?

I played a few matches last night and almost every single one was laggy as ****.

So this might be necessary lol.

 

[Omega Tyrant]

Classic Mario games always felt fresh and distinct. Compare SMB, SMB 3, SMW, SML, and SML2 to NSMB, NSMB 2, NSMB Wii, and NSMB Wii U.

It's not that people don't want 2D Mario. It's that they want it to look and feel different.

Exactly this; I don't look down on the NSMB series because it's standard 2D Mario (that is their strongest point), it's because they're all essentially "Mission Pack Sequels" of the first NSMB, and not particularly good ones.

Now Pokemon could definitely do something to change up the story/single player experience, the old "fight 8 gym leaders of a single type and then the Elite Four, with Team X trying to take over the world" is beyond stale at this point. But the gameplay itself is great and has continually evolved, and is ultimately what makes the series so popular. Additionally, Pokemon is a multiplayer-centric franchise, where the gameplay changes and rebalances each generation are a lot more impactful.

 

[Starlight_Lily]

The thing is, Pokémon falls into the same traps as you're implying with the Mario 3 level design and the NSMB subseries. When you think about it, what do you do in a major Pokémon game? You get your starter, get badges, beat evil team, beat league, enjoy post-game (if there is one). None of that really changes with the new Pokémon or mechanics, whether you have a Pikachu or you have a Garchomp facing Wulfric, it's the same basic formula that we've seen in multiple games and it hasn't changed that much over time aside from a couple here and there that mixed it up a bit (and it never sticks). You do add those new Pokemon, mechanics and the like, but then in the same vein, Mario also adds new items, mechanics like wall jump and basic improvements and the like to its gameplay as well. So in that sense, both are formulaic franchises that while they add improvements to the gameplay, they don't truly advance what their core was.

As for adding new things outside of battle, we do get things like contests and the like, but think about how the franchise typically treats those features. The vast majority of the features that GF adds tend to be removed not too long after, and no matter how popular they are, how much they add to the game, or even that they could improve by the next game, they're kicked off for the next thing. Granted, not all features can stay, but that type of philosophy doesn't really help it evolve as many of the features that could add so much to the games end up being ignored. So those new things just end up being just that: That new thing that we got in Gen 3 that didn't make it into Gen 4/5/6 (ignoring remakes of course).

Even as a fan of Pokémon and not really Mario, the former does have its share of problems with formulaic gameplay that I do see in the NSMB games and that is a flaw that it barely has addressed. I don't think time and age necessarily changes that problem, it's just a core flaw in the nature of the franchise.

Well no, the problem was that J.B was saying was that they should change Pokemon's main gameplay style, not change how the games play out, which yeah they do need to change that honestly.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Well no, the problem was that J.B was saying was that they should change Pokemon's main gameplay style, not change how the games play out, which yeah they do need to change that honestly.

That's the thing though.

They make pretty big changes every time.

From abilities, to natures, to the special split, to various things here and there.

There's always something new to do gameplay wise.

 

[Omega Tyrant]

Final Fantasy completely overhauls everything every time, I don't see how you could possibly compare it to Pokemon. If you've played one Pokemon game, you've played them all. This isn't a bad thing, but the mechanics have changed so gradually over the years that you can go from classic RGBY to X/Y, without playing any of the games in between, and not even need a refresher on the rules.

Meanwhile every Final Fantasy has a brand new method of leveling up your characters, from the fan favorite Materia system in VII (which despite being a fan favorite, was never reused) which allowed you to spec anybody as any type of character, to the weird board sphere thing in X which locked you in to certain archetypes with only a little bit of freedom, to the more classic job/class system found in the older games, which became the cornerstone of so many unrelated rpgs despite being all but abandoned by FF itself. And the battle system, despite being called the same thing thing since VII, has always been different every game, from subtle changes like allowing you access to your entire party at once in X, to huge sweeping changes like tossing turn based gameplay almost completely out the window in XIII. Final Fantasy has never been afraid to shake things up and diverge from what a'ready worked wonderfully. Fans have cried out for a game with VII's materia system and X's battle system, but Square has never given it to us, because Square isn't interested in giving us what we've had before,

This isn't to say GameFreak should completely change how battling works in Pokemon. They shouldn't. Pokemon's simplicity works wonderfully. But there are certain improvements that can be made to core design of the game that wouldn't change anything but for the better.

Take, for example, the move limit. Pokemon can only remember four moves. This was done chiefly due to the memory limitations of the Game Boy, but it's been carried through to better hardware simply because that's how it was originally. A four move list keeps things balanced well, however, and makes it easy to predict what tricks an in-game opponent might have up his sleeve, so it can argued they shouldn't add access to more moves at a time. And I'd agree with that. But is there any inherent reason we have to find a specific person in a specific town just to relearn a forgotten move, and travel back there every time we feel like changing a Pokemon's moveset? No, it's a holdover from the older games, kept for nostalgia more than for game balance.

I'd suggest they take a page from Ni no Kuni. Your monsters had a limited 'active' movepool, just like Pokemon, but any time you weren't in battle, you could pull up a simple menu and make a new movepool out of every move that monster had ever learned. No move was forgotten, there was just a limit to the number you could have active at once. Adding something like this to the Pokemon games would fix so many of the more annoying aspects of the game without doing anything to the core battle game balance. No longer would you teach your Pokemon a new move with an interesting name that turned out to be worse than the move you replaced it with. Now you could try every new move that your Pokemon learns without having to worry about messing up your existing moveset. No longer would you need to carry an HM slave, or belabor an otherwise good mon with a terrible move like Cut. You'd reach a bush, quickly swap out the moves, and go right back on your way.

There's a lot of room for improvement in the Pokemon mechanics.

Definitely agree here though that the handling of moves is inadequate and something that could definitely be improved; no one likes having to keep ****ty HM moves on until you get to a designated "move deleter" over halfway through the game, and it's completely asinine that hasn't been fixed after 6 generations.

 

[Chrono.]

Pokemon really could use... something.

Idk but Gen 6 feels really soulless to me and I'm not sure if the "definitive game" will save it at this point.

I guess it doesn't really help that I'm so indifferent to ORAS because I don't like RS.

 

[A Distant Demon]

The only changes I have liked since Gen 3 were adding running shoes on a button, multiple item registrations and making TM infinite.

Megas were ok but they need a buttload of work.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Definitely agree here though that the handling of moves is inadequate and something that could definitely be improved; no one likes having to keep ****ty HM moves on until you get to a designated "move deleter" over halfway through the game, and it's completely asinine that hasn't been fixed after 6 generations.

Actually, they've somewhat fixed it. Notice how Gen VI made less MHs mandatory

 

[Swamp Sensei]

And here I am liking all the Pokemon games.

Except HGSS.

That game was terrible.

 

[NintenZ]

Are you talking about the leak that said something about 50 megaevolutions?
I think that's too much...


RIDLEY! OMG! IT'S RIDLEY!

Oh that's right, you're a Ridley supporter, don't you also support Picu and Bomberman?

 

[Z25]

And here I am liking all the Pokemon games.

Except HGSS.

That game was terrible.

We have to strip you of your mod title for that statement!

Spoiler

JK, but do you seriously hate it? And if so why?

 

[Cutie Gwen]

The only changes I have liked since Gen 3 were adding running shoes on a button, multiple item registrations and making TM infinite.

Megas were ok but they need a buttload of work.

What about the physical/special split from Gen IV?

And here I am liking all the Pokemon games.

Except HGSS.

That game was terrible.

What's wrong with HG? Never played it but I personally didn't like the Johto games in general

 

[gameonion]

And here I am liking all the Pokemon games.

Except HGSS.

That game was terrible.

Gen 2 in General was bad imo.

 

[IceBreakerXY]

HG/SS is the best pokemon game no other remake and no other pokemon game has yet to match that game in just plain fun and a real pokemon experience

 

[Geno Boost]

If you had to choose between Wreck it Ralph and Mickey Mouse and Goku for smash wich one would you pick? (I know none of them will happen anyway)

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Gen 2 in General was bad imo.

3 Things it did right: Steel types, Dark Types and Special split.

 

[Champ Gold]

@ Cutie Gwen
You're gonna love this
http://gematsu.com/2015/09/kamen-rider-battride-war-creation-announced-ps4-ps3-ps-vita

And here I am liking all the Pokemon games.

Except HGSS.

That game was terrible.

I hope to God you are trolling Swamp, I really am. That was the LAST game GF actually tried on aside from BW1.

The amount of content and features in that game makes it a 10/10. Especially with the extra battles and Giovanni/Celebi event.

The only changes I have liked since Gen 3 were adding running shoes on a button, multiple item registrations and making TM infinite.

Megas were ok but they need a buttload of work.

I do love Pokemon following behind you. Too bad they dropped it after HG/SS

 

[A Distant Demon]

What about the physical/special split from Gen IV?

What's wrong with HG? Never played it but I personally didn't like the Johto games in general

Oh **** for some reason I thought that was 3. That was one of the best changes ever.

If you had to choose between Wreck it Ralph and Mickey Mouse and Goku for smash wich one would you pick? (I know none of them will happen anyway)

. . . Goku. They are all absurd and terrible choices. At least Goku would be fun.

@ Cutie Gwen
You're gonna love this
http://gematsu.com/2015/09/kamen-rider-battride-war-creation-announced-ps4-ps3-ps-vita


I hope to God you are trolling Swamp, I really am. That was the LAST game GF actually tried on aside from BW1.

The amount of content and features in that game makes it a 10/10. Especially with the extra battles and Giovanni/Celebi event.


I do love Pokemon following behind you. Too bad they dropped it after HG/SS

FUUU that too. I loved that to deatth. IT was like . . .my favorite thing.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

We have to strip you of your mod title for that statement!

Spoiler

JK, but do you seriously hate it? And if so why?

It was boring.

And it made me realize just how badly paced the Johto games are.

Plus the games just cluttered the menus, the phone system was gosh awful especially for rematches with Gym Leaders (I love having to call at a very specific time that I have to look up on the internet because there are virtually no hints) and you have to GRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIND a stupid amount near the end and none at all in the rest of the game.


There's a whole lot the game did right. Terrible was the wrong word, but it's the worst main Pokemon game imo.

 

[Chandeelure]

Oh that's right, you're a Ridley supporter, don't you also support Picu and Bomberman?

Yes, but the Ridley thing was a joke XD

And here I am liking all the Pokemon games.

Except HGSS.

That game was terrible.

Is this sarcasm?
Because everybody says those are the best Pokemon games (not me).
EDIT: Oh, the answer is above XD

 

[Starlight_Lily]

Final Fantasy completely overhauls everything every time, I don't see how you could possibly compare it to Pokemon. If you've played one Pokemon game, you've played them all. This isn't a bad thing, but the mechanics have changed so gradually over the years that you can go from classic RGBY to X/Y, without playing any of the games in between, and not even need a refresher on the rules.

Meanwhile every Final Fantasy has a brand new method of leveling up your characters, from the fan favorite Materia system in VII (which despite being a fan favorite, was never reused) which allowed you to spec anybody as any type of character, to the weird board sphere thing in X which locked you in to certain archetypes with only a little bit of freedom, to the more classic job/class system found in the older games, which became the cornerstone of so many unrelated rpgs despite being all but abandoned by FF itself. And the battle system, despite being called the same thing thing since VII, has always been different every game, from subtle changes like allowing you access to your entire party at once in X, to huge sweeping changes like tossing turn based gameplay almost completely out the window in XIII. Final Fantasy has never been afraid to shake things up and diverge from what a'ready worked wonderfully. Fans have cried out for a game with VII's materia system and X's battle system, but Square has never given it to us, because Square isn't interested in giving us what we've had before,

This isn't to say GameFreak should completely change how battling works in Pokemon. They shouldn't. Pokemon's simplicity works wonderfully. But there are certain improvements that can be made to core design of the game that wouldn't change anything but for the better.

Take, for example, the move limit. Pokemon can only remember four moves. This was done chiefly due to the memory limitations of the Game Boy, but it's been carried through to better hardware simply because that's how it was originally. A four move list keeps things balanced well, however, and makes it easy to predict what tricks an in-game opponent might have up his sleeve, so it can argued they shouldn't add access to more moves at a time. And I'd agree with that. But is there any inherent reason we have to find a specific person in a specific town just to relearn a forgotten move, and travel back there every time we feel like changing a Pokemon's moveset? No, it's a holdover from the older games, kept for nostalgia more than for game balance.

I'd suggest they take a page from Ni no Kuni. Your monsters had a limited 'active' movepool, just like Pokemon, but any time you weren't in battle, you could pull up a simple menu and make a new movepool out of every move that monster had ever learned. No move was forgotten, there was just a limit to the number you could have active at once. Adding something like this to the Pokemon games would fix so many of the more annoying aspects of the game without doing anything to the core battle game balance. No longer would you teach your Pokemon a new move with an interesting name that turned out to be worse than the move you replaced it with. Now you could try every new move that your Pokemon learns without having to worry about messing up your existing moveset. No longer would you need to carry an HM slave, or belabor an otherwise good mon with a terrible move like Cut. You'd reach a bush, quickly swap out the moves, and go right back on your way.

There's a lot of room for improvement in the Pokemon mechanics.

I'm going to be complete honest, I've only played the Final Fantasy games on the SNES, where the gameplay style is similar in some aspects, so yeah when it comes to later game, I'm completely talking out of my ass.

And yeah I'm all for making improvements like you've suggested for Pokemon, I am however not for changing the current way it plays, cause then it wouldn't feel like Pokemon anymore to me. Another idea that I saw that was pretty interesting, was what if moves like say slash, where able to do what cut does on the field as well? Its a pretty good idea honestly it means you aren't locking in moves you don't want on your Pokemon but it also doesn't mean that Game freak is forced to abandon the puzzle aspect of HM puzzles as well, but the way you suggested does work a lot better honestly.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

@ Cutie Gwen
You're gonna love this
http://gematsu.com/2015/09/kamen-rider-battride-war-creation-announced-ps4-ps3-ps-vita


I hope to God you are trolling Swamp, I really am. That was the LAST game GF actually tried on aside from BW1.

The amount of content and features in that game makes it a 10/10. Especially with the extra battles and Giovanni/Celebi event.


I do love Pokemon following behind you. Too bad they dropped it after HG/SS

**** YEAH! DYNASTY RIDERS 3! Showa Riders plz

 

[Chrono.]

HGSS was great imo but it didn't fix some of the problems the original GSC had.

Like the level curve.

 

[IceBreakerXY]

Will gen 4 as a whole was awful.DPP was just slow and boring and Pearl literally put me to sleep was the main reason i put down the series for like 2 years.I still think HG/SS is the only good thing from that gen but it couldn't save that generation imo

 

[Guybrush20X6]

If we're talking about Pokemon changing, one thing they should NOT do is a real time battle system. What I like about Pokemon is I can put it down and come back to it with no rush. If I do the same in Mario and I forget to pause (it happened, sue me, I'm dumb) you just get killed by goombahs/the timer over and over.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Will gen 4 as a whole was awful.DPP was just slow and boring and Pearl literally put me to sleep was the main reason i put down the series for like 2 years.I still think HG/SS is the only good thing from that gen but it couldn't save that generation imo

Now see I like Diamond and Platinum (platinum especially) much more than HGSS.

Just goes to show that quality is a relative thing.



A lot of you forget that.

 

[Solfiner]

I absolutely adore HGSS personally. The only real game I can say that I don't care for in the main line is probably Diamond and Pearl. Platinum fixed everything that I didn't like though.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Will gen 4 as a whole was awful.DPP was just slow and boring and Pearl literally put me to sleep was the main reason i put down the series for like 2 years.I still think HG/SS is the only good thing from that gen but it couldn't save that generation imo

Platinum was a ****ing masterpiece tho

**** YEAH! DYNASTY RIDERS 3! Showa Riders plz

YES MACH, DRIVE GHOST AND ETERNAL FOR HEISEI, AMAZON AND X! X!X! EKSUUUUUUU

 

[Omega Tyrant]

Actually, they've somewhat fixed it. Notice how Gen VI made less MHs mandatory

Yeah, that was a nice change, but the fact HMs still existed and still had the stupid "can't forget this move" mechanic is a problem.