"Pokemon is repetitive and boring." Well, not quite.

[VolcanoShed]

I've heard this complaint SO MANY MANY TIMES. First of all, no innovation? 1st gen set the trend, 2nd gen introduced 2 new types, dark and steel, breeding,(genders and baby pokemon) and had 2 regions, 3rd gen introduced the battle frontier and new hms, and concerts. 4th gen diamond and pearl were the first games in the series to have wireless compatibillity and had the watch thing, team galactic, more concerts, poffins, and unique gym puzzles. 5th gen introduced...well, fusion kyurem. And team plasma. 6th gen were the first main series pokemon games to be in 3d, had features like poke-amie, super training, the new EXP share, and mega evolutions. It even added a new type, called fairy of course.

And in defense of pokemon, tell me how much innovation can come from a turn based combat JRPG. Pokemon isn't the same thing every time with more creatures.

(but madden)

[^1.]

yes man

[Fork_Q2]

Originally posted by Darude - DeadJoke:

I've heard this complaint SO MANY MANY TIMES. First of all, no innovation? 1st gen set the trend, 2nd gen introduced breeding,(genders and baby pokemon) and had 2 regions, 3rd gen introduced the battle frontier and new hms, and concerts. 4th gen diamond and pearl were the first games in the series to have wireless compatibillity and had the watch thing, team galactic, more concerts, poffins, and unique gym puzzles. 5th gen introduced...well, fusion kyurem. And team plasma. 6th gen were the first main series pokemon games to be in 3d, had features like poke-amie, super training, the new EXP share, and mega evolutions.

And in defense of pokemon, tell me how much innovation can come from a turn based combat JRPG. Pokemon isn't the same thing every time with more creatures.

(but madden)

More of the same stuff and useless gimmicks isn't "innovation".

[VolcanoShed]

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

Originally posted by Darude - DeadJoke:

I've heard this complaint SO MANY MANY TIMES. First of all, no innovation? 1st gen set the trend, 2nd gen introduced breeding,(genders and baby pokemon) and had 2 regions, 3rd gen introduced the battle frontier and new hms, and concerts. 4th gen diamond and pearl were the first games in the series to have wireless compatibillity and had the watch thing, team galactic, more concerts, poffins, and unique gym puzzles. 5th gen introduced...well, fusion kyurem. And team plasma. 6th gen were the first main series pokemon games to be in 3d, had features like poke-amie, super training, the new EXP share, and mega evolutions.

And in defense of pokemon, tell me how much innovation can come from a turn based combat JRPG. Pokemon isn't the same thing every time with more creatures.

(but madden)

More of the same stuff and useless gimmicks isn't "innovation".

If you could innovate, how would you?

[Glass Double]

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

Originally posted by Darude - DeadJoke:

I've heard this complaint SO MANY MANY TIMES. First of all, no innovation? 1st gen set the trend, 2nd gen introduced breeding,(genders and baby pokemon) and had 2 regions, 3rd gen introduced the battle frontier and new hms, and concerts. 4th gen diamond and pearl were the first games in the series to have wireless compatibillity and had the watch thing, team galactic, more concerts, poffins, and unique gym puzzles. 5th gen introduced...well, fusion kyurem. And team plasma. 6th gen were the first main series pokemon games to be in 3d, had features like poke-amie, super training, the new EXP share, and mega evolutions.

And in defense of pokemon, tell me how much innovation can come from a turn based combat JRPG. Pokemon isn't the same thing every time with more creatures.

(but madden)

More of the same stuff and useless gimmicks isn't "innovation".

You could say the same thing about most game series. Zelda games, for example, tend to stick to the same format themselves, but they're usually praised all around.

Adding a few extra touches and gimmicks seems to have gotten them somewhere.

[VolcanoShed]

Originally posted by Fyresale:

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

More of the same stuff and useless gimmicks isn't "innovation".

You could say the same thing about most game series. Zelda games, for example, tend to stick to the same format themselves, but they're usually praised all around.

Adding a few extra touches and gimmicks seems to have gotten them somewhere.

Exactly. They woulden't keep the same formula if people didn't like it. And most of the time, people beg for innovation but get something they don't want.

[Val]

Originally posted by Darude - DeadJoke:

And in defense of pokemon, tell me how much innovation can come from a turn based combat JRPG. Pokemon isn't the same thing every time with more creatures.

(but madden)

Lots! Man I could think of dozens if not hundreds of ideas for turn based combat to be good, but it would make the game too hard for 90% of the gamers who are used to COD and angry birds.

[devious goon]

Pokemon is a boring game. Always was, always will be.

[Fork_Q2]

Originally posted by Fyresale:

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

More of the same stuff and useless gimmicks isn't "innovation".

You could say the same thing about most game series. Zelda games, for example, tend to stick to the same format themselves, but they're usually praised all around.

Adding a few extra touches and gimmicks seems to have gotten them somewhere.

Zelda is almost as bad, I agree. It seems to be an Nintendo thing.

[Fork_Q2]

Originally posted by Darude - DeadJoke:

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

More of the same stuff and useless gimmicks isn't "innovation".

If you could innovate, how would you?

Actually control Pokemon themselves, so it becomes a brawler like SSB instead of relying on this bad turn-based mechanic that was popular with 90's JRPGs but pointless now. Procedurally generated game-play. Make the controlled character do more interesting things other than just catch and train Pokemon. Make the world actually interesting and actually open world like Skyrim? Hell, make it MMO!

Now, you are probably going to say "well, that ain't Pokemon no more", no duh, the game has given up any chance of giving itself room to grow and develop, by sticking rigidly to a formula that's limited in what it can do, other than graphical updates and adding new Pokemon that's getting worse with every generation that is. "Concerts" lol!

[♥]

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

Originally posted by Darude - DeadJoke:

If you could innovate, how would you?

Actually control Pokemon themselves, so it becomes a brawler like SSB instead of relying on this bad turn-based mechanic that was popular with 90's JRPGs but pointless now. Procedurally generated game-play. Make the controlled character do more interesting things other than just catch and train Pokemon. Make the world actually interesting and actually open world like Skyrim? Hell, make it MMO!

Now, you are probably going to say "well, that ain't Pokemon no more", no duh, the game has given up any chance of giving itself room to grow and develop, by sticking rigidly to a formula that's limited in what it can do, other than graphical updates and adding new Pokemon that's getting worse with every generation that is. "Concerts" lol!

Isnt Pokemon Mystery Dungeon something like that? Able to control pokemon and able to attack enemies without a turn based system.

[Fork_Q2]

Originally posted by Sebastian 黒執事:

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

Actually control Pokemon themselves, so it becomes a brawler like SSB instead of relying on this bad turn-based mechanic that was popular with 90's JRPGs but pointless now. Procedurally generated game-play. Make the controlled character do more interesting things other than just catch and train Pokemon. Make the world actually interesting and actually open world like Skyrim? Hell, make it MMO!

Now, you are probably going to say "well, that ain't Pokemon no more", no duh, the game has given up any chance of giving itself room to grow and develop, by sticking rigidly to a formula that's limited in what it can do, other than graphical updates and adding new Pokemon that's getting worse with every generation that is. "Concerts" lol!

Isnt Pokemon Mystery Dungeon something like that? Able to control pokemon and able to attack enemies without a turn based system.

True, looks like this spin-off had the right idea (never played it, so I cannot say if it's any good though).

[♥]

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

Originally posted by Sebastian 黒執事:

Isnt Pokemon Mystery Dungeon something like that? Able to control pokemon and able to attack enemies without a turn based system.

True, looks like this spin-off had the right idea (never played it, so I cannot say if it's any good though).

I never played it either, but my sister enjoys it to no end, and ive watched her play it. The gameplay i would probably enjoy rather than turn based, but the customization and ability to explore from different angles is gone. Your basically stuck in a birds eye view with a default pokemon, rather than a personalized trainer.

[VolcanoShed]

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

Originally posted by Darude - DeadJoke:

If you could innovate, how would you?

Actually control Pokemon themselves, so it becomes a brawler like SSB instead of relying on this bad turn-based mechanic that was popular with 90's JRPGs but pointless now. Procedurally generated game-play. Make the controlled character do more interesting things other than just catch and train Pokemon. Make the world actually interesting and actually open world like Skyrim? Hell, make it MMO!

Now, you are probably going to say "well, that ain't Pokemon no more", no duh, the game has given up any chance of giving itself room to grow and develop, by sticking rigidly to a formula that's limited in what it can do, other than graphical updates and adding new Pokemon that's getting worse with every generation that is. "Concerts" lol!

So, remove the turn base mechanic? Well, that's what paper mario did and look how ♥♥♥♥♥♥ it is now.

[VolcanoShed]

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

Originally posted by Fyresale:

You could say the same thing about most game series. Zelda games, for example, tend to stick to the same format themselves, but they're usually praised all around.

Adding a few extra touches and gimmicks seems to have gotten them somewhere.

Zelda is almost as bad, I agree. It seems to be an Nintendo thing.

They're making a skyrim-like zelda as we speak.

[Fork_Q2]

Originally posted by Darude - DeadJoke:

Originally posted by Fork_Q:

Actually control Pokemon themselves, so it becomes a brawler like SSB instead of relying on this bad turn-based mechanic that was popular with 90's JRPGs but pointless now. Procedurally generated game-play. Make the controlled character do more interesting things other than just catch and train Pokemon. Make the world actually interesting and actually open world like Skyrim? Hell, make it MMO!

Now, you are probably going to say "well, that ain't Pokemon no more", no duh, the game has given up any chance of giving itself room to grow and develop, by sticking rigidly to a formula that's limited in what it can do, other than graphical updates and adding new Pokemon that's getting worse with every generation that is. "Concerts" lol!

So, remove the turn base mechanic? Well, that's what paper mario did and look how ♥♥♥♥♥♥ it is now.

Well do it in a way that's not ♥♥♥♥♥♥. Not all real-time games are ♥♥♥♥.