16 replies to this topic

[Forest_GS]

When you look at the most common of a certain type of animal or bug...well, that's what someone would think about when a certain species is mentioned.

There could be so many more variations of pokemon, that are different colors, learn different movesets, or different stats. There would be no need for shiny pokemon with this kind of variation. >.>

Imagine a Heracross, brown in color, one-sharp-point horn, and a very round shell. Imagine an onyxs(or is it onyxi?) made of every type of mineral. Imagine fuzzy versions of bugs, fuzzy caterpies? fuzzy weedles? A marill with a longer tail?

And instead of matching the stat variations to personalities, (which can change) they could tie the stat variation to the variations of pokemon. I'm not saying personalities shouldn't affect stats, just that personalities should be malleable.

I would add a third type to the pokemon too. Maybe have it affect the battles a little less than the first two types....a subtype. That would help with designing slightly different movesets for the new variations of pokemon.

I want to know who likes my idea. If I get no responses, I shall take it as nobody likes it.
Don't be afraid to add to this, or tell me this is a terrible idea.

Edited by Forest_GS, 04 November 2011 - 03:21 PM.

[PSI Aqua]

It's a good idea, but it would take FAR too much work and time for the team, as they would need to make seperate sprites for every Pokemon. While yes, we have female and males looking somewhat different, there isn't generally a big change and it's only for a few Pokemon.
Also: We have a Pokemon thread on it's own. It hasn't been bumped for awhile though. Maybe a mod should combine this thread with it?

[MarcelloF]

I'm happy the way things are right now.

P.S. No action RPG, please.

[Forest_GS]

Ah, didn't notice the other thread. Not sure if this should go in there or not either o.o.

An action rpg that actually had good controls would be good. And by good controls, I mean look at Zoids for the gamecube.
Yeah that zoids game was bland, no vibrant color landscapes, and lagged when there were more enemies, but the controls were great. One of the control sticks were used for quick maneuvering, and felt very natural after just a few uses.

Being able to accurately have pokemon do what they can do in the anime would be great, though without the proper controls, it would definitely be a flop.

[Cola]

I'd like that, but what I'd like even more is to customize your trainer and Pokemon with different clothes and accessories. If Battle Revolution can do it, then I'm sure it's perfectly plausible.

[shimapun]

This whole "variation" idea you have is already somewhat implemented in the games, when you think about it. It isn't always like "x species is represented by just one pokemon", we have multiple mice pokemon, cat pokemon, dog pokemon, different types of beetles, etc. The way you described idea just makes it sound like you're asking for different pokemon, rather than just variations of existing ones.

Also, I'd rather there not be any major changes to the battle system. Too used to the basic system that's been used for over a decade and I'm too much of a crybabby fanboy to handle a complete overhaul by this point.

Fuck innovation, man!

Edited by HotGirlOnInternet, 04 November 2011 - 04:20 PM.

[Noir]

Pokémon is aimed at young children, meaning designs need to be very recognizable and uncomplicated. Neither of which is the case if there were common variations like missing or extra appendages and different colors. It just wouldn't work as far as marketing goes.

We have slight gender variations and very few extreme ones, and ridiculously rare shinies. I think that's good enough.

[Lando The Bat]

I was thinking about how Pokemon could use a graphical face-lift earlier today. Thought this topic was about that, was wrong.

[The Cheese]

Frankly, with the way the series has progressed since Ruby/Sapphire (arguably earlier), the last thing the PKMN series needs is more pointless overcomplication, especially if the acquisition of such traits is still largely dependant on luck. Pokemon games are quite lengthy to be sure, but almost universally for the wrong reasons every single goddamned time. I spend more time grinding for lvl ups than I do with anything of actual substance or entertainment value - this is a problem no matter what kind of game you're making. Oh, but hey, at least there's OMFG MINIGAEMZ.

Honestly, if it were up to me I'd just abolish lvl ups entirely and have the stats for every Pokemon completely static. Sure, it might detract from the motif and charm of raising them a tad, but at the very least it'd make organising a capable team less a matter of "who is a more mindless gaming zombie than the other" and more a matter of the actual strategy pertaining your team's moves and elements to each other and your opponent. And hell, if it makes Onyx and Gyarados less of a legendary joke in spite of their perception as big, hard-ass monsters, then that's even better.

[Rigby]

Pokemon is dead. It has been for the last 4 years. Just so you know, I was a rabid fan of the franchise in my younger days. Seeing the decline in quality in the games in recent years has pretty much ripped my heart in two. Whatever Nintendo chooses to do from here on will be regarded as 'beating a dead horse', similar to the Sonic franchise circa. 2006. They've fallen out of the public eye for years now and there isn't anything that can be done to gain their long-lost respect over kids, what with the internet being the new 'thing'. IMO Nintendo/Gamefreak should take a break from making Pokemon games for about 6-7 years, which is about enough time to let them cool off from their release frenzy and to create new, innovaive ideas/PKMN naturally, without the pressure of time (to avoid things like this.)

So in answer to your question, your ideas are pretty cool, but I don't think anything can be done to the franchise now.

Edited by sandwichbars, 05 November 2011 - 11:31 AM.

[Noir]

Pokemon is dead. It has been for the last 4 years. Just so you know, I was a rabid fan of the franchise in my younger days. Seeing the decline in quality in the games in recent years has pretty much ripped my heart in two. Whatever Nintendo chooses to do from here on will be regarded as 'beating a dead horse', similar to the Sonic franchise circa. 2006. Thay've fallen out of the public eye for years now and there isn't anything that can be done to gain their long-lost respect over kids, what with the internet being the new 'thing'.

Is that why Black and White were the fastest selling DS games and fastest selling Pokémon games of all time as well as being called the best Pokémon games by reviewers and scoring multiple perfect scores, not to mention being adored by fans and considered by many to be the best in the series?

Right. Just because you don't like something does not mean it's dead.

[Stocking Anarchy]

We have slight gender variations and very few extreme ones, and ridiculously rare shinies. I think that's good enough.

With the exception of separate evolutions like Gallade or Nidoqueen the extremely different variations were all from gen five, so I think we'll get some more of these in the eventual sixth generation

Whatever Nintendo chooses to do from here on will be regarded as 'beating a dead horse', similar to the Sonic franchise circa. 2006. Thay've fallen out of the public eye for years now and there isn't anything that can be done to gain their long-lost respect over kids.

Yes, because as we all know, every Sonic game after the absolutely FLAWLESS SA2B was a horribly designed, horribly written and all around horrible waste of money, Colours and Generations never happened/don't count and every remaining fan is either a blind retard with no expectations/taste in games or Mariotehplumber.

[Dobkeratops]

A facelift? How about a complete reworking?

The battle system is slooooow, every new installment adds more statdumps represented with a cute jpg instead of turning the ones they have into actual characters, they keep adding more and more RNG featurettes into an already bloated system and pretty much every entry in the franchise follows the same fucking template. I'm okay with sequels being similar, but god damn it's been like 10 of them and they come in pairs.

I guess the statwhoring manbabies would be upset if they couldn't catch ten different skins of a charmless yellow rat picture with a bunch of random numbers attached to it to add more numbers at a snail's pace, but c'mon. That's why the Mystery Dungeon games don't bore me to death whereas I haven't been able to endure a main entry since Silver :x

/random rant

[Azookara]

I'm happy the way things are right now.

P.S. No action RPG, please.

Were people really that worked up over my topic I made a while back? Okay, I mean, unless you really were referencing that, it could've been that you didn't read that topic, but still, I first thought that's what you were implying, so nevermind..

Still, what's wrong with an action rpg variation of Pokemon? I'm siding with Dobkeratops here; the games have gotten increasingly stale due to just about every main game (not spinoff) in the series following the exact same gameplay methods over and over again; and it could use some expansion, some variation if you please. It doesn't even have to be a staple for the rest of time for the franchise either, just make a game with this, try it out, and maybe make a few more games like this while also letting the turnbase-and-stathog peeps play their oldschool pogeymans style.

Edited by Azukara, 05 November 2011 - 03:38 PM.

[ovarloard]

Honestly, I don't think I would care much for an introduction of a third type.

Note that this post is NOT addressing the games as a whole, and is focused on the battle mechanics of the games.

Speaking from the standpoint of a competitive battler, the battle system of Pokémon is unique. The sheer amount of depth and strategy you find in all aspects of battling - choosing the Pokés for your team, choosing the correct movesets for your Pokés based on the options given to you while making sure to keep opposing strategies in mind, making difficult decisions, and having it turn out alright is a feeling like no other. It's as close to perfect as can be. That's not to say there's no luck involved - there's a lot of luck, in fact, but the fact that so many people can still manage to play it and enjoy it so well despite that luck is a testament to how great the system is.

Adding in a third type would change all of this. There's no guarantee that a three-type system would be at all balanced - yes, I know there are tiers, and there are types that are slightly favored, but there's no one type that has a monopoly on the game. And with three types, there's no telling what could happen. It could screw up the tiering system completely - up until now, power has never been too much of an issue, what with the current organization of tiers based on usage. With three types though, the new immunities and weaknesses would be insane. One move could automatically be a OHKO on certain Pokemon due to being 8x effective. Say that Pokemon has some of the best of the best stats, though, and is moved to a lower tier due to it dying to one of the more popular types. Then, where does it go? It might not fit the lower tiers based on power, it won't fit in the higher tiers based on usage - where does that leave the tiering system? The whole point of the system now is to make sure every Pokemon has its own use - if it's not as viable in the upper tiers, that usually means it's a perfect fit for a lower one. Not anymore.

With the addition of types - how are move powers calculated? Will they have to change currently existing mechanics, and if this happens does the competitive scene have to start over in terms of strategy and even investigating the mechanics and building simulators?

Does this mean existing Pokemon would be changed to fit the new three-type norm? Would they not be changed and be left behind in this "revolution" of sorts?

Will this game still cater to all audiences?

Okay, honestly I'm not so sure where I'm going with this post anymore. I had an idea at first, and it sort of faded as I was writing this. Ended up rambling a LOT. I know there are other reasons, I just can't think straight right now.

suffice it to say that I'm not the biggest fan of a third type. [/mindless, thoughtless rant]

Edited by ovarloard, 06 November 2011 - 06:38 PM.

[Forest_GS]

Hmm...I guess I should expand on my idea of that 3rd type I mentioned. I'm not 100% sure it would work either.

Currently;
One type = 100% of the extra damage for that type of attack.
Two types = 50% of the extra damage for each of the two types of attacks.

My prototype idea of a third types would be low-impact, but enough to explain some extra attacks.
Maybe 45% extra damage for the two main types, and 10% extra damage for the third type.

Lets give a Weevile a third type, for an example. Ice/Dark (electric) That would give it the ability to learn the lower tier electric attacks.

I guess that's everything I was thinking about when I thought this up. Definitely a prototype idea.

=====

I also like the idea of getting rid of levels, getting rid of that extra growth would make adding extra trainer battles very simple. Would also make things such as making all your pokemon Lv.100 for an even WiFi battle a thing of the past.

[Dobkeratops]

Speaking from the standpoint of a competitive battler, the battle system of Pokémon is unique. The sheer amount of depth and strategy you find in all aspects of battling - choosing the Pokés for your team, choosing the correct movesets for your Pokés based on the options given to you while making sure to keep opposing strategies in mind, making difficult decisions, and having it turn out alright is a feeling like no other.

Hello.