Has Pokemon changed?

PostHas Pokemon changed? by **Peter Crisp** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:24 am

I know we have a Pokemon topic but I'd feel bad asking what many may consider a negative question in a topic for people who are going to enjoy the game. Not being a fan I know almost nothing about the franchise other than that it's a card game similar to top trumps but have the games changed over the past decade?
It just amazes me that each game can be released and sell by the truck load so I must be wrong in thinking that the only change is more Pokemon and maybe different arenas.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Mafro** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:31 am

It's been pretty much the exact same since Blue/Red. But that's not a bad thing :wub:

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Shadow** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:32 am

Of course they've changed!! We started with 150 Pokemon and now we've got about 600 durr!

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **aayl1** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:32 am

Not as much as you, man.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Red Yoshi** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:39 am

Nope, and i've put over 200 hours into each one :wub:

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Christopher** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:34 am

I wish it would become an MMO.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **TravelJug** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:43 am

suzzopher wrote:I wish it would become an MMO.

My gaming dream right there!

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Eighthours** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:48 am

Laziest franchise in gaming history. Where's the massive home console RPG that every man and his dog has wanted since about 2001 or so? There is simply no excuse for it not appearing.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **TravelJug** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:00 am

Eighthours wrote:Laziest franchise in gaming history. Where's the massive home console RPG that every man and his dog has wanted since about 2001 or so? There is simply no excuse for it not appearing.

I can honestly not comprehend why they haven't thought about making it!

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Christopher** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:00 am

TravelJug wrote:
Eighthours wrote:Laziest franchise in gaming history. Where's the massive home console RPG that every man and his dog has wanted since about 2001 or so? There is simply no excuse for it not appearing.

I can honestly not comprehend why they haven't thought about making it!

They dabbled with the terrible Gamecube games.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Cropolite** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:07 am

suzzopher wrote:
TravelJug wrote:
Eighthours wrote:Laziest franchise in gaming history. Where's the massive home console RPG that every man and his dog has wanted since about 2001 or so? There is simply no excuse for it not appearing.

I can honestly not comprehend why they haven't thought about making it!

They dabbled with the terrible Gamecube games.

I traded it in within a day - Colosseum or something. To say it was on-rails would be an understatement, the NGC were truly awful. :fp:

And the Gameboy / DS games haven't changed at all really, same old brilliant formula. I'll be having a look at this.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **TheTurnipKing** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:24 am

Peter Crisp wrote:I know we have a Pokemon topic but I'd feel bad asking what many may consider a negative question in a topic for people who are going to enjoy the game. Not being a fan I know almost nothing about the franchise other than that it's a card game similar to top trumps but have the games changed over the past decade?
It just amazes me that each game can be released and sell by the truck load so I must be wrong in thinking that the only change is more Pokemon and maybe different arenas.

It's an RPG, which don't often change substantially from release to release. (Final Fantasy could be described as "new moves and new areas). But the latest version added a number of interesting refinements. For example, there were beauty contests and suchlike, which played out similarly to battles, but added a whole second bunch of traits to traditonal movesets, giving you a reason to train Pokemon that weren't just death-machines. It also added a level of interest for the opposite gender.

Another interesting change was the possibility of dual Pokemon battlles, which added a whole new bunch of tactical thinking to the standard battles, encouraging you to think about how traditional Pokemon move-sets could interact.

There's a lot of thinking that goes into creating a real Pokemon game, Keeping it on the handhelds encourages a certain mindset that usually seems to come as a result of limited resources,

As for Colloseum, it was basicaly a single player storyline that was tacked onto the "battle your friends" shennangins that made N64 Pokemon Stadium sell so well. Considering that, it was actually a pretty good game, but way outside my demographic, being a mini Pokemon RPG stapled to a Pokemon movie, neither of which I have the time or inclination for these days, personally.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **St Nick** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:23 pm

I still think pokemon is brilliant. Yes, the forumla hasn't changed that much from red/blue, but those games were fantastic, and the same applies to the pearl/diamond. Addictive isn't a strong enough word.

Although...they can be a bit lazy with new pokemon designs sometimes, for example:

Pokemon Number 12 - Butterfree

Pokemon 267 - Beautifly

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **TheTurnipKing** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:35 pm

Looks like a Butterfree designed for use in the beauty contests :lol:

Is Butterfree actually in the same game? If it's omitted, that would explain it's appearance.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Seven** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:40 pm

I'm thinking Butterfree is actually Butterfly, when other one is some kind of bug that extracts water/something from flowers...so they're from different kind of insects.

TheTurnipKing - All Pokémon is in all games, but some of them will need another Pokémon to get em again. Like, if you want old favourites in Diamond you'll have to get Fire Red/Leaf Green for original 151, XD/Colosseum/Ruby/Sapphire for 152 to rest.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **SEP** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:36 pm

No, it hasn't changed much. Whether that's actually a bad thing is a point for debate. I mean, if it ain't broke, right?

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Alvin Flummux** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:53 pm

TravelJug wrote:
suzzopher wrote:I wish it would become an MMO.

My gaming dream right there!

My gaming nightmare. Pokémon should never be a pay-monthly affair, nor should it become an MMO as you'd get hordes of wankers going around with stupid names acting like fuckheads.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Cuttooth** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:58 pm

Eighthours wrote:Laziest franchise in gaming history. Where's the massive home console RPG that every man and his dog has wanted since about 2001 or so? There is simply no excuse for it not appearing.

A proper 3D Pokemon RPG would have saved the Gamecube. It's amazing the only thing they bothered to make was Colosseum.

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **Christopher** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:02 pm

Cuttooth wrote:
Eighthours wrote:Laziest franchise in gaming history. Where's the massive home console RPG that every man and his dog has wanted since about 2001 or so? There is simply no excuse for it not appearing.

A proper 3D Pokemon RPG would have saved the Gamecube. It's amazing the only thing they bothered to make was Colosseum.

Didn't changing the name to Wii and adding peripherals save the Gamecube?

PostRe: Has Pokemon changed? by **SchminkyPinky** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 3:12 pm

They need to do a full scale Wii version of the portable games. There are no excuses now as the Wii has online capabilities so trading would be possible. Do it Nintendo. Do it.

Has Pokemon changed?

Who is online

Affiliates