maglag wrote:But just how many people actually bothered to collect all the mons in a single game? In particular when that number just kept getting bigger and bigger?
Who knows exactly how many? I don't know but you don't either. What we could do is debate the merits of keeping that feature in there.
maglag wrote:Blaming the wrong people for something is quite counter-productive.
And nitpicking responses
isn't counterproductive?
Pokemon Sword and Shield also has plenty of data, lots of 0s and 1s, if you hack it or do weird shit you can add anything you want (and can fit in that amount of 0s and 1s).
Gen III had data for all Pokemon in the game, so it was just a matter of using a hacking device to spawn the ones that didn't appear anywhere. Sword and Shield doesn't have that data. And Nintendo makes their systems increasingly hard to hack
because they really don't want you to have fun with their games in any way than the one that they personally intended to so yeah, good luck coding a bunch of Pokemon from scratch and hacking them into an increasingly difficult to hack game.
Now that's just your opinion, gen V is the most hated one, not III.
Gen V is worse, don't get me wrong. But there's a consensus that it's the worst. In my experience, everyone talks about Gen III like it's the best fucking thing ever. Therefore, even though Gen V is the worst, Gen III is the most overrated. Those are two different things.
That's assuming money can solve anything.
It can't solve everything, but it can solve a lot of things. All other things being equal, having a bigger budget is good. That doesn't mean a big budget alone can carry something, but it certainly helps.
But pokemon has a certain, well, charm, magic, call it what you want, that plenty of other groups tried to replicate and only produced something inferior. Heck, pokemon wasn't even the first monster collecting franchise, but it sure did become the most popular one and has managed to to the top position in the genre for two decades now!
That I'll give you. Pokemon certainly has something that keeps it successful (which might be as simple as name recognition at this point)
So sure you could recruit thousands of corporate workers and soulless programmers and give them a decade's worth of budget, but chances are that you'll just end up dilluting the actual talent that made pokemon so good in the first place and end with some soulless AAA game with pretty graphics and nothing else.
Wait,
you were the one going on about graphics, and how jettisoning Pokemon was a necessary evil to improve them.
I said I think that is a bad idea. Are you now agreeing with me?
Again that's just your opinion, plenty of people enjoyed the games after Heargold/Soulsilver.
Of course. And I enjoyed games after those, I just don't think they felt as polished. That is all that I stated.
And what is exactly pokemon's strength? Collecting is a part, but also the simple story, exploring, curbstomping other kids and taking their money, just getting away from home and making adults aknowledge you with no need of some eldritch abomination forcing you to.
You mean the simple story that they add more and more cutscenes and dialogue boxes to make? See, I just picked out a tiny detail from
your point! It's what you've been doing the whole goddamn time! Do you see why that is unproductive?
As for your greater point, I would say that the strengths of Pokemon are being able to collect and battle a wide variety of quirky creatures using simple-to-learn mechanics. It's a game that you can put as little or as much effort into as you want.
Just look at all the Nuzlocke players. They self-impose themselves limitations that make it outright impossible to collect all the mons, but enjoy the game nevertheless. Collecting the mons is just one of pokemon's strengths, and collecting every last one is something only a very few people actually bother with.
Yes, there are multiple ways to enjoy the games. I never said there wasn't. I just said that
one way that people enjoy them is the collecting aspect and I didn't think that it was good to water that down.
Plus if you try to hold to an old strength for too long, it does becomes a weakness.
Yes, I agree, but I don't think "having lots of Pokemon" is an old strength that was being held on to for too long. I think it's the one thing Pokemon has consistently improved on.
"Gotta catch em all" was a nice motto back when there were only 150, but it simply couldn't scale up forever, and they dropped said motto all the way back in Ruby/Saphire.
But they gave the option to do so until Sword/Shield, which is a Switch game and thus bigger than the 3DS titles. They opted to drop it and focus on gimmicks and graphics, which I consider to be stupid.
Or like Nintendo used to have the best graphics back with the SNSE, but trying to have top graphics resulted only in the Gamecube.
Again, you're making
my point about graphics not being Nintendo's strong suit! My argument is that a large roster of 'mons is the Pokemon series' strong suit, and graphics aren't, so I think that it is stupid for Game Freak to sacrifice the former for the latter.
Another failed "gotcha." Did you even read what Ogre posted about Sony putting more money into something that will make less money for the purpose of winning fan loyalty? I honestly can't remember the last time Nintendo did that.
As for censorship, Nintendo will crush fan games/mods/remakes (Pokemon Uranium, Project M, Metroid II remake, etc.) in an attempt to boost sales for their own titles. That is also a form of censorship, and one that I find substantially more pernicious than the standard prudishness surrounding digital titties (porn is easy to come by, after all.) That doesn't make Sony's censorship
good but it's stupid to pretend that Nintendo is innocent of the same crime.
You know what? I'm not going to continue this discussion. You consider this to be a reasonable design decision, and I don't. As you said, that's
your opinion. You are free to have it and I am free to disagree with it. Mine is different. I am free to have it and you are free to disagree with it. I honestly don't think I'm going to convince you, nor that you will convince me. Therefore the reasonable thing to do would be to walk off.
I think Shrapnel summed my thoughts up best in his last post anyways.