First Pokémon Black & White Details and Images Evolve

xyrafhoan

New member
Jan 11, 2010
472
0
0
Mordwyl said:
John Funk said:
Zeeky_Santos said:
Seriously, why do people buy into what is essentially the same game with new names? Pokemon is like, the same thing over and over again, lunacy. nice to see that they are taking a step into a newish direction, but the very premise of Pokemon could be adapted into something that looks far better than this shit they put up before you, being praised as awesome.
Because the gameplay is awesome?

Seriously. High-level Pokemon is one of the most mindblowingly strategic games out there. Nothing I've ever played compares.
Frankly, Zeeky is right. Calling the games awesome is just pure bias over the franchise. That's it. The one thing that's keeping Game Freak in business with this tired out game is Nintendo, as I have lived through enough of the pet management genre to realise Pokemon Red and its future incarnations are on a pacemaker.
I fail to see how Pokemon has become a "tired" series when every generation has heralded significant changes to the metagame. It's not just about new 'Mons and updated graphics, but Pokemon has seen the addition of breeding and inheritance of IVs and moves from parents (made even easier in HG/SS), field-changing moves with effects as minor as "Solarbeam has no charge phase, Fire moves do more damage, Water moves do half damage" (Sun) or "Blizzard never misses, every Pokemon except ice types take 1/16th of their HP in damage" (Hail) to "Moves gain a 30% increase in accuracy and flying types lose their immunity to ground type moves" (Gravity), passive abilities for every Pokemon, and a split between physical and special moves on an individual basis rather than by type. If you ever bothered to explore Pokemon beyond the Catch 'em All adventure you'd find a hardcore battling scene that defies expectation, and with the advent of friend codes and online play, those players are more connected than ever before. Some people are just so biased by the "childish" exterior to explore the inner workings of a very complex game.

Edit: That said, what I've seen from screenshots doesn't have me all that excited, if only because I believe the camera is going to be a fixed angle and that just makes navigation bothersome. It makes the 3D more obvious but top-down cameras just work so well for this type of game. The battle screen, on the other hand, is a nice update to the perspective, and I'm curious to see what other changes will be announced.
 

MisterGobbles

New member
Nov 30, 2009
747
0
0
Pokemon has always just been the same thing copy/pasted over and over with little variation. This is probably the series biggest change since...well, the first games. And it still doesn't look much different...
 

v3n0mat3

New member
Jul 30, 2008
938
0
0
For Pokemon, I definitely will get a 3DS. A 3D Pokemon? Hell. Yeah. So long as Nintendo says "piss off, shovelware", It'll be a nice system to buy.
 

Mordwyl

New member
Feb 5, 2009
1,302
0
0
xyrafhoan said:
Mordwyl said:
John Funk said:
Zeeky_Santos said:
Seriously, why do people buy into what is essentially the same game with new names? Pokemon is like, the same thing over and over again, lunacy. nice to see that they are taking a step into a newish direction, but the very premise of Pokemon could be adapted into something that looks far better than this shit they put up before you, being praised as awesome.
Because the gameplay is awesome?

Seriously. High-level Pokemon is one of the most mindblowingly strategic games out there. Nothing I've ever played compares.
Frankly, Zeeky is right. Calling the games awesome is just pure bias over the franchise. That's it. The one thing that's keeping Game Freak in business with this tired out game is Nintendo, as I have lived through enough of the pet management genre to realise Pokemon Red and its future incarnations are on a pacemaker.
snip
Believe me, I've been studying Pokemon's mechanics for a long time (especially in advancement and effort values) and while I do admit several of them are quite elaborate and complex all it did is add stress to a game which was originally aimed for children. Granted, the conditions set upon moves as you explained are things which in hindsight make one think "they thought of adding these changes now?" as well as raise the question as to why involve so many "cushion" (for a lack of better words) statistics instead of opting for a more direct approach, AKA a real-time physics-based battle system.

Game design is one job that's not too different from that of a writer. That is, you must avoid redundancy as much as possible and make your content fluid on the medium. All these variables simply exist for a "being there" reason (i.e. Weight, height, IVs, etc.) instead of having a more flexible purpose. This was in fact one of the major changes Blizzard had undergone through Wrath of the Lich King, since the game was adding too many singular variables for the combat mechanics.

In short, the game has barely changed since its first inception with the first generation. I'll believe there's an evolution when there is one.
 

hardband

New member
Nov 21, 2009
97
0
0
Kalezian said:
hardband said:
Im scared the battle systems going to turn real time.

More intense battles...

This could go two ways, iv'e always wanted proper pokemon action battles but if handled wrong could become spectrobes :O

you can now attack the other trainer directly


seriously, how come I have to use my Pokemon to fight his Pokemon? why cant I just have Pikachu use thunderbolt on the douche and run away, or even better, steal his wallet?

on a sad note, my spell checker evidently knows Pokemon is supposed to be capitalized....
That would be awesome LOL and i'm suprised your spell checker even knows what a Pokemon is! :p
 

xyrafhoan

New member
Jan 11, 2010
472
0
0
Mordwyl said:
xyrafhoan said:
Mordwyl said:
John Funk said:
Zeeky_Santos said:
Seriously, why do people buy into what is essentially the same game with new names? Pokemon is like, the same thing over and over again, lunacy. nice to see that they are taking a step into a newish direction, but the very premise of Pokemon could be adapted into something that looks far better than this shit they put up before you, being praised as awesome.
Because the gameplay is awesome?

Seriously. High-level Pokemon is one of the most mindblowingly strategic games out there. Nothing I've ever played compares.
Frankly, Zeeky is right. Calling the games awesome is just pure bias over the franchise. That's it. The one thing that's keeping Game Freak in business with this tired out game is Nintendo, as I have lived through enough of the pet management genre to realise Pokemon Red and its future incarnations are on a pacemaker.
snip
more snip
For me, Pokemon represents the perfect blend of gameplay that is easy enough to understand for children, as you can beat the game with zero understanding of the game beyond "3rd tier evolutions are strong, legendary Pokemon are very strong, and there are these moves that are also strong", and extremely strategic team building in the end game with a large pool of 'Mons to draw from for all types of play styles. "Real time physics based combat" might be fine for older children and adults, but you risk making the game too difficult for the kids in elementary school who love Pokemon, too. Or, you just risk making a game that's no longer an RPG, and alienating the competitive battling group that has stuck with Pokemon because of what it is. I don't buy into the whole "variables exist just because", as new mechanics bring new considerations to IV spreads, whether it be related to raising a Pokemon with a specific Hidden Power, or if you're building a team around Trick Room, or if you want to take advantage of moves like Gyro Ball. None of these things are vital to successfully beating the game as a standalone outlet, but there is huge variety in the way of team building that is rarely seen in a game marketed towards children and it's not something that really needs to change.

I would have bought into "Pokemon is stale" if it's continued the way it did through Gen 3, but Gen 4 was a real revitalization of the battle system, bringing a lot more value back into old Pokemon in battle. What's really a problem with Pokemon is not the way the battles operate, but arguably the deluge of terrible HMs you're forced to learn to progress through the game, and the speed at which battles progress. Rolling HP levels gets really tedious when you're fighting a Pokemon as chunky as Blissey. Nor do I want to have half my team occupied by HM slaves until I've beaten the game and can get into the "real" game.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
Mordwyl said:
John Funk said:
Zeeky_Santos said:
Seriously, why do people buy into what is essentially the same game with new names? Pokemon is like, the same thing over and over again, lunacy. nice to see that they are taking a step into a newish direction, but the very premise of Pokemon could be adapted into something that looks far better than this shit they put up before you, being praised as awesome.
Because the gameplay is awesome?

Seriously. High-level Pokemon is one of the most mindblowingly strategic games out there. Nothing I've ever played compares.
Frankly, Zeeky is right. Calling the games awesome is just pure bias over the franchise. That's it. The one thing that's keeping Game Freak in business with this tired out game is Nintendo, as I have lived through enough of the pet management genre to realise Pokemon Red and its future incarnations are on a pacemaker.
NO, he's not. Frankly, this situation just reeks of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. Play competitive, then get back to me.

It strikes the perfect balance between "accessible for all ages" and "holy crap hardcore."

Edit: But basically, what the guy said above me.
 

sneakypenguin

Elite Member
Legacy
Jul 31, 2008
2,804
0
41
Country
usa
Augh my eyes, the graphics, the horror. Really shoulda waited for the 3ds maybe then it wouldn't be so pixely
 

john_alexander

New member
Aug 16, 2008
57
0
0
I might actually buy another Pokemon game. I haven't done that since Yellow; each iteration has offered too little to stand up to the nostalgia-tinted castle of AWESOME memories Yellow gave me.
 

Plurralbles

New member
Jan 12, 2010
4,611
0
0
sweet! But if they go too far from the formula I'll be alienated and say, "fuck that!"


THey're still going to restrict you from getting all the poke's.... I wonder how much we'll be limited by these games. If it's too large that'll be a deciding factor against buying it too.
 

Serafis

New member
Mar 24, 2010
76
0
0
Well RBY --> GSC was what would be called a true sequel

RSE was a reboot to the series with a completely revamped system.

DPP fundamentally changed the way combat works

B/W seems to be changing the look of the series as a handheld game into a more sophisticated look, afforded by the DS's power.

John Funk said:
NO, he's not. Frankly, this situation just reeks of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. Play competitive, then get back to me.

It strikes the perfect balance between "accessible for all ages" and "holy crap hardcore."

Edit: But basically, what the guy said above me.
Hmmm...I dunno. Setup takes forever to do, with all the EV/IV/Breed/Nature blending. Also, the act of having a combat reboot didn't change the OU list that much. Not enough to be significant anyways.
 

Samus Aaron

New member
Apr 3, 2010
364
0
0
Tom Goldman said:
However, if Joey returns and keeps calling about his Ratatta, I have a feeling Pokemon Black & White could end up angering more than they please.
Hahahaha! I know how you feel!
 

Baron_BJ

Tired. Cold. Bored.
Nov 13, 2009
499
0
11
NOTE: My head is quite sore at the moment and I feel that I have undoubtedly made many a brain-fart in my below comments, mainly in the form of grammatical errors and repetition and perhaps even aggression (though not aimed at players, I'm not that out of my head at the moment), I apologize in advance.

Before I'll get started I'll just say that it's sickening bullshit that Nintendo still has the trading system, it was originally in the original R/B games partially for necessity, now it's just a gimmick that they're using to milk people. No other developers out at the moment even have the amount of gall to try and pass off the bullshit that is the "trading mechanic".

The games only change is a minor update? OK, it's proven a successful system, all I ask is that there's something other than the combat to do (Given, those Contests were a nice addition, the secret base thing was a nice, tiny addition, etc, but they're all too small and easily forgotten, not something you give a shit about in the end). I've seen some mentions about the additions of hail, sunny day, etc, affects along those lines, however they're not something that any normal player will give a flying fuck about and they don't take much code to add at all. The games have rarely ever added anything new, I suggest you find my post made a few days before HG/SS release, I found there was near no change to anything barring some graphical updates.The games only change is a minor update? OK, it's proven a successful system, all I ask is that there's something other than the combat to do (Given, those Contests were a nice addition, the secret base thing was a nice, tiny addition, etc, but they're all too small and easily forgotten, not something you give a shit about in the end). I've seen some mentions about the additions of hail, sunny day, etc, affects along those lines, however they're not something that any normal player will give a flying fuck about and they don't take much code to add at all. The games have rarely ever added anything new, I suggest you find my post made a few days before HG/SS release, I found there was near no change to anything barring some graphical updates.

Flying-Emu said:
Zeeky_Santos said:
Seriously, why do people buy into what is essentially the same game with new names? Halo, Gears, God of War, ANYTHING is like, the same thing over and over again, lunacy. nice to see that they are taking a step into a newish direction, but the very premise of Halo, Gears, God of War, ANYTHING could be adapted into something that looks far better than this shit they put up before you, being praised as awesome.
See what I did there?

The same can be said of ANY series. Poke'Mon doesn't change its formula, because it WORKS. What they do with each new gen is modify, fine-tune, and perfect that core formula, which is what a sequel should do. I'm under the impression that you haven't played since Red/Blue, since Red/Blue and Diamond/Pearl/Platinum have vastly different strategies needed to achieve victory.
That's a dreadful argument. There are major differences in all of those games, however in regards to your argument regarding a lot of FPS games I will agree (*cough*CoD, BFBC2, etc, etc). However for shits and giggles I'll mention some of the most obvious differences off the top of my head for the 3 you listed. Halo (the piece of overrated crap that it is) is a first person non-cover based shooter, Gears is a 3rd person co-op shooter primarily using cover to avoid bullets and coordination to fire and allow your partner to heal. God of War is a hack and slasher, how is it like a shooter? It has been ripped off a lot though, they all failed in the attempt, but they tried admittedly.

John Funk said:
Zeeky_Santos said:
Seriously, why do people buy into what is essentially the same game with new names? Pokemon is like, the same thing over and over again, lunacy. nice to see that they are taking a step into a newish direction, but the very premise of Pokemon could be adapted into something that looks far better than this shit they put up before you, being praised as awesome.
Because the gameplay is awesome?

Seriously. High-level Pokemon is one of the most mindblowingly strategic games out there. Nothing I've ever played compares.
I keep reading this here, however I don't recall this from my time playing (I played all the games up to Diamond, I lost it and just said "meh, I don't feel like it anymore", would be nice to find it again though). It always came down to me just killing every single opponent with only a single attack (c'mon ************, use surf! YAY!). Often I'd rock up at the league with my level 80+ starter critter and not even have any remote resemblance of a challenge, at that point I wouldn't even need to plan or think out which attack to use against even opposite attribute critters owned by the league. After this I would always make a big group of the Pokemon of my choice 6 elements (won't go into it right now) and choose the biggest, burliest bitches around (since that's a pretty easy way to judge power unfortunately), but there was no point. There's not really any actual challenge after the league ((Kanto in the original (maybe remakes as well) Gold/Silver was sensational though)) and if I want to actually catch more of the little shits I have to bring along a fair few useless level 40 or so critters just in case.

I've heard of being able to link up online with the DS, but I don't know, nor do I care, how this is done. I buy games like Pokemon because People are annoying dickheads, I don't want to play with others, I want to roll around with a large group of trained attack animals and brutally maul small children and gangsters, after which allowing me to capture more for fun and profit. Even if this isn't how the apparent "high level Pokemon" isn't played, then how is it? Do dozens and dozens of grown men/women all meet up somewhere with their 6-party of level 100's specially picked for the best stats and abilities so that they can hold tournaments (As I was typing that I was being kind of sarcastic, but when I finished I thought "hang on, that'd be a lot of fun actually")? Not everyone lives somewhere where that kind of thing is an option, I for one live in a small, shitty town. If the aforementioned methods are how the game is meant to be done at the highest level then there really needs to be some sort of single player alternative to this (The Battle Tower was piss-poor thank you very much, I raised my legendaries to 100 for a reason and now I can't use them? Fuck you Mrs. NPC).
 

Will Lloyd-Reilley

New member
Mar 26, 2010
4
0
0
Serafis said:
[snip]

John Funk said:
NO, he's not. Frankly, this situation just reeks of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. Play competitive, then get back to me.

It strikes the perfect balance between "accessible for all ages" and "holy crap hardcore."

Edit: But basically, what the guy said above me.
Hmmm...I dunno. Setup takes forever to do, with all the EV/IV/Breed/Nature blending. Also, the act of having a combat reboot didn't change the OU list that much. Not enough to be significant anyways.
This is why I only play shoddy battle. All the fun strategery of high level competitive pokemon, with none of the stupid grindey bull that comes with the actual games.

Strongly looking forward to Black/White because hopefully they will shake up the current metagame. HG/SS were dissapointing in that regard.
 

Baron_BJ

Tired. Cold. Bored.
Nov 13, 2009
499
0
11
John Funk said:
Mordwyl said:
John Funk said:
Zeeky_Santos said:
Seriously, why do people buy into what is essentially the same game with new names? Pokemon is like, the same thing over and over again, lunacy. nice to see that they are taking a step into a newish direction, but the very premise of Pokemon could be adapted into something that looks far better than this shit they put up before you, being praised as awesome.
Because the gameplay is awesome?

Seriously. High-level Pokemon is one of the most mindblowingly strategic games out there. Nothing I've ever played compares.
Frankly, Zeeky is right. Calling the games awesome is just pure bias over the franchise. That's it. The one thing that's keeping Game Freak in business with this tired out game is Nintendo, as I have lived through enough of the pet management genre to realise Pokemon Red and its future incarnations are on a pacemaker.
NO, he's not. Frankly, this situation just reeks of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. Play competitive, then get back to me.

It strikes the perfect balance between "accessible for all ages" and "holy crap hardcore."

Edit: But basically, what the guy said above me.
MOST players don't know how to access this "hardcore" version of the Pokemon series that all this praise is given to (and more over keep the leveling process interesting, When I played if I wanted to level my critters I had to just destroy the league over and over, it wasn't very much fun), would you mind giving GREAT detail about this? It does sound interesting.

Something that keeps coming to mind whenever I see YOU post John, I notice that whenever you get into an argument in a post with other members (argumentative conversation, etc, call things whatever you wish, it's not a bad thing) I keep thinking "wow he's an editor! He's like the god of this land, he should be this almighty god who is above argument, etc, etc, wank wank", but then I always think "Hang the fuck on, he's just a normal guy who plays games like everyone else, but he gets paid for it, why the fuck am I thinking he should be above what the rest of us are doing (ie. Girlish e-slapfights)?". I know it's a pointless comment, but it nags at me constantly and maybe if I say it I'll stop thinking about it.

I just want news on the new starters to tell the truth.
I concur, when you see the starters you can tell the feel of all the new Pokemon near instantly. So far the few new ones shown to us have been quite lackluster, let's hope that things pan out better.

Once again, my head is still awful, I have most likely made another brain-fart filled with grammatical errors, I apologize again in case, I hope it wasn't too irritating to read.
 

Tanfastic

New member
Aug 5, 2009
419
0
0
Black and white sound more like they should've been made first... Mew as white Mewtwo as black you know? Makes sense... A lot more than starters as mascots instead of the main legendary.