Game Freak: Pokemon Isn't Just for Kids
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
sounds like a good idea to me. I personal think that a team builder demonstration/help thingee/faq built into the game would be awesome to help noobs get into the deeper mechanics. Im not even talking ev type stuff, just a balanced team.randommaster said:
also just for your info for straight forward normal battles online your team can only contain 3 pokemon, for double battles its 4 and i dont remember what they were for the rest of them. I havnt played the game myself to confirm this but I remember reading it somewhere with good rep.
I don't really like where the series have been led to, you know the television thing really lost it's appeal since the very first season. Shit the only thing that ever made me laugh in it's lifespan was the first episode with Ash not being able to catch picachu. It's way way too repeative.
Edit
Oke, you guys may have convinced me I'll bribe my little brother for his DS and give it a shot
Edit
Oke, you guys may have convinced me I'll bribe my little brother for his DS and give it a shot
I used to be in the Pokemon Metagame. I placed 14th in North America in a Gamebattles tournament my senior year of high school. Soon afterwards though the metagaming community was getting intolerable so I just got xbox live and switched to Cod4.
Yes. Xbox Live was a better alternative than what I had to deal with.
Yes. Xbox Live was a better alternative than what I had to deal with.
Yeah, that's the way the Union Room works right now, sans triple battles, so Things probably aren't too different.kevo.mf.last said:
As far as team building goes, you kind of learn by playing and getting beat by a single Pokemon that has a type advantage against you.
We all live, in a Pokemon world! Pokemon!rokkolpo said:
I bet someone has allready done this, but I don't care, because now I have that song stuck in my head.
Yeah, the battle factory is pretty much all I go to in the battle frontier. Being able to just pick up some Pokemon and fight is awesome.Tempest13 said:
I've recently gotten back into Pokemon via Pokemon: White. I was honestly surprised in the direction they took the story this time. Talking about the ethics of capturing and owning Pokemon and the clashing of different opinions. There was even some actual character development within some of the main characters. As someone who appreciates story in a game, especially in an RPG, I was pleasantly surprised. It's been a long time since I've played a pokemon game, so I can't remember whether the other games had similar themes. I'm pretty sure Red and Blue didn't.
I also find it kind of funny that people now-a-days would say that Pokemon is just for kids, when a lot of kids now-a-days are into games Modern Warfare or Halo. Meanwhile people like me, who are considered adults, are playing Pokemon. Talk about role reversal.
I also find it kind of funny that people now-a-days would say that Pokemon is just for kids, when a lot of kids now-a-days are into games Modern Warfare or Halo. Meanwhile people like me, who are considered adults, are playing Pokemon. Talk about role reversal.
Competitive Pokemon is rather complex. Breeding for IVs and Egg Moves and training for EVs (not to be confused with Eevees) are the easy, if time-consuming aspects. The challenge is putting together a team with a specific strategy in mind and devising tactics to achieve your goal. If I were to begin speaking the lingo of a competitive player, how many people would understand it?
I've long since ceased refuting the claims that the games never change, as I won't convince someone whose mind has been made up. The generational evolution of gameplay is most evident with regard to competition, which means the player who never battles another human with a good team won't really notice said evolution.
The core mechanics won't change drastically because to change a working formula would be silly. In Pokemon, you battle NPC trainers and wild Pokemon. The former you beat for EXP and money; the latter you attempt to capture. One mechanic that makes Pokemon appeal to me is that you must first defeat a wild Pokemon to capture it. If it's a legendary with a low capture rate, that might mean bringing its HP down to 1, putting it to sleep, and lowering its stats before attempting to capture it.
What if, in Call of Duty 2011, you were given your first gun but you had to defeat every subsequent gun you encountered before you could acquire it? What if you had to search high and low through maps to find these guns? What if each gun could be modified through extended use and modifying items to have a higher rate of fire, lower spread, less recoil, greater damage, a larger magazine capacity, and so on? What if sights, scopes, and skins (ooh, a shiny one!) could be added by using resources you could purchase at a shop, loot off a body, or find in a hidden cache? What if each gun had to be beaten to own because it had an adaptable AI with which you could interact? What if your gun could, over time, be so extensively modified that it evolved into something superior? What if you could take schematics for different guns and combine parts you liked into new guns, given the resources and time? What if your starting BB gun evolved over time into a .50 cal rifle with a scope that could not only magnify objects at varying distances but also have options toggled to see body heat, look through walls, measure wind and humidity, predict bullet drop, and take into account the curvature of the earth?
I can't speak for anyone but myself but I know I'd be more likely to play COD 2K11 if any of the previously stated hypothetical changes were implemented.
I've long since ceased refuting the claims that the games never change, as I won't convince someone whose mind has been made up. The generational evolution of gameplay is most evident with regard to competition, which means the player who never battles another human with a good team won't really notice said evolution.
The core mechanics won't change drastically because to change a working formula would be silly. In Pokemon, you battle NPC trainers and wild Pokemon. The former you beat for EXP and money; the latter you attempt to capture. One mechanic that makes Pokemon appeal to me is that you must first defeat a wild Pokemon to capture it. If it's a legendary with a low capture rate, that might mean bringing its HP down to 1, putting it to sleep, and lowering its stats before attempting to capture it.
What if, in Call of Duty 2011, you were given your first gun but you had to defeat every subsequent gun you encountered before you could acquire it? What if you had to search high and low through maps to find these guns? What if each gun could be modified through extended use and modifying items to have a higher rate of fire, lower spread, less recoil, greater damage, a larger magazine capacity, and so on? What if sights, scopes, and skins (ooh, a shiny one!) could be added by using resources you could purchase at a shop, loot off a body, or find in a hidden cache? What if each gun had to be beaten to own because it had an adaptable AI with which you could interact? What if your gun could, over time, be so extensively modified that it evolved into something superior? What if you could take schematics for different guns and combine parts you liked into new guns, given the resources and time? What if your starting BB gun evolved over time into a .50 cal rifle with a scope that could not only magnify objects at varying distances but also have options toggled to see body heat, look through walls, measure wind and humidity, predict bullet drop, and take into account the curvature of the earth?
I can't speak for anyone but myself but I know I'd be more likely to play COD 2K11 if any of the previously stated hypothetical changes were implemented.