Pokemon Question

[danielbishop56]

Good afternoon, I am asking a little research question for a game development project which I will not advertise here due to forum rules.

My question is regarding the 2D Pokemon RPG games. Specifically, what did you like about those games, what didn't you like, what would you add and what would you take away.

For example, I really liked-
Each Pokemon has a limited move set of 4.
Pokemon has elemental strengths and weaknesses.
Evolutions!
There were no Pokemon it was impossible to catch.

Some things I would have liked changed were-
I would have liked a deeper story and more interesting characters.
More world-building and background (for example, what ARE Pokemon? Have they always been here or did they recently arrive and kill all the regular animals?!)
More sprite animations for in-battle abilities (I understand this was partly due to software limitations).
Better balancing (no completely useless Pokemon).

Thank you for your time!

 

[SoreWristed]

What stood out for me was the fact that you were actively seeking pokemon to make 'the perfect team'. The unbeatable team of six, shaped and chosen to tackle every obstacle.

The lore of the game and expanded world can say whatever they want to about pokemon being about friends and love, for me it was becoming the strongest trainer out there. Through your travels, you become stronger, you take down bigger and badder enemies and eventually you prove yourself to the world to be one of the very best. You seek out pokemon to help shape your team. To find a balance between types and elements, all while being limited by their four moves and six members on your team.

It's also a game of the mind, it's format did not need people to have quick reflexes or any other skills, but simply an understanding of the mechanics. And if you did not understand the mechanics, as i did when i was 8, you can still power through with grinding. There are no jumping puzzles, you are given time to contemplate your next move, there's no more complicated tactics involved than finding the ideal move to take down your opponent. Basically chess with animals.

What i felt the game lacked, even as a kid, was endgame content. Once you get past the elite four, there's basically fuck all to do but start over. Later games kind of adressed this, but this was based solely on combat with the challenge tower and online battles. What would have solved this issue, and some small others, was sidequesting.

The later games had some side activities, but that's what they remained. Just activities, stuff to do. Like the beauty contests and fishing and whatever. I would have liked to see more stuff like the pokemon mansion and the powerplant (red and blue) have their own story. How they work in the game now is as checkpoints. They're there, not as part of the bigger story, to work as a flag you need to pass to be able to progress. I don't think that's bad per sé, but it's all they are.

 

[danielbishop56]

Hi SoreWristed, I agree that the strategy element was the real draw of the game for me too, almost like trying to refine a deck in a deck-building game.

And I agree with your point about the side-quests and end-game content.