thats not a pointacillies45 said:Alright...so if this was 10 years ago, this might have been cool...though at this point in the game, the graphics are too far behind, there's too many poke'mon and quite frankly, the gameplay hasn't changed its core mechanics since Gen 1...so why shouldn't I go back to playing gold/silver?
every pokemon changes the game, all of them didshrekfan246 said:I got nothing.
At least they're finally moving to 3D. If I ever get a 3DS, this would probably be ones of the games that I get. But -
[ul][li]Dat water starter.[/li]
[li]Dat map for areas outside of cities or enclosed spaces like forests/buildings.[/li]
[li]Dat Grass Oshawott.[/li]
[li]Dat name.[/li][/ul]
Pokemon Z would be a silly name. It would make sense with these two, but it would still be silly considering people already make the joke of calling them "pokemanz". Imagine the confusion. (Yes, that is a joke, but I still think Pokemon X and Pokemon Y are pretty unoriginal names, even if they are choosing it because of the three dimensional planes. Now, if they make the 3D actually impact the game in a significant way instead of just being a graphical overhaul, I'll concede my reservations.)
achived on what?Crispee said:I'm kind of mixed. I think the graphics are a massive improvement that could probably have been achieved a while ago, but the designs don't intice me all that much, in fact I've already forgotten their names and what they look like. It doesn't seem like they've actually shifted the game around a whole lot either, still the same similar looking character, the same types and the same duo of legendaries.
I dunno, the graphics are very pretty but I don't want to be drawn in by that alone, massively shift around the plot and gameplay and then we'll talk.
To quote xkcd:
"..throw off your commercial shackles, challenge us. Go out in a blaze of Dadaist glory. There is still time."
... I made no comments about the game remaining unchanged, so I guess we have something in common, because I don't see your point either.lazy villian said:every pokemon changes the game, all of them didshrekfan246 said:I got nothing.
At least they're finally moving to 3D. If I ever get a 3DS, this would probably be ones of the games that I get. But -
[ul][li]Dat water starter.[/li]
[li]Dat map for areas outside of cities or enclosed spaces like forests/buildings.[/li]
[li]Dat Grass Oshawott.[/li]
[li]Dat name.[/li][/ul]
Pokemon Z would be a silly name. It would make sense with these two, but it would still be silly considering people already make the joke of calling them "pokemanz". Imagine the confusion. (Yes, that is a joke, but I still think Pokemon X and Pokemon Y are pretty unoriginal names, even if they are choosing it because of the three dimensional planes. Now, if they make the 3D actually impact the game in a significant way instead of just being a graphical overhaul, I'll concede my reservations.)
i dont see your point
I'd recommend the 3DS XL, you get a lot more battery ife out of it for a start, and it looks sleeker and the screens dont press on each other when they're closed.Auron225 said:Well it is about damn time it went to 3D. It didn't need 3DS technology for that, it could've accomplished that in Gen 4.
The new legenderies and starters all look pretty sweet =) I'll probably pick the Fire one, it looks cute. Here's to hoping it isn't another dual fighting type - if it is, I'd take Grass instead. And the deer legendary reminds me of Princess Mononoke so I'll go for it!
Aaand I guess this solves my dilemma of "Do I get a 3DS or not?". I've wanted one since KH 3D came out but not quite enough for ONLY that. This isn't solid enough reason on it's own either but TOGETHER - yeah I'll have to get one.
geodude is a rock, a rock is the most inanimate of, objects onix is a bunch of rocksZehMadScientist said:The water starter is a frog with glasses.
Game Freak, you magnificent bastards, you.
But really, I hope they step up their game with the designs. I thought Gen IV was ok, but Gen V was trash. I remember an article here not too long ago that discussed the roots of Pokemon like Espeon and Drowzee, which are mythological in origin. Because Game Freak, as much as I love you, you have pretty much run out of animals to base your critters on, and resorted to sub species and inanimate objects. I know y'alls can do it!
That said, I do like the look of the fire starter.
that's reasonable, but its an rpg, i love them but its essentially "make my numbers beat your numbers" the game. i suppose from a story telling aspect, game feel and aesthetics it will change wonderfully.shrekfan246 said:... I made no comments about the game remaining unchanged, so I guess we have something in common, because I don't see your point either.lazy villian said:every pokemon changes the game, all of them didshrekfan246 said:I got nothing.
At least they're finally moving to 3D. If I ever get a 3DS, this would probably be ones of the games that I get. But -
[ul][li]Dat water starter.[/li]
[li]Dat map for areas outside of cities or enclosed spaces like forests/buildings.[/li]
[li]Dat Grass Oshawott.[/li]
[li]Dat name.[/li][/ul]
Pokemon Z would be a silly name. It would make sense with these two, but it would still be silly considering people already make the joke of calling them "pokemanz". Imagine the confusion. (Yes, that is a joke, but I still think Pokemon X and Pokemon Y are pretty unoriginal names, even if they are choosing it because of the three dimensional planes. Now, if they make the 3D actually impact the game in a significant way instead of just being a graphical overhaul, I'll concede my reservations.)
i dont see your point
I said if they make the switch to 3D have an impact on the game, I would concede my reservations about their naming conventions. As in, if the game being in 3D has a tangible impact on the mechanics of the world, instead of just being there so they can say "Hey, our game is 3D now!", I'll be fine with them naming it after the three dimensional planes.
Sounds like a zombie game!shrekfan246 said:Pokemon Z would be a silly name.
Grass/Rock would be okay but I'd like it to be feasible competitively, it wouldn't stop me from using it but it would limit the rest of my team choics somewhat, like in White 2 I used an Aggron and it crippled my choice for certain other team slots, basicaly forced Starmie to be my water after I didn't wanna give up my Krookodile.TheEvilCheese said:I think Grass/Rock would work OK as a starter, it would be interesting and weak to Bug, Steel, Fighting and Ice. So probably not great metagame-wise but they are certainly some of the lesser used attacks in the main game.SkarKrow said:My thoughts? Neat, I love Cel Shading, looks like there could be character customisation too which I'd also enjoy, and a lot more exploration, possibly some legend of zelda elements to the dungeons and a bit of platforming, which is certainly nice.TheEvilCheese said:Snippy snipsnip
The starters look meh too me, I quite like the grass one and I hope it's not as poor as Snivy was. I also really hope they get creative with type combinations, I do not want another Fire-Fighting type gamefreak! Nor do I want Grass-Ground for my starter ): Grass-Rock could be nice though?
Maybe have secondary types for the starters work like they did in Gen 4 as a kind of check to the starter it was weak too... maybe not rock actually for grass grass is defensively poor as it is...
If they do the gen4 thing Grass/Dark Fire/Psycic and water/Fighting would work well, but that kind of defeats the point of the starters being an elemental triangle, it's to teach new players about weaknesses (and why you should level other pokémon too, if your rival can 1shot your starter)
I really like the graphical style too, gave me Colosseum flashbacks.
I suppose not no.lazy villian said:achived on what?Crispee said:I'm kind of mixed. I think the graphics are a massive improvement that could probably have been achieved a while ago, but the designs don't intice me all that much, in fact I've already forgotten their names and what they look like. It doesn't seem like they've actually shifted the game around a whole lot either, still the same similar looking character, the same types and the same duo of legendaries.
I dunno, the graphics are very pretty but I don't want to be drawn in by that alone, massively shift around the plot and gameplay and then we'll talk.
To quote xkcd:
"..throw off your commercial shackles, challenge us. Go out in a blaze of Dadaist glory. There is still time."
the ds?
why would shift aroundd game play like that
along character and story lines i agree with you, and why would pokemon die
it sells nintendo hand helds
i dont see your point exactly?
I disagree. Generation two fixed the frankly game breaking Psychic type by introducing a type that was immune and a type that resisted it in Dark & Steel respectively.acillies45 said:the gameplay hasn't changed its core mechanics since Gen 1...so why shouldn't I go back to playing gold/silver?
Eeh, ok, fair point about the Geodude and Onyx and inanimate objects thing. Kind of justified because they, well, were rock types. And to be fair, Onyx is snake. Who happens to be made out of rocks. But most importantly, the majority of the first gen oozed of imagination, something the later generations lacked, especially the fifth. Blastoise is a perfect example, it's a huge turtle with ginormous water jets sticking out of its shoulders. How can you not love that!?lazy villian said:SNIP, I choose you!