so that IGN review on pokemon
- Thread starter 42
- Start date
Too much water segments was always a complaint on the original Ruby and Saphire and the surf segments were always very boring, so it's a valid complaint.
I do agree with her on too many HMs. Anything besides fly, surf, waterfall, and dive are useless to me in battle. The water part, not so much. This region is meant to be tropical, with tropics, comes water. I like the idea that each Pokemon game has their own geography, helps make the games feel different.
My initial response:
My response after realizing it's IGN:
Most people that are getting this/these titles are aware that it is a remake and based on the various videos and awesome demo, we all know what we're in for. It's simply idiots wanting attention because it's not an annual FPS or sports title. They are not doing anyone a favor by being the few who "honestly hate" games that others like and pointing out their "flaws."
Nintendo needs to get off their ass and implement HM items, like in zeta/omicron. Having a machete, jetpack, rocket boots, inflatable lapras etc to use HM abilities without being forced to take them on a pokemon is *so* much nicer. It allows the devs to keep the HMs as a series of progress checks to streamline world exploration while also using more of each type of barrier. Typically towards the end of a pokemon game, there's very few things that need to be Cut, because it's a pain in the ass and nobody near the endgame is going to be walking around with cut. But they'd be able to have more cuttable stuff, rocks to smash, etc if you could just use HM items. In Z/O, the HM items weren't mandatory (obviously, since you could still use the HM moves on pokemon) but they were an added perk for out-of-the-way exploration, as many were found in optional rooms or route paths.Elfgore said:
One other thing Z/O introduced was the idea of IV stones - talk to npc and max out an IV. At the end of Z/O campaign, there was another NPC that would set an IV to 30 instead (which was perfect for getting specific hidden power types). In the past, nearly every competitive player used action replay (or, later, pokegen/pokesav) to create "legit" max pokemon, as the effort required to get one actually legitimately was completely insane - literally thousands of eggs, hundreds of thousands of steps, praying to RNG that this next one will be max IVs in the stats you want. And god forbid you try to use hidden power - that easily doubles the amount of eggs you'd need to hatch. That kind of awful, soul-draining grind is the main reason pokemon PvP is a shitfestival - there should really be an option (even if they lock it until endgame) to alter IVs. Make it cost gold, make it cost an item you can farm. Just don't make it purely random on spawn and tell players to hatch thousands of eggs.
Honestly, after how many great ideas were introduced in Z/O, I find it really hard to go back to the "main" pokemon games and suffer through how little they've actually changed. Daily grind quests and shirts that cost $200,000 does not a great game make. I was a competitive battler in state-wide tournaments during the R/S/E and Fr/Lg era, so gen 3 getting a new release should make me excited, but... it just doesn't. What they add isn't what pokemon *needs*, it's mostly just useless bullshit. Mega evolutions, dailies, RNG breeding... zzz. Give me HM items and *maybe* I'll buy a pokemon game again, nintendo.
I'd say it's a valid thing to complain about, there's a ton of Surfing in Gen 3 and having to deposit a team member to get Surf (ah, the old Pelliper HM whore) out is irritating.
I imagine it's even more grating with the new movement options (if they're still featured), because you lose all that lovely circle pad movement.
IMO, this would've been a great time to implement a running shoes equivalent while surfing, or perhaps just some kind of personal hovercraft-bike-thing to replace it altogether.
I imagine it's even more grating with the new movement options (if they're still featured), because you lose all that lovely circle pad movement.
IMO, this would've been a great time to implement a running shoes equivalent while surfing, or perhaps just some kind of personal hovercraft-bike-thing to replace it altogether.
I've been sitting here re-reading your post for a while now, trying to work out why I disagree with it (the paragraph I didn't snip, at least). I think it's because you seem to be angled entirely toward the competitive battling aspect of Pokemon. Which is fine of course, don't get me wrong, but it's not all Pokemon games are about, and not even what they're about to most people. IVs represent that line they keep banging on about in every game: Pokemon of the same species are all unique. Randomised IVs make Pokemon act a bit more like real animals: you can train a horse all you like, but if its speed IV is low, it's not going to compete.AuronFtw said:
So, being able to alter IVs in game strikes me as wrong. The people who have perfect IVs *are* the ones who go to the most effort (or cheat, yeah, but that's a separate problem). I could be wrong (haven't used it for myself), but I think the solution you're looking for is something like Shoddy Battle.
Edit: So that reply was totally off-topic. For the OP: Ruby/Sapphire was my least favourite generation, but not because of the surfing. The large amount of water fits the theme of the game (land vs water), so it kinda makes sense. Would have been better maybe if the different water sections yielded different Pokemon, instead of mostly the same three.
Well, dont you just find water pokemons on water? It does influence the gameplay, right?
I never played them much but I dont see it as a bad criticism since I could say that a GTA could have too many driving sections if you barely used weapons in the missions.
I have seen people counter the argument by saying that the world has water too but honestly that doesnt work because the world also has a lot of sewers, does that mean that games should spend more time in sewer levels?
I dont know, Saints Row 4 for example makes cars obsolete after gaining powers, something that happens right at the start, for someone that likes to drive around in open world games that may be a negative.
I never played them much but I dont see it as a bad criticism since I could say that a GTA could have too many driving sections if you barely used weapons in the missions.
I have seen people counter the argument by saying that the world has water too but honestly that doesnt work because the world also has a lot of sewers, does that mean that games should spend more time in sewer levels?
I dont know, Saints Row 4 for example makes cars obsolete after gaining powers, something that happens right at the start, for someone that likes to drive around in open world games that may be a negative.
fools... they haven't got a clue of what too much water is yet.MerlinCross said:
soon Archie's plan will be complete.
*surfing theme begins playing sinisterly*
and by the time we are done only the winguls will be able to read their reviews.
Yeah, I'm sick of IGN talking about Dynasty Warriors this w....CrimsonBlaze said:
Sorry, without context, this could be about just bout any game in the last decade, and it gave me DW flashbacks. It's one of those commonalities in gaming: when [Game I Like] doesn't get the "right" reviews, complain about teh bias and compare it to Madden or FPS.
Anyway, the point of the review is that the game is a remake, and that this brings up many issues, especially in the face of what they've changed and/or updated. This seems like a legit criticism, so I don't get why folks are getting their panties bunched. And to the people who already know what they're getting....why does this review even matter, then?
As far as the score reflecting it not being a sports title:
Black and White: 9
Black and White 2: 9.6
X and Y: 9
Noticing a pattern here?
In a series about rock-paper-scissor dogfighting, game balance is kind of an issue.Aerosteam said:
I'm curious. Do you feel the same way about their Pokémon reviews specifically?TizzytheTormentor said:
Which is basically what the review said. But I mean, do you really expects fans to be accurate?Lieju said:
No! There's crosses to nail ourselves up on and games journalists to complain about! It's easier to say "Too much water" and pretend the entire game review is a single-issue referendum.
Wait, so what is the criticism? I read the review and I thought they meant too many water type pokemon? With whatever BS water type hydro pump surf armor penetrating attack they have? That seems more like a valid complaint than a map had too many water sections.
Like if it was a review of Ocarina of Time and they said the water temple was too hard, I'd go with that. But simply says Lake Hylia is too big seems a little desperate.
Like if it was a review of Ocarina of Time and they said the water temple was too hard, I'd go with that. But simply says Lake Hylia is too big seems a little desperate.