Why oh why haven't game-creators done this yet?

[TomWiley]

Cutscenes should be skippable, pauseable and rewindable. Just like movies. I always seem to get interruptted when in the middle of a cutscene and have to miss half of it.

Definitely this!!!

AND
"Story" in racing games. UNNEEDED. I started playing Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (2010) and as much as I love Criterion, I hate the fact that there is so much CRAP I have to watch before I can start playing. Even when it is skippable, I have to wait.

Wait what? There was no story in Hot Pursuit 2010.

Also, some cutscenes should not be skippable. The Last of Us is an excellent example where the line between pre-rendered and real-time is completely blurred, and the ability to skip a scene would quite literally destroy the game.

 

[Dragonbums]

There are some ideas that are so obvious that you can't help but wonder why they don't appear in games. I'm talking things that could easily be done with today's technology but haven't been because, well, because God hates us I guess.

For instance: A game where you play as a pokémon. Preferably in 3D. You know, like Super Mario, or Zelda. My point is that you'd play as, say, a Pikachu, and you'd be able to go around and thundershock and jump all you like. Like in Super Smash Bros. except that you wouldn't be confined to a small stage. Think Super Mario 64 with Pokémon. And obviously there's be more than just one pokémon available to play.

It can't be denied: Pokémon has been around for over a decade, and everyone's been wanting a game like this for a long, long time.

So what game feature, or just what game, are you surprised that they haven't made yet?

They have already made such a concept a long time ago.
Here is their currently most popular of the Pokemon niche franchises.

That is the most recent one they did involving another franchise.

 

[Dragonbums]

There are some ideas that are so obvious that you can't help but wonder why they don't appear in games. I'm talking things that could easily be done with today's technology but haven't been because, well, because God hates us I guess.

For instance: A game where you play as a pokémon. Preferably in 3D. You know, like Super Mario, or Zelda. My point is that you'd play as, say, a Pikachu, and you'd be able to go around and thundershock and jump all you like. Like in Super Smash Bros. except that you wouldn't be confined to a small stage. Think Super Mario 64 with Pokémon. And obviously there's be more than just one pokémon available to play.

It can't be denied: Pokémon has been around for over a decade, and everyone's been wanting a game like this for a long, long time.

So what game feature, or just what game, are you surprised that they haven't made yet?

Because Pokemon can't seem to innovate. They've been around forever, and the only change I can think of is that they're making mega leveled digi- I mean pokemon. I think they're suffering from the same stagnation that Fire Emblem had for a while, though I think Awakening fixed that. They need to bring Pokemon to the 3d world in the same way they did with Super Mario 64, or OoT.

You know, it really helps to do a little research on what your talking about before you post.
Pokemon has done a multitude of side series that have not only been fun and creative, but also turned a pretty good profit for them.

Pokemon Ranger series.
Pokemon Mystery Dungeon series
Pokemon Conquest (that is now seeing a sequel)
The Pokepark series, and so on.

 

[Innegativeion]

They need to bring Pokemon to the 3d world in the same way they did with Super Mario 64, or OoT.

Que?

At any rate, you seem to be unaware of the veritable BAJILLIONS of pokemon spin-offs, most of which are quite good. Some of which are *extremely* good.


Mystery dungeon- A dungeon crawler with rather intense plotlines

Conquest- A turn-based strategy RPG with management elements

Ranger- Real-time touch-based game about capturing pokemon with the stylus

Snap- Pokemon safari, and to this day probably one of the best spin offs.

Stadium- Basically a 3D pokemon battle platform, but with huge amounts of bonus content

Rumble- Never played it, but a real-time action game as I understand it. Kind of like a kid's version of diablo.

Numerous puzzle games- trozei, etc.

an AR game about capturing pokemon

Pinball- self explanatory

 

[Fox12]

They need to bring Pokemon to the 3d world in the same way they did with Super Mario 64, or OoT.

Que?

At any rate, you seem to be unaware of the veritable BAJILLIONS of pokemon spin-offs, most of which are quite good. Some of which are *extremely* good.


Mystery dungeon- A dungeon crawler with rather intense plotlines

Conquest- A turn-based strategy RPG with management elements

Ranger- Real-time touch-based game about capturing pokemon with the stylus

Snap- Pokemon safari, and to this day probably one of the best spin offs.

Stadium- Basically a 3D pokemon battle platform, but with huge amounts of bonus content

Rumble- Never played it, but a real-time action game as I understand it. Kind of like a kid's version of diablo.

Numerous puzzle games- trozei, etc.

an AR game about capturing pokemon

Pinball- self explanatory

I know 3d pokemon games exist, as I've played several of them (my fault for not being more clear). The only one I haven't heard of was conquest. What I mean to say is I haven't seen a 3d pokemon game that I would call really "epic" in scope, in the way OoT was. It would be interesting to see a game that had a really great level of exploration in it, similar to Skyrim or Fallout 3 (in terms of scale, not game mechanics or mature content)and that had a more character driven story. Maybe allow for travel between all of the regions. If a game like this exists I haven't heard of it, but it would be interesting.

 

[EvilRoy]

A really fresh take on chess. It is such a popular turn based game there must be some ways to improve it while keeping to a turn based system.

Shogi is a lot like chess, but with different move sets and the ability to place pieces that you previously took from your opponent back on the board in strategic positions (they act under your control of course) in lieu of moving a piece that turn. It adds another layer of complexity to an already intense game, and the different movement helps freshen the game up.

OT:
I would really like to play a game that takes a really schizophrenic approach to setting. Like I want to be traversing a Skyrim-esq wilderness and visiting my homie jarlin up a place like Whiterun and then walk for ten minutes into a Deus Ex like cyberpunk city, and head on over to a place out of Arcanum steampunking it all over the place. Sandbox environments that mix elements from all three giving us cyborg minotars and the like to fight against, and quests and classes/characters/species from each.

This sounds a like lot like the premise of Kino's journey, an anime where the protagonist goes from 'country' to 'country' each episode and they are all radically different settings.

Never heard of that one, I'll have to check it out. And hope for a spinoff game I guess.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

I'm not sure if it actually exists, but I did have a neat idea for an online FPS. Two small teams (say, max of five?) in a very large urban environment. Make it slightly slower paced, more tactical and team-based. I actually had the idea playing MGS4 with the Rat Patrol- Imagine two teams like that, staking eachother out in a big ruined city. Unfortunately I doubt you could get many people to play it like that, they're more likely to just run around like a madman shooting shit.

 

[Gone Rampant]

There are some ideas that are so obvious that you can't help but wonder why they don't appear in games. I'm talking things that could easily be done with today's technology but haven't been because, well, because God hates us I guess.

For instance: A game where you play as a pokémon. Preferably in 3D. You know, like Super Mario, or Zelda. My point is that you'd play as, say, a Pikachu, and you'd be able to go around and thundershock and jump all you like. Like in Super Smash Bros. except that you wouldn't be confined to a small stage. Think Super Mario 64 with Pokémon. And obviously there's be more than just one pokémon available to play.

It can't be denied: Pokémon has been around for over a decade, and everyone's been wanting a game like this for a long, long time.

So what game feature, or just what game, are you surprised that they haven't made yet?

Pokemon Mystery Dungeon casts you as a person turned into a Pokemon. We have had games where we play as Pokemon before.

 

[Gergar12_v1legacy]

I'm still waiting for my sci-fi sandbox game

We have had ones in nearly every time period now. Red faction was half way there but I want my flying cars damn it!

I know right like a Star Wars knights of the old republic, but bigger, and with actual non rail shooter space combat: fuck you mass effect 3

Oh a Scfi Star Wars flight slim.

We're lucky that we get some zombiegames where it's actually about the zombies and not about the people. Who are acting stupider the more the story focus is on them.
I would also like a game where i rebuild a settlement and maybe have diplomatic and trade relations with other settlements.

The "Walking dead" Show paints a rather dark picture of the survivors. Everyone is an asshole and gets angry over stupid crap. So much so that if every single character of the show where to die, chances of survival would increase for the survivors they someone keep finding...

Yeah most of those tried to be as stupid, and reckless as can be need to take a look at the zombie surivival guide by Max Brooks.

Why has nobody made a Han Solo; Intergalactic Smuggler game yet??!! Seriously, the lack of this games existence is a crime against gaming. Just imagine a GTA/Mass Effect style space crime adventure game starring Han Solo himself, with pilotable Millenium Falcon sections and co-op with Chewie, set during the duos pre-rebellion days.

It would be the greatest Star Wars game ever made and yet no one is making it!

Yeahs Scfi gta/sandbox, it would be skyrim but with spaceships, and lasers!!!

 

[immortalfrieza]

The story line is so easy you can clear it with any team. And if you just use one pokemon the chances are it will be so overleveled it will wreck everything solo. (Harder difficulties would be appreciated)

That's my biggest gripe I think. Using one Pokémon constantly to power level to the point you can crush everything in one or 2 hits regardless of type is such an obvious strategy, one that basically makes the whole type mechanics pointless for the actual, you know, GAME. I know I know, trading, competitive play, and all that crap is what Pokémon is supposed to be about, which is why I don't like it so much. The single player should be something that prepares a player for competitive play, and it does a VERY poor job of that. That, and the fact that no game should require playing with others in order be able to have merit, a game should be able to stand on it's own.

But, like I said, you can play Pokemon on many levels. That's why it's so popular. Not all of them are supposed to be competitive on a high level. Some(like the normal-type or bugs you get in the beginning) are there to catch before you can really start building your team and evolve quickly to become strong compared to the early opposition. Some pokemon (like the baby Pokemon) are there just to collect and be cute. I'm fine with that. Makes it more interesting and feel like the world is alive.

You are just talking about the one aspect of the games.

What I'm talking about is that Pokémon has poor balancing between the Pokémon. If the point of Pokémon is competitive play, then every Pokémon should be able to equal every other Pokémon statistically, even if it's because one is good at one thing while another is good at another, whether they're just there to be collected or not. As it is, with the actual competitive play it ends up being dominated by a select few Pokémon, and on the single player the same thing would happen if the power leveling strategy was finally taken out of the equation.

 

[Lieju]

I know I know, trading, competitive play, and all that crap is what Pokémon is supposed to be about, which is why I don't like it so much.

...

What I'm talking about is that Pokémon has poor balancing between the Pokémon. If the point of Pokémon is competitive play, then every Pokémon should be able to equal every other Pokémon statistically, even if it's because one is good at one thing while another is good at another, whether they're just there to be collected or not.

It is not. 'The point' of Pokemon isn't the online play, how many times do I have to say this?

The online-play is a part of Pokemon, you don't have to play it at all to enjoy Pokemon. You don't even have to play the games to enjoy Pokemon, it has grown beyond that. A girl I babysit sometimes has never played the games but she is a huge fan who watches the anime and collects cards based on what Pokemon she finds cute or cool.

I haven't played online for few years, but I don't think the game is horribly unbalanced, even on Uber tier. Unlike in Gen 1 where Psychic type had no real counters.
What you seem to want is a game where all Pokemon are designed for online play, it seems, but that would alienate a huge part of the fanbase.

Part of the fun with a new gen will be seeing what Pokemon will become popular in online-game, and what old ones will become usable when they get new moves/abilities/hold items/etc.

There is Geist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geist_(video_game)
You get to possess people and objects and such. Mess with electronics and scaring guards. I remember getting stuck early on because I sucked at it so I can't tell you how good it is but you could look into it, not really haunting a house per se but you still get to act like a ghost, if that counts.

I liked a lot of the ideas of Geist, but it was pretty restrictive in what you could do and all those lackluster FPS-sections made me quit playing it. I really need to finish it one of these days...

Ghost Trick, of course, is another game where you can manipulate objects as a ghost, but it's not about haunting people to scare them.

 

[immortalfrieza]

It is not. 'The point' of Pokemon isn't the online play, how many times do I have to say this?

As many times as you feel like, it'll still be wrong because the facts don't support it. Trading and competitive play is the only reason that Pokémon didn't fade away as some obscure kiddy RPG, and everything in the main games is built around it, from the gameplay, to the dialog, (I swear about half the dialog from all the NPCs is about battle strategies) to the battles themselves (or rather, it WOULD if Gamefreak had level scaled the games properly). It's also the same reason why the games are more popular than ever instead of having died out from the massive amounts of stagnation the franchise is filled with. I mean, how often do you hear people praising the storyline of the games? Their favorite trainer battles? I don't know about you, but all I ever hear is "this Pokémon can crush any person's team!" or "this Pokémon is pathetic!" or "this move is stupid to use!" and so on. Competitive battling is the only thing keeping the series together.

The online-play is a part of Pokemon, you don't have to play it at all to enjoy Pokemon. You don't even have to play the games to enjoy Pokemon, it has grown beyond that. A girl I babysit sometimes has never played the games but she is a huge fan who watches the anime and collects cards based on what Pokemon she finds cute or cool.

True, but what do the anime and cards have to do with anything I've said? I'm talking about the games here and ONLY the games.

I haven't played online for few years, but I don't think the game is horribly unbalanced, even on Uber tier. Unlike in Gen 1 where Psychic type had no real counters.
What you seem to want is a game where all Pokemon are designed for online play, it seems, but that would alienate a huge part of the fanbase.

What I want is a game full of Pokémon which are balanced to each other, online play or not. When's the last time you saw or heard of a Pidgey or a Caterpie or whatever or it's evolutions in competitive play and actually stood a ghost of a chance? When's the last time you heard of a Dragonite or legendary or some other OPed Pokémon in competitive play? Not often if at all I bet for the former and pretty much everybody for the latter. I want Pokémon to be more equal in statistics and type matchups so that competitive battling is more varied and isn't just filled with the select few overpowered Pokémon species.

Mostly though, I don't give a rat's ass about the competitive play. I want Pokémon to be equal so that most every team is viable enough on both sides of the equation to make the battles more engaging, and to actually have a reason to stick with the pidgey you got ages ago, especially if and when they overhaul the A.I. and level scaling to provide an actual challenge.

Part of the fun with a new gen will be seeing what Pokemon will become popular in online-game, and what old ones will become usable when they get new moves/abilities/hold items/etc.

On that, I can't argue, but they should just put more thought into how each Pokémon, moves, abilities, items, etc. so that wouldn't be necessary.

 

[Lieju]

Trading and competitive play is the only reason that Pokémon didn't fade away as some obscure kiddy RPG, and everything in the main games is built around it, from the gameplay, to the dialog, (I swear about half the dialog from all the NPCs is about battle strategies)

I can't think of much of that at all, actually. At most they mention you should have Pokemon of different types, even STAB is mentioned only in passing.
I don't know how you can simultaneusly claim that everything in the main games is built around comptitive battling, and that they're ignoring it.

I don't know about you, but all I ever hear is "this Pokémon can crush any person's team!" or "this Pokémon is pathetic!" or "this move is stupid to use!" and so on. Competitive battling is the only thing keeping the series together.

Amongst the older fans, perhaps.

True, but what do the anime and cards have to do with anything I've said? I'm talking about the games here and ONLY the games.

We were talking about the new Pokemon created. They might be introduced by the games, but they aren't created solely for the online experience or even the storyline.

What I want is a game full of Pokémon which are balanced to each other, online play or not.

Why? I have had teams made of just Ghost Pokemon, for example, that I made for fun and that did well amongst the people I battled against. I have played through the story-mode with unevolved Pokemon, or just Bug-type etc.
True, they wouldn't do well against higher-level players, but I don't make all my teams for that.

When's the last time you saw or heard of a Pidgey or a Caterpie or whatever or it's evolutions in competitive play and actually stood a ghost of a chance?

So you want them to get rid of the concept of evolution? You want ALL the Pokemon, whether unevolved or not, to have the same stats? (Actually, with the introduction of Eviolite in Gen V, unevolved ones got a boost)

Also, I haven't played online for some time, but aren't there different tiers or special battles where you agree to use only certain Pokemon?
We used to hold tournaments like that amongst our friends, the silliest being Metronome-cup, for example, where Metronome was the only move allowed.

Or type-tournaments where only certain types are allowed. The game itself has those. (Black/White 2)

And double and triple battles can change the dynamic and what Pokemon are usable.

 

[AusGamer44]

I want an archeological site recreated accurately and beautifully in a sandbox game.I may never get to Pompeii or Egypt or the Acropolis,but I'd LOVE to be able to work around these places restored to their ancient glory without having to dodge spears or soldiers or build the civilization from scratch.There was a pyramid recreation on a history site a few years back,but it was super basic and unimaginative.I just want a game where the past comes truly alive.If it does have to have a plot,it's one that rewards historical knowledge e.g you're a time traveler who has to fit in to the landscape you've gone back in time to,by behaving in the correct cultural manner for the time period.If you don't serve the right food,or wear the right clothing,or hold the party the right way you get tumbled and risk imprisonment or worse.I do not want to be a civilization creator,or a God,or a dictator.I just want to be an Egyptian in a genuine Egyptian building in a genuinely accurate recreation of that world. Or be Madame de Pompadour in an exact copy of Versaille.Or a Roman matriarch in Pompeii.Or an Renaissance noblewoman in Whitehall Palace.For people with limited funds to travel,and who love history,I think a less combat focused historical recreation game would be awesome.

 

[Siyano_v1legacy]

My first idea to spawn in my head is taking Super Mario Crossover and take the idea to, say, basically every game made so far

The second idea is quite basic but it would be to make game that have more than 10 of the same series to innovate.
- Pokemon (the original RPG, no spinoff), I'm tired of not seeing anything new to this game and why does combat still so slow
- Mario (again the platformer), we have seen it, new super Mario, new super Mario U, new super Luigi u, really, what's next?
- Remastered Edition, bleh, I don't really see the appeal of just replaying a old games, most of the times they haven't aged well or they are just too bland

That it for now