Zero Punctuation: Pokemon White

[Desert Tiger]

They kinda changed it in this one. The EXP you receive is now based on your own level comparative with your opponent's. You could fight something level 50 and get 6000 exp with a level 40, or get 1200 with a level 60. Of course, it doesn't help that they give you an experience boosting item that was pretty much the rarest item in the game in the previous gens like halfway through the game...

Oh really? I was wondering how I was exp sharing a second pokemon and still keeping my first so much stronger than the rest. Are you referring to the exp share? Or is there some mystical item that I have never heard of in 12 years of pokemon?

No, he's talking about Lucky Egg, which boosts your exp gain by 1.5x.

Wow, I have never heard of that. I've missed out on so much exp.

You get it given to you in the electric cave by the Professor.

 

[Coldster]

So chess or any card game in general is something nobody can be serious about?


Gotta inform all those people who actually are serious about those things, quick, run!

In chess both players have 16 pieces, and a 64 square board, with very specific movement constraints for each piece.

In card games, the ones taken seriously that I can remember at least, the players hands aren't showing.

Pokemon is like a chess match with 2 lanes and 1 queen each, or a poker game where everyone's hands are showing. It's not "strategy", it's memorizing a spread sheet.

In Pokemon you have six Pokemon, each with an ability, stats and four moves. with nigh infinite combinations. There is a huge amount of strategy involved, who to lead with, what
moves to give a Pokemon to counter its weakness, how one Pokemon in a team can compliment another, how to counter someone who has their bases covered as well, what EVs to give to a Pokemon. There is a lot more strategy to a Pokemon battle than there is to Chess. Go in to a competitive battle without any strategy and watch how well your spread sheet memorization works.

Ha! If there actually was alot of strategy involved with Pokemon then I was a genius when I was six.

My Captcha says "Boose laser". What is that supposed to mean?

If you did this at the age of 6, what are you doing slumming around here?

Okay, what did you seriously mean by that? That I, right now am six years old?! No, but what mean is that when I first played Pokemon Blue I was six years old and was able to beat it. Therefore, the strategic part of Pokemon is obviously not hard if could do it at such a young age. I haven't bought the last 3 generations of Pokemon (Black/white, HG/SS, and Platinum) because I realized that it is the same game as before with minor improvements. Yes Pokemon is still a good game but I don't think it is meant to be played seven generations in a row.

Not sure what the other guys are saying, but basically, you implicitly stated that the games do not have a lot of strategy involved because you beat the games at a young age. You also stated that if the games did, you would be some kind of genius for doing so. But your opinion is mainly formed from the fact you only played the story, and not battles with other people, so I showed a video of an actual battle where strategy does make an appearance and sarcastically said that if you had the capacity to perform what the guy in the video did, why are you in this forum instead of doing better things with your insanely high intelligence?

In any case...

Besides, "catching them all" is no longer viable...or even the point, really. It's all about competitive play, with the advent of wi-fi in D/P/P.

Pokemon is now the middle school version of COD and Halo?

Do you know what Pokemon REALLY is?

It's secretly the deepest competitive strategy game ever.

IT HAS TIER LISTS

http://www.smogon.com/dp/articles/intro_comp_pokemon

I wouldn't call it the deepest when it's based on luck as well. Missing the punch and getting critical hits in is still all chance.

There are moves that have a certain amount of accuracy and power to them. Most people would opt for the more accurate but weaker attacks than the less accurate but more powerful. Crits are a problem, but simulators remove them to remove elements of luck. Also, moves that rely on luck such as double team that increase evasiveness or decrease accuracy are banned in competitive play. When you factor in things such as predictions and indications of how the other person's pokemon are set up based on items and moves, it leaves very little to chance. And that's disregarding damage calculations.

No, I could not, and probably still not do whta was done in the video. What I mean was that Pokemon is not a challenging strategic game like that one guy waaaaaaay back was saying. I countered his point by saying that if a six year could beat the game then it is not hard.

 

[Grunge4Ever]

Most of your complaints about this didn't even bother me during the game.

They bothered me in other games (haven't played Black or White). When encountering a random battle with say a goddamn Zubat I really wish I could skip the 'ready to battle' sequence where the zubat makes a noise and just immediately run away.

Use repels then.

 

[ZeroKaiser]

So chess or any card game in general is something nobody can be serious about?


Gotta inform all those people who actually are serious about those things, quick, run!

In chess both players have 16 pieces, and a 64 square board, with very specific movement constraints for each piece.

In card games, the ones taken seriously that I can remember at least, the players hands aren't showing.

Pokemon is like a chess match with 2 lanes and 1 queen each, or a poker game where everyone's hands are showing. It's not "strategy", it's memorizing a spread sheet.

In Pokemon you have six Pokemon, each with an ability, stats and four moves. with nigh infinite combinations. There is a huge amount of strategy involved, who to lead with, what
moves to give a Pokemon to counter its weakness, how one Pokemon in a team can compliment another, how to counter someone who has their bases covered as well, what EVs to give to a Pokemon. There is a lot more strategy to a Pokemon battle than there is to Chess. Go in to a competitive battle without any strategy and watch how well your spread sheet memorization works.

Ha! If there actually was alot of strategy involved with Pokemon then I was a genius when I was six.

My Captcha says "Boose laser". What is that supposed to mean?

If you did this at the age of 6, what are you doing slumming around here?

Okay, what did you seriously mean by that? That I, right now am six years old?! No, but what mean is that when I first played Pokemon Blue I was six years old and was able to beat it. Therefore, the strategic part of Pokemon is obviously not hard if could do it at such a young age. I haven't bought the last 3 generations of Pokemon (Black/white, HG/SS, and Platinum) because I realized that it is the same game as before with minor improvements. Yes Pokemon is still a good game but I don't think it is meant to be played seven generations in a row.

Not sure what the other guys are saying, but basically, you implicitly stated that the games do not have a lot of strategy involved because you beat the games at a young age. You also stated that if the games did, you would be some kind of genius for doing so. But your opinion is mainly formed from the fact you only played the story, and not battles with other people, so I showed a video of an actual battle where strategy does make an appearance and sarcastically said that if you had the capacity to perform what the guy in the video did, why are you in this forum instead of doing better things with your insanely high intelligence?

In any case...

Besides, "catching them all" is no longer viable...or even the point, really. It's all about competitive play, with the advent of wi-fi in D/P/P.

Pokemon is now the middle school version of COD and Halo?

Do you know what Pokemon REALLY is?

It's secretly the deepest competitive strategy game ever.

IT HAS TIER LISTS

http://www.smogon.com/dp/articles/intro_comp_pokemon

I wouldn't call it the deepest when it's based on luck as well. Missing the punch and getting critical hits in is still all chance.

There are moves that have a certain amount of accuracy and power to them. Most people would opt for the more accurate but weaker attacks than the less accurate but more powerful. Crits are a problem, but simulators remove them to remove elements of luck. Also, moves that rely on luck such as double team that increase evasiveness or decrease accuracy are banned in competitive play. When you factor in things such as predictions and indications of how the other person's pokemon are set up based on items and moves, it leaves very little to chance. And that's disregarding damage calculations.

No, I could not, and probably still not do whta was done in the video. What I mean was that Pokemon is not a challenging strategic game like that one guy waaaaaaay back was saying. I countered his point by saying that if a six year could beat the game then it is not hard.

Well sure, but that's just beating the main storyline. The real challenge is in the competitive area (as in almost every pvp to date), battling other players with strategies such as those.

 

[SketchyFK]

Besides, "catching them all" is no longer viable...or even the point, really. It's all about competitive play, with the advent of wi-fi in D/P/P.

Pokemon is now the middle school version of COD and Halo?

Do you know what Pokemon REALLY is?

It's secretly the deepest competitive strategy game ever.

IT HAS TIER LISTS

http://www.smogon.com/dp/articles/intro_comp_pokemon

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah... wait you aren't kidding.


Yu-Gi-Oh! has tier lists too. That doesn't really indicate anything.

Yu-Gi-Oh! is still way better than pokemon actually. I don't know why it gets so much hate while pokemon doesn't.
Also, at least Yu-Gi-Oh! DOESN'T HAVE FUCKING LAND CARDS so I don't really see why MTG gets so much more respect than it either.

Nope. Instead, it has field cards, which are a lot like land cards.

In what way? They have nothing to do with summoning.

...That's true lol. Forget I said that. >_>

U have posted the wrong thing there if u wish to show some1 how competitive pokemon is. I'm not sure if the old Battle.Net servers are still running but back a few years ago they were really potent.

And I'd be willing to say that Yu-Gi-Oh! not having land cards is its own worse enemy. Magic has a much wider variety of cards thanks to the control created from their land system. Having a COST is something that Yu-Gi-Oh is something it has been struggling to deal with for a while now. They initally tried to have ritual monsters, then fusion summons, then syncro summons which actually use the player to count resources in the form of monsters' combined levels.

The probable reason that magic is so popular in contrast to Yu-gi-oh is that the later has so many 1-turn kills and their list of banned cards is constantly growing. The fact that you can still use cards from way-back-when is a disadvantage to new players who want to try at competitions.

Magic restricts itself to having a current set and older cards are rarely seen if only in casual play. You can get early wins with magic just as with Yu-gi-oh but with magic you can actually summon 1,000,000,000,000 creatures, gain control of some1s turn forever, drain their life, burn burn burn, creatre creatures far greater than anything concievable in yu-gi-oh, whereas yu-gi has 5 creature slots and burning/milling is only something people have heard of in fairy tales.

 

[SketchyFK]

Most of your complaints about this didn't even bother me during the game.

They bothered me in other games (haven't played Black or White). When encountering a random battle with say a goddamn Zubat I really wish I could skip the 'ready to battle' sequence where the zubat makes a noise and just immediately run away.

Use repels then.

I've seen the odd person say that there is a differance between black and white, there really are not many differances other than "Obtainable Pokemon" (which there are only really 2 or so) and different city looks.

The real reason I wanted to quote u guys is because.. thank GOD for repels. I swear they are my favourite thing about this game.

 

[Dexiro]

Great review Yahtzee. I haven't played pokemon since Blue/Red, and it's nice to know I haven't missed anything in 15 years.

~ basing opinions off a ZP video? You should know better ;3

WHAT! HE DOESN'T LIKE SOMETHING I LIKE!? CLEARLY THE MAN IS BIASED BEYOND ANY HOPE![/quote]

Are you new here? It's pretty generally accepted that people shouldn't base their opinions off ZP videos, they're only intended to be entertainment.

Great review Yahtzee. I haven't played pokemon since Blue/Red, and it's nice to know I haven't missed anything in 15 years.

~ basing opinions off a ZP video? You should know better ;3

Except in Pokemon's case, its true for the most part!

Seriously... I quit playing after they released gold and silver... 151 was too much for me, and they add pokemon to the game at a rate far faster than I can catch without cheating. And with the advent of all their bullshit store promotions of giving you a pokemon you can probably get already, but this one is special because it lets you get a pokemon you can't get in the new game, is really, really stupid.

Yellow might of been the best, though I'd argue any pokemon game that DIDN'T make you have to have 10+ versions of the game just to have them all, would be the best. My favorite moment though in pokemon, has to be getting a Cacuna that knew both Harden and Tackle. If only I could of some how got it to learn silk shot...

Yeah a lot of that stuff is really annoying. The thing is though hardly anyone cares about catching all the Pokemon anymore, it's just not worth the hassle. I would really like a game where catching every Pokemon is feasible.

What you should worry about with the new games really is the gameplay and other bells and whistles. The gameplay has been improved over the generations, if kind of slowly, but the newer generations are focusing more and more on improvements. From what I've heard the newest gen is the best so far.

 

[EndlessSporadic]

Wow. I never saw this coming. I was sure he'd be reviewing Crysis 2.

He probably hasn't played it yet or there aren't enough negative points about it to actually make a video about it.

But for the exact reasons mentioned in this video, that is why I stopped playing after emerald/sapphire/ruby.

 

[mrdude2010]

You really should have picked up Pokemon Black, Yahtzee. It focuses on story rather than collecting a bunch of critters. At one point you have to choose whether to choose between your friend and your journey, with a branching story for each path. It's pretty much two entirely different games and it puts the Bioware writing staff to shame.

I'm sorry you had to get the wrong version to get back into what has become a great series.

Yea that's totally comparable to KOTOR or ME2 in terms of writing. i'm astounded that bioware has skimmed by with so little effort put into their writing that a recycled story with one twist can put them to shame.

I can't tell if you're serious or not, which I find hilarious since people seem to have the same problem with me.

i think they're both somewhat sarcastic

 

[FallenMessiah88]

Not much to say about this one. I just don't get Pokemon. I watched the TV series when i was a kid, but that's about it. But hey, I'm currently looking for some new games for my DS and this one and Okamiden are pretty high on my list so maybe this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship...

To be fair though, there's not much to get in pokemon in general. Sure they add extra random crap that some people really enjoy like battle towers and endurance thingies and whatnot (if I remember correctly pokemon 8: electric boogalo even had a whole damn island to play with after you beat the story).

But as far as many people will care: You can safely ignore the story and the lack of cutscenes and voice acting make it easier to do so than any nonportable console game. You still collect critters, and you still make them cage fight other critters.

So, y'know. If you want some mindless entertainment then this will sure as hell fit the bill. Covered me off at least.

Well thats certainly good to hear. I think I'll give it a try then.

 

[randommaster]

You really should have picked up Pokemon Black, Yahtzee. It focuses on story rather than collecting a bunch of critters. At one point you have to choose whether to choose between your friend and your journey, with a branching story for each path. It's pretty much two entirely different games and it puts the Bioware writing staff to shame.

I'm sorry you had to get the wrong version to get back into what has become a great series.

Yea that's totally comparable to KOTOR or ME2 in terms of writing. i'm astounded that bioware has skimmed by with so little effort put into their writing that a recycled story with one twist can put them to shame.

I can't tell if you're serious or not, which I find hilarious since people seem to have the same problem with me.

I think they're both somewhat sarcastic.

I'm hoping it was sarcastic. There were a bunch of people taking it super seriously, so it's hard to tell.

It would be funny if Gamefreak did something like that, though.

 

[Laxman9292]

I agree with Yacee. While I like turn based combat, the one in Pokemon is very boring. Its just more complicated rock-paper-scissors. Hit with strongest attack, rinse and repeat.

You have clearly never played competitively. Saying it is too easy to beat the campaign trainers is like complaining about bad AI in a FPS, once you get online, the kiddie shit you used in the game is not gonna fly anymore.

 

[soulmonarch]

Speaking of things that haven't been done on ZP yet:

I would love Yahtzee to review Dynasty Warriors 7. Something tell me I would laugh my tits off.

 

[Eldarion]

I agree with Yacee. While I like turn based combat, the one in Pokemon is very boring. Its just more complicated rock-paper-scissors. Hit with strongest attack, rinse and repeat.

You have clearly never played competitively. Saying it is too easy to beat the campaign trainers is like complaining about bad AI in a FPS, once you get online, the kiddie shit you used in the game is not gonna fly anymore.

Um, so what? Who cares what pros do online when most people just want a nice single player RPG?

Competitive pokemon.....just...really?

 

[psiho333]

Hahaha, fun review as always Pokemon(s) are (were) imo good when there were only 150 of them, or with the first expansion 250. Those actually had great design and didn't resemble real animals as much as the newer ones do.

But oh, the frustration of random encounters ...

 

[zerobudgetgamer]

While the plot seems interesting, it gets old rather quick, the minor tweaks do noting to disguise the fact its still the same game from ten years ago.

Also your arguements on DragonQuest and FF are a bit off. First how many DragonQuest games even get to go outside Japan? Their market is the only one that like the same style over and over. Personally I like FFX, and FF12, hated FF 13. For me 12 was FF at its height its pinnacle, the way the series should have evolved and should have kept on evolving, but noooo they actually devolved it for 13.

Does anyone know why 13 was crap and played liek something out the dark ages? Because all the hardcore turn based RPG fans hated 12... WTF? Japan and its RPG's have never caught up to modern standards. If you look at Infinite undiscovery, Lost Oddesy, Enchanted Arms, or other console RPGs from Japan, you'll see that aside from very slightly different battle mechanics their all basically the same. No evolution.

Ironically Pokemon's problem is they have never "Evolved"(LOL pun intended) in 15 years.

Well, what kind of evolution are you looking for? Most of the really great fighting games still haven't moved out of their 2D corridor, and aside from slight differences from one game to the other, it's all the same button combining to create big, flashy attacks. And don't get me started on shooting games (RPG haters talk about fighting reskinned baddies all the time, what the hell's the difference between shooting at Nazis or shooting at the Taliban aside from the scenery?)

For the record, a lot of people disliked FF12 because it was the start of taking the gameplay away from the gamer. Ignoring all other flaws (character design and the homogenization of abilities, overarching plot getting hidden under overarching side quests, the complete and utter uselessness of summons, and the lack of attachment to characters through either development or love interest) the Gambit system basically allowed gamers to leave the game to do it's own thing. You wanna level up your guys? Either spend dozens of hours in front of the TV fighting shit, or find some enemy that summons monsters, set your gambits up so it kills the summons but not the summoner, and leave the game on for those hours while you do something else. And let's not forget Yiazmat, the 6+ hour "Secret" boss that most people just set up their Gambits and left alone, ensured that they would NEVER die in those entire six hours because their Gambits wouldn't allow it.

The gaming industry as a whole thrives on familiarity. It thrives on it from similar stories to similar baddies, right down to similar controls. How often have you played a game where X wasn't used for Confirm, or that the Trigger buttons weren't used to shoot, and yet was still heralded as a genius product, and/or that didn't end up setting a precedent for all future sequels and similar-genre games? And another for the record, a lot of these games that stick to the known formula are far more popular than you give them credit. In the first day of release here in America, Pokemon Black/White sold over 1 million units, and sold almost 3 million in the first two days in Japan.

 

[Laxman9292]

I agree with Yacee. While I like turn based combat, the one in Pokemon is very boring. Its just more complicated rock-paper-scissors. Hit with strongest attack, rinse and repeat.

You have clearly never played competitively. Saying it is too easy to beat the campaign trainers is like complaining about bad AI in a FPS, once you get online, the kiddie shit you used in the game is not gonna fly anymore.

Um, so what? Who cares what pros do online when most people just want a nice single player RPG?

Competitive pokemon.....just...really?

Just like some people might just want a nice relaxing FPS campaign without wanting to deal with playing online with a bunch of annoying teenage twats? Seriously, listen to yourself and get off your high horse, it is a strategy game and people usually like strategizing against other humans as opposed to rough AI opponents. Pokemon actually makes more sense to be played online. And, just as not everyone who plays CoD or whatever is a pro, there are people who play pokemon online that are not pros.

 

[Laxman9292]

No, I could not, and probably still not do whta was done in the video. What I mean was that Pokemon is not a challenging strategic game like that one guy waaaaaaay back was saying. I countered his point by saying that if a six year could beat the game then it is not hard.

Beating the main game was not the challenge he was talking about. When played against actual people it becomes the challenging strategic game he meant. That is like saying since a six year old can beat the main missions in Starcraft then the game is not hard. And then you would immediately have your computer rage hacked simultaneously by thousands of little Koreans who could whip your sorry ass in Starcraft.

 

[snowfi6916]

I can't download or watch the video. There is a problem with the webpage.

Please check on this Escapist tech/moderator....guy....person...uh...

Thanks.

 

[Andrew_Mac]

their all evolutions of the same pokemon what else would would you call a vanilla ice cream line? they have tons of creativity

I mean, why is the family even called vanilla in the first place? Vanilla is the most plain ice cream flavour ever.

And as for tons of creativity bullshit, most of the pokemon names are just badly made puns. Such as:
Sandile. It's a Crocodile, and its ground type. OMG push the freaking boat out!!!
Boldore. Yes, IT'S A ROCK TYPE!!! :O I'd NEVER have guessed that!!!
Timburr. it carries bits of wood. Well done. and its evolutions aren't much better. Gurdurr. yep, it carries steel girders... Conkeldurr. Well thats just silly...

All in all, I like pokemon, but I prefered it when it wasn't all puns and lack of creative names. I know, its always been that way in Pokemon. since the first in the pokedex, bulbasaur. Its a plant dinosaur! But still, that was when they were still growing. No excuses now.