Zero Punctuation: Pokemon White

[Silas13013]

While I found the review entertaining (if massively lazy and uninformed), I must say the comments here are much better to read. Mostly it's most peoples inability to understand what pokemon is. Such as this individual:

-snip-

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.

Remember when Yahtzee did his review of Bowers inside story and said he wishes that "kiddy games" and "fun for all the family" were not the same thing in the developers eyes? Well that's what pokemon does. Yes, it's main target audience is young children. Are you really so think as to think that a game based off of completing it to 100% and designed for kids, is not going to be able to be beaten by kids? Of course not, that's just stupid. However, despite the easiness of the campaigns of pokemon (seriously yahtzee? You had trouble with N? I always knew you couldn't play video games but honestly...) it has a very deep and complicated metagame that people who have the desire to get a challenge out of the game can pursue.

So in reality, you are both right. The main game is easy because its designed for children to be able to beat without much trouble. However, to say that it isn't a deep or strategic game is fine, it just means you don't know anything about the majority of the game. But to deny its existence is laughably ignorant.

 

[Extravagance]

I see his point. I've been bored as hell with the series since Crystal. The current ones are only worth taking a look at because the usual "go here, defeat gym leader, go here defeat gym leader" takes a slight back seat to the thing with N. Though the grunts really needed some reworking.
"We believe that pokemon should not be slaves to people. So we're going to steal everyone's pokemon, and here are the ones we have to fight you with." Fairly contradictory.

 

[SD-Fiend]

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.

well it's made of snow. snow is white and so is vanilla ice cream also what else do you expect them to name a rock type? grassolon? if it's not a pun the only thing they can name it is something completely unrelated.

 

[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?

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.

Your point being? The experience of the majority of the playerbase is more relevant than what the very small hardcore crowd can turn the game into with enough IV training or whatever.

Fact of the matter remains that you can play thru most of the story mode using whatever element attack the enemy is weak to and win in 1 or 2 shots. This has been true pretty much since the original red and blue that I still own and play. Does this ruin the whole experience? No it doesn't. Obviously these games are fun to enough people anyway. I've played every generation since the original red version. But the combat is kinda stale and could use a lot of improvement.

In short, the use-surf-on-fire-type-win-match gameplay isn't really excusable just because a small portion of the fanbase play against eachother with fully IV trained teams or whatever. Cause the story mode sells the games.

 

[Flunk]

Pokemon is pretty stupid but I have to say I'm kinda enjoying this one. It's pretty well executed but it might just be helping me relive treasured childhood memories. Oh well, that's good enough sometimes.

 

[Semudara]

Your point being? The experience of the majority of the playerbase is more relevant than what the very small hardcore crowd can turn the game into with enough IV training or whatever.

Fact of the matter remains that you can play thru most of the story mode using whatever element attack the enemy is weak to and win in 1 or 2 shots. This has been true pretty much since the original red and blue that I still own and play. Does this ruin the whole experience? No it doesn't. Obviously these games are fun to enough people anyway. I've played every generation since the original red version. But the combat is kinda stale and could use a lot of improvement.

In short, the use-surf-on-fire-type-win-match gameplay isn't really excusable just because a small portion of the fanbase play against eachother with fully IV trained teams or whatever. Cause the story mode sells the games.

The real focus of Pokémon has always been multiplayer. Not just crazed EV/IV geniuses battling over Wi-Fi, but even just friends playing through the campaign at roughly the same time and battling each other along the way. Pokémon has never had that strong of a single-player experience; if you don't have friends to play it with, then you miss the point of Pokémon, and it becomes nothing more than a weak RPG. Pokémon is supposed to be a social experience.

 

[Eldarion]

Your point being? The experience of the majority of the playerbase is more relevant than what the very small hardcore crowd can turn the game into with enough IV training or whatever.

Fact of the matter remains that you can play thru most of the story mode using whatever element attack the enemy is weak to and win in 1 or 2 shots. This has been true pretty much since the original red and blue that I still own and play. Does this ruin the whole experience? No it doesn't. Obviously these games are fun to enough people anyway. I've played every generation since the original red version. But the combat is kinda stale and could use a lot of improvement.

In short, the use-surf-on-fire-type-win-match gameplay isn't really excusable just because a small portion of the fanbase play against eachother with fully IV trained teams or whatever. Cause the story mode sells the games.

The real focus of Pokémon has always been multiplayer. Not just crazed EV/IV geniuses battling over Wi-Fi, but even just friends playing through the campaign at roughly the same time and battling each other along the way. Pokémon has never had that strong of a single-player experience; if you don't have friends to play it with, then you miss the point of Pokémon, and it becomes nothing more than a weak RPG. Pokémon is supposed to be a social experience.

The strategy remains largely the same on that front as well. I'm not even sure what your trying to say here. I think that the battle system could use improvement, your seem to want to argue that the problems it has are fine because....multiplayer?

Surf the fire types, thunderbolt the flyers, earthquake on the electric types, ect. Do we need 90+ power moves capable of one shotting opponents? Cause with the team your using to play through the gyms with, thats even more likely to happen. It doesn't help that these attacks have over 10 power points, 100 accuracy and no drawbacks at all.

I play and enjoy these games, I still think the combat needs to improve. The social aspect of pokemon seems to revolve around trading not battles. Thats kinda why they release 2 different versions and have pokemon that only appear in one and not the other.

 

[Justanothergamer300]

Everything you said was so true but why do I love it so much

and I thought I stopped liking pokemon

 

[Nazulu]

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.

So you get rid of crits with simulators on the computer? Also, can you still use moves like Body Slam which have like 70 accuracy but do 80 damage and has a possibility of stunning? Even if you allow moves with 90 accuracy that's still chance which prevents it from being the deepest competitive strategy game.

Thanks for the info, I find that interesting.

 

[ZexionSephiroth]

A) No, cannons are high-powered military weapons.

B) Your local game shop you nitwit.

D) No. I'm talking about Mystery Dungeon.

Oh, mystery dungeon! I see. Must be my 3D bias or something... Anyways Mystery Dungeon was okay, but it still felt turn based... that was okay as well, but the whirlwind kept me from finishing; which was just so fustrating.

Also, I have to clear up what I meant by "canon". Canon as in "part of the official francise, and not fan made." You may already know that but still...

...Thank you again.

 

[Treefingers]

Meh. His complaints are either cos he sucks at the game or because he's a nitpicky little twat.

I used to love Yahtzee, but this is the first of his videos i've watched in a while and i've just remembered why i haven't been keeping up with his videos like i once did.

 

[Custard_Angel]

Eh... He got it all down I suppose.

Pokemon as a game isn't that good (shut up), but it does have a huge fan base that will support it to their last dying breath.

I had fun with pokemon years ago, but the time for pokemon is over.

Gone are the days of a rhinoceros made of rocks and a mushroom crab.

In are the days of a fucking ice cream cone and a pile of cogs.

Also, why is it that everybody seems to love the shit out of Yahtzee until he shits on your favourite title and suddenly he becomes an "anti-mainstream troll". Stand by your own convictions people... Take the good with the bad.

 

[BreakdownBoy]

No not either one, just can't understand Yahtzee reviewing a game like this when there are much beter and popular games being released. And just because my oppinion does not agree with you does not make me either idiot or a troll. And I also view pokemon as a child's franchise, again my opinion.

 

[BreakdownBoy]

Double post

 

[James Raynor]

There are people who honestly believe Pokemon has undergone any fundamental changes in the past 15 years. This worries me.

It has, look at the initial mechanics then the mechanics today.

 

[sarttan]

I've heard great things about this Pokemon, but this review confirms my suspicions:
Pokemon hasn't changed at all. And it only gets stupider from here on out....

I wasted 2 years of my life catching all 493 from last generation, I am NOT going to start over because of this!

 

[Coldster]

While I found the review entertaining (if massively lazy and uninformed), I must say the comments here are much better to read. Mostly it's most peoples inability to understand what pokemon is. Such as this individual:

-snip-

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.

Remember when Yahtzee did his review of Bowers inside story and said he wishes that "kiddy games" and "fun for all the family" were not the same thing in the developers eyes? Well that's what pokemon does. Yes, it's main target audience is young children. Are you really so think as to think that a game based off of completing it to 100% and designed for kids, is not going to be able to be beaten by kids? Of course not, that's just stupid. However, despite the easiness of the campaigns of pokemon (seriously yahtzee? You had trouble with N? I always knew you couldn't play video games but honestly...) it has a very deep and complicated metagame that people who have the desire to get a challenge out of the game can pursue.

So in reality, you are both right. The main game is easy because its designed for children to be able to beat without much trouble. However, to say that it isn't a deep or strategic game is fine, it just means you don't know anything about the majority of the game. But to deny its existence is laughably ignorant.

Huh, thats a really good compare/contrast right there. I really liked Bowser's Inside Story mainly because it's predecessors were amazing and the fact that the DS has very few really good games. I also didn't mean to say that it has no strategy in it, its just that it is extremely easy (that is for the story people so stop quoting me now ok?) while the competitive pvp is where it comes into play.

 

[Jopoho]

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.

I agree on the whole, but I thought the Team Rocket romance subplot and a few other moments were really sub-par when compared to the rest of the story, and it created this awkward separation between brilliant moments and the less awesome moments. It really took me out of the experience.

 

[KilloZapit]

My only real combat is on Yahtzee's hatred of turn based combat. I mean a lot of people hate turn based combat, and I agree that a lot of turn based combat systems are really boring and silly, but i don't think that is really so much because they are turn based as it is because they don't really try to do anything interesting. The thing is, I can name just as many real time combat systems that are just as boring. How about Secret of Mana or Seiken Densetsu 3 and it's over-reliance on spell and item spamming? Even going back to some non-rpgs, the way many beat-um-ups basically boiled down to having to flying kick guys repetitively in the face?

Although personally I still prefer the Pokemon Mystery Dungeon games to the main series just because I think combat flows a hack of a lot better, but I was always a fan of roguelikes, probably because although they are essentially turn based, it feels a lot less like a back and forth and more like a actual brawl, the best of both worlds so to speak. I guess the only real difference is they try and make it look a tiny bit more like each step is happening simultaneously and not one after another.

 

[ArchAngelKira]

I have found myself with each gym leader with weird combo pokemon with something immune to its own weakness, I also found my self kill other pkmn with its weaknees trait, and.. really all he's saying true and just brought to light.