thats because most players don't do competitive battles oto

once you look into the competitive side, it starts making a lot more sense on a strategic level, spiritlord.

Otoshimo wrote:

Cause that pretty much is the point of legendary Pokemon,
they are powerhouses. They are meant to be sweepers thats why they are banned from tournament gameplay.

there's no reason why they couldnt make an interesting legendary that isnt a sweeper, lugia or giratina are an example.

but there's more important things to fix on legendaries, like something other than pressure. (dream world helped out with the monstrosities that are multiscale lugia and regenerator ho oh)

Otoshimo wrote:

Spiritlord wrote:

I think the main thing to work on in terms of gameplay is further developing the strategic side of the game. So far, you need very little strategy beyond type matchups to actually complete the game.

Not like EVs,
IVs,
Ability/movepool/nature breeding,
Selective battle stratagems (baton passing, flail/endeavor setups, Voltturn, Sun/rain teams, etc.)
Entry traps,
and the plethora of already existent material that incorporates into actual pokemon strategies mean anything....

nope >_> they mean jackchnit in terms of pokemon havine a "developed strategic side of the game".

Thank you for half-reading my point and using it so cleverly in the creation of such an utterly hilarious comment.

You don't need those to complete the game. You can easily complete the game with a reasonable team, with sub-par movesets, any old natures and IVs and no EV training whatsoever. As I said earlier, you need very little besides type matchups and some semi-decent pokemon to complete the game.

The strategic side only comes in for serious players who want to go the extra mile. And then that only applies in places like the battle institute, etc, and in competitive battles against anyone who is also a serious strategic player.

What I said I wanted was for it to be further developed. I want it to also become a core part of the game, not just a hidden side option for hardcore players. This would mean making EVs visible, which, as far as I can tell would be the ideal next step for the series. And also maybe add somewhere where you can remove all EVs from a pokemon, to start training again, in case you mess up. The way they have it at the moment, you have to keep separate records of everything you are EV training - it's very easy to make simple mistakes on these, which would mess up your training completely. And any battling outside of the EV training would also completely mess it up. They need to make it more accessible, and more realistically possible for normal people.

Also, the IVs need some tweaking. As far as I can tell, between IVs, natures and abilities, it can take virtually forever to catch/hatch a pokemon with 'ideal' stats for whatever battle role you want to give it. And you are only informed about which of your IVs is highest, and are given clues as to how high it is, but are not told anything about any of the others. Which is annoying. Maybe IVs and natures should have a small amount of influence on each other, or something.

I never said they didn't have a developed strategic side of the game. I only said it needed improving, and (at least partially) applying to the main game. Okay, so I didn't explain all of this in that post, but, never mind. The basic idea behind it is still there. Sort of.

^ You can remove EVs, there are berries for that.

Pokemon has a lot of underlying balance issues; I imagine if Nintendo tried to incorporate a fully functioning strategy system into the in-game part; competitive would get screwed really hard. Think of it as a balancing act, do you make in-game mind-numbingly straightforward, 'hit-A-to-win' and by doing so, make competitive interesting, vice versa, or find some weird middle ground between the two that makes neither preferable.

Anyway, I don't see whats so wrong with Nintendo adding a normal evolution to Eevee, maybe evolving from Eevee at level 30 or something. This would mean it could very easily be a Normal type; and hey you can hardly bring out the 'unoriginal' argument since that's been flying in the wind since around 3rd gen; and yet no one really cares too much.

Ataraxia wrote:

^ You can remove EVs, there are berries for that.

Really? I've never seen any of them. How do you get them, and how many EVs does each berry remove? The only way I know of deleting EVs is with the right services at join avenue, and with that you have to be pretty lucky to get the right services, and have them taking away the right EVs. And I still don't know how many it takes off.

Ataraxia wrote:

Pokemon has a lot of underlying balance issues; I imagine if Nintendo tried to incorporate a fully functioning strategy system into the in-game part; competitive would get screwed really hard. Think of it as a balancing act, do you make in-game mind-numbingly straightforward, 'hit-A-to-win' and by doing so, make competitive interesting, vice versa, or find some weird middle ground between the two that makes neither preferable.

They could add a 'tactical mode' in the options, which causes the opponents to have brains, and sometimes have slightly bigger teams, possibly with slightly higher levels. Of course, if they did have bigger teams and higher levels, your team would grow faster, so they'd have to as well. One thing which annoyed me about Gen 5 was that you rarely, if ever, met a trainer with more than 3 pokemon.

They tried to make a 'hard mode' with the set battle system, but I find that that's just awkward and frustrating. I don't like hard modes which make the game hard by crippling the player. I prefer to have tougher opposition.

Ataraxia wrote:

Anyway, I don't see whats so wrong with Nintendo adding a normal evolution to Eevee, maybe evolving from Eevee at level 30 or something. This would mean it could very easily be a Normal type; and hey you can hardly bring out the 'unoriginal' argument since that's been flying in the wind since around 3rd gen; and yet no one really cares too much.

I think a normal type eeveelution is a good idea, provided it keeps Eevee's stat patterns and abilities. I still use an un-evolved Eevee as part of my main team on Soulsilver.

-----------

One thing I haven't seen anyone mention yet that I think is pretty important is the vs seeker. Anyone else think we need it back?

Spiritlord wrote:

Ataraxia wrote:

^ You can remove EVs, there are berries for that.

Really? I've never seen any of them. How do you get them, and how many EVs does each berry remove? The only way I know of deleting EVs is with the right services at join avenue, and with that you have to be pretty lucky to get the right services, and have them taking away the right EVs. And I still don't know how many it takes off.

I don't know the exact names but you get them from either White Tree or Black Tower on the final floors as a reward. (can sometimes be a Rare Candy though)
They reduce an EV by 10, but if the EV is over 100 it drops it down to 100.
E.g. 238 effort value will decrease to 100 if the berry is used. 90 effort value will drop to 80 if the berry is used.

Spiritlord wrote:

Otoshimo wrote:

Spiritlord wrote:

I think the main thing to work on in terms of gameplay is further developing the strategic side of the game. So far, you need very little strategy beyond type matchups to actually complete the game.

Not like EVs,
IVs,
Ability/movepool/nature breeding,
Selective battle stratagems (baton passing, flail/endeavor setups, Voltturn, Sun/rain teams, etc.)
Entry traps,
and the plethora of already existent material that incorporates into actual pokemon strategies mean anything....

nope >_> they mean jackchnit in terms of pokemon havine a "developed strategic side of the game".

Thank you for half-reading my point and using it so cleverly in the creation of such an utterly hilarious comment.

your so very welcome, i appreciate the smartass response to the point i wanted to make towards your obliviousness to the "strategic gameplay" that is practically added to every generation (as was my point).

and here's your berry-EV effects stats
http://www.ign.com/wikis/pokemon-black-white-version-2/Berries

Otoshimo wrote:

Spiritlord wrote:

Otoshimo wrote:

Spiritlord wrote:

I think the main thing to work on in terms of gameplay is further developing the strategic side of the game. So far, you need very little strategy beyond type matchups to actually complete the game.

Not like EVs,
IVs,
Ability/movepool/nature breeding,
Selective battle stratagems (baton passing, flail/endeavor setups, Voltturn, Sun/rain teams, etc.)
Entry traps,
and the plethora of already existent material that incorporates into actual pokemon strategies mean anything....

nope >_> they mean jackchnit in terms of pokemon havine a "developed strategic side of the game".

Thank you for half-reading my point and using it so cleverly in the creation of such an utterly hilarious comment.

your so very welcome, i appreciate the smartass response to the point i wanted to make towards your obliviousness to the "strategic gameplay" that is practically added to every generation (as was my point).

and here's your berry-EV effects stats
http://www.ign.com/wikis/pokemon-black-white-version-2/Berries

Ehe, glad to be of service to you. If I could possibly offer any other wonderfully insightful help, please, do not hesitate to ask. ;)

But, yeah, I guess we've solved this dispute now. Cheers for the link.

UPDATE

as of today, there was actually some news regarding the next generation of pocket monsters.
Forgive me being so slow to pst this here, midday. but there were more important places i needed to show this 1st to. However, because of this being so late there is a video up now I can put explaining such rather than me just linking and explaining. So here y'all go, Pokemon X & Y's news as of May 11, 2013

Because of the new Robin Pokémon...

Spoiler:

Otoshimo wrote:

UPDATE

as of today, there was actually some news regarding the next generation of pocket monsters.
Forgive me being so slow to pst this here, midday. but there were more important places i needed to show this 1st to. However, because of this being so late there is a video up now I can put explaining such rather than me just linking and explaining. So here y'all go, Pokemon X & Y's news as of May 11, 2013

I like the looks of these, especially the panda.

Except for the yellow thing. That looks absolutely atrocious.

they look pretty cool :D

i wish they had the old artist for the pokemon, the feel of that art is what most people remember "Old gen" as. Maybe if that artist drew the pokemon art people would say OH SHIT IT LOOKS LIKE GEN 1 POKEMON!

by gen 1 artist i mean this guy



as opposed to this guy

Released this morning. several additional tid-bits.

1st off, the english names of the new pokemon:
~Gogoat
~Helipotile
~Fletchling
~Pancham

2nd, character customization will be a feature carried throughout the game. The Pokémon Company confirms that at certain points you'll be able to get new outfits and accessories for your Trainer! They also confirmed diagonal movement.

all this released with a new gameplay clip, featuring the main protagonist and the 4 new pokemon.

HNNNG! SO MUCH WANT!

I haven't played a pokemon game in such a long time now... I never got to pick up a copy of B2/W2

Vortiene wrote:

they look pretty cool :D

i wish they had the old artist for the pokemon, the feel of that art is what most people remember "Old gen" as. Maybe if that artist drew the pokemon art people would say OH SHIT IT LOOKS LIKE GEN 1 POKEMON!

by gen 1 artist i mean this guy

Spoiler:

as opposed to this guy

Spoiler:

Wait aren't they both Ken Sugimori's work?

Snagglux wrote:

Vortiene wrote:

they look pretty cool :D

i wish they had the old artist for the pokemon, the feel of that art is what most people remember "Old gen" as. Maybe if that artist drew the pokemon art people would say OH SHIT IT LOOKS LIKE GEN 1 POKEMON!

by gen 1 artist i mean this guy

Spoiler:

as opposed to this guy

Spoiler:

Wait aren't they both Ken Sugimori's work?

are they both? i dont know tbh, but i think thats why people complain about new pokemon looking different from 1st/2nd gen. bit different look. (now that i check i do think they are both sugimori)

Vortiene wrote:

Snagglux wrote:

Vortiene wrote:

they look pretty cool :D

i wish they had the old artist for the pokemon, the feel of that art is what most people remember "Old gen" as. Maybe if that artist drew the pokemon art people would say OH SHIT IT LOOKS LIKE GEN 1 POKEMON!

by gen 1 artist i mean this guy

Spoiler:

as opposed to this guy

Spoiler:

Wait aren't they both Ken Sugimori's work?

are they both? i dont know tbh, but i think thats why people complain about new pokemon looking different from 1st/2nd gen. bit different look. (now that i check i do think they are both sugimori)

Yes they are still sugis' artwork (as far as I prominently know). however the artwork isn't that factor that deters people nowadays, it's when you start getting pokemon designs like this...

Spoiler:

...that people feel the series is running out of ideas and only staying alive to make insane money. it's not the artwork Vorthole, it's designs that seem way to unimaginative, unfinished, inorganic, or just downright ludicrous to what the original game titles brought to the table.

and yet to be honest... not all the 1st 151 designs are great themselves. yes there are very well done ones, but even gen 1 has it's dull designs. even mores, people that take that "gen 1 was the best pokemon all others suck now" fail to realise that the majority (if not the entirety) of gen 2 were all pokemon slated for the very 1st title, yet were scrapped at the closing of the pocket monster project.

...that, and stuff like the anime itself don't really keep the spirits up that pokemon is doing any better as it was in the past via it's designs and concepts.

the original game brought digglet/dugtrio, magnemite/magneton and voltorb/electrode to the table.

edit: what's the problem with bidoof? D:

Chagrilled wrote:

the original game brought digglet/dugtrio, magnemite/magneton and voltorb/electrode to the table.

edit: what's the problem with bidoof? D:

Bidoof is a legend (among terrible pokemon...)

This image says it all :

Spoiler:

I find my self wanting to play the 1st/2nd gen pokemon games but when I do so on an emu on my phone i dont get any satisfaction.


IMO new pokemon games won't have the allure of the old ones. Not because of the art style (ok yeah most of the new artworks are pretty terrible). I think it is because when blue or red were out , there was no internet to find all the info on were to find what. And most importantly no meta. I think I lost my interest on pearl when I restarted the game again and again untill I got and adamant monkey.

when you say first/second gen, do you perhaps mean the remakes? cause the actual first gen game is buggy as shit.

Chagrilled wrote:

when you say first/second gen, do you perhaps mean the remakes? cause the actual first gen game is buggy as shit.

oh ho ho you did not just say that fool....

you forgot a fishy pun, i am disappointed. so what's the problem with the designs this gen?

all gens are good in some manner, you are deluding yourself if you think the new ones are completely terrible.

They all have flaws, of course.

As an example, I didn't really like 3rd gen pokemon other than the pseudo legendaries, but 3rd gen's world and story were so fun to play through, especially the huge ocean area and dive puzzles.

Vortiene wrote:

all gens are good in some manner, you are deluding yourself if you think the new ones are completely terrible.

They all have flaws, of course.

As an example, I didn't really like 3rd gen pokemon other than the pseudo legendaries, but 3rd gen's world and story were so fun to play through, especially the huge ocean area and dive puzzles.

I've actually just recently been playing through third gen, and it actually has some of my favorite pokemon. Breloom, Swellow, Torkoal, Glalie, Gardvoir, so awesome.

Then again, I've never really disliked a generation. I will say second gen, although I still love it, is my least favorite of the 5 gens so far.

There will always be complaints about the new generations though. I I'm a pretty good age to be a pokemon fan, since three generations already existed whenever I got into it, so I've just always been used to the differences I guess. There are specific pokemon within each generation I dislike for different reasons, but I don't dislike any generations.