Post by: odifiend on September 04, 2004, 05:18:34 AM
Firstlt, it should be noted that Cory Faller, the writer, admits he has little experience with Pokemon.
I think some of the ideas are refreshing, but personally, most of them would ruin what makes Pokemon, Pokemon. People have been clamoring for real time battles forever, but there is no way to adapt that to Pokemon. The game is about strategy. A game where higher level Pokemon easily evade a lower level Pokemon's attacks, destroys the satisfying feeling of taking out Pokemon 10 levels higher than you because you have a good knowledge of stats and weaknesses. Also the idea that Pokemon should be able to attack in between special attacks, would give the advantage to Pokemon with high attack, unless it was carried out like in Skies of Arcadia.
Faller does have some great ideas, though. He seems to borrow from the mechanics of Tales alot. He proposes that their should be several paths of moves sets per pokemon and that moves should be learned by the frequency of using lower level techs.
I'd like to here what you guys think.
Post by: CHEN on September 04, 2004, 05:25:12 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 04, 2004, 05:35:40 AM
- Free-roaming 3d environment very akin to the Zelda world...No onscreen map stage selection like in Colosseum
- In battles, actually have the Pokemon hit each other instead of magically hitting from the opposite side of the field(I hate how most RPGs are like this)
- I would like to say no to random battles, but I do understand that it'd be hard to implement, at least in the overworld areas...Perhaps the randomizer could be applied to the fields in the overworld and the "see your enemies before they strike" is applied to caves...But it's not that big of a deal *shrug*
- NPC interaction that affects later events...
Now onto the battle system...I've been thinking about a real-time battle system for Pokemon as early as 1999, but the more and more I think about it, the more I can see the problems in implementation. Stats would need to be reworked, especially considering the fact that Pokemon moves were limited by the turn-based aspect of it...So a time-delay between certain moves would need to be added, such as having the highest power moves taking the longest time to recover from and the lower power the shortest...If somehow this system could magically work, I think it could take the battles in a great direction, particularly if you had to use the environment to your advantage...Say you get into a battle near a river...Then in the battle screen, the river is in the battle square, which can be used to the advantage of water-type pokemon...Or if there's large boulders scattered throughout the field you could use them to hide from attacks...I also may be way ahead of myself here but interaction between objects would also apply, like knocking down trees to injure your opponent or to open up a path up to the branches of the trees or knock down health items...
That's my ideal Pokemon, though the implementation is most likely years off... ^_^
Post by: odifiend on September 04, 2004, 06:05:49 AM
Post by: joshnickerson on September 04, 2004, 06:22:53 AM
I agree that Pokemon needs some sort of "shakeup" to keep it fresh. I like what Bill's said so far, it's pretty much what I'd add to the games if I was in charge. The menu would have to stay, though I'd like to see a bit of "Paper Mario" influence... like if you tap a button at just the right time you can add extra "oomph" to your Pokemon's attack. Or maybe using a button to "call" to your pokemon, causing it to dodge an opponent's attack.
I've said this before, but I'd like to see puzzles that you have to use your Pokemon to solve... such as Geodude crushing a boulder blocking an electric generator, then using Voltorb to turn it on, and opening a door on a ledge, then using Noctowl to fly you up to the ledge.
I don't know that MMORPG would be a wise idea or not... it would be a great idea in theory, but would it be in practice? I'd hate to think of a Pokemon world filled with lamers and flamers... not to mention the gamers that would log out of a battle the second it didn't go their way. I guess if anyone could pull it off, it'd be Nintendo. I just think they should focus on building a more satisfying single player game before working on any online game.
Post by: kratos on September 04, 2004, 07:53:16 AM
Nintendo could implement a system of sending and relaying information through the GBA, or more preferably, the DS.
Since you really wouldn't be able to pause the game (if this were a MMORPG) the DS with it's two screens would work wonderfully (IMO.) You could receive messages on one screen and have a map, Pokedex, Pictochat, or anything else Nintendo would decide to implement on the other. And since the bottom screen is a touch screen, menu navigation would be a breeze. Hell, you could even have voIP and a buddies listor something to let people communicate over long distances (gamewise that is.)
Post by: KDR_11k on September 04, 2004, 08:08:42 AM
The combat system fits into the MMORPG genre as it is more a matching of stats than any interactive combat (tactical options in Pokemon are so limied they could just as well roll a dice and multiply that with your level to see who wins), but I'd like them to scrap it nonetheless. Yes, it IS standard practice to make the only important factor how long you have worked on the level threadmill, but still. Environment and positions should play a larger role, ambushes and other tactics should be possible. Team combos, of course, too (you know, like throwing a blob of water at the enemy and your teammate electrifying it so it deals big damage upon impact). I haven't played any Pokmon game after Red, so I don't know whether you can do team combos in them, but they should be in (to encourage partying, for example). Of course, a turn based combat system wouldn't work online (what if you encounter a lamer who won't finish his turn?), but AFAIK most MMORPGs have a system where you attack and have to wait some time until you can attack again, spells and stuff like that require different recovery times. If SOE were to do a Pokemon MMO they'd probably use the standard MMORPG system, but with Nintendo noone could say what will happen.
Also, timing based stuff would be completely impossible in an MMO, what with lag and botters and stuff.
Post by: CHEN on September 04, 2004, 08:31:38 AM
Dear God, I would soooooo want that to happen. Maybe in the year 20XX...
Post by: Strell on September 04, 2004, 11:10:37 AM
It's just a thought.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on September 04, 2004, 12:30:38 PM
Post by: Mumei on September 04, 2004, 03:13:26 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 04, 2004, 03:41:07 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 04, 2004, 04:48:52 PM
IGN's front page really pissed me off since all it said was Pokemon Online, as if it was an exclusive scoop. Once I found out it was speculation I was mad that they "fooled" me into looking at the article. Imagine if a magazine had that on it's cover and you bought it only to find out it was a "what if" story.
Oh and MMORPGs, and any online community style game in general, always suck. Trust me we don't want one. Battling and trading with friends online would be cool but wandering around a 3D world with a bunch of rude assh0les and 12 year old brats? No thank you. I'm a pro-online guy but only so I can play with my friends without getting together.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on September 04, 2004, 07:04:55 PM
Post by: Mario on September 04, 2004, 09:37:05 PM
Quote
People have been clamoring for real time battles forever, but there is no way to adapt that to Pokemon. The game is about strategy.
I completely agree. Pokemon needs to stay turn based.
As for online, I think being able to battle your Pokemon online against anyone in the world, would be absolutely amazing, I don't really give a crap about playing other games online, but Pokemon would really benefit from it. (and so would Advance Wars..)
But this is Nintendo, they'll milk the Pokemon franchise and take it one baby step at a time, maybe we'll see the ultimate Pokemon game in 100 years by linking our Nintendo DS 3000 SPs up to our flying toaster cell phones.. *sigh*
Post by: KDR_11k on September 05, 2004, 07:19:28 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 05, 2004, 07:33:18 AM
Post by: CHEN on September 05, 2004, 07:53:39 AM
Post by: Syl on September 05, 2004, 01:11:55 PM
Pokemon is *FAR* more of a strategy based game than anyone who plays alone understands, once you get into the level 100 tournaments, and get things such as breeding for the best stats and the EV/IV bullshit, the game gets unnecessarily complicated and getting a good team takes more time than even *I* have.
Which is why its absolutely perfect for an MMORPG.
I do agree that the system should be tweaked a little bit, but this is how i see a pokemon MMORPG battle starting.
Walk up to a person (or multiple people) , challenge to a fight (with up to 3 pokemon per side out, and you choose other random things like "no items" or whatever other rules you want) . Then, a random circular barrier shows up on the ground, and "battle mode" starts.
After that, its basicly the same formula that its always been, highest speed goes first, attacks have the same power/effects, pokemon special abilities work the same way. Everyone in the general area can watch, and the fights would be made unnecessarily flashy simply for that reason. after you "faint" the predetermined amount of pokemon or whatever you decided on to win the battle, you move onto the next one.
For wild pokemon, (like any other mmorpg) you'd be able to see them randomly wandering around the side of the road, in the sky, in the water. Some pokemon would be hostile, others not nearly as much. Some flying pokemon, for instance, would be flying too high to be accessible from the ground and would only be available to catch once you recieve the "fly" HM. Trainer battles could be initiated in the sky and water just the same way, but only pokemon of certain types would be available... and it would be impossible to totally faint the pokemon a trainer is riding on. (Probably get down to 1hp and would be considered fainted)
I suppose that it would also be necessary to have more of a bond with pokemon, based upon feeding them or whatnot, the "love meter" introduced in Gold/silver was a step in the right direction, but it needs to be something far far more intricate and useful.
Oh, and the way to deal with pokemon of different levels. A level 50 pokemon is going to kill a level 10, 20, or even (weak) 30 pokemon without any trouble. Thats how it is, thats how its going ot stay. Badges are the way around this, once you recieve "X" number of badges, your only allowed to challenge people of similar badge levels to a fight. Or maybe it would be baed upon average levels of pokemon that are with you. Also, people could set up their own Gym, which would end up going through a screening process and probably approval by a moderator, but it would defiantely add some uniqueness to the game.
I think that the pokemon number should be upped to roughly 500 myself, but i'm a whore and 500 seems like the perfectly disturbing number to "catch em all"
Post by: Draygaia on September 05, 2004, 02:06:56 PM
Post by: Chasefox on September 06, 2004, 09:34:56 AM
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on September 09, 2004, 06:38:09 PM
now if i didnt try to run away, or started running but realized that i was about to get reamed, i should be able to press A and whip out my pocket monster .
great game
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 09, 2004, 07:57:59 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 10, 2004, 08:46:45 AM
Post by: CHEN on September 10, 2004, 01:28:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Chen: Now you got me confused, I never heard 90% of the term you used. Besides stat boost was just an example, I'd never waste time on that in a real fight, the enemy goes down in five strikes, if he stat boosts he just wastes his chances for an attack.
Hahahahahahah, that was my exact conclusion too when I played Red/Blue. I'd just give Blastoise three water attacks and Charizard three fire attacks, which is of course totally useless. But then I started to learn more of the game (with the help of internet boards) and I started to learn expert knowledge. You can get away with it just fine in-game, but in link battle against pro's, you won't stand a chance. I guess I could teach you the basic things you need to know about competitive battling, but it would be a waste of time if you don't like it. Some prefer the game's simplicity and would rather enjoy the game and ignore the endless possiblities it has to offer. I'm totally fine with this, as the process of being a pro requires lots of time and commitment. Not everyone likes to commit a lot to one thing. And not to mention it requires some knowledge in mathematics. There are still many things left to discover, things Nintendo and Game Freak refuse to tell us.
Let me give you an example of how you and I are different. You'll be person A and I'll be person B.
A: Stat moves suck! By the time they're used, I would already have killed them!
B: Not true, not true at all. What if I sent out a Pokemon with outstanding
defense stats, like Dusclops? With 130 Base Stats in each defense, I'm quite
sure it can last one attack, unless you have used Swords Dance or an attack
incresing move, in which you surely wouldn't have because non-damaging moves
suck so much. I would use Will-o-wisp after you attack, which burns you thus
lowers your attack and eats away your HP.
A: But then I'll use Special Attacks!
B: Yes, and I'll use Calm Mind raising my Special Defense and withstanding your
attacks, then Resting to recover health.
A: Then I'll switch to something with Shadow Ball.
B: Then I'll use WoW again. That switch will actually help me more.
A: I'll kill you before you even have a chance to attack!
B: Pssh, fat chance. Didn't I say it had 130 base defenses?
I hope I didn't hurt your feelings.
But do you understand what I'm trying to say here? Another thing I'd like to add is: Bill said that he doesn't see any actual strategy involved when you take your time to think out your attacks. And that fast-paced games like Tales of Symphonia have more strategy involved. Well, he's wrong. For instance, why is Advance Wars such a strategic challenging game even though it's turn based? Why is chess so difficult to master? It's because they're simple, they have simple rules and equally important, they're balanced. If things are balanced, you have the possibilty to come up with different strategies and tactics to try to change things in your favor. And uhm... I'm running out of thoughts now... maybe next time...
Post by: Mario on September 10, 2004, 02:16:01 PM
Pokemon is the deepest game I have ever played.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 10, 2004, 08:57:31 PM
Post by: odifiend on September 11, 2004, 05:27:29 AM
Post by: CHEN on September 11, 2004, 05:56:25 AM
Uh, trying to be on-topic, this is what the core of Pokémon should be as long as it exists. It's accessible for everyone, yet deep enough for the competitive ones among us. That's why Pokémon is such a huge hit. It's a brilliantly designed concept that works almost flawlessly.
Post by: Syl on September 12, 2004, 08:15:56 AM
I'm currently enjoying leaf green, so i'll get back to this later.
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 12, 2004, 09:24:39 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 12, 2004, 10:44:18 PM
Syl: Considering the only time I ever played against a human opponent (and the only time I knew a human opponent, too) was before even yellow was out, that's how my experience turned out. The problem with Pokemon is that it requires people to bring their own savegames. Games like that never work for me, noone I know plays them and therefore noone has any savegames (and a savegame isn't something you can set up in five minutes).
Post by: CHEN on September 13, 2004, 12:02:42 AM
Post by: Nephilim on September 13, 2004, 05:27:19 AM
someone said it would show the real trainers from the rest
In reality it will be a bunch of n00bs with there 5 rare pokemon.
everyone will just use the 15odd rare pokemon, would be useless to real trainers
The only fair battles would be low level
Post by: KDR_11k on September 13, 2004, 06:44:52 AM
Post by: CHEN on September 13, 2004, 08:03:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: DeadlyD
Would be boring, in reality
someone said it would show the real trainers from the rest
In reality it will be a bunch of n00bs with there 5 rare pokemon.
everyone will just use the 15odd rare pokemon, would be useless to real trainers
The only fair battles would be low level
Was that directed to the link? If so, don't judge something you know little about. RS Bots weren't specifically designed for 'n00bs', it was designed for competitive people. It's great for pro's who want to experiment and battle with other pro's with lvl. 100 pokémon + perfect values without all the hassle. Most of them experiment with different movesets and teams of six. It's very challenging to think of a balanced team with little weaknesses while able to counter all types. That's why they battle other pro's to find out if a team has any particular weakness. Knowing the metagame is important too. If, for example, Skarmory is played a lot, you obviously need someone to get rid of Spikes. Legendaries are banned in most tournaments by the way, so it's all mostly fair.
And KDR, go to Gamefaqs, to the Ruby & Sapphire FAQ page. There's an interesing FAQ called 'Advanced Trainer Guide'. That's a good way to start understanding the deep part of Pokémon. It's filled with mathemathical equations and statistics, so it could get boring if you're not very good at numbers.
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 13, 2004, 08:17:18 AM
Post by: odifiend on September 13, 2004, 11:53:58 AM
But I consider myself very Pokemon conscious and it would take another skilled person to take on my team.
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 13, 2004, 12:37:51 PM
Post by: odifiend on September 13, 2004, 04:27:04 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 13, 2004, 08:57:51 PM
I thought that 5 legendaries comment was aimed at the Pokemon MMO... Urgh, camping legendary spawns... Fun!
Post by: CHEN on September 14, 2004, 07:45:44 AM
I don't know if I should recommend this, so that's why I said read the FAQ first. And if you're not interested after reading it, then don't bother. Pokémon can get dull pretty fast if you don't enjoy it. That's why most people should just play it for fun and not worry about anything at all, since the game's AI is pretty easy to defeat. Stat enhancements? Don't need them. Fire Blast? Because it's cool. Ah, I should play that way too, it's much more relaxing than all the competitive battling. *Remembers the good old year 1997*
Post by: KDR_11k on September 15, 2004, 12:14:10 AM
Post by: CHEN on September 15, 2004, 03:58:32 AM
Gamefaqs > GBA > Pokémon Ruby FAQ page > Advanced Trainer Guide by egervari
Post by: Nephilim on September 15, 2004, 05:02:24 AM
I had this game, Pokemon Red
we use to have lil mini tourneys
use to come out, I never used you "stats" rasising to win a match, esp Mewtwo vs Mewtwo
You saying you raise the stats to win, didnt work
Only way to win, esp if you had both used PP up (these were the days before the missingno. glitches) was to use a Ice attack. There for freezing the other Mewtwo, making it that they couldnt use recover or attack
They fact you claim I know nothing is silly
The fact is Pokemon in this age, has too many rare and unbalanced pokemon
Pokemon such as straight Bug type are now useless
you can use your gamefaqs guide all you wish, but learning from mistakes is better then reading some guys view
Post by: odifiend on September 15, 2004, 05:26:07 AM
ara? Look you know nothing. Apparently the people you fought against were also ignorant to the depth of pokemon. You probably could have ended a mewtwo vs. mewtwo match faster if you used amnesia...
DeadlyD the point is that Pokemon evolved a whole lot from Red/Blue to Gold and Silver. They divided the special stat and added dark pokemon and steel pokemon, therefore mewtwo lost his advantage 3 times. He is still a powerhouse but a good scizor or pinsir could take him out, as could heracross (all bug pokemon). Tyranitar, a new pokemon, would crush mewtwo, and suicune, my favorite pokemon, could take out mewtwo as soon as he attacks.
It is true that there are many rare Pokemon, but now that there are more of them it is easier to achieve balance. Everyone has the ability to catch them and now that there are more than six, there is variety in the lineups even if people bring strictly legendary pokemon to battle. Even so, you can agree with your opponent that legendaries are off limits, I find battles a lot more strategic this way.
I've never used gamefaqs to learn the stat-whatevers. You could have noticed the natural selection thing just by having plenty of Pokemon babies. And I learned ideal movesets from Pokemon Stadium. I guess that is the more expensive way, but I enjoyed myself and did learn from my mistakes. Though right now I'm fed up with Pokemon. :___:
Post by: CHEN on September 15, 2004, 08:24:24 AM
Quote
you can use your gamefaqs guide all you wish, but learning from mistakes is better then reading some guys view
Did you even read the FAQ? Thought so.
