Topic: Pokemon "Ideal"?

[odifiend]

Head over to IGN and read the 6 page article on Pokemon Snapped, an editor's opinion on how Pokemon should be taken online.
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.

[CHEN]

Pokémon MMORPG with the good old battle menu = how it should be. I challenge you, lass!

[Bill Aurion]

No, online is the least important thing at this point.

- 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... ^_^

[odifiend]

I think using the environment to your advantage is pretty sweet, but in a game like Pokemon you'd have to rework the entire battle system which is essentially the game.  I agree with CHEN, the menu is the way to do it period.  I suppose a spinoff could be good, but imo if any Nintendo franchise should be about using your environment to your advantage it should be Custom Robo.  Already you can dash behind walls and it could be bettered by falling elements, manipulating the environment, etc...  You might as well better a game where that is already part of the mechanics that completely change another game.

[joshnickerson]

I found he contradicted himself a few times in that article, but I did agree with the point that Pokemon is about building a relationship with your Pokemon, but we have yet to see that really implemented into any of the games... I'm not sure how they'd go about doing it, but I'd like to see something more than just affecting "Return" attacks. I also agree that despite there being nearly 400 Pokemon types, a lot of 'em are too much alike. Instead of just adding more creatures to the next game, I'd like to see Nintendo just increase the differences between them all.

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.

[kratos]

What I would like to see is a return of the "connectivity" aspect.  Now before you get your flame gear on, hear me out.
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.)  

[KDR_11k]

Since this is probably about adapting Pokemon for online play, NOT how the franchise should evolve, I'd say statements like "online is secondary" or "NPC interaction" are mostly pointless.

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.

[CHEN]

But if you change/modify the battle system to make it more complicated, you'd be alienating the core audience that Pokémon is mainly targeted at: kids and pre-teens. Pokémons shouldn't needlessly be complicated, so it shouldn't be your typical MMORPG. What I meant with a Pokémon MMORPG was a huge online world with plains, forests, mountains, cities, rivers and oceans that changes with every season. Where everyone could communicate with others, battle against each other, trade etcetera. Gym leaders, who are hired by Nintendo, are all around the world in special gyms to let you earn badges. If you earned enough badges, you'd be qualifed to compete in major tournaments to win a title/prize. Or if you're not the competitive person you could go fishing, plant berries, enter a beauty contest, taking pictures of wild pokémon snap-style, breed pokémon, enter a bike race, do good deeds, watch television, visit sales, play various mini-games with people, take a cruise/surf to a (mysterious) island. It should still be a game where simplicity and communication are the main focuses.

Dear God, I would soooooo want that to happen. Maybe in the year 20XX...

[Strell]

Mmm, I always thought using a microphone with voice recognition and making the battles like the cartoon show would be an excellent idea.  That DOES make it real time, but perhaps the "real time" feature could be tweaked so that low level pokemon could still stand a chance against higher level ones.  Perhaps implement some sort of button/reaction mechanism like in Mario RPG.  So you could call out commands and also have some direct control over dodging/critical hits.

It's just a thought.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Maybe a good idea is if the battles play like ToS does but in a more 3D style of fighting not 2d-ish and there can be a recall the pokemon/call out pokemon button to make the battles more real time and pokemon can roam arround in grassy areas and dungeons or all over. Also if its a MMORPG Nintendo would need to setup a real good server but the problem with that it contradicts Nintendo's free online goal. and we know how companies always charge for MMORPG game  servers , and Hey You Pikachu and Lifeline on the PS2 had pretty bad implemented voice technology on their games ESPECIALLY lifeline.

[Mumei]

Regardless of how feasible his ideas were, you have to admit that it did sound far more interesting than the way Nintendo is making them now.

[Bill Aurion]

Feasibility, unfortunately, is the most important thing to consider...Otherwise you get a game like Fable...

[Ian Sane]

I'll agree that Pokemon is in a rut and needs something to freshen things up.  I don't think an MMORPG is the answer.  I view that as skipping a step.  Sure that could be cool in the future but we STILL haven't received a real 3D Pokemon RPG yet.  We've wanted that since the N64 and I would hate it if Nintendo ignored that dream game and skipped right to an online game.  And NO Pokemon Colloseum doesn't count because that game f*cking sucks and removes virtually every fun element of the Pokemon formula.  You can't even catch wild Pokemon in that piece of sh!t.

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.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Yes Ian your right since i will shudder voice chat with little kids saying "bulbasaur is TEH ROXXORZZZZZ Cause ITS GREENER THEN TEH POTTERZZ" and the response "OH YEA MY CHARMANDER KICKS TEEEH BULBASAUR ASSORRZZZ CAUSE IT TEH FLAME TROLLERZZZ". Yeeeeaaaa and also sometimes on X-play they show "IT came from Xbox Live" and its pretty sad.

[Mario]

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*

[KDR_11k]

I don't think there's any strategy left in Pokemon that realtime could take away. I mean, combat is "stat boost, stat boost, stat boost, stat boost, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, heal, attack, attack, attack, attack, attack, win". Where did you guys see strategy in there?

[Bill Aurion]

That's what I've been thinking...I see really no strategy involved when you can take your time to think out your attacks...The *real* strategy comes from having to make decisions on the fly, like in real-time RPGs as Tales of Symphonia...  

[CHEN]

It's not just stat boosting and attacking. I admit Physical Sweepers are common, but a good Pokémon player cannot win with a team with just that. Tanks with Cosmic Power and Recover beat Physical Sweepers, while Hazers can nullify stat boosts, so tanks will lose their armor plating. You can give status inflictments like Will O Wisp or Toxic and watch till the Pokémon dies. Or use Roar/Whirlwind to inflict burn/toxic/paralyze to the entire team. A Cleric with Aromatherapy and Heal Bell nullifies status conditions. There're annoyers that has the purpose to just annoy the heck out of you with Thunder Wave/Confuse Ray. Spiker Skarmory has Spikes which will damage your Pokémon if they switch and Roar to force you to switch. Baton Passers can turn a losing situation in a winning one. Then there are special kinds who are based on one singular move/ability, such as Belly Drum, Arena Trap, Rain Dance, Wonder Guard. And you can only choose four moves per Pokémon, so you have to make decisions. You must also balance your team of six, so that you won't be weak to one kind and have moves to cover that. Preparations are very important. Predict what moves the enemy Pokémon carries, predict what it'll do next, what it's weak against and act accordingly to beat it. Have perfect IV's and maximize EV's to increase your chance of winning. Oh yes, there's a lot of strategy/tactics involved in Pokémon. More than your average RPG. It's not easy to win a Pokémon tourney, a good Pokémon player can tell you that.

[Syl]

^what he said.
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"  

[Draygaia]

A Pokemon using the D20 system would be awesome.  But if it was done real time like Tales obviously you would still need use of stat for evasion.

[Chasefox]

Just something I've always wanted to see is a pokemon game/battle system like super smash brothers...just choose a pokemon w/ moves set to different button combinations, and have a real time battle like in the tv show...that's what I've always wanted to see.  Don't get me wrong, I love the old versions, I just thin this could be a cool idea.

[Stimutacs Addict]

all i want is a true 3d adventure RPG, Zelda esque, with one giant world . . . and i want to be able to see a rhyhorn charging my punk ass from across the dungeon and have time to run away, but if i can't elude him he should be able to hurt me.

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

[MaleficentOgre]

All good ideas that are never going to happen because nintendo won't allow pokemon to change into anything good like an action RPG that makes sense.  no it's just not going to happpen

[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.

[CHEN]

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...