Pokémon X and Y Discussion

[shockwave527]

Originally Posted by Fat Jimera0

Alright, just going to come in and try and bring the discussion here a little bit back down to earth.

Some of the suggestions being made on this thread are drastic. I'm not saying they're bad persay, but there's a number of reasons why it's all really pointless fantasizing.

One reason is simple; a lot of the speculation here is super specific. The more specific your speculation about things is, the less likely it is to come true. When you start getting into the actual mechanics of the things you're suggesting instead of just a general idea, the chance of your idea being right drastically drops.

Now that being said, I think most of you guys realize that. What I think a lot of you ARE forgetting though is that Gamefreak is a business. Their first and foremost goal is to make money. Furthermore, Pokemon is a long established, very successful series that has historically remained successful, and has done so by leaving its core mechanics mostly untouched. When this sort of thing happens in business, the general inclination of companies is NOT to innovate, but to be conservative and stick to what the know what works. It's standard risk management. They know they have to change a bit to keep people interested, but the last thing they want to do with a cash cow like Pokemon is risk derailing it with anything too drastic.

If Gamefreak decides it wants to do some of the things you're suggesting, it's much more likely to occur in a spin-off game, where diverging from the norm is expected. Putting something as drastic as a complete restructuring of the way Pokemon are trained after literally a DECADE of success with the current formula is not likely to happen in a main series game. They might make small tweaks, but they are simply not going to throw out everything they've built up over the past 10 years in favor of an unproven system.

It really depends which ideas you talk about. A light type? Somewhat farfetch'd, still possible. You're right about when we go into supereffective/not effective and details and all that, but that's the fun! Speculation and coming up with our own ideas. Someone could be right. Less so with a total reorganizing of the type chard, but slightly possible.

Other things, like field advantage, aren't as farfetch'd, as they've been done in other games and by the looks of the field in the trailer it's possible they could do this. No clue as to whether they will, but still. As with the last one, coming up with details may not end up HAPPENING but it's still fun to create ideas.

It all comes down to what you're talking about. You have to be clear, as many ideas have been shared here, what are you really talking about with this comment?

[Bashfrog]

Originally Posted by Fat R_N

But EVs aren't that complicated and directly power up the Pokemon over battles

ummm, I didn't say it was a bad system or to specifically get rid of it completely(I forgot what I said. Maybe I did say something), but I just don't feel it. I felt more bond actually fighting in battle subway battles or wi-fi battles than fighting the same pokemon over and over. That's not how I came to love my blissey, or my primeape, or my donphan. Case in point: mamothswine. I've heard great things about it, but the experience using it wasn't fun for me, so I don't like them. Perhaps I would if something could show me for myself their strength.

[Count Serperior]

I'm with Jimera0 on this.

People are getting WAY too excited. It's still the same game, but with the camera at an even lower angle.

From the video, the characters still looks like he or she can only move up/down/left/right. Where is diagonal movement? Actually, no, we need full 3D movement! The circle pad is there for a reason!
Also, the game still looks like a DS game. It's cute and colorful and has a certain style, yes, but it still looks like Phantom Hourglass/Spirit Tracks. The 3DS is capable of much MUCH more. Just look at RE: Revelations/Monster Hunter Tri G (NOT MH4, that one looks worse than 3, wtf Capcom), Mario Kart 7, Kid Icarus: Uprising, Mario Land 3D....even Ocarina looked better than what was shown in the trailer.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not one to focus on graphics, but Gamefreak is being extremely lazy with my favorite franchise ever.
And I just KNOW that I'll rack up 500+ hours in this game.
smh.

[Gokuzbu]

They might not be final graphics. They have almost a year to polish them

[labarith]

Originally Posted by Fat Satisfaction

A convergent evolution will probably have 2 different types of movesets that arent neccessarily interchangeable, I'd rather just keep with the current system and have a mon with a large assortment of moves on its own

Ah, but you see there's the reason to do the convergent evolution! That way you can have two completely different versions of the pokemon, movewise! You could either have, say, a physical verison, or a special verison, but not a mixed version!

Realistically, though, it's exclusivity of moves will probably be of a coverage variety, or of a cleric/vs non-cleric variety.

For example, suppose a chansey-type and an infernape type evolved into the same pokemon, chansape (yeah, I know not those 2 would evolve). Chansape would have a weak movepool, and would either be a cleric type, or a physical attacker...

It's actually some really amazing design space... it is only mildly comparable to DW-exclusive moves VS Breeding moves...

[Infernis]

Originally Posted by Fat Bashfrog

Ok, surprisingly no one thought of this yet, but you know how the scientist at Devon Co. spoiled the dream world years before it came out? Another, lesser known scientist also had an idea. The ability to talk to pokemon.

They did that in HGSS. I could talk to my Graveler. It would roar back at me, and give me a context-based reaction. And it was so rad.

Originally Posted by Fat shockwave527

I know. I used to play the games, catching everything in sight, naming them, always keeping my starter on my team, never trading something I had named, using pokemon I liked because I liked them and thought they were cool.

Now I EV train, buy proteins etc, pre-pick my team beforehand with pokemon, ability so that I have good type coverage and that they're all good, try to get a good nature, and all in all, it's a lot less fun.

Then don't do that. Do a Nuzlocke run and kick metagaming in the teeth. No purchasing of items. Don't use doctors/nurses in the wild more than once. Only use Pokemon centers once. The game isn't hard. It's up to you to make a fun challenge out of it.

Anywho, that Kimikogaming article about Norse mythology in XY has a followup now.

[Bashfrog]

I just realized that they've added things that have changed the game significantly multiple times. Look at how weather causes things that no one ever would have thought would occur before it was created. Breeding likely was where building and training "the perfect pokemon" really got serious. In fact, gen 3 added abilities, which changed up the game quite a bit. Gen 5 added dream world, which breathed life into many, and gen 4..... just did stuff to the competative scene, which changed it by quite a bit, in fact.

So I don't think adding something else, maybe a new side to pokemon, or just a competative boost, is going to destroy the game.

I personally believe that the drastic consequences people talk about will never happen, because they are far too farfetche'd. In fact, most ideas people have really are simple additions that would just cause a slight recalculation. You all need to consider that in a stable structure, it is not the one thing that causes the destruction most often, but multiple, small mistakes.

[Bashfrog]

Originally Posted by Fat Infernis

They did that in HGSS. I could talk to my Graveler. It would roar back at me, and give me a context-based reaction. And it was so rad.

I thought of that too, but that doesn't count as talking to me. That's just interaction. I'd love to see that again though.

[Jimera0]

First off, wasn't saying that ALL the ideas being suggested were Farfetch'd (heh). I didn't name names because I didn't want to ruffle any feathers, but it seems now that I was too general.

I do get a bit annoyed when people get into the real specifics and start suggesting base stats for evolutions and stuff, since that sort of fantasizing is generally kept off the forums in general (primarily to keep the forum from being cluttered by "what if"'s). I think that the mods decide to just let it slide in new game threads since trying to trim all the fantasizing would be impossible. In any case it doesn't really do any harm here, at least not in the absence of any real news. It's just hard to suppress that gut response. Still, that wasn't the main point of the post.

The main point wasn't so much at the little things that could be added (the location based field effects being a good example), so much as at the suggestions that key cornerstones of the game-play be thrown out, reworked or completely replaced. It actually had relatively little to do with your post, Bashfrog, except for the bit about training Pokemon to gain resistances to types, since that'd really screw both with training by making it more complex and with battling by adding new uncertainties with regards to typing, further complicating matters. Still, that's much more reasonable than some of the OTHER things I've seen suggested, like the abolishment of IVs and EVs or that "attack speed" suggestion. Independent of whether those are good ideas or not, they'd never happen because they'd change the game mechanics at their core.

Really this is most evident because of Generation V, the first generation to not have any major mechanics tweaks. It's pretty apparent that Gamefreak is happy with the way everything is calculated at this point, and that they're expanding in different areas outside of core mechanics instead at this time. I just don't see Gamefreak taking any huge leaps and changing battle mechanics up in that way anymore. It simply doesn't make sense that they'd rock the boat when what they have right now works so damn well.

I guess I just want people to be a bit more realistic in their predictions and guesses. Fantasizing is fun and all, but I guess I'm really looking for meaningful discussion on what might REALLY be in the game, instead of a bunch of wishes and role-playing.

Then again, I suppose all the information we do have has been discussed to death so we don't have much else to do but fantasize, so maybe I'm just being a stick in the mud :P.

EDIT: Oh, and to clarify, I'm not suggesting that these sort of changes would necessarily ruin the game, only that they're too big a risk financially for Gamefreak to try. Any fandom can be really dumb at times, and if something changes in their favorite game, even if it could be interpreted as for the better, a lot of people will denounce the game as being an insult to the series or whatever. They still might buy the games, but Pokemon isn't a 1 game deal; it's a series that's going to run indefinitely. And those people might not buy Generation 7 if they didn't like Generation 6. Gamefreak and Nintendo can't risk putting off their core fanbase like that, as it could have disastrous long term consequences.

[shockwave527]

Originally Posted by Fat Bashfrog

I just realized that they've added things that have changed the game significantly multiple times. Look at how weather causes things that no one ever would have thought would occur before it was created. Breeding likely was where building and training "the perfect pokemon" really got serious. In fact, gen 3 added abilities, which changed up the game quite a bit. Gen 5 added dream world, which breathed life into many, and gen 4..... just did stuff to the competative scene, which changed it by quite a bit, in fact.

Don't forget:

Gen 2: New Types, (not effecting battles) Day and Night
Gen 3: Weather, Special Attack and Defense, Abilities, Double Battles
Gen 4: Special/Physical split so that special/physical was not type based
Gen 5: Dream world, triple and rotation battles, (and not effecting battles) seasons

I'd say the gen 3 and gen 4 were pretty big changes

[shockwave527]

Originally Posted by Fat Infernis

Then don't do that. Do a Nuzlocke run and kick metagaming in the teeth. No purchasing of items. Don't use doctors/nurses in the wild more than once. Only use Pokemon centers once. The game isn't hard. It's up to you to make a fun challenge out of it.

I know Nuzlocke and have done a Sapphire and a Diamond one in the past, but that's a totally different game on it's own. It just feels like when I was younger and when I play the games like I used to I have a real conneciton to my Pokemon, whereas now they're just things. I'd enjoy to have a Manectric or Aggron or Altaria or Luvdisc on my team, but now I'd never because they're so "terrible". You lose the connection.

I'm not saying abolish EV's, but it's something to take a look at.

Look at earlier in the conversation when people were talking about "reorganizing the type chart" or "buffs and weaknesses". I know this is smogon, but people have stopped caring about having fun in the game and seem to only be thinking about the metagame, when if you really take a look at what pokemon was founded off of (no one say money), you see that there needs to be that relationship, that care or the game means nothing. Plus things need to make sense, as they already do with the type chart. And I just feel the game has muddied up a bit.

That's why I'm happy with the whole "bond with pokemon will increase" thing. Hopefully it doesn't have to do with "friendship" or anything, though, as that's just one more stat to the growing pool of winning pawns I'd need to keep track of.

[Jimera0]

Originally Posted by Fat shockwave527

Don't forget:

Gen 2: New Types, (not effecting battles) Day and Night
Gen 3: Weather, Special Attack and Defense, Abilities, Double Battles
Gen 4: Special/Physical split so that special/physical was not type based
Gen 5: Dream world, triple and rotation battles, (and not effecting battles) seasons

I'd say the gen 3 and gen 4 were pretty big changes

Special attack and defense were in Generation 2, not Generation 3. Abilities were the big core battling mechanics change in generation 3.

I'd also like to point out that none of the Generation 5 changes actually changed the core mechanics of battling. Adding new modes doesn't qualify anymore than adding new gametypes to a FPS would change the actual mechanics of the combat itself. This is as opposed to things like abilities, which is comparable to perks/armour abilities/etc. in FPS, or a Psyical/Special split is comparable to changing how armour and shielding works in an FPS. These things change how straight up combat works. Gen V didn't introduce ANYTHING of that sort.

(Again, JUST POINTING IT OUT. Not suggesting you were somehow wrong in your list, I'm just using it to make MY point about how core mechanics seem to have stopped changing).

[labarith]

Originally Posted by Fat shockwave527

Don't forget:

Gen 2: New Types, (not effecting battles) Day and Night
Gen 3: Weather, Special Attack and Defense, Abilities, Double Battles
Gen 4: Special/Physical split so that special/physical was not type based
Gen 5: Dream world, triple and rotation battles, (and not effecting battles) seasons

I'd say the gen 3 and gen 4 were pretty big changes

You've forgotten FC wifi on G4, and random wifi on G5 - two of the best things for the game!

In G4, I occasionally did a wifi battle or two on smogon. In G5, I can get in 5 battles in an hour easy (3 on 3), or 3 triples battles!

As long as G6 is compatible with G5, things will be great! If it's not, then we're talking a serious buzzkill for both my G5 playing and my G6 playing.

[shockwave527]

Originally Posted by Fat Jimera0

Special attack and defense were in Generation 2, not Generation 3. Abilities were the big core battling mechanics change in generation 3.

I'd also like to point out that none of the Generation 5 changes actually changed the core mechanics of battling. Adding new modes doesn't qualify anymore than adding new gametypes to a FPS would change the actual mechanics of the combat itself. This is as opposed to things like abilities, which is comparable to perks/armour abilities/etc. in FPS, or a Psyical/Special split is comparable to changing how armour and shielding works in an FPS. These things change how straight up combat works. Gen V didn't introduce ANYTHING of that sort.

(Again, JUST POINTING IT OUT. Not suggesting you were somehow wrong in your list, I'm just using it to make MY point about how core mechanics seem to have stopped changing).

True, but advancements are still always possible. 2 game or 3 without huge updates, maybe. That's why I doubt a new type. But adding field elements, especially if they wouldn't effect wi-fi battles, I'd think is a possibility. You can't judge that it's not going to change off of only 1 generation.

Something that would really throw people for a loop if it happened: new status.

[Infernis]

Originally Posted by Fat shockwave527

I'd enjoy to have a Manectric or Aggron or Altaria or Luvdisc on my team, but now I'd never because they're so "terrible". You lose the connection.

Perhaps you have, but I'm a junior in college, and during my Nuzlocke of HG a month ago I bonded hardcore with my team. Graveler is not a fantastic Pokemon. Stantler is even worse. Doesn't mean that they weren't useful in the game, and that I wasn't immensely happy when I won the game with them. (Though Stantler had a climactic death against Morty's Gengar early on. That rat bastard and his Mean Look / Curse...)

[shockwave527]

Originally Posted by Fat Infernis

Perhaps you have, but I'm a junior in college, and during my Nuzlocke of HG a month ago I bonded hardcore with my team. Graveler is not a fantastic Pokemon. Stantler is even worse. Doesn't mean that they weren't useful in the game, and that I wasn't immensely happy when I won the game with them. (Though Stantler had a climactic death against Morty's Gengar early on. That rat bastard and his Mean Look / Curse...)

Exactly, but I'm not talking about nuzlocke here, just normal play with caring about EVs. When I pick 1 team from the start and only catch/use those, they seem more like tools then pokemon. In a nuzlocke, that's entirely different as you don't get to choose and they're your life. I know that feeling, and it's much better. But I tend to do not many nuzlockes as (a) I don't have a way of emulating, (b) I don't like resetting my games, (c), I tend to beat games non-nuzlocke in a first play through, and (d) I end up loving those pokemon so much that I hate to see them die.

EDIT: Plus, playing with proper rules, I couldn't be sure of catching any of my favorite pokemon.

[keleyeemoh]

Originally Posted by Fat shockwave527

I know Nuzlocke and have done a Sapphire and a Diamond one in the past, but that's a totally different game on it's own. It just feels like when I was younger and when I play the games like I used to I have a real conneciton to my Pokemon, whereas now they're just things. I'd enjoy to have a Manectric or Aggron or Altaria or Luvdisc on my team, but now I'd never because they're so "terrible". You lose the connection.

I'm not saying abolish EV's, but it's something to take a look at.

Look at earlier in the conversation when people were talking about "reorganizing the type chart" or "buffs and weaknesses". I know this is smogon, but people have stopped caring about having fun in the game and seem to only be thinking about the metagame, when if you really take a look at what pokemon was founded off of (no one say money), you see that there needs to be that relationship, that care or the game means nothing. Plus things need to make sense, as they already do with the type chart. And I just feel the game has muddied up a bit.

That's why I'm happy with the whole "bond with pokemon will increase" thing. Hopefully it doesn't have to do with "friendship" or anything, though, as that's just one more stat to the growing pool of winning pawns I'd need to keep track of.

What's stopping you from not giving a shit about EVs in-game? From using Manectric or Aggron or Altaria or Luvdisc on your team? It's not competitive, you have nothing to prove to anyone. In-game is a completely different experience, where you can have 4 Fire-type moves on your Charizard if you want to and still wreck shit. There's no point in fighting a bunch of Patrat to get those perfect Attack EVs. You don't need perfect Attack EVs for in-game, you can just go through with whatever Pokémon you want.

[shockwave527]

Originally Posted by Fat keleyeemoh

What's stopping you from not giving a shit about EVs in-game? From using Manectric or Aggron or Altaria or Luvdisc on your team? It's not competitive, you have nothing to prove to anyone? In-game is a completely different experience, where you can have 4 Fire-type moves on your Charizard if you want to and still wreck shit. There's no point in fighting a bunch of Patrat to get those perfect Attack EVs. You don't need perfect Attack EVs for in-game, you can just go through with whatever Pokémon you want.

I've now kind of forgot the point that I was going for.

More that defending the guy who had the idea of getting rid of EVs or something as they seem to mud up the game, but I don't know. I do try to have my first game I play in a generation be catch em' all and whatnot, and then after that play with the other style, but it still feels wrong to be a (relatively) older pokemon player and not EV train and whatnot when all of my friends do, because then I can't battle with them without losing every single time. I hope they do come up with a way to increase the pokemon-person bond despite EVs.

[Master of the Six Kings]

Been reading through all the pages and gotta say, the "Midas Touch" thing is super intriguing. I;d love a Pokemon based off that.

I also defianteyl want a sick Poison legendary this generation. Something crazy Poison/Dragon-eqsue or X and Y crazy looking giant squid. And a general poison buff (SE on Water, or maybe the ability to not only remove TSpikes but "corrode" other entry harazrds, removing a present layer at random. Or the ability to lock in Toxic Spikes from Spinners while in play).

[shockwave527]

Originally Posted by Fat Master of the Six Kings

Been reading through all the pages and gotta say, the "Midas Touch" thing is super intriguing. I;d love a Pokemon based off that.

I also defianteyl want a sick Poison legendary this generation. Something crazy Poison/Dragon-eqsue or X and Y crazy looking giant squid. And a general poison buff (SE on Water, or maybe the ability to not only remove TSpikes but "corrode" other entry harazrds, removing a present layer at random. Or the ability to lock in Toxic Spikes from Spinners while in play).

IDEA
Move: Spritz
Type: Water
Effect: Fire attack weakened by 5% on the pokemon used on, entry hazards cannot be set for X turns on either side. Any that are there already will still be there.

[Jimera0]

Keleyeemoh is right, if insensitive to your position :P.

I suspect that your issue isn't really something that can be solved by altering the game itself too much (asside from bringing back interacting with your Pokemon; I never did understand why they didn't continue that in every game after HGSS. It really can't take up that much data!). Rather it has to do with your mindset while playing. Unless I'm mistaken, you feel somewhat compelled to optimize your team when there are no restrictions. This isn't a problem with the game itself; as kele pointed out, nothing requires that you do that unless you want to. It's a problem with the fact that now that you know how to optimize your Pokemon you feel obligated to do so. It's something that I know a LOT of people who've tried competitive battling experience; knowing all the guts of the game takes some of the mystery and charm out of it. It's not a flaw inherent in the game though, it's a flaw inherent in people.

What I suggest is trying out new ways of playing to try and force you to ignore those obligations. Since it's clear that Nuzlocke's don't sit well with you (me either really, I can't ever make myself release a "dead" Pokemon), I suggest trying things like a Scramble Challange (misspelling intentional) or a Gauntlet. In both of these you can set some ground rules before asking people to give you challenges, so you can ensure you don't have to deal with Pokemon dying or anything. In your specific case I'd say the Scramble Challange should suit you more since it's very good at getting you attached to your Pokemon.

[shockwave527]

Originally Posted by Fat Jimera0

Keleyeemoh is right, if insensitive to your position :P.

I suspect that your issue isn't really something that can be solved by altering the game itself too much (asside from bringing back interacting with your Pokemon; I never did understand why they didn't continue that in every game after HGSS. It really can't take up that much data!). Rather it has to do with your mindset while playing. Unless I'm mistaken, you feel somewhat compelled to optimize your team when there are no restrictions. This isn't a problem with the game itself; as kele pointed out, nothing requires that you do that unless you want to. It's a problem with the fact that now that you know how to optimize your Pokemon you feel obligated to do so. It's something that I know a LOT of people who've tried competitive battling experience; knowing all the guts of the game takes some of the mystery and charm out of it. It's not a flaw inherent in the game though, it's a flaw inherent in people.

What I suggest is trying out new ways of playing to try and force you to ignore those obligations. Since it's clear that Nuzlocke's don't sit well with you (me either really, I can't ever make myself release a "dead" Pokemon), I suggest trying things like a Scramble Challange (misspelling intentional) or a Gauntlet. In both of these you can set some ground rules before asking people to give you challenges, so you can ensure you don't have to deal with Pokemon dying or anything. In your specific case I'd say the Scramble Challange should suit you more since it's very good at getting you attached to your Pokemon.

I get it, EVs aren't inherently causing this, and it is me. I think I'm going to try playing Y before anyone finds out about EVs or what's good or not, since that's been very hard to do with all the information around on BW, but now there's worldwide release and we can get back to the basics, allowing me to easily go through the game just based on pokemon I like. :)

Thanks for the challenge tips, I'll check them out.

[Antihaxxer]

Originally Posted by Fat shockwave527

Don't forget:

Gen 2: New Types, (not effecting battles) Day and Night
Gen 3: Weather, Special Attack and Defense, Abilities, Double Battles
Gen 4: Special/Physical split so that special/physical was not type based
Gen 5: Dream world, triple and rotation battles, (and not effecting battles) seasons

I'd say the gen 3 and gen 4 were pretty big changes

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Weathers, Special Split, Items started in Gen 2.
Gen 3 only add Abilities & Double battles (and Choice Band)

[keleyeemoh]

Originally Posted by Fat Jimera0

Keleyeemoh is right, if insensitive to your position :P.

Sorry if I came off as insensitive, that wasn't my intention. I was just trying to help!

[CynicalGiant]

They finally decided to give us a non reptile grass starter. Could see him becoming Grass/Ground Pangolin/Porcupine or Grass/Dark rodent thief. He doesn't really interest me though.

Froakie has a high chance of being Water/Fighting, and I would love for his evolution to be called something along the lines of Fisticroak. I could also see him just being pure Water type and becoming Beetoaden, the Conductor pokemon. I'd pick him either way.

The fire fox will probably become either a Renamon or Okami reference. Either way, most likely going to be Fire/Psychic.

My hopes for this generation:
- Better IV system. Less RNG with breeding. Ways to increase it in-game with currency or points would be nice.
- Harder Gym difficulty. Tired of Gym Leaders with only 3 pokemon later in the game, I expect 5-6 team members near the end, not for them to have 3 and only have one slightly harder but yet not really addition on "Challenge Mode". More variety in their teams would be nice too.
- The Sandstorm treatment for Hail. Give Ice types a DEF boost during hail. Rock types needed the SPDEF, Ice types really do need the DEF increase. Would make Hail more worth it.
- More ways to remove hazards. Very tired of being forced to use Rapid Spin, would be nice if there were more options that fit better on builds and allowed for more diverse team choices.

Originally Posted by Fat Count Serperior

From the video, the characters still looks like he or she can only move up/down/left/right. Where is diagonal movement? Actually, no, we need full 3D movement!

Also, the game still looks like a DS game. It's cute and colorful and has a certain style, yes, but it still looks like Phantom Hourglass/Spirit Tracks. The 3DS is capable of much MUCH more.

even Ocarina looked better than what was shown in the trailer.

I am pretty skeptical about this, but I do have a feeling that there will be full 3D movement they just didn't show it much in the trailer. The game itself looks similar, at least graphically, to Pokemon Colosseum for the Gamecube. Also, most 3DS games seem to look terrible or less than how they really look when shown in trailers. Super Mario 3D Land looks far better on my 3DS than it ever did in the trailers. I am going to assume the same with these new games.

One could also assume that the full 3D movement hasn't been fully tested yet, we still have quite a bit of time before the games are fully released. Probably giving Nintendo and Game Freak a little too much credit, but they hardly ever disappoint.