-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
Saving a lot of data is annoying, but the people who list it as one of gen 4's major problems are massively overreacting. It's not that bad, though I do obviously prefer faster saving.
It really boils down to one extra minute while you're saving.
No one really got pressed over it unless their battery was low, but like the infamous Wild Area trees, it's symbolic of the engine issues Gen 4 had.
First thing I'm doing in BDSP is saving and seeing how long it takes compared to the original tho.
Come to think of it... Do we even have a comparison between save times across all the main series games?
You know, I've been thinking about Mega Evolution as of late. I think it's the best of the super mode mechanics we've had so far, and if there was any of them I'd keep, it's Megas. It's the only one with substance behind it as it gives Pokemon new stat spreads, new abilities, and even new typings and it added a lot to many Pokemon and was fun in competitive battles.
But that's beside the point: one of the criticisms about its execution was how much it breaks in-game. You can liberally use it and the mons effectively trivialize the game once you Mega Evolve them.
Then I've been thinking...but I think there's one easy way they could fix Mega Evolution if they ever put it back in to control how OP it is in-game. Heck, it could've been done back in Gen 6 itself.
And the biggest way to regulate Mega Evolution imo...would be to connect it to Pokemon Amie.
It was right there from the start. Mega Evolutions are a cool mechanic, but I also really love Pokemon Amie. It's such a cute feature, and it's adorable to play with your Pokemon and forge a bond with them. Feed them, interact with them, vice versa. And in doing so, the game also has mechanics of affection and enjoyment, especially the former which emphasizes how much the Pokemon loves you. It helps really push the notion of making your Pokemon your friends, so much so that through little things like this you forge a stronger bond with the mon, and it shows in battle where they can do stuff like crit or heal poison or endure a hit because they love you. It's so neat.
And that would be the perfect way to regulate Mega Evolution as a mechanic. How? Because one of the key thins about Mega Evolution in lore is that they make it very clear that it can only be achieved through a strong bond between Trainer and Pokemon. That is one of the big things both the games and the anime have tried to push, and the SM dex entries even talk about how painful Mega Evolution can be for many mons. I believe the Gen 7 dex entries are meant to emphasize what would happen to a Pokemon if it Mega Evolves but lacks a strong bond with a Trainer, and so much so that if they don't, then they're in pain and will go wild, but with a strong bond they are in total control of that power. The XY anime even emphasized this with how Korrina's Lucario went wild and was very evidently in pain when Mega Evolved at first.
So I think a good way to regulate Mega Evolution's effectiveness in-game would be to really tie that into Pokemon Amie as a requirement for it to be fully effective in battle. To tie in to what would happen if a Pokemon Mega Evolves in the absence of a strong bond, make it so that if the mon doesn't have enough affection points from Amie, then it can Mega Evolve, but it would go berserk basically. Completely disobeying you and using moves at random, without you being able to command it. Not only using moves at random, but have a high chance to frequently hurt itself until it faints. Many SM/USUM dex entries even talk about how some Mega Evolved Pokemon can't even hear the commands of their own Trainer, or are in so much pain they act wildly. Make that happen in-game, basically! And maybe as Affection points go up through Amie, that happens less and less. And once you've achieved maximum affection with the mon, then you've mastered the ability to use Mega Evolution with the mon. If you have max Affection with the mon, then the mon even when Mega Evolved will then listen to you without fail, and you can fully utilize the mechanic.
Attaching Mega Evolution to Amie and its related derivatives would be an excellent way to not only regulate its effectiveness in-game, but it's incredibly beneficial for both features. It adds a layer of substance to the Mega Evolution mechanic, ties it into its canonical lore effectively, and also further incentivizes the use of the Pokemon Amie feature by encouraging players to use it as a means to master Mega Evolution and achieve the bond with the Pokemon and put in the work and effort they need to fully effectively utilize Mega Evolution. Sure, you have the Key Stone now, but that doesn't mean you've mastered the bond with your Pokemon just yet. So use Amie and work on developing the bond with your Pokemon and in doing so, your ability to control the mon when Mega Evolved strengthens with it.
I think this would be an excellent way to improve the Mega Evolution mechanic. Of course, I don't think the fools at Game Freak even realize this is a possible thing they could do, but if there's one way to improve Mega Evolution, this is almost certainly one that would work imo.
But that's beside the point: one of the criticisms about its execution was how much it breaks in-game. You can liberally use it and the mons effectively trivialize the game once you Mega Evolve them.
Then I've been thinking...but I think there's one easy way they could fix Mega Evolution if they ever put it back in to control how OP it is in-game. Heck, it could've been done back in Gen 6 itself.
And the biggest way to regulate Mega Evolution imo...would be to connect it to Pokemon Amie.
It was right there from the start. Mega Evolutions are a cool mechanic, but I also really love Pokemon Amie. It's such a cute feature, and it's adorable to play with your Pokemon and forge a bond with them. Feed them, interact with them, vice versa. And in doing so, the game also has mechanics of affection and enjoyment, especially the former which emphasizes how much the Pokemon loves you. It helps really push the notion of making your Pokemon your friends, so much so that through little things like this you forge a stronger bond with the mon, and it shows in battle where they can do stuff like crit or heal poison or endure a hit because they love you. It's so neat.
And that would be the perfect way to regulate Mega Evolution as a mechanic. How? Because one of the key thins about Mega Evolution in lore is that they make it very clear that it can only be achieved through a strong bond between Trainer and Pokemon. That is one of the big things both the games and the anime have tried to push, and the SM dex entries even talk about how painful Mega Evolution can be for many mons. I believe the Gen 7 dex entries are meant to emphasize what would happen to a Pokemon if it Mega Evolves but lacks a strong bond with a Trainer, and so much so that if they don't, then they're in pain and will go wild, but with a strong bond they are in total control of that power. The XY anime even emphasized this with how Korrina's Lucario went wild and was very evidently in pain when Mega Evolved at first.
So I think a good way to regulate Mega Evolution's effectiveness in-game would be to really tie that into Pokemon Amie as a requirement for it to be fully effective in battle. To tie in to what would happen if a Pokemon Mega Evolves in the absence of a strong bond, make it so that if the mon doesn't have enough affection points from Amie, then it can Mega Evolve, but it would go berserk basically. Completely disobeying you and using moves at random, without you being able to command it. Not only using moves at random, but have a high chance to frequently hurt itself until it faints. Many SM/USUM dex entries even talk about how some Mega Evolved Pokemon can't even hear the commands of their own Trainer, or are in so much pain they act wildly. Make that happen in-game, basically! And maybe as Affection points go up through Amie, that happens less and less. And once you've achieved maximum affection with the mon, then you've mastered the ability to use Mega Evolution with the mon. If you have max Affection with the mon, then the mon even when Mega Evolved will then listen to you without fail, and you can fully utilize the mechanic.
Attaching Mega Evolution to Amie and its related derivatives would be an excellent way to not only regulate its effectiveness in-game, but it's incredibly beneficial for both features. It adds a layer of substance to the Mega Evolution mechanic, ties it into its canonical lore effectively, and also further incentivizes the use of the Pokemon Amie feature by encouraging players to use it as a means to master Mega Evolution and achieve the bond with the Pokemon and put in the work and effort they need to fully effectively utilize Mega Evolution. Sure, you have the Key Stone now, but that doesn't mean you've mastered the bond with your Pokemon just yet. So use Amie and work on developing the bond with your Pokemon and in doing so, your ability to control the mon when Mega Evolved strengthens with it.
I think this would be an excellent way to improve the Mega Evolution mechanic. Of course, I don't think the fools at Game Freak even realize this is a possible thing they could do, but if there's one way to improve Mega Evolution, this is almost certainly one that would work imo.
I don't think that would have fixed anything.
It doesn't address the main criticism of Mega Evolutions is that is made some Pokemon so OP, usually ones which were already popular & powerful, that the meta became centralized around them leaving many other Megas behind.
Heck, limiting access to high Affection would only affect the main game (which is already easy enough to beat without Mega Evos). Players would just pick one or two Pokemon to be their designated Mega. In XY that would likely be the Kanto Starter with the other being the Lucario you're just given (a third would be the Blaziken Giveaway if you got that when it was active). In ORAS it would be the Hoenn Starter, Latios/Latias, and a third being the Shiny Beldum Giveaway. Even if they made it so you could get Mega Stones early on instead of late/post game, unless a player has a specific Mega they want to use, most players would stick to those... infact most did because of that.
It's very dumb that there are two separate metrics by which the game measures the bond between a Pokemon and its trainer, and yet the super mechanic that in-universe is described as drawing from the bond between a Pokemon and its trainer completely ignores both metrics.
That's kind of more an issue on the competitive side of things. I was more addressing in-game use, of which there are multiple things that can (and should) be done about it. The competitive side of things is another can of worms that is something everyone had to deal with eons ago when Megas were all the rage. Granted the advantage of Dynamax in that regard is that Dmax was easier to just snap from the meta (Z-Moves hypothetically would've been insta-bannable too but no one did that in the end).
The Gen 6 games were inherently very easy yeah but I was more addressing how to keep it from being completely and utterly demonizing for an in-game use in the hypothetical scenario that it be used in-game. To bring up another super mode mechanic, Dynamax is by itself better in-game than Z-Moves or Megas because its use is severely limited in-game to Gym/League battles and it's in rather scripted battles and your opponent can use it too.
Ideally you can, and should, only use one or two available Megas in-game on a team, but I was addressing how to potentially make the mechanic less overpowering in-game for a story playthrough. XY and ORAS are a case where especially with the former it's not very hard to begin with and that's more an issue of inherent game difficulty or game design. The issue of available Megas is on Game Freak because of their decision to only give it to specific Pokemon and make certain ones literal gifts but that's another issue entirely.
Even if you use a fairly meh one like Abomasnow or Ampharos the mechanic is still fairly broken for in-game as is, which is what I was aiming to address.
My point ultimately was that there is a way to make the mechanic more rewarding to use for an in-game story run by making you put in the work, effectively improving its implementation if it's to be used instead of being a cheap ticket to win the game. I think the mechanic is cool but I was saying that it had a way to add substance to it when a feature that addresses its in-universe lore (bond between Trainer and Pokemon) while not just being handed to you in such a way that Megas become a free win ticket.
The whole competitive stuff and the fact that certain mons became too OP is another situation entirely that would need to be addressed very differently because competitive is a different beast from in-game
You want the most busted super mechanic tied with one of the most busted mechanics in the franchise?
Surely nothing can go wrong there.
Also, as one that doesn't particularly care about Amie, Camp, Contests and other similarly cute things, that'd pretty much guarantee I'd either pkhex or not use Megas ever.
I don't know why, but I am really liking the idea of a potential Let's Go Johto game. It's kinda weird since I don't care enough about Go and Let's Go to play it myself, but there are some small things that do make it kinda appealing like the ride Pokemon and Shiny Hunting (which is weird coming from me since I don't shiny hunt).
Sadly I can't exactly grasp what that "potential" actually is.
Maybe I like the idea playing a Pokemon game without caring about EVs.
Sadly I can't exactly grasp what that "potential" actually is.
Maybe I like the idea playing a Pokemon game without caring about EVs.
I think the main concern I'd have about a potential Let's Go Johto is the issue of the potential exclusion of cross-gen evolutions to the new mons. The OG Let's Go Pikachu and Eevee excluded all of the cross-generation evolutions that were introduced in Johto and Sinnoh (ie Kingdra, Electivire, Magmortar, Rhyperior, etc.) and while that was a shame, it wasn't totally bad since some of the mons like Seadra, Magmar, and Rhydon are okay enough to usable in battle even without them. Johto doesn't have the same luxury as so many of its mons are incredibly mediocre in battle. When you look at all the cross-gen evos to Johto mons that have happened since, you have Ambipom, Mismagius, Honchkrow, Weavile, Togekiss, Yanmega, Gliscor, Mamoswine, Porygon-Z, Cursola, and Wyrdeer. That's a ton of mons that have evolutions who could potentially be excluded, and if you count Kanto mons Sirfetch'd will almost certainly be excluded too if the others are and we all know Farfetch'd on its own is garbage. The difference is that unlike some of the Kanto Pokemon, the likes of Aipom, Misdreavus, Murkrow, Sneasel, Togetic, Yanma, Gligar, Piloswine, Corsola, and Stantler are all very mediocre, if not outright bad on their own without their evolutions. Point being, that's a sizable number of Johto mons who are mediocre to bad and absolutely need their evolved forms to be viable in battle. It would really ruin the playability of the game if players were forced to end up with very aggressively mediocre mons on a playthrough.
While I enjoy GSC and HGSS I do feel they are hampered by having only a select few mons be viable, and the fact that many Johto mons suck in battle without their cross-gen evos means if those are excluded that would severely hurt the game's playability when only a select few mons would actually be usable in-game in a hypothetical Let's Go if said evos were excluded from the mix.
While I enjoy GSC and HGSS I do feel they are hampered by having only a select few mons be viable, and the fact that many Johto mons suck in battle without their cross-gen evos means if those are excluded that would severely hurt the game's playability when only a select few mons would actually be usable in-game in a hypothetical Let's Go if said evos were excluded from the mix.
I feel some of these cross evolution issues can be solves just like how Game Freak solved stuff like Teleport and Sunless Solar Beam, just give the stats of the fully evolved version or an alternative stat spread to the Gen 2 Pokemon. It's not like these games will be competible with mainline games so they can technically get away with temporary retconning stats.
But I think something like Gligar, Sneasel, Standler, Murkrow, and Togetic will be fine even without evolutions or a stat buff.
I think modern Pokémon games aren't really bad but they're not really what I want to play.
I've probably said it before but it's honestly pretty hard to admit that I'm getting older and I'm more or less set in my ways now. In case you don't know I'm part of the age group who started with the DS era (Gen 4-5) and there were many things about those games in particular that I really valued and formed a fairly concrete idea of what Pokémon "is" to me. And frankly, those games had me hooked and I sunk countless hours into them, and I even watched the DP anime a lot back then (in case Dawn being my pfp wasn't evidence enough, she's one of the most formative characters of my childhood from one of my most formative pieces of media).
But since then the games since XY have started to take the series in a different direction and are trying to do other things. And in the end, there's nothing wrong with that but that stuff isn't really what I want to pick up a Pokémon game for. It's sad that a series is reinventing itself and replacing what I find interesting with what I don't necessarily but I guess such is life. Many other franchises have been doing the same too
I honestly started falling out of Pokémon gradually starting from XY. X and Y were pretty fun and were really great looking for the first mainline 3D entry and I still enjoyed it. But I blazed through it pretty fast and afterwards I was like "Wait, that's it?". I really couldn't be as attached to it like I could the games before it. I still sunk many hours into it afterwards because of Pokémon Amie and its three minigames, which I found utterly adorable, and because of the Super Training minigame, which I found cute. Also the Friend Safari was fun, and XY really does have some of the best multiplayer features in the series. Still, my interest in it wasn't as strong as past games. ORAS ended up being the same song and dance. Finished it quickly, felt a bit empty afterwards. I didn't totally fall out at this point and was still watching the anime (which was honestly a fun watch) and was into the competitive scene, even though the power creep was slowly burning me out. Ironically Gen 7 ended up diminishing my interest even further. Maybe it's partially because I was getting into other things now but I played through Sun once and even though I appreciated the increase in difficulty and the story was great I just put the game down and didn't touch it again afterwards. Ultra Sun took me nearly a whole year to complete because I took several breaks between because I was honestly struggling to force myself to get through it. I had no interest in the anime at that point and was barely into the competitive scene itself. I straight up skipped out on LGPE. At that point I was frankly wondering if I had simply outgrown the franchise, and I was like "Yeah, I guess I've just outgrown this series
".
Yet in a weird way, and this ties into yet another unpopular (and contrarian) take I have, Gen 8 is ironically the most fun I've had with Pokémon in a long time. More specifically, I find Sword and Shield's DLC got me hooked into Pokémon in a way that I haven't been in ages. And I frankly don't know why. The base game beforehand was the same song and dance with Gen 6, except I got through the story, played a little more, then I put it down and went on to FE Three Houses which I spent months being super into, never touching my copy of Shield for months to come. And yet, I decided to purchase the DLC out of curiosity and somehow, it got me hooked again. Especially when the Crown Tundra half came out. I haven't had so much fun since, and I've replayed my copy of Shield multiple times with the DLC attached and I've really enjoyed it. Maybe because it actually has repeatable and fun post-game activities in DLC with rematchable rivals/Mustard/Peony and Dynamax Adventures and Restricted Sparring and the Star Tournament and whatnot. Maybe because the Crown Tundra and Isle of Armor felt so much more alive than the main Wild Area (which is honestly pretty boring) and brought back the joy of exploration that other recent games lacked. I'm not sure. I know the game is heavily flawed and lacks polish but especially after the DLC I still ended up enjoying it. A lot, even. I don't even care anymore that the EXP All mechanic is mandatory or that the game makes it easy to over level, I had fun with it outside of that anyway. Frankly it's merely less tedious anyway and not less difficult (My recent playthroughs of Sapphire and Platinum confirmed my suspicions that older games are still easy, just much more grind demanding).
I suppose in a way there's a good reason why I'm looking forward to Legends: Arceus so much. It's *so* different from every mainline Pokémon game before it that it's more likely to register in my brain as something new and interesting and not just as "That thing I love but just off a little bit". It has Pokémon attached to its name, but it's a brand new and refreshing experience. I'm also looking forward to BDSP because it'll reignite the feelings of joy I had for DP in my younger days despite sticking to the formula of old.
But I also think the Red and Green formula is becoming increasingly primitive and outdated compared to what other RPGs can do now. It's starting to show that that formula is not only unsustainable, it's actively holding the series back from true growth. Especially with the advance of technology that GF has no choice but to roll with, using that formula is actively making Pokémon fall behind compared to modern day RPGs. So I'm glad to see Legends: Arceus is trying something new, even if I expect some hiccups along the way, I do hope it leads to Game Freak trying new formulas for Pokémon games because it cannot be what it used to be anymore without some major overhauls. It's long overdue but even if Legends doesn't come out perfect, the effort to reinvent the wheel to something that allows Pokémon to truly adapt to modern games and be up to par instead of staying in the Game Boy days is truly commendable. I guess that's yet another reason I'm looking forward to Legends. Combined with BDSP not really butchering the classic Sinnoh experience I think I'll end up seeing Gen 8 as one of my favorite generations, ironically enough, especially since I strangely ended up enjoying SwSh after the DLC and really enjoyed Galar in the grand scheme of things despite how much of a mess that game is (it's clear they took a bunch of different ideas and slapped them together at times).
Loooots of rambling but had a lot of thoughts in regards to the stuff I said.
I've probably said it before but it's honestly pretty hard to admit that I'm getting older and I'm more or less set in my ways now. In case you don't know I'm part of the age group who started with the DS era (Gen 4-5) and there were many things about those games in particular that I really valued and formed a fairly concrete idea of what Pokémon "is" to me. And frankly, those games had me hooked and I sunk countless hours into them, and I even watched the DP anime a lot back then (in case Dawn being my pfp wasn't evidence enough, she's one of the most formative characters of my childhood from one of my most formative pieces of media).
But since then the games since XY have started to take the series in a different direction and are trying to do other things. And in the end, there's nothing wrong with that but that stuff isn't really what I want to pick up a Pokémon game for. It's sad that a series is reinventing itself and replacing what I find interesting with what I don't necessarily but I guess such is life. Many other franchises have been doing the same too
I honestly started falling out of Pokémon gradually starting from XY. X and Y were pretty fun and were really great looking for the first mainline 3D entry and I still enjoyed it. But I blazed through it pretty fast and afterwards I was like "Wait, that's it?". I really couldn't be as attached to it like I could the games before it. I still sunk many hours into it afterwards because of Pokémon Amie and its three minigames, which I found utterly adorable, and because of the Super Training minigame, which I found cute. Also the Friend Safari was fun, and XY really does have some of the best multiplayer features in the series. Still, my interest in it wasn't as strong as past games. ORAS ended up being the same song and dance. Finished it quickly, felt a bit empty afterwards. I didn't totally fall out at this point and was still watching the anime (which was honestly a fun watch) and was into the competitive scene, even though the power creep was slowly burning me out. Ironically Gen 7 ended up diminishing my interest even further. Maybe it's partially because I was getting into other things now but I played through Sun once and even though I appreciated the increase in difficulty and the story was great I just put the game down and didn't touch it again afterwards. Ultra Sun took me nearly a whole year to complete because I took several breaks between because I was honestly struggling to force myself to get through it. I had no interest in the anime at that point and was barely into the competitive scene itself. I straight up skipped out on LGPE. At that point I was frankly wondering if I had simply outgrown the franchise, and I was like "Yeah, I guess I've just outgrown this series
".Yet in a weird way, and this ties into yet another unpopular (and contrarian) take I have, Gen 8 is ironically the most fun I've had with Pokémon in a long time. More specifically, I find Sword and Shield's DLC got me hooked into Pokémon in a way that I haven't been in ages. And I frankly don't know why. The base game beforehand was the same song and dance with Gen 6, except I got through the story, played a little more, then I put it down and went on to FE Three Houses which I spent months being super into, never touching my copy of Shield for months to come. And yet, I decided to purchase the DLC out of curiosity and somehow, it got me hooked again. Especially when the Crown Tundra half came out. I haven't had so much fun since, and I've replayed my copy of Shield multiple times with the DLC attached and I've really enjoyed it. Maybe because it actually has repeatable and fun post-game activities in DLC with rematchable rivals/Mustard/Peony and Dynamax Adventures and Restricted Sparring and the Star Tournament and whatnot. Maybe because the Crown Tundra and Isle of Armor felt so much more alive than the main Wild Area (which is honestly pretty boring) and brought back the joy of exploration that other recent games lacked. I'm not sure. I know the game is heavily flawed and lacks polish but especially after the DLC I still ended up enjoying it. A lot, even. I don't even care anymore that the EXP All mechanic is mandatory or that the game makes it easy to over level, I had fun with it outside of that anyway. Frankly it's merely less tedious anyway and not less difficult (My recent playthroughs of Sapphire and Platinum confirmed my suspicions that older games are still easy, just much more grind demanding).
I suppose in a way there's a good reason why I'm looking forward to Legends: Arceus so much. It's *so* different from every mainline Pokémon game before it that it's more likely to register in my brain as something new and interesting and not just as "That thing I love but just off a little bit". It has Pokémon attached to its name, but it's a brand new and refreshing experience. I'm also looking forward to BDSP because it'll reignite the feelings of joy I had for DP in my younger days despite sticking to the formula of old.
But I also think the Red and Green formula is becoming increasingly primitive and outdated compared to what other RPGs can do now. It's starting to show that that formula is not only unsustainable, it's actively holding the series back from true growth. Especially with the advance of technology that GF has no choice but to roll with, using that formula is actively making Pokémon fall behind compared to modern day RPGs. So I'm glad to see Legends: Arceus is trying something new, even if I expect some hiccups along the way, I do hope it leads to Game Freak trying new formulas for Pokémon games because it cannot be what it used to be anymore without some major overhauls. It's long overdue but even if Legends doesn't come out perfect, the effort to reinvent the wheel to something that allows Pokémon to truly adapt to modern games and be up to par instead of staying in the Game Boy days is truly commendable. I guess that's yet another reason I'm looking forward to Legends. Combined with BDSP not really butchering the classic Sinnoh experience I think I'll end up seeing Gen 8 as one of my favorite generations, ironically enough, especially since I strangely ended up enjoying SwSh after the DLC and really enjoyed Galar in the grand scheme of things despite how much of a mess that game is (it's clear they took a bunch of different ideas and slapped them together at times).
Loooots of rambling but had a lot of thoughts in regards to the stuff I said.
Is it ok if I ask what your experience was with open world games to make you feel that Legends is going to be terrible no matter what?
I've only played Mario Odyssey and GTA V in terms of open world type games, and I loved both of those, Odyssey being my favorite game of all time. I also did try Breath of the Wild, which I enjoyed until I got stuck on one of the Divine Beasts and quit
Here are my issues with open world exploration games:
1. Lack of progression in the main form of interaction. In order to be worth the time doing it, the exploration has to be interesting. However, there's a limited number of interesting situations if the given tools are static. This gets worse since many open-world games constrain the stuff in the overworld by forcing it to match a certain aesthetic (BotW has much better content in a sterile blue box than it does in the open wilderness as an obvious example) As a result, I would want to have the tools available expand over the course of a playthrough. Having sections locked off until a tool is acquired because those sections rely on having said tool is a completely fine game design choice, but it inherently makes the world less open. In other words, I want my exploration-heavy games to be Metroidvanias and not open-world.
Though, I suppose instead of limiting the possibility of upgrades or the locations using them, you could just periodically reset the upgrades so that they don't always get a chance to overwhelm the challenges of the game. So, a roguelike. Still generally considered an entirely different genre.
2. Inability to tune the difficulty curve. Arguably a counterpart to the above. Instead of not being able to design around a character having a particular ability, this is not being able to design around the player having particular experience or skill level. My big complaint with Odyssey ties into this: there are so few parts that are designed for the well thought-out base moveset, because everything is set up to use the gimmick you just got introduced 5 minutes ago. It would rather throw out and replace the previous gameplay than build on it. I can't help but feel that this is partially because it cannot assume that what it would be building upon was actually experienced.
3. If you're trying to get me to take in the sights, you're doing a terrible job. I really have no idea why so many open-world games try to be realistic. Realism is boring. Why would I get excited about your forests or cliffs or whatever on my crappy university student screen when I've seen plenty of it in real life? I'm well aware that not every game does this, but I feel it can certainly apply to Legends.
Edit: Right, the actual question for why I'm uncertain about Legends as a result of it pushing being open-world. For basically every RPG that I keep coming back to, 99% of the world doesn't matter to why I'm coming back. If I'm really putting loads of time into an RPG, most of that is going to be within the few rooms of whatever postgame combat arena it happens to have. Legends has shown off a lot of content that doesn't apply to the experience within those rooms if they even exist, so I'm concerned that all the attention is elsewhere.
Last edited:
Basically, lack of motivation. The open-world content I've played (GTA, Skyrim, the post-game of Mario Odyssey) kind of fails to make me want to do things.
The only game I can think did it right is Forza Horizon, because it specifically has a button for "can you recommend me something to do?".
That's fair. A lot of the times I also need a push to actually do things, mostly like a mission or marker telling me where to go. But for me a lot of the fun in open world games like GTA is kinda just doing whatever once I've finished a mission or two. 90% of the fun from that game is just driving around in a car and running over things. To a lesser extent it's the same for Mario Odyssey and the Wild area/DLC of Shield. It's fun to wander around doing nothing and fucking around, but that's just me.
This would probably get my gamer card revoked but I never cleared a single GTA San Andreas story mission, all I did there was just roam around and have fun with the cheat codes before getting gunned by the authorities.
Now I wonder what will Pokemon do with this...
Now I wonder what will Pokemon do with this...
If anything that just increases your gamer credit. Playing around with invincibility cheats and crashing planes into the ocean is the most fun part of GTA V for me, I couldn't tell you what the actual story was
How Pokemon handles this remains to be seen but I'm still really excited
I feel this. I get overchoice pretty easily in games, so I'm not super into open-world games that flex the amount of things you can do whenever. I can usually enjoy open-world games well enough when there's a direction to follow if I don't know what to do, so whether I'll be into Legends or not remains to be seen.
I agree with this.
BotW did succeed by making its open-world very engaging and giving out rewards for exploring no matter where you went. It's a ridiculously deep game.
On the other hand, we've seen what happened when GTA got open-world games popular in the first place.
A bunch of soulless clones and an outbreak of franchises trying to slam a square peg in a round hole to make their games open.
Which brings to attention the two regions that were somewhat open, or at least non-linear.
Kanto and Johto.
Kanto allowing for sequence breaks was pointless at best. Why? Take for example Lt. Surge. Why exactly would you skip him? When you come back, he will be the exact same chump he was when you went around him. Nothing changes. The levels don't scale.
Johto actually had a split route which *did* have a major impact.
What was that impact? The level curve got fucked up beyond repair.
This raises serious concerns for Legends, but, there was also another experiment that gives us some insight in how they seem to be planning Legends.
Levels all over the place, segmented by areas with certain roamers that were stronger than the norm all over the place.
This kinda works, sure, but then again, where are the trainers?
Legends is looking very different from what we're used to, which does explain BDSP being a parallel side-project.
I feel this...I'm plagued by overchoice in real life so obviously when I play a video game as a means of escape, I'm seeking the opposite. I want a clear sense of progression that is oftentimes lacking in real life. And that's one thing I love about most Pokémon games is a clear set of goals.
Having said that, I'm still intrigued by Legends. Even BotW had gaps compared to its predecessors, despite the acclaim, so I'm seeing Legends as more of a testing ground similar to BotW. Though we'll have to scale down expectations for Legends comparing the Pokémon franchise to Zelda, but I still give GF credit for taking a big risk, finally.
You'll roam around and have fun with glitches before getting mauled by a Wild Pokemon.
Yeah, I'm much more of a story person and, while I like exploration, I'd like it to be a background thing while there's a linear main story I can always go back onto and do. I'm a bit bad with directions so a game which is an open world "do things in whatever order you like" I feel like I'd get lost and not sure what to do next. Also games like Metroidvania's where you have to do some exploration to find the story bits I find a bit intimidating and afraid I'd get lost in. It's kind of why I liked Gen V's paths being so "linear" as they are yet they do make them their own enclosed places you can explore and have unique bits to them (and since I was familiar with BW's routes all the new additional paths in B2W2 didn't feel so overwhelming).
Last edited: