Pokemon Legends - Arceus - 28th Jan 2022 *Official Content Only*

Hugin said:
One thing I'm interested in is Kleavor's shiny. They've been more deliberate with shinies recently(Galaran Legendary Birds), and they've slowly shifted Scizor's shiny from ugly yellow-green to almost matching Scyther's colors over the generations, so I'm curious whether they'll do anything clever with the colors there.
Click to expand...
I'm a little worried about them trying to pay homage to Scyther by making it's shiny lime green. I'll be honest, the color is one of the reasons I dislike Scyther, and I feel like that color would feel even weirder on a rock monster like Kleavor.

I think the most likely situation is it has colors like Regirock, which I'm fine with
 
I dont think Scyther will able to destroy his rock brother, but I find hilarious the Rock / Scissor / Papers with the Scyther family line

1633329863450.png
 
Antihaxxer said:
I dont think Scyther will able to destroy his rock brother, but I find hilarious the Rock / Scissor / Papers with the Scyther family line

View attachment 375952
Click to expand...
Knowing the way Pokemon are designed, I'd not be surprised if this is actually a deliberate reference.

Sadly doesn't really reflect on the typing... Steel beats Rock that beats Flying but Flying is still resisted by Rock (albeith tecnically the presence of the bug typing kinda messes it up anyway)
 
PokemonCrusader said:
I think Game Freak realized that the GSC presentation of new discoveries made no logical sense at all. 100 new Pokemon suddenly appearing when a decent chunk of them were extensions of previous lines? (...) An universal retcon just makes sense. I am glad that GF finally did the same with the Leaf Stone with Leafeon. An inconsistency in lore is perfectly fine when it makes logical sense.

Interestingly, the anime took the GSC route when it introduced new Pokemon and types in the Johto seasons. But in the Hoenn season when they returned to Kanto for the Battle Frontier, Ash and Brock acted like it was normal to see Hoenn Pokemon and Contests Halls in Kanto. IIRC, they did the same with Fairy Types in the XY season. It was presented as matter of fact. It is easier to gloss over than try to contrive a way that somehow reclassification makes a Clefable impervious to Draco Meteor.
Click to expand...

Arceus (during GSC): Hmm, seems like blessing the world with my latest batch of creations brought the humans in a bit of a unrest. Dialga! Palkia! The humans arbitrarily ordered my creations and now I can't simply add more without them panicking. We're going to need to intersperse any new creation throughout time & space, back to when they didn't care where a Pokemon came from, so that the past humans are already used to them thus they don't question their existence in the present. Pain in my freakin' arc...
Antihaxxer said:
I dont think Scyther will able to destroy his rock brother, but I find hilarious the Rock / Scissor / Papers with the Scyther family line

View attachment 375952
Click to expand...

Except...
Both Scyther's STABS are neutral to Kleavor, infact Kleavor is double super effective against Scyther with its Rock-type.
Kleavor's Rock-type is only neutral against Scizor, and Scizor's Steel-type is super effective on Kelavor.
Scizor's Steel-type only does neutral to Scizor, though at least in this one Scizor can't hit back with anything super effective.

It's more of a REVERSE rock-paper-scissors. Only way I can see a proper rock-paper-scissors working in Pokemon is if it's Rock/Electric-Grass-Steel/Flying.
 
Obviously it wasn’t planned when Scizor was made but they’ve done a pretty great job with the type triangle and the RPS reference imo
 
Hmmm...I just remembered the Sinjoh ruins in HGSS when Arceus had that trippy egg event, but it seems there isn too much jhoto references as of yet. You guys think they will try to bridge a deeper connection with that and ruins of Alph or will it be another mystery for the ages?
 
Pikachu315111 said:
Could also get Super Luck if Stone Axe is a Leaf Blade expy as I'm thinking it is. "What so lucky about Kleavor?". I don't know, what so lucky about Murkrow, Absol and Pidove they get Super Luck?
Click to expand...
I think Absol having Super Luck makes perfect sense actually. It’s based on a number of different mythical creatures but all of them connected to omens and luck (good or bad).

Crows and doves are also symbols or omens of luck and fortune in various cultures (usually bad and good, respectively).
 
Count Bleck said:
Hmmm...I just remembered the Sinjoh ruins in HGSS when Arceus had that trippy egg event, but it seems there isn too much jhoto references as of yet. You guys think they will try to bridge a deeper connection with that and ruins of Alph or will it be another mystery for the ages?
Click to expand...

Nope.
 
I could see us investigate the Unown here, at least, though I imagine any connection would just be more Implications
 
I think they'll mostly keep it to things that tie to Sinnoh rather than any myths/legends from other regions. The timeline doesn't work for most of them, plus the distances involved, plus them likely wanting to leave the option open for a Pokemon Legends game for every region, tells me that we might see a reference to "the recent destruction of a tower in Johto" or something, but they won't do anything more than that.
 
Is it something weird that the game is called Pokemon Legends Arceus and nothing except the latest Arceus Iphone was said about Arceus ?
 
Hugin said:
I think they'll mostly keep it to things that tie to Sinnoh rather than any myths/legends from other regions. The timeline doesn't work for most of them, plus the distances involved, plus them likely wanting to leave the option open for a Pokemon Legends game for every region, tells me that we might see a reference to "the recent destruction of a tower in Johto" or something, but they won't do anything more than that.
Click to expand...

Oh oh surely if we get a Johto one it’ll be set just prior to the tower burning down and the resurrection will be part of the plot. Honestly I would buy the game just for that, even if it was a GO game.
 
Antihaxxer said:
Is it something weird that the game is called Pokemon Legends Arceus and nothing except the latest Arceus Iphone was said about Arceus ?
Click to expand...

Going to guess encountering Arceus would probably eventually be the major goal of the game. If I were to hazard a guess, we'd need to climb Mt. Coronet which would be easier said than done. Sure in Sinnoh it's easy to climb up as it's been excavated and paths through the mountain have been dug, but in Hisui? While there's probably caves (though most would be dead ends likely leading to a Pokemon's lair), it's likely to get to the top of Mt. Coronet it would involve treacherous mountain climbing over several kinds of terrain and obstacles; it'll probably be THE final challenge where you'll need all the Noble Pokemon's skills to get higher up.

Coronis said:
Oh oh surely if we get a Johto one it’ll be set just prior to the tower burning down and the resurrection will be part of the plot. Honestly I would buy the game just for that, even if it was a GO game.
Click to expand...

If we get another "Legends" game set during that time in Johto I think they should make it a dual region game with Kanto and explore the past relations between the two regions. Maybe have the two regions having been rivals in the past until a legendary trainer helped both regions band together. Not sure which Pokemon they would use as the "cover" mon, maybe make a new Legendary.

Also I'm curious if what we think they would do for other "Legend" games is as straightfoward as we thing. I think one reason for Legends: Arceus is to give Arceus a game where its the central Legendary. So in that respect, if the Legends games are meant to focus on a Legend or Mythical who didn't get its own title, a Hoenn one wouldn't be based on Rayquaza, Unova based on Kyurem, & Alola based on Necrozma. For them the title mons would be Jirachi/Deoxys, Victini/Meloetta, & Marshadow/Zeraora. Though, that said, a Legends for Zygarde & Eternatus could work as both got shafted for their own game.
 
R_N said:
Johto shares enough with Kanto as-is, please don't let a Johto Legends game be half Kanto too.
Click to expand...
I doubt a hypothetical Johto Legends Game would involve Kanto, simply Kanto’s main schtick is that 100 contemporary- it’s the only region not to have any past history- everything is done for the sake of progress. This is especially notable in its comparison to Johto: Johto is a region rich of history and culture and continues the respect the past, while Kanto is focused on the present and modern progress. It’s similar to how BW had Black and Black 2 focusing on the contemporary side of development, while White and White 2 were focused on preserving the past.
 
Pikachu315111 said:
Also I'm curious if what we think they would do for other "Legend" games is as straightfoward as we thing. I think one reason for Legends: Arceus is to give Arceus a game where its the central Legendary. So in that respect, if the Legends games are meant to focus on a Legend or Mythical who didn't get its own title, a Hoenn one wouldn't be based on Rayquaza, Unova based on Kyurem, & Alola based on Necrozma. For them the title mons would be Jirachi/Deoxys, Victini/Meloetta, & Marshadow/Zeraora. Though, that said, a Legends for Zygarde & Eternatus could work as both got shafted for their own game.
Click to expand...

I don't think its that simple on mon selection. Arceus always played a huge part in Sinnoh's lore and history, so it being the central focus of a new game that takes place in ancient Sinnoh absolutely makes sense.But something like Meloetta, which isn't really integral to Unova, or all then Gen 7 Mythicals who are implied to not even be *from* Alola, or in most recent cases Zarude being outright stated to be made for the movie and not have any connections to galar. These all make me think future Legends games shouldn't really be focused on mythicals as their standard, specially for recent gens where the mythicals aren't really made for their regions anymore. If anything games that take place in a region's past should prioritize what would make sense lore-wise to be the central mon. Just so happens that this game's central mon is also a mythical.
 
R_N said:
Johto shares enough with Kanto as-is, please don't let a Johto Legends game be half Kanto too.
Click to expand...
DreamPrince said:
I doubt a hypothetical Johto Legends Game would involve Kanto, simply Kanto’s main schtick is that 100 contemporary- it’s the only region not to have any past history- everything is done for the sake of progress.
Click to expand...

Sadly that's the exact reason why a past game may include both Johto and Kanto. It's Johto's unfortunate curse being connected to Kanto and considered an expansion upon it having a more detailed history whereas Kanto is, well, "just is". Like, I wouldn't know what a "Legends: Kanto" game would be about, unless they take the term "Legends" loosely and we play the journey of a young Samson Oak and Agatha.

AquaticPanic said:
I don't think its that simple on mon selection. Arceus always played a huge part in Sinnoh's lore and history, so it being the central focus of a new game that takes place in ancient Sinnoh absolutely makes sense.But something like Meloetta, which isn't really integral to Unova, or all then Gen 7 Mythicals who are implied to not even be *from* Alola, or in most recent cases Zarude being outright stated to be made for the movie and not have any connections to galar. These all make me think future Legends games shouldn't really be focused on mythicals as their standard, specially for recent gens where the mythicals aren't really made for their regions anymore. If anything games that take place in a region's past should prioritize what would make sense lore-wise to be the central mon. Just so happens that this game's central mon is also a mythical.
Click to expand...

Well who's to say "Legends" has to focus on a "macro" Legend? All Legendaries and Mythicals have legends connected to them, some more obscure than others. And maybe they have a connection to the greater macro legend of the region than we realize.
 
I kind of expected the world to be "cut up" into segments with Gate like areas splitting them. I would be amazed if they managed to take the Wild Area/DLC expertise from SwSh and create an entire world map. Let's also not forget that Pokemon likes to segment its gameplay quite strictly (No, you can't go to X place until you've done Y Move/Object/Skill/Story thing). So having "gated" areas preventing you from exploring would not be a surprise.

People keep expecting a full congruous area like BotW, but I don't think it would work for a game which has its routes in a "Home base" as it were, and people blocking you from entering dangerous areas (as you are supposedly new to the Team) makes sense until you are "cleared for access". Other "Tribes" might not have agreements with Yours, so accessing a particular area may be blocked until you get said Tribe on your side. I think it makes sense to have stuff split up a bit. Keep in mind the age group these games are aimed at. In BotW, it took me a long time to be comfortable with just going wherever I wanted to without any real objective. That freedom is something I hadn't had in a game for a long time. Pokemon definitely is working on the freedom of movement, but its not 100% there yet.
 
Rapti said:
So, apparently some videogame media outlets are making a big deal out of this tweet by Joe
https://twitter.com/x/status/1443516921706598402
personally, I wouldn't mind it if he happens to be right and I'd hazard a guess that most people here wouldn't either

but I wonder how it would affect mass reception if Legends is not in fact a "true" open world game ™
Click to expand...
Uh I don't think I'd have much problems with it either, I enjoyed XBC and XBC2 and the "segmented openworlds" scenario worked very well to make the world feel *big* but not *empty* (which is often the problem of certain open world games that have large completely empty areas).
Obviously this assumes it's done properly, which isn't something I can 100% trust GF on, but heh.

Besides, seeing how poorly "wild area" performs on SwSh, honestly i'd take smaller open areas with good performance over one single open area with terrifyingly bad fps and questionable quality textures.
 
Rapti said:
So, apparently some videogame media outlets are making a big deal out of this tweet by Joe
https://twitter.com/x/status/1443516921706598402
personally, I wouldn't mind it if he happens to be right and I'd hazard a guess that most people here wouldn't either

but I wonder how it would affect mass reception if Legends is not in fact a "true" open world game ™
Click to expand...

There're almost no true open world modern games. Only real open world games are sandbox, like Minecraft or Terraria, and the second isn't true open world either since most in-game content is only attainable after completing mandatory challenges like defeating wall of flesh amongst other key bosses. GTA affords to be an almost true open world because there're no stats and so progression from point 0 to point 100 is irrelevant, only parameters that will change are your money, which has a minimal impact in terms of what you can buy, and you don't need a fully custom vehicle nor the best rocket launcher in the game to finish it, since they are games that revolves around story and narrative instead of presenting a real difficulty curve.

For these type of games, true open world are purely incompatible. Dark Souls isn't a true open world either. Anor Londo is not accesible from the beginning, nor are the Crystal Caves or each area that comes after obtaining the Lord's Vessel. It gives you the false impression of being an open world because they let you enter areas that most modern games would've blocked, and use difficulty to keep you at bay and reconsider other options.

For people to be mad about Legends being or not being a true open world, first most of them need to understand what a true open world really is, that the first the legend of zelda is not a true open world, and finally whats the difference between an open world and a sandbox, something that causes a lot of confusion nowadays. It's no coincidence that each and every game that has been regarded over the years as excellent in terms of world or inner-level design is not a true open world (and to a certain degree, BToW isn't either, because if you are experiencing the game for the first time, is very improbable that you'd explore certain deadly areas without the proper equipment while mantaining an aceptable experience, so it's designed to let you, theoretically, aventure each area, but not to early survive in several of them, and that makes a practical difference in the way you perceive the game and how it's played at the end).
 
Sirya said:
There're almost no true open world modern games. Only real open world games are sandbox,
Click to expand...
Tecnically when people talk of "open world" they think of games like Botw, Cyberpunk, Skyrim, Fallout, etc, where aside "inside building" areas, the entire map is accessible by just walking without any loading screen.
Also tecnically the way, say, the two DLCs are in SwSh.

Usually the main draw of pure openworld games is to have free access to the entire map and a sense of distance/travel that isnt interrupted by loads, making exploration feel more immersive and rewarding.

The "segmented openworld" games are obviously the majority nowadays (see Xenoblade), and it's both easier to design and to some degree better to play, as you can afford to have different level areas and bigger background differences without needing to design ""transitions"", while still being able to maintain a sense of freedom and exploration.

Personally I do prefer the latter type, "pure" openworld end up being too dispersive and feel "empty" more often than not anyway.
 
Playing through Okami right now, which can also qualify as "segmented open world" of sorts, and I'd like to add that this type of structure allows areas to be more easily differentiated from one another.
It combines the fact you can walk freely and explore every nook and cranny of a given area with more freedom in area customization, since you could technically have, say, a volcanic area after walking through a rocky cave 'gate' without it being too jarring to the player.

I find it a good compromise, personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top