Sorry, I should have phrased that a little differently. What I mean to say is the game should not be limited to just the mechanics of the older games. There’s so many small mechanics they’ve added since the days of the 2D games on GBA that shouldn’t be ignored just because they aren’t retro.
One mechanic I’ve always loved in any game it’s been in is the ability to have a hideout/home/etc that you can deck out with furniture and whatnot to make it your own. It’s just a comfy mechanic to have.
Being able to trade with anyone around the world is pretty dope. It was much harder finding another kid with Pokemon Blue so I could get a goddamn Pinsir.
In HeartGold/SoulSilver specifically (and then not again after for some reason), you could toggle the running shoes. So much nicer than having to hold B all the time. They also allowed for two Select items (items you can activate without entering the items menu), which also never carried over to other games.
I seem to remember one of the more modern games allowing you to view move details (description, power, accuracy, etc) from the movelist screen during a fight, rather than having to go to Pokemon > [Pokemon] > view moves, or whatever it is. I think one game also allowed you to see if the move you’re about to use is super effective or not, but I’m not really a fan of that one. Learning type effectiveness is part of the game imo, but my opinion on this isn’t too strong.
Not really QOL but I loved mega evolution and would like to see it come back. It was exclusive to Gen 6, which was the last Gen I played, but I heard they never included it in following Gens. It was basically a temporary “evolution” (a different form) for specific fully evolved Pokemon for just the fight. Only one Pokemon can mega evolve per fight though, so you gotta choose wisely. Gen 6 competitive battling was peak imo for just that reason.
I really liked the EV training in Gen 6, not sure if that carried over but it made it much easier to increase EVs, rather than having to fight the same Pokemon over and over again.
HMs eventually disappeared. Gen 4 had a whole bunch, then in Gen 5 I think there were still a lot but most weren’t required for progression (I think in order to beat the game you only needed one of the HMs, I can’t remember which. The rest were just for optional stuff I think. It’s been a while though). I think in Gen 7 they finally removed HMs. The moves are still available I think, but they don’t do anything outside of battle.
I’m sure there’s more I’m forgetting, someone else can expand on this list.
I dont know which game but they did add a QoL feature that tells you whether a move is effective, super effective, or ineffective vs monsters youve fought before, based on typings.
I remember that being the “feature” which really highlighted the dumbing-down of the game. Work things out for yourself? Look them up? Remember what you’ve learned? No, we’ve solved the puzzle for you, don’t worry.
Not to blow my own trumpet, but I was able to memorise basic type relationships as a small child!
That is a summing-up of the criticism that I’ve seen a few times though: they refuse to accept that their players grow up and only ever aim the games at youngsters, difficulty-wise.
i believe masuda made it very clear at the beginning of the swsh announcment, said he was going to make a “half ass game going foward, simply becauses hes tired of the franchise”, thats why every game has been a joke since.
masuda needs to hand it to another company, or have someone revamp the console games.
Honestly, I'd rather see another studio take a crack at the franchise. I don't know whether Gamefreak have lost a lot of important talent over the years or if they just got lazy because their games are guaranteed to sell no matter how poorly they're produced, but they do not know how to make games in the current era. Full stop. The last handful of mainline Pokemon titles have been unacceptably poor quality, and Nintendo won't light a fire under their ass because... why would they, when they're already printing money?
I think it would be wildly beneficial to the health of the franchise if a completely new studio took the wheel for a minute. They don't have to reinvent the game mechanics or take the story in some dark and gritty direction or anything like that, but if they just made it functional that'd already be a huge step up over Gamefreak's last few releases.
Personally, I'd love to see Retro Studios take a crack at a mainline Pokemon title. They've already got a very close relationship with Nintendo, and have released nothing but bangers.
I would call the new ones not even interesting enough to pirate, so yes.
Something like sword/arceus style but not garbage with mechanics around the gba era.
So no giga dumbshit or similar but still special/physical change.
Also if we’re requesting unicorns be brought to reality, more options. I wouldn’t hate the all the new giga shit if I could disable its cutscenes. It wasn’t even cool the first time.
Open world games don’t hold me, because ironically, they tend to feel too small. When you can walk from one side of the setting to the other in real time, it all feels small.
The only “open world” game that’s been a linear story survival sandbox that I’ve seen do it well is Raft. And that only works because of the medium of it being an open sea where the players can wander, then move through the story at their leisure.
The ol Ubisoft formula? Yeah - I enjoy sprinkling them in to my gaming.
Easy to pick up. Only got a bit of time? Go unlock some area or marker. Got a longer amount of time? Make progress towards the main quest. That with achievements gives me a list of short and long goals I can work towards.
Funny that you mention it. I usually play an open world game in parallel with a heavier on rails RPG/CRPG – and opt for the open world game when I want a more “brain off” session.
Indeed, I often times will play for a few hours and find all sorts of cool things, but nothing that moves the story along.
Case in point, I have been playing BG3 for months a few hours here and there and I’m only in the beginning parts of Act 3. And before that I dumped probably 400hrs into Elden Ring, and then went back in for many, many more when the DLC came out.
I played BG3, put over 100 hours, it took me 2 years. But I don’t mind, it was an easy game to pick up after a break and continue with, and the quests were rewarding in themselves, you didn’t need to complete the whole game to understand it.
There are definitely games I have started played, then couldn’t remember what I was doing after a break and wasn’t enthused enough to return to it. I can’t remember specific games but I know it happens.
I’ve put around 400 hours into that game. But I’ve only “completed” it once.
I came from divinity where you needed to play the game on tactician to experience all the content. Not sure if bg3 is the same way but I went in with that mindset.
Such a great game and so much to explore. Took me back to when I was a kid trying to 100% mass effect.
So many studios fail to breath life into their worlds and pump them full of tedious bs. (Looking at you starfield. What a let down that was…)
Yeah I’m only playing balanced or whatever the middle/default difficult is. I have 263hrs as of right now and have really been enjoying it. And I’m doing Dark Urge so I’m missing a bunch of content just because of “bad decisions”, and the way I ended up in act 2 I also know I missed a bunch of content. I’m not even close to being done with Act 3 (I don’t think) and I’m already debating if I will do another playthrough afterwards, or play something else from my ever growing backlog. And I’ve never been a 100%'er and usually happy/lucky if I even finish it. 😂
I like the idea of open world games. In practice it depends entirely on the execution, and amount of free time I have. I enjoyed the hell out of Cyberpunk 2077, but have zero desire to play GTA6 or the latest Ubisoft snoozefest.
Is the openworld meant for exploring, like pre-Starfield Bethesda game? Yeah i love those.
Is the openworld crafted only for wasting player time, like Ubisoft game? Nah.
Is the openworld crafted as a backstage for the main story but also can be explored, like GTA franchise or dying light? Yeah, those are nice.
Is the openworld only used as a backstage for the main story that doesn’t encourage exploration because it conflict with player urgency, like Metro Exodus? I’d rather not.
If it means a return to random encounters, no absolutely not. There’s a reason I don’t go back and replay the older games even though I have fond memories of them. That reason is largely Zubat. Fuck you Zubat.
But also, aside from a handful of bugs and performance problems Scarlet/Violet and Legends: Arceus are the best the franchise has ever been. I’d rather they refine what they’re already doing and keep making things better rather then regress purely to appease someone’s misguided nostalgia.
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze