Nintendo 3DS

DontNou posted...

lmfao, go kill yourselves.

Ah yes, someone on a video game forum telling other people on a video game forum for liking a popular and well-made gaming franchise because he doesn't like it. You remind me of that neckbear meme.
---
What I can't get over is how she ripped one testicle off..~Frogstir
I can't read your topics without expecting Bel Air now.~KensaiBlade

Starwars4J posted...

Purification posted...

Strategy huh? The SMT series has some of the most intricate gameplay mechanics I've ever experienced in a JRPG. Trying to take on Nocturne Hard Mode and Digital Devil Saga 2 Hard Mode have been some of the most difficult and strategic gameplay experiences I've had, and I've played just about every major RPG title out there.

The amount of preparation and the need to predict what the enemy is going to do several turns in advance, where the bosses can pretty much instantly turn the tide of battle in a single attack, is both quite thrilling and frustrating.

All of which pales in comparison to the depth involved with not only crafting the perfect team, but i figuring out what the perfect team is in the constantly changing metagame. The sheer options just eclipse anything in any other RPG series. There's a reason it has the large adult following that it does.

In regards to the preparation before combat, you could say that in a sense. But I was referring to specifically just the combat mechanics. Pokemon is some of the most simple combat mechanics possible for an RPG, as it was designed for children originally.

The strategy you're referring to is something that came about because of the community, not inherent strategy programmed into the game. It could exist or not exist, either way, the game would still be doable. You can easily beat the entire game without any tactics (the only way Pokemon has ever been difficult for me was when I do single element runs). The strategy you bring up is forced onto the game by the community, which is something that can be done to quite a lot of things. With your logic in mind, something like Yu-Gi-Oh is one of the most strategic games in existence.

Simply put, I argue that Pokemon has artificial strategy that only exists because the community wanted a way to make the game more strategic. This type of strategy can be applied to almost anything that has an online community.
---
The Judge, Jury, and Executioner

Consoles have exclusives. That's what supposed to sell them, isn't it?
Telling some random person in some random board to kill themselves just because they don't agree with you is very mature.
Pokémon does have a huge adult following for its complex gameplay mechanics. See Smogon and such.

MetalLoki posted...

I'm 21 and love both Pokemon and SMT, and hope this happens one day

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8j8xbBRCF1r0rwlxo1_1280.jpg
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l84wu534Ql1qb8982o1_500.jpg

So...would I be safe to assume that we can finally get to kill annoying Pokemon trainers?
---
The Judge, Jury, and Executioner

Purification posted...

Starwars4J posted...

Purification posted...

Strategy huh? The SMT series has some of the most intricate gameplay mechanics I've ever experienced in a JRPG. Trying to take on Nocturne Hard Mode and Digital Devil Saga 2 Hard Mode have been some of the most difficult and strategic gameplay experiences I've had, and I've played just about every major RPG title out there.

The amount of preparation and the need to predict what the enemy is going to do several turns in advance, where the bosses can pretty much instantly turn the tide of battle in a single attack, is both quite thrilling and frustrating.

All of which pales in comparison to the depth involved with not only crafting the perfect team, but i figuring out what the perfect team is in the constantly changing metagame. The sheer options just eclipse anything in any other RPG series. There's a reason it has the large adult following that it does.

In regards to the preparation before combat, you could say that in a sense. But I was referring to specifically just the combat mechanics. Pokemon is some of the most simple combat mechanics possible for an RPG, as it was designed for children originally.

The strategy you're referring to is something that came about because of the community, not inherent strategy programmed into the game. It could exist or not exist, either way, the game would still be doable. You can easily beat the entire game without any tactics (the only way Pokemon has ever been difficult for me was when I do single element runs). The strategy you bring up is forced onto the game by the community, which is something that can be done to quite a lot of things. With your logic in mind, something like Yu-Gi-Oh is one of the most strategic games in existence.

Simply put, I argue that Pokemon has artificial strategy that only exists because the community wanted a way to make the game more strategic. This type of strategy can be applied to almost anything that has an online community.

Artificial? So, what exactly constitutes "natural" depth? Something that's broken broken will stay, no matter how many people play it. Having a community only reveals what already is there. Pokémon has an enormous variety of possible strategies which exist on the game, even though you don't need to use them in story mode. The game has a focus on multiplayer, but it's not like people are freely creating expansion packs for it.
While the main stories are generally easy, a higher challenge is the very reason why they have the Battle Frontier sort of feature, too.