3 years ago#101
3 years ago#102
3 years ago#103
Game Freak is a one-hit wonder studio that's completely incompetent when it comes to innovation. the only business model they have is milking and rehashing the same 17-year-old pokemon formula until it runs dry (may take some time..) they don't know how to do anything else. and their founders/senior management are lazy as f***.
harmano knight they made that alot of ppl enjoy it so that 100% destroys what you say
3 things 1. i am female 2. i havea msucle probelm its hard for me to typ well 3.*does her janpuu dance*
3 years ago#104
Are there people in here suggesting Drill Dozer wasn't a fantastic, charming little game?
I'm afraid to read lest I go on a killing spree.
3 years ago#105
So much blind fanboyism...
The mods proved me right!
3 years ago#106
Official Dratini of the Pokemon X Board
http://i48.tinypic.com/w2mtnc.jpg <<<LOL (FIRE EMBLEM: A SPOILERS)
3 years ago#107
Game Freak barely manages to update Pokemon games between generations. Annual sports games have more advancements in graphics than Pokemon games do, and Pokemon games take 3-4 years per generation.
I understand keeping the top-down view and the spirit of handheld Pokemon games, but they could've upgraded Pokemon X/Y's visuals WAY more than they did.
I don't think they should move off of Pokemon. They do that one thing great and I'm sure Nintendo pays them a LOT to keep up what they're doing.
3 years ago#108
The main problem I have with this list is that a lot of them are really common sense stuff and should have been implemented long ago and are not real major changes. Second is that it is not much to say if those are the only changes made after 17 years....
1. Pretty obvious, should have been there in game #1.
2. How often did these actually even occur? Not very often at all.
3. This was something that was actually half decent so there's #1.
4. See #2.
5. Again common sense addition.
6. Not sure what you even mean here,
7. Same as #6.
8. This was actually something decent and new so that's #2.
9. Something actually cool and new so #3.
10. This is very iffy. We got Steel, Dark, and Ice. So 3 new types over 4 new generations of games and it does not look like were getting a new type in X/Y so far.
11. This was new so that's #4.
12. New, but still minor considering how many pokemon actually even get a signature move, but I'll let you have that one so that's #5.
13. I won't even count this considering "new pokemon" are added everygame and all they do is take an animal/object add eyes and give it a really bad pun name. There's a pokemon that it literally garbage for christ's sake.
14. 14-17 are all new so that's #8 things.
17. Again common sense, nothing major.
While I understand that there are other things to list it just does not add up enough for it to not feel like the same thing to me. Sure when you play Red/Blue compared to X/Y the two are vastly different, but they change so little that it feels the same in the long run.
LoL IGN: Butch Magnus
3 years ago#109
and NIS should take a break from Disgaea
What is the meaning of life? A: Nanomachines, son
If you agree to be my wangdingo, quote my level and karma~
3 years ago#110
None of those are instantly common sense, considering most RPGs don't include any such factor for limits of moves. For instance, move relearners? How many Breeder RPG or monster/sim battlers have move releareners? Oh wait, like none of them. (See Persona/etc. Sure you can buy any skill but that deletes the importance of actually relearning instead of just teaching them any move which would be stupid in Pokemon)
Even then, people who say Pokemon games don't change at all have to be kidding themselves. Just because it's not turning into a FPS, or turning into a racing game doesn't mean it's not changing.
That's kind of why it's the main series, and not a spin off. (Maintain the base roots, change the formulas around the base roots)
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.