You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
New starter designs are atrocious, though I suppose it's to be expected at this point after making 600 other pokemon designs or whatever ridiculous number they're up to now. Love how this is basically a handheld Pokemon Colosseum, but everyone's going to think this is Nintendo revitalizing the franchise because no one played Pokemon Colosseum. I don't understand how nintendo is willing to take big risks with their flagship franchises, yet there's absolutely no variation in pokemon games.
On that note, look at how Nintendo's other franchises made the jump to full 3D.
Mario: Mario 64 was a huge shake-up of the Mario formula. Instead of running through a linear or lightly branching level simply to reach the end, now you're running and jumping around a huge 3D space, accessed from a large hubworld that you're also able to explore. Your goal in levels isn't to reach the end of them, it's to collect stars, allowing for an enormous amount gameplay variation within the levels themselves. Whereas in previous games you were limited to simply running and jumping, Mario is now able to punch, kick, walljump, triple jump, sideflip, backflip, and so on. Additionally, there are totally new power-ups replacing the old ones.
Metroid: Metroid Prime makes a gigantic change from the previous Metroids by having the game play in a first-person perspective (One of the most brilliant design decisions in video game history). Despite this, it retains much of the classic Metroid formula of item collection and exploration; however, the new first-person perspective allows it to do all sorts of new things as well as creating a very immersive gameplay experience.
Zelda: Ocarina of Time does nothing too drastic to the preexisting formula, but it makes up for that by introducing a large amount of new gameplay mechanics (First-person aiming, horse riding, multiple items able to be equipped at once, a completely revamped combat system, 3D puzzle mechanics), including the main gimmick of the game: time travel, essentially allowing for two different gameworlds (Like Link to the Past's light and dark world, but expanded on more).
Pokemon X and Y are probably going to be more like Kirby 64 than any of the above; a game that makes minimal changes to an already good gameplay system. Although, unlike Kirby, Pokemon has been around for almost 17 years now (Let that sink in) before the release of the first main 3D game, and with close to zero variance in the gameplay. It's also not because it's a JRPG series. For example, the Final Fantasy series has a large amount of system changes from game to game. The last innovative Pokemon game was Gold and Silver, for greatly expanding on the existing gameplay system and adding in a bunch of new stuff (Day/night cycle, pokemon gender, a radio, allowing you to go back to Kanto and see how it's changed since Red and Blue, eggs, a secret boss fight, etc).
Don't know why I wrote all this. I guess I'm just mad at how stupid Nintendo has been for the past 7 years, and all the dumb decisions they continue to make. (╯︵╰,)
How can you shoot grunts or jackals? Easy! Ya just don't lead 'em so much! Ain't war hell?
Well I feel cheated/mad at Nintendo when they announced Gen 6 just 12 weeks after Black 2/White 2 came out here in the US and I can guarantee you I would have never bought it if I knew Gen 6 was going to come out the following year. I wonder if this is the same feeling the fighting fans had when Capcom announced Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 just 23 weeks later after the original release of Marvel vs Capcom 3.....