Please explain how it matters in the slightest unless you play hardcore competitively? The vast majority of people who play the game literally do not care about stats and couldnt even tell you what they do. And that is a design failure
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Pokémon Sun and Moon Starters Revealed. Releases November 18th 2016.
- Thread starter BY2K
- Start date
Please explain how it matters in the slightest unless you play hardcore competitively? The vast majority of people who play the game literally do not care about stats and couldnt even tell you what they do. And that is a design failure
VGC2017 will hopefully by a laugh.
I'm expecting a Parental Bond nerf (second hit down to ~25%, second hit doesn't activate special effect), and a Dark Void nerf (Accuracy dropped to 60-70%, also hits your adjacent partner Pokémon in Doubles/Triples)
Both of those would make be fun, but hopefully Kangaskhan and Smeargle and in the Alola Regional Pokédex, so they wouldn't be in the VGC2017 ruleset.
Note: The above is speculation, not indicative of insider knowledge
They change every year. The main issue with this ruleset isn't Smeargle, but is the Primals. With no restrictions on them, you can have 2 Primals and a Mega on your party at once. If Primals were removed, the metagame would be a lot less centralised.
I'm expecting a Parental Bond nerf (second hit down to ~25%, second hit doesn't activate special effect), and a Dark Void nerf (Accuracy dropped to 60-70%, also hits your adjacent partner Pokémon in Doubles/Triples)
Both of those would make be fun, but hopefully Kangaskhan and Smeargle and in the Alola Regional Pokédex, so they wouldn't be in the VGC2017 ruleset.
Note: The above is speculation, not indicative of insider knowledge
They change every year. The main issue with this ruleset isn't Smeargle, but is the Primals. With no restrictions on them, you can have 2 Primals and a Mega on your party at once. If Primals were removed, the metagame would be a lot less centralised.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
The VGC format is just horrendously unbalanced. For all the gripes people have with Smogon's overreaction at banning stuff, at least their meta features more variety.
It varies on the year and which pokemon are allowed in. Mega evolution was a huge game changer as well in the 2014 format that people had to adapt to. Every competitive game goes through this; some years are more balanced than others when it comes to providing variety and counter strategies. 2016 is not looking like a good year for team variety, but maybe Sun and Moon will limit the roster again and 2017 will be great.
PreyingShark
Member
I never went through a "3D shift" because I started with the 3D ones. When I went to play the 2D ones that were released for my GameBoy I just... adapted. Both 3D and 2D Marios and Zeldas feel pretty similar to me TBH.
So to me yes, this is exactly what you sound like.
What would be laughable is making Splash actually do something.
Slamtastic
Member
but lavender town though
Competitive play has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm saying. And is in fact irrelevant when it comes to sales data as well, if the ONLY people buying pokemon were competitive players their sales numbers would be dogshit tier
Dude. Before the Physical/Special split, all Fire, Ice, Grass, Dragon, Electric, Water, Psychic and Dark type moves relied on Special Attack.
This means the elemental punches were all Special, so a strong Special Attacker was better with those punches than any fighting type. For example, Alakazam.
After the split, this shit completely changed. The way many Pokemon were used was shook up, you can't use elemental punches on Alakazam effectively because its Attack stat sucks.
Pokemon of any type could now be geared toward either Physical or Special and still be great, instead of limited to what their Type was classified as. It completely changed the metagame, and how many Pokemon are used.
Azumaril is a perfect example of what you're talking about. Went from being one of the most nothing Pokemon in the game to one of the most used all because of a type change and a new move. New moves, abilities, types, items, and Pokemon are all dramatic balance changes that only the strongest of the strong come out from relatively unscathed. It's really not that hard to get.
for an extreme minority of people who play competitive sure, for everyone else, not really
DecoReturns
Member
Made before Pokemon was popular and had a set of rules.
The story never go that far anymore
Why would we believe you?
I mean, we play Pokemon much more than you do. Why do you think this is some obscure thing? Do you think children, including us, didn't think about it? Especially given that we're talking about fundamental stats, not something like IVs.
Neoleo2143
Member
I suspect some ability nerfs in the future as well as some hard code changes surrounding Mega Raquaza and the Primals. That or they decide not to bother with primals in VGC ever again.
DecoReturns
Member
Nothing like elemental punching everything with a Alakazam.
ArchedThunder
Banned
And when the games are still outselling most other games clearly people wanting a genre change are the minority.
Have you asked them? Have you conducted a proper sampling of the player base to gauge the actual interest of people who want a change in the games including those who constantly buy them?
Or giving Mewtwo Amnesia for the most unstoppable sweep imaginable on the glorious Special stat.
Have you?
The Shadow Knight
Member
But then your DOTA comparison is completely irrelevant isn't it? As everyone who plays that generally plays it in competition against others. Comparing the competitive side of DOTA to the casual side of Pokemon is some serious apples and oranges.
For the casual side of Pokemon it's quite simple: don't fix what ain't broken.
You can't state something as fact without doing so, and i never did. The other poster however did state, AS A FACT, that the majority of players don't want a change with absolutely no legitimate source behind it.
He did. 95% of his friends stopped playing because the games are repetitive according to them.
Considering the sheer number of Pokemon I would say Pokemon is fairly well balanced.
Juding by past history VGC 2017 will only be Pokemon in the Sun and Moon region dex.
Not really, im comparing the majority to the other majority
Fortunately, we don't need statistical surveys to prove everything.
There's plenty of evidence, like, oh, sale numbers, or the fact that we've played Pokemon since our childhoods, or the fact that you're the only person in this thread arguing this.
Sure, you can say those are just anecdotes, but why should I disregard those in favor of your lone opinion?
Neoleo2143
Member
Competitive to Competitive? Because why would you compare a single player game to a multiplayer game?
Except the sales data has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it. The sales data DOES NOT expose the fact that perhaps, a majority of those people buying the games, do in fact want a change, but buy them anyways.
Really like the starter designs! The only design element that isn't so great is that Poppilo's snout almost looks like a party hat that has slid off his head and onto his face. It just looks a bit "stuck on" - like it doesn't belong to his face.
The cover legendaries I'm not sold on yet. They look a bit like toys come to life - I think it's the gold bits that are stuck on everywhere. I have faith that they'll look better in the in game context though.
The cover legendaries I'm not sold on yet. They look a bit like toys come to life - I think it's the gold bits that are stuck on everywhere. I have faith that they'll look better in the in game context though.
DecoReturns
Member
Blame the customers then.
Pokemon sells more games per release than most entire franchises.
If the formula was truly "in need of a change", people would stop buying them like fans did with Assassin's Creed. AC's formula was flawed and people got bored.
But after staying strong for 20 years, it's obvious that the gameplay loop of pokemon is a very strong and universally liked one.
If the formula was truly "in need of a change", people would stop buying them like fans did with Assassin's Creed. AC's formula was flawed and people got bored.
But after staying strong for 20 years, it's obvious that the gameplay loop of pokemon is a very strong and universally liked one.
tbh if he thinks minor DotA changes are so important, he sounds like he has friends who're edgy and think they're too mature for Pokemon and only play DotA
Didn't this entire discussion spawn from you saying that none of the changes the series has made over the past 20 years have actually mattered as if it were a fact? Did you not also declare that turn-based RPGs were outdated as if it were a fact? Don't throw stones from glass houses now.
Because you still want to use your Pokemon well?
If a Pokemon has amazing SpA but literally not Atk, then obviously I'm not going to put Giga Impact on them, I'm going to use Hyper Beam. I don't even play competitively outside of minor dabbling, but I still want to actually use my Pokemon. Why do you play Pokemon at all if your going to treat each new one as just another one of several amorphous entities. This seems less about Pokemon being bad and you just being bad at Pokemon tbh. If I were you I'd just quit while I was ahe- Well actually you're already significantly behind since no one's going to take you seriously on this topic anymore, but you might as well save face and admit you don't know what you're talking about.
...so you think people buy the games but don't really want to?
Why would that happen?
Have you?
Except the fact that turn based RPGs is backed by an entire generation of sales data on consoles/handhelds/PCs?
Except the fact the the the vast majority of the changes that most people are arguing for are COMPLETELY behind the hood aside from prettier visuals and a few multi battles that a majority wont even know exist? Lets go do a poll of mid school kids about what all the stats mean and how the impact the moves. Lets ask them all if they know how a Sp. Attk stat affects only one ability out of a list of 20 and see how many of them get it right.
You mean, like Pokemon's sales?
ArchedThunder
Banned
This whole thing it extra hilarious to me because I personally think Pokémon could use a big shake up, only I think that shake up should just be the structure of the adventure and not the battle system.
BW was a good first step, it was a shame they back pedaled on story being a big focus with XY, hopefully they correct this with SM. Gyms should stay, I'd just rather they were more of a side thing.
BW was a good first step, it was a shame they back pedaled on story being a big focus with XY, hopefully they correct this with SM. Gyms should stay, I'd just rather they were more of a side thing.
Play the first game, and then play the latest game.
If you are still saying that the Games didn't change then you are either:
a) full of shit
or
b) blind
But since you wouldn't be able to be here if you were blind, option A is a given
it sure is seeing as how every gen has declined in sales from the previous with 1 exception, diamond/pearl outselling ruby/sapphire.
DecoReturns
Member
When Mewtwo was truly the strongest Pokemon ever.
Still the coolest one tho.
The Shadow Knight
Member
Bollocks, being easily accessible for the crowds but having incredible depth for those that care is masterful design.
It's pretty interesting how you dismissed sales data until you felt it benefited your argument lol.
ArchedThunder
Banned
XY is still selling and it's very near BW despite being on a sytem with a much smaller install base.
Dropping from 17 to 15 and then 15 again over the course of 10 years is not a decline worth mentioning.
Wait i thought sales don't matter?
I never dismissed it, I never said they were selling badly. I only stated that Raw sales numbers alone do not tell you the entire opinion of a game. Just because i buy a game doesnt mean i like everything about it. I.E i bought TLOU both the original and Ps4 version even though i fucking hated how bad the AI was.