• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Moving to 3D and adding online feature killed Pokemon's charm

I've been trying to articulate why Pokemon hasn't hit for me in recent Installments. Is it the poor or lazy design in Pokemon? That could be looked passed. Continuing to appeal to first time fans when the series is now multi generational? Yeah maybe.

But I feel what really done it for me is the modernization in visual, the need to go fully 3D and the introduction of Online.

I'm not saying these things are bad in any way and that Gamefreak should not have incorporated them. It was in fact Inevitable.

Moving Pokemon into full 3D should have been a bigger concern to both GameFreak and Nintendo giving the magnitude of challenges they never faced. It is one thing to just make Pokemon 3D, but the 3D animation, unique movements, and attacks haven't been fully realized in 3D (While I would argue the Monster Hunter has some of the most unique 3D animations, they too have peaked in that category recycling monsters and movements) we are talking over 1000s of Pokemon now. This isn't even considering Nintendo's hardware philosophy to be able to handle such a fidelity. (We haven't even mention 3D environment and it challenges.)

Online features in the main series, while welcomed, is missing something Pokemon GO recaptures,
ironically, from the older games; physical coop. Not just local coop

Pokemon's creator caught bugs as a child. The older games, with the Gameboy link cable or the DS wireless connection and Pokemon GO, successfully simulate that virtually. Pokemon Go as mentioned uses online to physically move people. You don't really get that in mainline series.

The real charm that has been lost the most is audio. As an audiophile. Some of the best chiptune music have come from GameFreak. All of which has gone now.


But the 2D graphical fidelity from Crystal to Ruby and Sapphire and Diamond and Pearl Mixed 2.5D that followed was peaked visuals and audio and should have stayed as the staple for the series.

What do you think?
 
Last edited:

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
I personally was never fan of Pokemon series, when it came to monster collecting game I was much more in to Shin Megami Tensei series simply because I likes Demon designs way more than Pokemon designs.
 

MirageMew2

Member
Online is the most compelling part and a staple of the franchise since 2006 and what you suggest out of Pokémon Go is the most hated aspect of the game.
 

Spukc

always chasing the next thrill
il_794xN.3614881974_e92c.jpg
ruby_ss3.jpg




Nah 20.000 pokemons killed it
Also gamefreak has to be the worst dev to assign to pokemon.
And this has been since the gba.
1 gen behind tech
 
Last edited:

POKEYCLYDE

Member
Pokemon is a victim of it's own success. So popular that it doesn't need to deliver quality for the games to sell. You call it the "modernization" in visual, but there is nothing modern about the 3D visuals of the latest Pokemon games.

Personally, I believe that there are many different visual styles that Pokemon could go down, but it would require a reboot of sorts.

resize


A 3D or 2.5D with this visual style would be fantastic. Even going with a higher fidelity 3D or an Octopath style would be great.

However, that would require a ton of work. Work Gamefreak doesn't want to do, and why would they when the trash they release every other year sells upwards of 10-20 million units?
 

Whitecrow

Banned
I agree.

For me, 2D and sprites limitation had the advantage of leaving a lot for the imagination, and first gens had some really badass designs.
Then 3D came, and flat colorful textures and cartoony style ruined everything.

Also, knowing people IRL, asking what Pokemon they had, and change some lv100 shit, and talk about some widespread cheats that were totally BS, or not, having only 10 years, will always be better than any online shit you can do today.
 

Soltype

Member
Pokémon lost its charm many years ago ,well before 3D. The art styles started getting all over the place, too many Pokemon, etc. The first two games had a certain air to it, from the music to the art style there seemed to be cohesion. I read that they thought gold and silver would be the last game so they poured everything they could into it, and it shows.
 

BlackTron

Member
Nah 20.000 pokemons killed it

I can say this is what killed Pokemon for me personally. I am glad I was there for gen 1. Did everything even MANY TCG battles and collected the whole base set. With gen 2, I just saw an endless sink of the same shit this time with badly hastily designed Pokemon. Stopped collecting cards full stop and Silver was my last game.

I played LeafGreen on an Anbernic a lifetime later and it's pretty much the best thing ever, but even then I wish it only had gen 1 Pokemon so a completed Pokedex meant 151.
 

Kenpachii

Member
They introduced way to much pokemons in newer generations and legendary's. Also because of this the art and looks of said pokemon games felt more randomized then anything, no soul in them.

Then obviously them rebooting the same story line for another 30 times isn't something that inspires also.
 

Soodanim

Member
Pokémon is cursed to suffer from incapable devs. Game freak can't handle anything beyond sprites, and Niantic can't handle anything at all.

I want to like Pokémon games, but devs get in the way of that. I haven't touched a console game since Sun/Moon disappointed me. I only play Go because it's free and there's a community that surrounds it.
 

Shut0wen

Banned
Disagree, sword and shield is one of best pokemon games since x/y, only issue was lack of pokemon but everything else was perfect
 

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
The only experience I've had with Pokémon is when my son had the games on his 3DS.

I can't comment on the online aspect, but after seeing 2D (White and White 2) and 3D(X and Sun) I think 3D is the best way forward.

However, Nintendo should move onto not only huge, 3D open worlds, but also go for a super realistic style.

Imagine Pokémon with a world like Red Dead 2, with cities as big as GTA 5. Now mix in hyper realistic art style, and a very adult story line with mature themes, and you have a recipe world domination.
 
The problem is trying to continue the pace of Pokemon games in this era where games take longer to develop.

They used to come out with a new mainline pokemon game every 3-4 years.

The decision to make Pokemon Arceus at the same time as Scarlet and Violet was obviously more than they could handle, just as the decision to make Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee as their first Switch games was a mistake.

They should be spacing out their releases rather than increasing their pace. That's the real issue, not just a move to 3d.
 

Mownoc

Member
I don't think it's either of those for me. It's either the design of the world and Pokémon or I just can't enjoy them without nostalgia anymore. (Though I had no problem finishing Ruby last year which wasn't really that nostalgic for me as I'd never done it.)

Pearl was fine, I think the global trade centre was good. But I can see how people who had a lot of IRL friends that played Pokémon may feel otherwise.
 
Last edited:

SoraNoKuni

Member
Honestly, I think they should have gone the zelda approach from 2d to 3d.
Gamefreak is a mediocre dev studio in everything technical.
 

deriks

4-Time GIF/Meme God
Wasn't 3D's or online stuff that is to blame, but because there's too much content and less quality in the games

Persona games are kinda like Pokémon, and almost 30 years later we are getting the sixth game, and like was 5, chances are that it's going to be the shit. It's not really a fair comparison, but we are getting Pokémon games in basically every two or three years, and gets a little tired to the developers and to the players to have a thousand animals to catch, and most of them are too weird to like
 

Sethbacca

Member
The 3ds 3d titles were fantastic and retained a lot of the charm of the classics. The Switch titles I'm a little more on the fence about. I think they'd have been a lot better in the hands of a competent developer who wasn't just using the Pokemon license as a money printer.
 

STARSBarry

Gold Member
Victor Omega Victor Omega

I think Josh sums it up perfectly



He starts at 1:43

The issue with modern age gaming is that all the barriers are removed, this means you put less into a game, and therefore what you get out of it feels less impactful, because you don't have to work for it.
 
Last edited:

Ceadeus

Member
Back then, during the Gameboy generation, it sure was cool as hell to see so many kids at my school playing during recreation.

2D sprites were always more charming. Now kids and young adult play from home alone, and these games are ugly af. Pokemon was never meant to go full 3D imo. Old sounds effects has so much to do with charm and nostalgia too.
 

bosnianpie

Member
We haven't been the target audience of these games for two decades my friend. RBY felt magic because we were 12 years old when it came out.

But yeah - same thing can be said about Mario I guess but Nintendo made Wonder work well for older players aswell. Game Freak screams low effort these days, which is painfully noticeable when comparing Pokémon with other series in the same range.
 

squidilix

Member
I realized this when I playing Pokemon Coral (Rom Hack)... I'm pretty shocked this was a GBC game.. and... the demo was fking good?

I've played Pokemon Ultra Moon / Ultra Sun (my first full 3D since the 4G). This is maybe... the worst experience in my gaming life... everythings is.... easy, too many cinematics, no adventure feeling because always a NPC is behind you to help you..., I cant understand how people can enjoy this? Everything is on your face... 0 difficult

We can say many thing... but Pokémon gen 1, gen 2 (GOAT), gen 3 (IGN Was right), even the gen 4 are a least a good game and a good JRPG, not just a "Pokemon Product"
 

Hudo

Member
I personally was never fan of Pokemon series, when it came to monster collecting game I was much more in to Shin Megami Tensei series simply because I likes Demon designs way more than Pokemon designs.
You can also make a harem of female demons, which is what I, as a certified coomer, deeply appreciate about SMT.
 
Last edited:

Ev1L AuRoN

Member
I have a lot of nostalgia from the GBC games, love to play to this day, the music the pixel art, everything is perfect to me. These new Pokémon games I really don't care, I don't watch the new cartons and have on investment on the new generic beasts, also the games today feel so cheap, on GBC the game was simple because it was running on a 8bit handheld system, and they put so much charm and finesse into that cartridge. Pokémon games today are embarrassingly bad.
 

Kataploom

Gold Member
This guy have a great analysis of why 3D models look worse than 2D sprites, as a former BA in Graphic design myself I fully agree. It's in spanish but you can maybe auto-translate captions:



I also think the focus on "more more more pokemons more more more catch them all!! we'll add more more more!!!" is what made the franchise unsustainable. I was almost staggered by how sooooo many people complain in Sw&Sh because not all pokemon were in the game, claiming all their previous games pokemon were being left behind... I mean, had people REALLY carried all their pokemon from Gameboy and NDS entries to these days? I was shocked, like, WTF?! I didn't even know it was such a strong factor for the brand, never even crossed my mind.

They have to stop making new pokemons and start making entries without newer pokemons (well, maybe 1-3 newer pokemons for collectors), they can make new pokemon stories based on existing regions, etc. And then release like a bunch of new gen pokemons once per console generation... Or even maybe spread new pokemons across different games so they can focus on game quality instead.
 

BlackTron

Member
I have a lot of nostalgia from the GBC games, love to play to this day, the music the pixel art, everything is perfect to me. These new Pokémon games I really don't care, I don't watch the new cartons and have on investment on the new generic beasts, also the games today feel so cheap, on GBC the game was simple because it was running on a 8bit handheld system, and they put so much charm and finesse into that cartridge. Pokémon games today are embarrassingly bad.

Pokemon on Game Boy = best work on the whole system

Pokemon on Switch = well..........
 

Saber

Member
What killed pokemon is not online.

What killed pokemon is GF. Pokemon was never meant to be open world and never meant to be about exploration. Pokemon was about catching all pokemons and having trainer battles with both people and players. You basically almost never do battles because the games does not force/incentive you into battles(and when you battle npcs they have 1 pokemon 90% of time) in order to progress and theres no reason to battle other players as battles became too much about gimmicks rather than the fun stuff(animations, strategies, etc). Just look at Pokemon competitive scene where people aways use the same pokemons because...theres no reason to use your favorites as the games does not allows all of them to be used. They took away features from the games with no tradebacks and are use most of them as a selling point.
Theres no reason to interact with NPCs as they already talk near you with random useless retard ramblings.
Their main activity, Tera Raids, is a sonority polution with a bunch of extreme spam of sound effects from both pokemon cries and battle effects. The good music from Pokemon games is basically dead, trade with some gen z dumbass who thinks poop is music.

And I'm being generous to not talk about visual art, graphics, animations from both monsters and human models, performance, soundtrack and other points where SV fails miserably.
 
Last edited:

Banjo64

cumsessed
Online no, 3D yes.

Another issue is once you’ve played any Pokémon game at 2x speed, the normal speed seems like you are playing in slow motion.

Everything from text speed to battling to movement is g l a c i a l .

Game Freak are just a technically incompetent studio, so we’ll never get anything gorgeous like Octopath. TBH, compared to Gen 1-4 I don’t think they’ll ever give us anything worth playing again (great for kids though).
 

Holammer

Member
There are plenty of problems with recent pokemon, but I think the move to 3D makes the player consider the absurdity of the setting even more. When it suddenly needs to look like a lived in world. It's kinda stupid in the 2D games too, but I never got the same cognitive dissonance. It's a vidya game!

Maybe a reason why Pokemon Legends kinda worked better for me compared with Scarlet & Violet? There's only one village and wilderness everywhere.
 

MrA

Member
I'd say being in a soul crushing routine of make a product you stopped caring about a decade ago did,
If the Pokemans didn't make so much money I'd say its time to change developer
 

Fbh

Member
What I'd like to see is a new Pokemon game build on the style of the last 2 hours of Scarlet/Violet.
At the end of Scarlet/Violet you get to this area where for a couple of hours it almost feels like a proper RPG. There's a semblance of level design instead of everything just being big mostly empty and flat fields. And there's a bit of a story and mystery, and you've got a party and they talk as you walk around (no voice acting of course)
Like look at this:
4.jpg


It almost looks like someone put a bit of effort into the design of the location.


3D pokemon is fine. It just need a more competent developer or at least a proper budget.
 
Last edited:

Vandole

Member
I've been on video game message boards for longer than pokémon has existed. And ever since the GBA games, I've seen people talk about how the series isn't good anymore. They give examples that are completely meaningful to themselves, they say a Gamefreak is a terrible developer, and they say the series is doomed. And then a year or two later a new edition comes out and sells millions and millions of copies.

The originals came out when I was in college, and I enjoyed them (or at least Red). I also enjoyed Crystal, but then never managed to sink more than about 5 hours in any of the other installments. I've had three kids who all enjoy the first game or two that they were introduced to, but then ultimately stop playing the series.

Anyway, this was a long way to get to my point. To me it just seems like the idea is fresh the first couple times you play it, and then no matter what features get added, the core gameplay just gets very stale. Either that, or the series ultimately evolved to really focus on kids under the age of 12. At any rate, in a world that is overflowing the video games, there's no reason why everyone shouldn't just move on and find something new.
 

KXVXII9X

Member
I definitely noticed a change since gen 6. I actually liked Gen 6 and actually liked the online features (have no idea why they didn't just stick with that). At least things in that generation felt new. I did also appreciate parts of Sun and Moon. A few changes to Sun and Moon and it could be my favorite 3D game for sure.

Game Freak is inexperienced with 3D and it shows. Especially with making things feel dynamic and alive. Genius Sonority did such a great job with Colosseum and XD. I only played Colosseum, but they managed to sell the sense of scale in both the arenas and Pokémon. The music also was a big help. It just oozed character. Colosseum made me want more out of the games since Gen 3. I was that person to the comment above. The formula got stale fairly eventually.

I think the big thing that made the earlier gens feel charming was that they were more abstract in visuals. I could let my mind wander in how everything was playing out. The quick animations and sprites did a good job at selling you a scene. A static, dynamic pose sold more emotion and energy than the dull lifeless animations of the 3D games. I also loved visiting the towns and filling in the scenery. I also think getting older and experiencing more JRPGs/RPGs took away the appeal of the series as it used to be the main game I played.
 

KXVXII9X

Member
What killed pokemon is not online.

What killed pokemon is GF. Pokemon was never meant to be open world and never meant to be about exploration. Pokemon was about catching all pokemons and having trainer battles with both people and players. You basically almost never do battles because the games does not force/incentive you into battles(and when you battle npcs they have 1 pokemon 90% of time) in order to progress and theres no reason to battle other players as battles became too much about gimmicks rather than the fun stuff(animations, strategies, etc). Just look at Pokemon competitive scene where people aways use the same pokemons because...theres no reason to use your favorites as the games does not allows all of them to be used. They took away features from the games with no tradebacks and are use most of them as a selling point.
Theres no reason to interact with NPCs as they already talk near you with random useless retard ramblings.
Their main activity, Tera Raids, is a sonority polution with a bunch of extreme spam of sound effects from both pokemon cries and battle effects. The good music from Pokemon games is basically dead, trade with some gen z dumbass who thinks poop is music.

And I'm being generous to not talk about visual art, graphics, animations from both monsters and human models, performance, soundtrack and other points where SV fails miserably.
I played Pokémon since Red and Blue, and exploration was the series staple. It wasn't meant to be an open world, but it was meant to be explored. The more you explored, the better items, Pokémon, and experience you got to level your Pokémon. There were some alternative paths, and some optional legendries. The game had puzzles that lead to different areas and Pokémon. Different NPC shared secrets and hints that would be helpful. I think gen 5 was where exploration was scaled back. They then started to make the games more open starting with the wild areas in Sword and Shield.
 

Sleepwalker

Member
If you grew up playing pokemon you dreamed of watching them in complete size in the overworld and also online play or even mmo style pokemon. So no, these things didn't ruin Pokemon. The devs did.
 

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
i see a lot of people mentioning specifically gen 1-4 but not gen 5. I play black and white on DS and I quite enjoy it despite me swearing off Pokemon in the past. I've not played any of the previous games, remake or original.
 

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
This guy have a great analysis of why 3D models look worse than 2D sprites, as a former BA in Graphic design myself I fully agree. It's in spanish but you can maybe auto-translate captions:
I mean yeah but how is Gamefreak supposed to compete with that? The guy says (Google's auto translate is actually pretty handy) that 2D leaves more to the imagination. How can 3D do that? your head will always have the idealized version of what you want Charizard to look like, it'd be pretty damn hard to go into the mind of every kid and then animate a new, different animation of Charizard for every kid's specific desires and wants. & that's not even getting into the adult pokemon fandom, which is uh.... yeah.
 
Last edited:

Saber

Member
I played Pokémon since Red and Blue, and exploration was the series staple. It wasn't meant to be an open world, but it was meant to be explored. The more you explored, the better items, Pokémon, and experience you got to level your Pokémon. There were some alternative paths, and some optional legendries. The game had puzzles that lead to different areas and Pokémon. Different NPC shared secrets and hints that would be helpful. I think gen 5 was where exploration was scaled back. They then started to make the games more open starting with the wild areas in Sword and Shield.

It wasn't mean to be explored like in a open world, thats what I meant. It was supposed to be straight routes, and those routes can be further explored to find additional routes, itens, caves etc. But in the end they are all linear routes, and that helps the player not only exploring but finding specific mons and focus on specific locations(like named caves and such).
Open worlds are meant to be explored in a different approach, one that gives freedom. But pokemon is not about freedom, you are supposed to beat trainers to get stronger, fight gyms in order to beat the league(or similars), etc. The reason for that is that is helps trainers to accordly with the supposed level of the area. Just like rpgs, its a sequence to guide the trainer. This does not exist in SV.
The example you gave about NPCs is something I talked in my post. SV npcs are 90% completelly useless, unless find a specific npc that already is saying beforehand it's an event. People tend to say that the process of talking with a npc is "boring", what I found boring is passing through npcs and a bubble of dialogue appears above him sayin "slurp". This is laziest game they ever created.
 
Last edited:
I still argue that Online is a doorway to GaaS and none of us want that for Pokemon.
You cannot want a Fully 3D multi region, multi gen, MMO like Pokemon game and not get GaaS.
 
Top Bottom