• 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.

Pokémon Community Thread 3: "Soon, All of Hoenn Will Be Under Its Withering Glare…"

B

Black-Wind

Member
JennyTablina said:
This is pretty true of any DLC though, most isn't a necessity at all, Cosmetic character skins ect.

Also as another poster noted, Pokemon's main demo is kids, Game freak have been doing this long enough to know how to be responsible. Kids are not good at all with knowing their game might not be complete. You stick Ash's hat up on some DLC purchase portal, kid pesters mum and dad because they ABSOLUTELY must have that one item Nintendo made you pay real moneybucks for. You eventually get Fox News-esque stories about how one kid got hold of their parents credit card and spent $200 so he could dress up in all of Ash's various uniforms.

Nintendo don't take chances with this sort of thing, they don't want that sort of thing happening on their watch and make sure that Microsoft Live/ Apple iOS purchasing disasters are not easy to do, or that any DLC is not so major a requirement to the title that people feel they need to take measures to get what they want.

Personally I think if GF want to do some kind of update where the fashions can be added to via Wifi, thats awesome but like...not even Style Savvy/Style Boutique did in-game DLC right?

One of the reasons I love Nintendo is because they don't lock down their games to DLC (that's on the disc really) type unlocks. Animal Crossing's promo items are always free, event Pokemon are pretty much free. That's awesome, and I hope it never changes.
Click to expand...

Thanks for making my point clearer lol!
 
Aggrotek

Aggrotek

Member
JennyTablina said:
This is pretty true of any DLC though, most isn't a necessity at all, Cosmetic character skins ect.

Also as another poster noted, Pokemon's main demo is kids, Game freak have been doing this long enough to know how to be responsible. Kids are not good at all with knowing their game might not be complete. You stick Ash's hat up on some DLC purchase portal, kid pesters mum and dad because they ABSOLUTELY must have that one item Nintendo made you pay real moneybucks for. You eventually get Fox News-esque stories about how one kid got hold of their parents credit card and spent $200 so he could dress up in all of Ash's various uniforms.

Nintendo don't take chances with this sort of thing, they don't want that sort of thing happening on their watch and make sure that Microsoft Live/ Apple iOS purchasing disasters are not easy to do, or that any DLC is not so major a requirement to the title that people feel they need to take measures to get what they want.

Personally I think if GF want to do some kind of update where the fashions can be added to via Wifi, thats awesome but like...not even Style Savvy/Style Boutique did in-game DLC right?

One of the reasons I love Nintendo is because they don't lock down their games to DLC (that's on the disc really) type unlocks. Animal Crossing's promo items are always free, event Pokemon are pretty much free. That's awesome, and I hope it never changes.
Click to expand...

This is all true, but I'm not arguing that Nintendo will or won't do it, I'm saying that it doesn't make them the "bad guy" if they were. It's a business decision and it doesn't make them bad if they do it, or good if they don't.
 
S

Snacks the sober sea lion

Member
I forgot about Gengar. That seems like the best bet.

And it doesn't seem far-fetched (
insert Farfetch'd sprite
) to have free items that are delivered through Wifi, but that depends on if GameFreak has the initiative and means to do it similarly to New Leaf.
 
B

Black-Wind

Member
Aggrotek said:
This is all true, but I'm not arguing that Nintendo will or won't do it, I'm saying that it doesn't make them the "bad guy" if they were. It's a business decision and it doesn't make them bad if they do it, or good if they don't.
Click to expand...

Sure, "bad" and "good" are subjective terms.

But Horse Armor DLC can be VERY anti-customer in the wrong context (For example, reasonably priced outfits in a buy/free-to-play MMO like GW2 isn't bad) and, in games geared towards kids, is exploitative to say the least.

So it comes down to if you think anti-customer practices are "bad" or not. That's what people mean when they say "becoming the bad guy". They mean that they're trying to pop ever dime outta the player and going along this trend of "it's OK to buy DLC, devs gotta get that green!" mind set that grossly over looks the context.
 
Q

Qurupeke

Member
So, with 4 stage evolutions confirmed, when we should expect Dual type moves or Pokemon with 3 types? Well, possibly never because they're too confusing but one can believe right?
 
Z

Zeroth

Member
Black-Wind said:
Sure, "bad" and "good" are subjective terms.

But Horse Armor DLC can be VERY anti-customer in the wrong context (For example, reasonably priced outfits in a buy/free-to-play MMO like GW2 isn't bad) and, in games geared towards kids, is exploitative to say the least.

So it comes down to if you think anti-customer practices are "bad" or not. That's what people mean when they say "becoming the bad guy". They mean that they're trying to pop ever dime outta the player and going along this trend of "it's OK to buy DLC, devs gotta get that green!" mind set that grossly over looks the context.
Click to expand...

But the original idea was just make the game free and make stuff like clothes be paid. You know, cosmetic stuff, like what TF2 does. The problem is that Free to Play is plagued with bad executions of this, so it's pretty common to people just assume the model is horrible. Would you really call TF2's model as "anti-consumer"?

Finally, although I understand the "kids will be playing" argument, it's worth noting that kids play F2P stuff on their phones already. The feared abuse of their lack of experience with money is understandable, but it's not something that would be starting with this idea.
 
A

Anbec7

Member
So uhmm the hype got me and I pre-ordened Pokemon X

But it's been a long time since I played my last Pokemon games were Ruby and Sapphire...

Any tips? lol xD should I not battle online because I will get bodied? I mean I watched some streams and man the game has evolved..
 
M

MarkusRJR

Member
So pumped to pick up Pokémon X when it comes out, along with a 2DS. Just paid off my pre-orders for both.

Do we know just how fast/slow battles are? One of my big worries is that it'll be a D/P situation since the 3D models might make for slower/longer attack animations. I literally fell asleep multiple times trying to beat Pokémon Diamond.
 
Cute Dragon Here

Cute Dragon Here

Member
Anbec7 said:
So uhmm the hype got me and I pre-ordened Pokemon X

But it's been a long time since I played my last Pokemon games were Ruby and Sapphire...

Any tips? lol xD should I not battle online because I will get bodied? I mean I watched some streams and man the game has evolved..
Click to expand...

Haha, just have fun, take your time, and stuff. I'm more of a collector. Perhaps you can try battling with people that you know here instead.
 
Z

zroid

Banned
I thought this was pretty neat\

ku-bigpic67pdyu.jpg


source: https://twitter.com/ugusyan/status/382341238000611328
 
B

Black-Wind

Member
Zeroth said:
But the original idea was just make the game free and make stuff like clothes be paid. You know, cosmetic stuff, like what TF2 does. The problem is that Free to Play is plagued with bad executions of this, so it's pretty common to people just assume the model is horrible. Would you really call TF2's model as "anti-consumer"?

Finally, although I understand the "kids will be playing" argument, it's worth noting that kids play F2P stuff on their phones already. The feared abuse of their lack of experience with money is understandable, but it's not something that would be starting with this idea.
Click to expand...

F2P Pokemon?
Terrible idea. :/

Cosmetic DLC works for games that have a huge Multiplayer focus such as TF2 or MMOs with mature enough demographics (that's my point about context ... those games aren't Pokemon). Pokemon is not a MMO or anything like that ... so there's far less of a need to feel like you look unique compared to other players. Going F2P and having $5 fedoras and other useless appearance items would be a HUUGGEEE mistake for that reason alone. Then factor in the child exploitation (ya know, the type that leads to stories you hear about when a child gets hold of their parents itunes) and you have a cluster-fuck.

I think everyone would be much happier with the current set-up ... as in, just buy the whole game and get the whole game.
 
D

Dark Orchid

Member
Zeer0id said:
I thought this was pretty neat\

ku-bigpic67pdyu.jpg


source: https://twitter.com/ugusyan/status/382341238000611328
Click to expand...

I like the idea, but there's a few things wrong that I wish I hadn't noticed:

-The Gen I coloring is incorrect, the sprites would be using the same pallet as the overworld.
-The Gen I-Gen III character sprites seem to have been scaled to an incorrect resolution at some point. As a result, their eyes all look like the Green Wigglytuff sprite.
 
Z

Zeroth

Member
Black-Wind said:
F2P Pokemon?
Terrible idea. :/

Cosmetic DLC works for games that have a huge Multiplayer focus such as TF2 or MMOs with mature enough demographics (that's my point about context ... those games aren't Pokemon). Pokemon is not a MMO or anything like that ... so there's far less of a need to feel like you look unique compared to other players. Going F2P and having $5 fedoras and other useless appearance items would be a HUUGGEEE mistake for that reason alone. Then factor in the child exploitation (ya know, the type that leads to stories you hear about when a child gets hold of their parents itunes) and you have a cluster-fuck.

I think everyone would be much happier with the current set-up ... as in, just buy the whole game and get the whole game.
Click to expand...

That's your opinion, and it's fine. I was just commenting on your perception about F2P.
 
Q

qq more

Member
Dark Orchid said:
I like the idea, but there's a few things wrong that I wish I hadn't noticed:

-The Gen I coloring is incorrect, the sprites would be using the same pallet as the overworld.
-The Gen I-Gen III character sprites seem to have been scaled to an incorrect resolution at some point. As a result, their eyes all look like the Green Wigglytuff sprite.
Click to expand...

Gen I's tiles are also very poorly pasted and resized wrong. Look at the trainer at the top. Look at the grass and flower tiles.

Also the sign... some of its pixels are missing.... erm.
 
B

Black-Wind

Member
C

ColtraineGF

Member
To clarify:

Team Fortress 2 started out as a retail game, part of the Orange Box. It moved on to a F2P model 4 years after it released. Valve could afford to experiment like this because:
1. They had an alternate revenue stream in Steam.
2. The game itself had most likely made back its dev costs and then some.

The approach taken by Valve is probably going to be different than a game which sets out from the beginning to take advantage of the freemium model.

Example article: The Top F2P Monetization Tricks

That said, it's certainly GF's choice to try and do a free game with outfits (though it's hard to say whether the main audience would care to pay for MC costumes en masse when they mainly play for the Pokemon...).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LTTP: Pokémon Scarlet........this is painful.
15
937
Saiyan-Rox replied
Community Threads reminder!
Community
2
583
Maiden Voyage replied
Pokémon World Championships disqualifies pros with hacked creatures, sparking community debate
News Drama
19
2K
Paltheos replied
The Pokémon Company is “having conversations” about how to ensure the quality of future games under its frequent release schedule, it’s said.
Game Dev 2
62
4K
PonyStation4 replied
Crunchyroll Announces the Removal of Its Comment Section Across All Platforms To 'Reduce Harmful Content'
News 2
58
4K
StreetsofBeige replied
Top Bottom