Honestly the main reason the discourse around this game is annoying is that the whole idea of an edgy version of pokemon is juvenile as hell, but people are instead moralizing about stealing from fucking nintendo
It's sad too because I don't want edginess, I want Nintendo to just explore Pokemon like they're living creatures.
The worldbuilding is so shallow and the Pokedex entries don't make sense. And the new Pokemon roll out to replace the old ones (hate that it's called dexit).
It's frustrating to think about the proposed ideology of Pokemon about stewardship, compassion, and working together when the franchise itself is just that, a franchise.
It's frustrating to think about the proposed ideology of Pokemon about stewardship, compassion, and working together when the franchise itself is just that, a franchise.
Tangential to that, it always annoyed me growing up with the media and the games that key to all the stories is the idea of individual pokemon actually being important and growing meaningfully as part of a largely static team, but in the games they're just disposable type, stat, and move pools that get switched out or binned indefinitely and your static team at the end is a bunch of stuff you caught in the last fifth of the game or less. The one, singular exception to that in my experience was when I caught a shiny vulpix in one of the gym challenges in Sword (of all places), and that became my sweeper for the entire rest of the game and both DLCs, but that's the most edge case of all edge cases being something that was insanely rare and special in its own right, that was also a very strong and viable pokemon, with nearly perfect stats on top of that.
Like there's a huge disconnect between the sort of collecting gameplay and the story about growth and whatnot, since you're basically playing a looter shooter and the pokemon are just new weapon rolls to be evaluated and kept or tossed, and none of the franchise's mechanical attempts at fixing this have worked because they're always just limited gimmicks that can't get in the way of that core looter-shooter progression loop.
Consequently, I've always wanted to see something where a given pokemon's progression is more fluid and has higher peaks than just "this is a one stage low-stat trash mon and that's all it will ever be, bin" or "this has one mid-tier evolution that comes super early, good early game bruiser and then trash as soon as something better comes along," as long as you actually invest in it and keep it around. But I don't think Pokemon could ever do something like that, because that turns it into an RPG where pokemon are mechanically characters instead of weapons and the evolutions or whatever are like classes they prestige into instead of fixed forms.
I think there's something deeply contradictory in Pokemon's messaging that there is a quantifiable hierarchy in power, even in the anime. Training is great and everything, but a starter bird wouldn't win in a matchup with any fully evolved mon, let alone a legendary.
There's a cynicism that's passed off as realism that decides that one creature is inherently better than another. Is that biological essentialism? I had a similar issue in Steven Universe where Jasper was treated as a superior fighter to Amethyst regardless of training and tactics.
Like yeah, a physically weaker creature might not win in a battle of strength, but that doesn't mean there's no way to win a fight in another way. And even if not, it's fucked up that there is an inherent value system in place.
Then again all of the Pokemon values they express in the series falls apart when you look at the fact that it's possible to trade a Pokemon, and there's an incentive to do so. It really fucked me up as a kid seeing ash trade his Butterfree and then later feeling sad when Butterfree left on his own accord and was sad. Pokemon are depicted as sentient and it's bizarre at this point they still incentivize trading with the tagline: Gotta Catch'em All!
Training is great and everything, but a starter bird wouldn't win in a matchup with any fully evolved mon, let alone a legendary.
Ironically I was just thinking "like what if evolution trees were more fleshed out and went further, so some filler trash like pidgey ends up having a path to turn into the legendary birds or something comparable." And the more I thought about how, mechanically, that would work I came to the ironic conclusion that instead of pokemon being looter-shooter weapons, they should be more like the weapons from Monster Hunter in having trees and upgrades.
Then again all of the Pokemon values they express in the series falls apart when you look at the fact that it's possible to trade a Pokemon, and there's an incentive to do so. It really fucked me up as a kid seeing ash trade his Butterfree and then later feeling sad when Butterfree left on his own accord and was sad. Pokemon are depicted as sentient and it's bizarre at this point they still incentivize trading with the tagline: Gotta Catch'em All!
Yeah, that disconnect between how the story is just "they're real and smart and your friend" and everything else is "so we gotta sell two identical versions of the same game but with different collectables, and we gotta move all these gacha card packs, and..."
Like yeah, a physically weaker creature might not win in a battle of strength, but that doesn't mean there's no way to win a fight in another way. And even if not, it's fucked up that there is an inherent value system in place.
I've always thought that Pokemon should introduce the competitive tiers to the main game. Explain them as being the in-universe equivalent of weight classes - there's nothing wrong with being a featherweight, but it's understood that you shouldn't get put into the ring with a super heavyweight, because the competition favors certain physical attributes over others.
Hell, the games could be completely revitalized if they based more of the game mechanics around competitive battles. Teach the players about walls and sweepers, program smart opponents who play to win, cut out all of the XP grinding and the breeding for perfect stats shit and focus on the player getting better at the game instead of just increasing their numbers, etc.
this sounds like a formalisation of the smogon shit which i don't think im opposed to but i havent played a pokemon since X & Y so yeah. i dont think there's any point being made here, just nintendo making ubers real would be funny
try radical red sometime. it's a mod that forces you to learn competitive strategies and team building because the AI is not only playing to win, but it also has access to things like favorable terrain that you can't change.
I’ve long felt that friendship level should be explored much more deeply and be at minimum equally impactful as the rest of the stats combined.
Ash is objectively a bad trainer. His ability to befriend Pokémon he trains and coaches in a talentless manner transcends the rest (except for every time he reaches a final).
The power of friendship and bonding with companion creatures is the main thing about the show.
in the games they're just disposable type, stat, and move pools that get switched out or binned indefinitely and your static team at the end is a bunch of stuff you caught in the last fifth of the game or less.
That's on you, Pokemon games are generally pretty easy and you can beat them with most any party. I beat gold with pretty much just my feraligator because I was a dumb kid who didn't level anyone else.
That's true, but the games are designed with the intention for players to replace Pokemon in your roster. The anime did it too, with Ash changing out his team between regions and only occasionally revisiting them.
There's a level of disposability baked into the series.
The worldbuilding is so shallow and the Pokedex entries don't make sense.
they're written by children
That's the cute meme, but the reality is that they were written by the developers without much forethought. I read that post about Diagetic Essentialism a few days ago, and I know it's splitting hairs to over invest in worldbuilding, but I think such a popular series could stand to be a little more responsible in how it explores the relationships between humans and animals. Even fictional ones.
I don't want an age-up or edgy story, I just want the world to be depicted with more depth. I just want to know where the ham comes from when you make sandwiches in the new games. Or just don't have meat. Nobody asked for it and it just raises more questions.
Signed,
An autistic person with terrible luck in special interests.
I mean, it just kinda sounds like you want Monster Hunter then (or maybe MH: Stories given it's a turn based team RPG ala Pokemon).
I just want Pokemon to actually do more of its early premise of humans and animals working together in community. I would love a team-based mon game, but I really just want to see Pokemon answer and explore the philosophical questions present in the series.
I agree on all points and that just makes me all the more passionate about getting rid of IP laws and letting an ambitious fan write the Pokemon game we deserve. Liberate all Pokemon!
I was really hoping to find a mod that recognized that N/plasma were completely right and that you as the player should join them. alas, no such mod exists.
nah, i'm moralising because you can sell people into slavery, protecting nintendo is incredibly cringe
What if you could say yes to join Team Rocket on Nugget Bridge?
I recall a romhack where you could be team rocket.
It was edgy teenage nonsense, but it had some ok to decent moments.
I've played that and it's okay! I like that you get a Zubat as your starter 'mon and every time you battle with Red you get trounced.
people are instead moralizing about stealing from fucking nintendo
I've noticed this a lot. people who defend intellectual property (already cringe) often go above and beyond what it's supposed to entail (mega cringe). They think that not just the actual creative content is protected by copyright law, but that anything conceivably closely resembling it is as well. Imagine if, for example, the guy who made Stardew Valley was sued into oblivion for "stealing Harvest Moon." Like. What? Corporations would love to establish such a Draconian understanding of creativity as a legal precedent.
If we didn’t exist under capitalism and I didn’t make my livelihood off of selling art I would say “yeah whatever let’s free-for-all this shit and see how weird we can get with it” but we’re converging on a situation of using ai and shit like this that is a threat to workers in creative industries. Eventually all corporations will just adopt the new playbook and cut workers out too, but I think there’s some legitimacy to being a little concerned about how this stuff shakes out over the next 5 years or so.
a situation of using ai and shit like this that is a threat to workers in creative industries.
Isn't the case here just traditional asset ripping and plagiarism against a notoriously litigious huge corporation? There's no way AI was involved given the models are all literally just official pokemon meshes with some changes here and there.
Yea I think mostly, I do think the dev has a history of using it in other places which is why people were wondering but it does seem like it’s mostly traditional asset “theft.” Mostly what I’m going off of is how the discourse has been bc a lot of tech bros have glommed on to it to use as a jumping off point for excusing ai stuff
Nintendrones are the most brainwashed corporate bootlickers I've ever encountered
Speed running to be the most annoying gaming fanbase
I've always been aware the world of Pokemon is a lot darker than the games let on
such a sophisticated mind right hereLol I don't like bullying people for critically analysing their media however silly it is but I can't stop this exact thought from crossing my mind whenever I hear someone saying "you know Disney movies are actually really dark and--"
Totally get what you're saying. Analyzing your media is good. Even finding or making an arguement for darker themes or making up a "darker" version of non dark media is fine, even sometimes great or funny in a good and intentional way.
And i don't have a problem with someone doing a dark analysis of pokemon, whether i agree with it or not. What i think deserves derision is how it comes off as "unlike you, I a smart and serious person was always aware of intended darkness and adult themes within this massive commercial children's media. You may not like it, but this is what peak analysis of Pokémon is."
This is a game for adults!!! I scream holding up a picture of a little uwu pink haired cartoon creature holding a Tommy gun
It is at best a game for 13 year old boys
This is giving 14 year old boys too much credit. They’ve matured exactly zero over the course of that year, they just got better and being little shits.
I like Pokemon because wooper is cute and I like seeing the funny animals. Yes the world has a massive cognitive dissonance where the story is about becoming friends with Pokemon and the gameplay is about kidnapping and using them to fight. I don't care. Every 10 year old has realised that about Pokemon.
I'm glad Pokemons monopoly is being challenged because they might have to actually try more than they did with SV but I want people to shut up about Palworld. It's just ARK with Pokemon instead of dinosaurs. I should play ARK now I think about it
God this conversation again. Ever since 1996, kids and adults have done the age old, "WOULDN'T YOU WANT A REALISTIC POKEMON WITH BLOOD AND SEX AND VIOLENCE?" Because that's something the series was severely needing.
For real though, if Nintendo sues Palworld and wins then you can say goodbye to any spiritual successor to any game ever getting made ever again. I don't think they will, but they fukken might.
Given that both companies are Japanese, and Palworld's development has been very public over the past 3 years prior to the recent early access release... if there was something to sue for, Nintendo would have been on it years ago IMO
This is basically just the "Barney is gay and I want to shoot him" shit being rehashed
I like palworld a lot, but this mf is cringe. I love Nintendo games, but fuck Nintendo for putting the same raggedy game out over and over. Let me force my Arbok to build me a house at gunpoint goddammit.
I actually like that Nintendo is getting some competition in some of its long entrenched genres. I recently started playing an early access game called Dinkum that's an Animal Crossing competitor, and it's refreshing to see it go places where Nintendo won't (there's some light combat, a more robust terraforming system, a way bigger island, and more importantly doing mundane shit like going in and out of buildings or catching fish/insects doesn't lock you into 5+ seconds sequences). It's still a little janky at times and rough around the edges but it's a very entertaining game if you liked (or tried to like) the most recent Animal Crossing.
Try out My Time at Portia/Sandrock
Not quite the same but the vibes are great
I cant go back to pokemon either cause its a garbage game for babies
isn't Shin Megami Tensei already edgy pokemon? what am i missing here?
3d survival crafting guns edgy pokemon is pretty different from top-down jrpg turn based battle edgy pokemon.
Pokemon is technically less edgy shin megami tensei since smt came first
Hell, Megami Tensei is from 1986 (not that good of a game tbh. Megami Tensei II otoh is surprisingly good, in spite of some old age related jank)
People seem to forget that the monster collecting rpg thing was gonna be a craze and pokemon happened to be the spark. There's more subtle lead ups as well but tomogatchi should be enough
“I hope Nintendo’s lawsuit fails”
Good news, they’re not going to sue them, never were.
just like real life
I'm so twisted
