If innovation is for indie games only why the hell are we still buying games from big corporations. If they can't get their crap together and come out with something genuinely interesting why keep throwing money at them so they'll keep making mediocre and formulaic games?
There's sticking with a style and then there's just sheer bad game design. Do pokemon games absolutely require a rehash of the same asinine plot every iteration? Do they need to innundate you with slow-moving text while in battle? Instead of, for example, saying "rain continued to fall," couldn't they, you know, make it look like it's raining?
The game plays like an extraordinarily dated RPG. They've barely done anything to improve or streamline the process, and in most cases it feels like a chore. The story is boring, repetitive and cliche, and after that you're left with one of two things: leveling up your pokemon or catching them all. The second, I'll grant, can have a certain element of entertainment to it (like with legendaries, for example), but the first is as tedious as it is in any other RPG.
Pokemon is a stale and stodgy franchise. They've done little to improve on the formula, and the fact that they still make disturbing amounts of money off it simply encourages this behavior. Does nobody else see the problem with the fact that they can make mounds of cash off remaking a 90's RPG without any significant improvement not just once, but three times?
To paraphrase Yahtzee, Nintendo really is the only company we let get away with this crap (although in all honesty, there are a few others too. 'sup EA). It's not just pokemon either, but pokemon is perhaps one of the most atrocious offenders since at least most of the other franchises receive large graphical overhauls and even in some cases gameplay overhauls. Pokemon is just the same bland RPG remade countless times, which is a damn shame because there's so much potential in the concept.






Reply With Quote