'What if' Pokemon

For posting threads about MMOs, console games, other virtual pet sites, gaming news and suchlike.
Post Reply
User avatar
Nogitsune
Colourmeister
Posts: 1069
Joined: 21 Jan 2006 01:52 am
Gender: Male
Location: My mind, but I leave it frequently.
Contact:

'What if' Pokemon

Post by Nogitsune » 22 May 2010 02:56 am

With all the pokemania going on, I thought I'd pose this:
If you could have created pokemon:
1] Would you use the same types as in the current games or different ones?
2] Would you use the same regions or different ones?
3] How would you arrange the pokedex?
4] How would legendaries be introduced?
5] What items or features would you keep or toss from different generations?
6] Would you have more type combos?
7] Would some pokemon have more forms than they currently do?
8] Anything else?
Faster than a speeding cheeseburger, but not by much.

User avatar
Noble fauf
Posts: 105
Joined: 02 Aug 2009 12:04 am
Gender: Male
Location: Terror Mountain

Re: 'What if' Pokemon

Post by Noble fauf » 22 May 2010 07:50 pm

My answers to a few of the questions...

1] I'd stick with the sames types, but I'm in the group that also wants a "light" type to counter dark type.
3] I would arrange the pokedex in chronological/alphabetical order
4] a trio and a duo per game, and that's it (seriously, how many were added in diamond/pearl?)
6]definitely, I want to see a dark/psychic and a fire/grass type
7] I feel sorry for the pokemon with no evo's
8] yeah...pokemon that evolve by trade only annoy me!

User avatar
Nogitsune
Colourmeister
Posts: 1069
Joined: 21 Jan 2006 01:52 am
Gender: Male
Location: My mind, but I leave it frequently.
Contact:

Re: 'What if' Pokemon

Post by Nogitsune » 25 May 2010 02:21 pm

Noble fauf wrote:My answers to a few of the questions...

1] I'd stick with the sames types, but I'm in the group that also wants a "light" type to counter dark type.
3] I would arrange the pokedex in chronological/alphabetical order
4] a trio and a duo per game, and that's it (seriously, how many were added in diamond/pearl?)
6]definitely, I want to see a dark/psychic and a fire/grass type
7] I feel sorry for the pokemon with no evo's
8] yeah...pokemon that evolve by trade only annoy me!
1] I might use most of them, but I think I'd combine Ground and Rock into Earth while either adding an 'Air' type or replacing Flying with it. I also agree there should be a 'Light' type added. I'd have it strong against both Dark and Ghost but weak against Grass (in fact, Grass-types would probably be immune to it).

2] I might try to consolidate the regions. I don't like that there's such a disconnection between the Johto/Kanto regions and the Sinnoh and Hoenn regions. I'd also like to re-include the Sevii Islands and introduce the Orange Islands to the games.

3] The national pokedex would always have all the starters at the beginning. I might also be tempted to list any 'line' of pokemon as the same species with the same pokedex number (Bulbasaur, Ivysaur, and Venusaur - for instance - would all be #001).

4] For me I'd use the Saint Beasts as bases for all legendaries - but only three per region (or maybe three plus one 'boss'). I would probably have one or two other legendaries in a region that would work like Mew, Mewtwo, Celebii, etc.

5] I liked the evolution stones and I wish they would have kept them around and diversified them.

6] I'd have at least one of every type and type combo possible.

7] All pokemon except fossils and legendaries would have three forms (all fossils would have two evolutions). Some, like Eevee would have multiple evolutions. No pokemon would rely on trading to evolve.

8] Allowing the player to choose their wardrobe would be nice, especially since they seem to always give female trainers skirts.
Faster than a speeding cheeseburger, but not by much.

User avatar
Noble fauf
Posts: 105
Joined: 02 Aug 2009 12:04 am
Gender: Male
Location: Terror Mountain

Re: 'What if' Pokemon

Post by Noble fauf » 26 May 2010 04:55 am

I liked the evolution stones and I wish they would have kept them around and diversified them.
Yeah, only 2 pokemon evolve with the thunder/sun stones. Did the pokemon creators just not like evolutionary stones anymore?
No pokemon would rely on trading to evolve.
Yes please! I’m playing Crystal with a haunter and a graveler… (17 pokemon evolve from trade only!)
I might also be tempted to list any 'line' of pokemon as the same species with the same pokedex number
That’s an interesting idea I hadn’t thought of.
Allowing the player to choose their wardrobe would be nice, especially since they seem to always give female trainers skirts.
I would be happy with skin/hair color options. Not everyone wants to look vaguely japanish-american.

User avatar
Xelio
Posts: 688
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 09:50 pm
Location: Somewhere that's green...

Re: 'What if' Pokemon

Post by Xelio » 28 May 2010 04:17 am

If you could have created pokemon:
1] Would you use the same types as in the current games or different ones?

I'd have a lot of the current types, sure, but maybe not steel. I don't know, that weakness to fire is just too easily exploited. Poor magnemite took a hard hit with that. I'm not sure what more types I would add, though I'd make it so all ice types could learn the water HMs. Seriously, why limit choices as to who to dump those moves on.

2] Would you use the same regions or different ones?

I can't say that I have too many issues for the regions. Oh sure, if I'd made them they'd have had different names, but eh, they're fine by me as is.

3] How would you arrange the pokedex?

Wow...tough. I can't say that I can think of a system that works, other than putting all evolution families together and maybe all starters at the front and all legendaries at the end, based on their game or all-games-inclusive as the user desires.

4] How would legendaries be introduced?

Duos or trios and only one set per game. Really, there are just too many floating around. The old system of one duo and one trio was fine in Red/Green/Blue. I want that back. With maybe a chance to unlock and old legendary per game.

5] What items or features would you keep or toss from different generations?

I like evolution stones. I'd bring them back more. And holding items is win, so I'd keep that. The phone though...trash that thing. Or at least let there be an option to turn it off when you're not in the mood to receive calls. Oh, and I'd put the pokeradar in all the games. Chaining shiny pokemon is good when bored.

6] Would you have more type combos?

Sure, why not have an example of every type combo? Could be fun.

7] Would some pokemon have more forms than they currently do?

Yes. I'd have a pre-evolution/baby form of Kangaskhan that's the baby from the pouch. Would be cute I'd think. And some legendaries aside, I'd have all pokemon have a least one evolution, even if its a baby form.

8] Anything else?

Like mentioned above, wardrobes! Wouldn't have to be a huge one, but being able to pick hair/skin and maybe eye color and between a few sets of clothes would be wonderful. Even if they only showed up on the little overworld figure, it'd still be a welcome change to girls in tiny skirts/shorts with improbable hair. I picked the male trainer in my SoulSilver game just because I couldn't take the girl's clothing and hair.
Image
Thanks Tiel for the lovely set!
Subeta - Neopets

User avatar
Foghawk
Posts: 369
Joined: 03 Jun 2007 08:58 pm
Human Avatar: 254768
Location: a narrow dusty room
Contact:

Re: 'What if' Pokemon

Post by Foghawk » 30 May 2010 12:20 am

Walls of text follow.



1] Would you use the same types as in the current games or different ones?
I'd at least have simplified them a little and brought them closer to some kind of logic. If we're starting from scratch, I also like the idea of making each 'mon's Type 2 a subtype - either unique to each main type, or just from a separate set (elemental versus ecological roles, perhaps?). It'd make the Type 1/Type 2 distinction have some relevance. (I'd scrap 'Normal' and replace it with some kind of 'adaptable' type. It's not quite a throwaway type, but I never cared for the idea.)
I've never been in the camp that wanted a 'Light' type; I always saw Dark as being opposed to Fighting - 'honorable' martial arts versus sneaky pragmatism. If we're starting over from the beginning, I could see room for it, but if we're talking about modifying existing types, I don't see anything it could do that Fire, Electric, or Psychic couldn't do just as well.

2] Would you use the same regions or different ones?
I think the regions themselves are pretty interchangeable; the physical layout of the routes is mostly irrelevant, and the most memorable part of the towns is really their music. I'd definitely work a bit more on the storyline, though - beef up the evil team a bit and make them clever antagonists (re: evil teams: Rocket still wins, and Giovanni is still the best), plus maybe a return to the laughably nasty rival from the original games we all loved to hate. (The nice ones always bored me; there's no delicious spite in victory.)
Also, I'd bring back the Game Corner and fold the logic game they replaced it with into it, plus let you buy coins again. (But I'd knock the TM prices back to 4000.) And maybe redo the Safari Zone. Great concept; hair-tearing, tedious execution.

3] How would you arrange the pokedex?
The standard chronological arrangement is fine for general use, but I'd definitely beef up the search and let you sort your in-game dex in other ways.

4] How would legendaries be introduced?
No more than one trio, one duo, and one 'extra' per gen, and possibly less. No weird quasi-legends like Phione, or Heatran, or Rotom; it's a legend or it's not. No 'Formes'. Maybe Castform is okay, but besides that they are just silly. Standard end-of-the-dungeon formula is fine - it is an RPG.

5] What items or features would you keep or toss from different generations?
Items:
Yeah, evolution stones get a bad rap. The species-specific evo items (Electirizer, Magmarizer, etc...), though, feel like a cheap cop-out, an excuse as to why the evolutions weren't obtainable in earlier games. (At least Metal Coat and the Razor items actually did something else.) I'd have found some other way to make it work - say, a special location.

Features:
(tl;dr: sprites are just better.)
Honestly, I have never cared for the 3D overworld concept - it isn't particularly good-looking, it doesn't mesh well with the sprites used in battle and for overworld objects and people, and it just doesn't add anything to the game. Going the 'full' 3D route, as Black and White are promising to do, won't really help; character sprites are still sprites, battles are still sprites, and I suspect it will only make walking around more confusing.
I also didn't care for the attack animations in 4th gen; they didn't mesh well with the sprites of the pokémon. In-battle 'mon animations aren't a bad idea, but the execution we've seen in the Black and White previews so far doesn't really seem to work - it reminds me of the Emerald animations, squashing and distorting sprite-based graphics (which tends to turn out badly). The two-frame animations of 4th gen aren't bad, but ideally, I think, we would have Crystal-style animations (with FR/LG-style shading) for both front and back sprites.
I wouldn't go back on existing graphics, but if it had been my job from the first, I'd have skipped it. It always seemed to me that Pokémon was a fundamentally sprite-based game; it's one thing to create a genuinely full-3D game (Snap, Stadium, Colosseum, Revolution) and another to mash together completely different artwork concepts. What's more, the time saved by not reworking the graphics completely leaves the opportunity to update the mechanics...

I loved the changes that were made to mechanics in Advance; they really increased the depth of strategy without making it so complex that casual players would really need to know anything. The 4th-gen physical/special split was good too. The only other mechanical addition I can think of at the moment would be changes to breeding - I'd like to see some way to influence the IVs of hatched pokémon based on their parents'; as it is, there's enough randomness that you might as well not try.
Presentationally, I'd stick with the hilarious ALLCAPS text and increase character limits (they are a frustrating artifact of old hardware). I'd also stick to the first-pokémon-follows-you thing they did in HG/SS - probably my favorite of the features introduced in 4th gen; it makes logical sense, is really sweet, and emphasizes the friendship theme. Awww.

6] Would you have more type combos?
If you can come up with pokémon that logically fit into new combos, absolutely, but I don't think it's a necessity to fill every possible combination - I can't help but feel it would end up forced.

7] Would some pokemon have more forms than they currently do?
Generally, no. Baby Kangaskhan actually makes sense, but I feel it shouldn't be required for a pokémon to have two or three stages - I always liked that some had just one, or just two; it seemed more natural and less cookie-cutter. (As for 'mons that evolve by trading, plus version exclusives, I'd leave them as is - but include a post-Elite 4 reward that'd let you get them on your own.)

8] Anything else?
Not that I can remember! Wardrobe sounds okay but more than a little useless - you character sprite is tiny, and you don't see your full sprite for very long. It feels like it could easily be disruptive if it wasn't worked into the story well. EDIT: Oh, and similarly to the first-mon-follows-you feature, I'd give surfers and flyers unique field sprites. Riding a faceless blob is kinda lame.



This reminds me of the virtual pet project thread. Whatever happened to that? It was awesome. :<
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests