Pokemon's Core Gameplay: To Change or Not to Change

There's been a lot of arguments within the fanbase on whether or not they should change the story formula, but it seems like there isn't much talk about the series' core gameplay: turn-based. The reason I brought this up is because I've had several arguments with one of my BMGF comrades on Skype, who also has a PC account, about whether or not Pokémon should change the gameplay. He despises the turn-based gameplay because it's boring and doesn't make the Pokémon feel real since he treats his Pokémon as living beings (he's also not very fond of chess either for the same thing), and he believes that it'll hurt the franchise in the long-run. He doesn't care about new mechanics such as Mega Evolutions or the physical/special split, he just wants GF to get rid of the turn-based gameplay. Because of this, he's creating two fan-made Pokémon games: one using the gameplay from Mega Man Battle Network and combining it with Pokémon elements such as TMs and potions in the form of battle chips, and the other is a 2D platformer with elements from the Crash Bandicoot series such as the crates. I, as well as another of my Skype contacts, warned him that what he's doing will not make it feel like a Pokémon game if they were ever going to be part of the main series and it'll only alienate veteran fans if it was no longer a turn-based RPG. Changing gameplays entirely isn't a new thing in the video game industry, sometimes the changes to a long-running franchise can make them critically acclaimed like Metroid Prime and Resident Evil 4, and other times make them complete flops like Banjo Kazooie Nuts 'n' Bolts and the post-Final Fantasy X titles. I ask you this: Should Pokémon abandon the turn-based gameplay for a different gameplay style completely or should it remain the same?

may or may not work, but to change the core gameplay also means that changes will have to be done in all aspects of the main series. It's gonna be much more complicated than a spinoff since it has to contain as much old as there is new while, at the same time, keeping both in good... "harmony". Quite a cheesy line, i know, but you know what i mean; unless these changes blend in well, the result will only be a disaster; an end to the franchise may come near.

Another thing: Unlike the games you've mentioned, there is competiton in this one. What he suggested is possible, but it will take some hell of time to make it practically and technically work -- and even at a huge risk.

That said, they don't have to abandon what we already enjoy. They could simply start a new series, that way, it won't feel too alienated for a surprise. I'm pretty sure that this has already crossed GF's (or other companies, for that matter) minds... and i won't say they've made any bad decisions in keeping it so. After all, it's not us who'd lose a lot of money. For me, no big deal whether they change it or not - if it works, great; if it doesnt, move on. I'll just wait and see what happens, they know their stuff more than i do.

If your friend is serious about making a game, then why not suggest something of his own? A completely new monster-breeding-slash-battling game that he thinks will work the way he imagines. That way, without bringing the name of pokemon, he won't be bound by another game's formula that is meant majorly for turn-based gameplay. I'm pretty sure that he is packed with something completely original in his mind if he has decided to go that far.

The entire battle system is based on turn based controls. To change that would not be a main series Pokemon game.

It would just be a Battle Area Game with Pokemon Characters.

There is room to grow and make games outside the main series.

Imagine a Zelda game where puzzles are solved not by items, but by collecting pokemon?

That is just an example of the freedom you have making spin-off games. Turn-Based is not and out-dated idea like VHS, it is a legitimate game design that is still amazing when done right.

Hasn't GF already deviated from turn-based games with Pokemon Ranger and Pokemon Mystery Dungeon? Lol.

Besides that, turn-based RPGs are tried and true; people like them. I doubt McDonald's would discontinue beef and start making soy burgers because of a vocal minority. That would be like corporate suicide...

I'm a purist. Pokémon is team of 6, turn-based, elemental attacks limited by power points. Those are its main draw. Changes should happen only inside the mechanics, so I would disagree with it.

Watchers of the anime like me sometimes want that Pokémon would be more life like, but on the other hand this is still a fantasy game, so realism should not be the primary concern of the developers.

YZN said:

Hasn't GF already deviated from turn-based games with Pokemon Ranger and Pokemon Mystery Dungeon? Lol.

Click to expand...

Mystery dungeon is a rogue-like, but still turn-based game - just not the traditional jrpg. Just saying XF

molivious said:

Mystery dungeon is a rogue-like, but still turn-based game - just not the traditional jrpg. Just saying XF

Click to expand...

OIC. Never actually played it >.<
Lol

YZN said:

Hasn't GF already deviated from turn-based games with Pokemon Ranger and Pokemon Mystery Dungeon? Lol.

Besides that, turn-based RPGs are tried and true; people like them. I doubt McDonald's would discontinue beef and start making soy burgers because of a vocal minority. That would be like corporate suicide...

Click to expand...

Gamefreak did not make either of those game titles. Gamefreak only makes Main title games which include Pokemon Red, Green, Yellow, Blue, Gold, Silver, Crystal, Ruby, Sapphire, Fire Red, Leaf Green, Emerald, Diamond, Pearl, Platinum, Heart Gold, Soul Silver, Black, White, Black 2, White 2, X and Y.

Only games that have Pokemon that are not part of the main series that Gamefreak was involved in was Harmonoknight.

Hudson Soft:
Pokemon Trading Card Game
Pokemon Card GB2

Jupiter:
Pokemon Pinball
Pokemon Pinball: Ruby and Sapphire

HAL Studios:
Pokemon Ranger

Creatures Inc.:
Pokemon Ranger: Shadows of Almia
Pokemon Ranger: Guardians Signs
Pokepark
Pokepark 2

Genius Sonority:
Pokemon Colosseum
Pokemon XD: Gale of Darkness
Pokemon Battle Revolution
Pokemon Trozei
Pokemon Typing Adventure

Chunsoft:
Mystery Dungeon series (Gates to Infinity were done by a now merged Spike Chunsoft)

Ambrella:
Hey, You Pikachu!
Pokemon Channel
Pokemon Dash
Pokemon Ranch
Pokemon Rumble
Pokemon Rumble Blast
Rumble U

Mixed:
Pokemon Stadium (Nintendo EDA and HAL Laboratories)
Pokemon Stadium 2 (Nintendo EDA and HAL Laboratories)
Pokemon Snap (HAL Laboratories and Pax Softnica)
Battrio (Takara Tomy and AQ Interactive)

Other:
Pokemon Puzzle Challenge (Intelligent System)
Pokemon Puzzle League (Nintendo SOftware Technologies)
Pokemate (Square Enix)
Pokemon Conquest (Tecmo Koei)


(if you want a more organized list I can clean it up)

As of yet the Core games have revolved around the same basis but have evolved quite a bit since their induction. I do not see the core functions nor the main story's core settings ever changing more than slightly. We'll keep getting little tweeks to the battle system, but I don't see them leaving the turn based style, nor do I see them going well out of their way to make a Pokemon game geared towards older kids.

hohoho, i used to think that those devs were sub-groups from game freak rather than completely unaffiliated developers from nintendo.How can i be so oblivious.

Cerberus87 said:

I'm a purist. Pokémon is team of 6, turn-based, elemental attacks limited by power points. Those are its main draw. Changes should happen only inside the mechanics, so I would disagree with it.

Click to expand...

This basically sums up my argument. As the title of the thread suggests, it's the core gameplay. Without it, you're either making a spin-off or just ending the series and starting a new pokémon series. If they were going to adapt pokémon for a powerful console (i.e. Xbox One, PS4, not WiiU) they could probably make non-turn-based pokémon be very impressive, but I think in its element on handhelds there's no reason to change the formula.

XanderO said:

(if you want a more organized list I can clean it up)

Click to expand...

Er yeah, I think you've made your point. Shoulda done my homework I suppose -_-'

There are already different game modes like Contests and Pokeathlon. I think I spend as much time hatching pokemon as I do training them. I think it would be cool to see pokemon in the grass, and have a way of fainting them without battling. Maybe you get Effort Points but not XP, or something like that.

I, for one, would really like to see main series Pokémon games becoming ARPGs instead of traditional turn-based RPGs.

No... that's what spinoffs are for.

YZN said:

Er yeah, I think you've made your point. Shoulda done my homework I suppose -_-'

There are already different game modes like Contests and Pokeathlon. I think I spend as much time hatching pokemon as I do training them. I think it would be cool to see pokemon in the grass, and have a way of fainting them without battling. Maybe you get Effort Points but not XP, or something like that.

Click to expand...

I asked cause my research was a jumbled mess in paragraph form. XD Some people can't really read when others post like that.

No it shouldn't be changed. Don't fix what isn't broken, it has grown slightly over the years but still remains generally the same as it did in Red/Green for a reason, it just works.

As others have said, if they want to experiment with other mechanics than that's what the spinoffs are for :)

While I'd love to see a side-game that follows more of an ARPG format, I'd prefer the main series stuck to the tried-and-true format.

Roughsponge said:

As others have said, if they want to experiment with other mechanics than that's what the spinoffs are for :)

Click to expand...

^.^

See? This is what I'm talking about.

I'd like to see an action RPG type game on the Wii U or its successor.
The main series handheld games should remain turn-based. Fans have played Pokemon like this for years. Strategies have evolved due to the addition of new elements in every generation, and if the next generation changed this, all of that would go down the drain. I don't think people would play competitively either.

You know what I hate? People who play a longstanding series, don't like the format of the series, and think IT should change to suit THEM.

Personally, I enjoy turn-based RPGs and I would be devastated if they chenged the battle style.

That being said, if they were to change it, my vote would be for the battle style found in Final Fantasy XIII. Mildly turn-based, yet it felt like real-time. I really thought that was a fantastic way to play the game and it might be interesting to see something like that be integrated into Pokemon