Jump to content

Pokémon Direct 8/18/21 Discussion Thread


vanguard333
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

D/P were the games that effectively ended my attachment to the franchise. I just didn't like anything about them, aside from Empoleon. And though B/W were a one time upturn, my interest has just been nonexistent since.

 

I was also only counting mainline games. If I was counting spinoffs, non-functional games like Hey You, Pikachu and the trash mobile gacha games would of course be worse. But that's almost as unfair as counting the Mario and Zelda CD-i games.

I see. If it helps, Pokémon Platinum was a massive improvement over Diamond & Pearl in basically every way.

…Sword and Shield are mainline games though; I didn't mention a single spin-off title. I admit that I should've been more clear when I said "among other games" that I wasn't referring to spin-off titles, but I thought the fact that I listed Sword & Shield as my only named example was enough to imply that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/18/2021 at 5:42 PM, Azz said:

Not in my opinion no. Personally, when ORAS came out, seeing the fact you couldn't choose the MC's skin tone or hair colour or even customise the MC at all was ridiculous, especially after X and Y. Having skin tone options/different hair colour options is great if it makes players feel more included and should become the standard of pokemon games, remake or not (which thankfully it is).

Inclusivity and diversity is far more important imo than remaining faithful to designs of the MC that is supposed to represent the player in the first place. Like I may play using Lucas' design, but I'm not playing as Lucas, I'm playing as me and I should be able to have the MC that is supposed to represent me look like me.

 

On 8/18/2021 at 5:56 PM, vanguard333 said:

Honestly, I was fine with ORAS lacking customization options because X & Y and Sun & Moon's customization options made me feel all the more excluded for one simple reason: they forgot about redheads. Personally, I'd rather no option at all over a customization option that goes, "Okay, we've included brown hair, dark hair, blondes, and multiple skin tones. …Yep; that's everyone; I can't think of a single person that's left out from that." Imagine if a game included every customization option except the ones that would match you, and they did that across multiple games.

 

I've been making that exact same argument to try to get red hair and left-handedness into video games as options for well over a decade now; no one seems to listen to that argument.

 

On 8/19/2021 at 7:19 AM, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I'm seeing skin tone and clothing customizations as good things, full stop. Pokemon has always been a social game, so it's rather silly that, in the past, when you battled or traded with someone else, it was someone who looked just like you. This is one of the few changes X and Y made that I really appreciated, and I'm glad to see it continue going forward.

I just wanted to ask you three since you all seem to like character customization and feel it is a must in the series, are you children? I don't mean to make that sound condescending by the way so I hope you don't interpret it like that.

Because if you are self inserting into a 10 year old child that is a bit of an issue. Pokemon stopped being inclusive since like 2005. Some of the original fans who started liking it as a kid have long since grown up. Some are even in their 30s or 40s! I doubt it'd be an exaggeration to say that there probably exist more than 10,000,000 fans who are adults yet pokemon is still marketed to children.

We all take granted that this game hasn't had an actual improvement to its story board in over 25 years and it relies on us having knowledge of video games worlds to get by (as the player I mean). How is a child supposed to know how to read a map so they can get to locations without getting lost? How is a child supposed to know to care for life forms when they have barely any, if at all, knowledge of biology? We still have to start a journey as a child with no experience in the world and simply ignore that? This game is flawed on many levels. 

But I don't want to derail this conversation and go into all the details. I just wanted to point out the one important detail loads of people seem to leave out. This game is made for children. We play as a child character. Pokemon has been going over 25 years with some of its fan actually having children of their own who picked up the franchise. This game was never meant to be inclusive. Them adding skin tones and customization was just a business maneuver to prevent them from being criticized.

If anything the game should have fire emblem awakening's opening as a story board. We wake up with amnesia and meet a kind professor who helps us get started on traveling the world. Then we could maybe have an immersive story.. We can wake up as a humanoid shape shadow and can then customize ourselves later or early on to get the ball rolling. This whole playing as a kid and leaving home (and in some games leaving right after we just moved in lol) is stupid. They have to get out of that mold. It is holding them back. I'm not a child anymore and so are millions of fans. Awakening had 3 molds (one kinda looked child like, while one was very adult and large like). But I think I've said enough. I'm sure y'all get the point. 

TL;DR this game is not inclusive and never will be. As a business they know how to use smoke and mirrors to keep taking your money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Tediz64 said:

I just wanted to ask you three since you all seem to like character customization and feel it is a must in the series, are you children? I don't mean to make that sound condescending by the way so I hope you don't interpret it like that.

I'm going to have to stop you right at the part that I bolded: I honestly don't care about the character customization in Pokémon games and I could easily take it or leave it (is that the right expression for not really caring about something and not really missing it if it disappears?). My point was simply that, if they're going to include it all, they should at least bother to remember that redheads exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

I just wanted to ask you three since you all seem to like character customization and feel it is a must in the series, are you children? I don't mean to make that sound condescending by the way so I hope you don't interpret it like that.

Because if you are self inserting into a 10 year old child that is a bit of an issue. Pokemon stopped being inclusive since like 2005. Some of the original fans who started liking it as a kid have long since grown up. Some are even in their 30s or 40s! I doubt it'd be an exaggeration to say that there probably exist more than 10,000,000 fans who are adults yet pokemon is still marketed to children.

I'm in my twenties. So, not a child.

Do I self-insert into the player character? Yeah, I think I do. Like, suppose I'm playing Red, and I need to get my character (let's call him "Pete") from Pallet Town to Viridian City. I'm describing my efforts to a friend. Rather than saying "Pete travels north up Route 1", I would say "I travel north up Route 1". "Pete" is "I", at least as far as the game is concerned. 

Is it wrong to self-insert as a character depicted much younger than myself? I don't personally think so, no.

Also, I don't really understand the argument of Pokemon being inclusive in the past... but not anymore. There were always adults playing Pokemon. There have always been girls playing Pokemon. There have always been people with dark skin playing Pokemon. Even though the protagonist, up to Crystal, was always a boy. And up to X & Y, was always fair-skinned. It was never "exclusive", but giving the player gender and appearance options has made it more "representative" of the fanbase, at least.

2 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

We all take granted that this game hasn't had an actual improvement to its story board in over 25 years and it relies on us having knowledge of video games worlds to get by (as the player I mean). How is a child supposed to know how to read a map so they can get to locations without getting lost? How is a child supposed to know to care for life forms when they have barely any, if at all, knowledge of biology? We still have to start a journey as a child with no experience in the world and simply ignore that? This game is flawed on many levels. 

I think you're underestimating children here. Depending on the education they've received, a 10-year-old child can be as knowledgeable as the lay adult on matters like geography and biology. They're not doctors or cartographers yet, but neither is the average 20-something.

I will grant that the "letting kids leave home at 10 years old" does strain credulity somewhat, but the world of Pokemon works on relatively gentle and optimistic rules. People give you gifts all the time. Villains are easily distinguished, and they can be stopped with simple talent. Healthcare is free, and most tools are affordable with a little work. Death exists, but at a huge distance from the player character. It's not grittily realistic, but maybe it doesn't have to be.

2 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

But I don't want to derail this conversation and go into all the details. I just wanted to point out the one important detail loads of people seem to leave out. This game is made for children. We play as a child character. Pokemon has been going over 25 years with some of its fan actually having children of their own who picked up the franchise. This game was never meant to be inclusive. Them adding skin tones and customization was just a business maneuver to prevent them from being criticized.

The mere fact that it's marketed to children (certainly, it is) doesn't make it non-inclusive. All games have a target audience. And even if Game Freak added customization to allay criticism, is that bad? A good change made for a bad reason is still a good change.

2 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

If anything the game should have fire emblem awakening's opening as a story board. We wake up with amnesia and meet a kind professor who helps us get started on traveling the world. Then we could maybe have an immersive story.. We can wake up as a humanoid shape shadow and can then customize ourselves later or early on to get the ball rolling. This whole playing as a kid and leaving home (and in some games leaving right after we just moved in lol) is stupid. They have to get out of that mold. It is holding them back. I'm not a child anymore and so are millions of fans. Awakening had 3 molds (one kinda looked child like, while one was very adult and large like). But I think I've said enough. I'm sure y'all get the point. 

Hey, I'm not opposed to Pokemon changing up the formula somewhat! The "10-year-old who lives with a single Mom" has been done to death. That said, I'm not personally a fan of the "amnesiac" opening. I've never experienced amnesia myself, so that wouldn't be inclusive to me. Joking aside, it just seems like an excuse to create a protagonist who otherwise has no links in the established world.

How about a game that lets us play as a gym leader? Design a character of whichever age and appearance you want, recruit gym trainers from around the region, have a rivalry with the leader in the next town over, come up with puzzles and challenges, and build your own team further! Could be a fun alteration to the formula.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For its worth, it was stated once that the BW protagonists (plus Bianca and Cheren) were 12-16 (it was only said 14 without specifying if referring to BW or B2W2), so they definitely haven't stick to 10-year-olds every time.

In fact, Red and Blue are 11 actually during RBY/FRLG, as paltry of a difference it is from 10.

Come to think of it, 10 years old is mostly only stated in the anime, not the games.

Edited by Acacia Sgt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might want to pick the DPPt remakes. DPPt and RSE are the only games I've missed, and while I have some cruicial intellectual/worldbuilding baggage against RSE/ORAS that make me refuse to touch that, I think can deal with DPPt+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

I just wanted to ask you three since you all seem to like character customization and feel it is a must in the series, are you children? I don't mean to make that sound condescending by the way so I hope you don't interpret it like that.

Because if you are self inserting into a 10 year old child that is a bit of an issue. Pokemon stopped being inclusive since like 2005. Some of the original fans who started liking it as a kid have long since grown up. Some are even in their 30s or 40s! I doubt it'd be an exaggeration to say that there probably exist more than 10,000,000 fans who are adults yet pokemon is still marketed to children.

No I am not a child, and I fail to see how me wanting to be able to see a mc that somewhat looks like me when I play a game that's whole premise is to immerse the player in the world to where it feels like I myself am going on my own pokemon adventure? At least, that is how I have always played pokemon games growing up at least. Like, I'm not playing the game to project on to the 10 year old protagonist so I myself can pretend I am 10 years old, but I do like to play the game where I'm like 'Yes, that character that is supposed to represent me, does look like me, cool'.

How exactly has pokemon become less inclusive exactly? They went from having only a male mc to asking the player to simply pic how they want to look when they start a game, a big update in inclusivity if you ask me? If you are referring to inclusivity in terms of difficulty, pokemon has always been a kids game and is made more kids to play, the fact that people still want pokemon to grow up with its audience baffles me because game freak never promised to do that because from its original release to now, pokemon has always been for kids and, sans the few little throwbacks and easter eggs for older fans, that will never change. This fact still doesn't prevent older fans from enjoying the games though.

22 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

We all take granted that this game hasn't had an actual improvement to its story board in over 25 years and it relies on us having knowledge of video games worlds to get by (as the player I mean). How is a child supposed to know how to read a map so they can get to locations without getting lost? How is a child supposed to know to care for life forms when they have barely any, if at all, knowledge of biology? We still have to start a journey as a child with no experience in the world and simply ignore that? This game is flawed on many levels. 

But I don't want to derail this conversation and go into all the details. I just wanted to point out the one important detail loads of people seem to leave out. This game is made for children. We play as a child character. Pokemon has been going over 25 years with some of its fan actually having children of their own who picked up the franchise. This game was never meant to be inclusive. Them adding skin tones and customization was just a business maneuver to prevent them from being criticized.

Yes, a world where a 10 year old leaves their home to travel the world and inevitably single headedly defeats an evil corporation is far fetched but why does it have to make sense? What happened to imagination? It would be nice if pokemon tried something different story wise, but I fail to see an issue with its current story it tells verbatim per game cause it is in fact a video game.

The whole excuse 'it's made for kids, it's only inclusive for money and business reasons' is bs. As someone who works with kids, they are extremely perceptive and notice things. The very simple thing of being able to chose your skin tone does wonders for POC, especially when in so many video games, they very often don't see themselves as main characters (and especially in pokemon when again, orginally the only option you had was a male npc from red/blue to gold/silver, and then all you had was pale skinned male or female until X/Y). While it may be for the incorrect reasons (and unfortunately this is an issue with inclusivity and representation in general), it is there now and has made people happy and should be expected as the norm from game freak from now on imo.

Anyways, I'm not gonna derail the thread anymore. The character customisation options are literally in the game, I really don't know why this is such a debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Azz said:

Anyways, I'm not gonna derail the thread anymore. The character customisation options are literally in the game, I really don't know why this is such a debate.

My fault, sorry, I should've paid more attention to this thread.

@Tediz64 please use a little bit of common sense before posting.  No one here is literally 10, because they'd be breaking the agreement they checked off when signing up for this forum (and if you are Literally 10 and have somehow passed for someone older, please keep your mouth shut).  Nor does it matter that the main character be the same age as the player, because if that was the case, I'd have a very tiny pool of video games to choose from.  The main character is an avatar, which means if someone wants customization options like darker skin or certain hair colors, then there's no harm in including those.

I hope this puts that discussion to rest.  My apologies for derailing the thread.  As for the game itself, I don't have too many fond memories of Gen 4, so unless I'm extremely bored, I'll probably skip this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Interesting. What do you think of Legends: Arceus then?

Also a skip, I'm really busy.  The concept behind Arceus is cool, but I could never get it to click in my head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/31/2021 at 3:26 PM, vanguard333 said:

I'm going to have to stop you right at the part that I bolded: I honestly don't care about the character customization in Pokémon games and I could easily take it or leave it (is that the right expression for not really caring about something and not really missing it if it disappears?). My point was simply that, if they're going to include it all, they should at least bother to remember that redheads exist.

If you are already indifferent towards it then I suppose my point probably didn't come across regardless had I worded it better. Which I'll clarify in a sec

On 8/31/2021 at 5:44 PM, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

The mere fact that it's marketed to children (certainly, it is) doesn't make it non-inclusive. All games have a target audience. And even if Game Freak added customization to allay criticism, is that bad? A good change made for a bad reason is still a good change.

Hey, I'm not opposed to Pokemon changing up the formula somewhat! The "10-year-old who lives with a single Mom" has been done to death. That said, I'm not personally a fan of the "amnesiac" opening. I've never experienced amnesia myself, so that wouldn't be inclusive to me. Joking aside, it just seems like an excuse to create a protagonist who otherwise has no links in the established world.

How about a game that lets us play as a gym leader? Design a character of whichever age and appearance you want, recruit gym trainers from around the region, have a rivalry with the leader in the next town over, come up with puzzles and challenges, and build your own team further! Could be a fun alteration to the formula.

And this is the the direction I was hoping the conversation would go in. Discussing why the story isn't changing and we keep doing the same routine but I'll add more in a sec

On 9/1/2021 at 2:06 PM, Azz said:

No I am not a child, and I fail to see how me wanting to be able to see a mc that somewhat looks like me when I play a game that's whole premise is to immerse the player in the world to where it feels like I myself am going on my own pokemon adventure? At least, that is how I have always played pokemon games growing up at least. Like, I'm not playing the game to project on to the 10 year old protagonist so I myself can pretend I am 10 years old, but I do like to play the game where I'm like 'Yes, that character that is supposed to represent me, does look like me, cool'.

How exactly has pokemon become less inclusive exactly? They went from having only a male mc to asking the player to simply pic how they want to look when they start a game, a big update in inclusivity if you ask me? If you are referring to inclusivity in terms of difficulty, pokemon has always been a kids game and is made more kids to play, the fact that people still want pokemon to grow up with its audience baffles me because game freak never promised to do that because from its original release to now, pokemon has always been for kids and, sans the few little throwbacks and easter eggs for older fans, that will never change. This fact still doesn't prevent older fans from enjoying the games though.

Yes, a world where a 10 year old leaves their home to travel the world and inevitably single headedly defeats an evil corporation is far fetched but why does it have to make sense? What happened to imagination? It would be nice if pokemon tried something different story wise, but I fail to see an issue with its current story it tells verbatim per game cause it is in fact a video game.

The whole excuse 'it's made for kids, it's only inclusive for money and business reasons' is bs. As someone who works with kids, they are extremely perceptive and notice things. The very simple thing of being able to chose your skin tone does wonders for POC, especially when in so many video games, they very often don't see themselves as main characters (and especially in pokemon when again, orginally the only option you had was a male npc from red/blue to gold/silver, and then all you had was pale skinned male or female until X/Y). While it may be for the incorrect reasons (and unfortunately this is an issue with inclusivity and representation in general), it is there now and has made people happy and should be expected as the norm from game freak from now on imo.

Anyways, I'm not gonna derail the thread anymore. The character customisation options are literally in the game, I really don't know why this is such a debate.

I should have added that I'm not advocating for the removal of those features. But to put more of an emphasis on why do we keep giving Nintendo our money when they keep throwing at us the same formula over and over again when we could ask for more than that. 

On 9/1/2021 at 2:40 PM, eclipse said:

My fault, sorry, I should've paid more attention to this thread.

@Tediz64 please use a little bit of common sense before posting.  No one here is literally 10, because they'd be breaking the agreement they checked off when signing up for this forum (and if you are Literally 10 and have somehow passed for someone older, please keep your mouth shut).  Nor does it matter that the main character be the same age as the player, because if that was the case, I'd have a very tiny pool of video games to choose from.  The main character is an avatar, which means if someone wants customization options like darker skin or certain hair colors, then there's no harm in including those.

I hope this puts that discussion to rest.  My apologies for derailing the thread.  As for the game itself, I don't have too many fond memories of Gen 4, so unless I'm extremely bored, I'll probably skip this one.

So now I'll try to actually clarify where I was going. When I approached the discussion from the pov regarding inclusion and who it leaves out I guess it was interpreted as me saying this should be removed and it should go back to it's default but that isn't what I meant. I meant to say or drive home we should be holding them more accountable to give us more options to play as other than just a child with the same old story board. So I read a book on economics and how in the relationship between the consumers and producers, it is the consumer who actually has control of the prices and can dictate what sells and what gets shelved. If we (collectively as a community) don't buy or pay them for continuing to give us the exact same quality of a product many aren't happy with, they'd have no choice but to either do better or drop this idea and move onto the next. The fact that each pokemon titles sells and makes them loads of money is why they can keep doing the same thing without thinking of changing it up. I'd really like to go further but then the discussion will reach deeper into the realm of business production and how consumers communicate with those who create content. I just feel like we could ask for more, and should be able to get it. But it's cause all of us aren't on the same page or we don't all push at the right time that they are gonna keep doing the same thing over and over. As long as this gen4 remake gives them enough money to break even on sales (or earn profit), they'll never understand that this isn't accepted by all of the community. But at the same time, the people who do buy the game don't understand how powerful their dollar is and how they can use it as a vote or means of communication to the company. We should demand more. And the company needs to listen, but we consumers need to work together and get synchronized. I think I've probably made myself more clear but I'm sure this is also pretty off topic so I'll stop there. 

To summarize, I wasn't advocating for the removal of customization. I meant that we could demand more and actually get what we want, but not until all consumers withhold their money and send them a message that the same crappy product they keep making is going to make us happy anymore.

Edited by Tediz64
Grammar checks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...