SM casualized

>>26757276
no i dont know the type chart off by heart actually
and no i don't want to game to spoon feed me the exact way to kill the mon

its a dumb feature, stop making wild assumptions about the player base so you can make an excuse for why that garbage is not so bad

>>26757276
Yeah, I completely agree.

I mean, this is /vp/, which is full of underage and people who only play Pokemon, so of course the majority of people here wouldn't know, but battle forecasts are pretty damn common in RPGs of all sorts. If anything, Pokemon's just catching up with this.

It's a non-intrusive element that wont make it any different for experienced players. It's literally just children finding something to bitch.

File: masuda (3).png (7KB, 336x418px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 336x418px

>>26757276

>>26757317
so if you don't know which move will be supereffective what do you do? if you google it then it's the same thing, of you don't and use whatever then you're beyond retarded so what's the problem?

>>26757333
Some one gets it

Shit man its like these ppl have never played a tactics game

You think they go to /v/ and cry about excom being too easy cuz it has accuracy?

Besides, pokemon is litterally a kids game. For kids.

>>26757451
>telling you accuracy of an action is the same as telling you the weakness

handholding defense force is THIS retarded

>>26757476
>telling you accuracy of an action is the same as telling you the weakness


Yeah, that is actually pretty comparable.


The challenge of pokemon never had to do with KNOWING moves are super effective, otherwise the mere knowledge of the type chart (which anyone on this board should fucking have) would render any competitive play completely solved and thus, pointless.

The challenge comes from putting yourself in a situation where you can safely land the moves.


Like, seriously, how underage are you? I mean, it sounds like you kind of need this feature, really.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/gen-vii-pokémon-sun-and-moon-and-up-to-date-news.3549746/page-144#post-6853938

I don't fucking know why all of the autists have their panties in a bunch over this shit. If you've been a fan of this series long enough to come on this board and complain about it, you most likely has the entire type chart memorized and have no use for a tiny text box to remind you. If you want to play a challenging game, go play dark souls. Pokemon is not and never will be challenging in any way.

>>26757276
If you keep using the word "casualization," they won't calm down. A better word for what GameFreak is doing is "streamlining".

>>26757276
I have two issues with this.

First, if you're playing the game blind, you don't know the types of every new Pokémon, and just one battle isn't always enough to instantly figure it out (if you saw Heracross for the first time, you'd probably know it was a Bug and know to use a Fire-type move, but would know figure out it was a Fighting-type just from that first battle?)

Second, we don't actually know this game is going to be free of long cut scenes every few minutes or other forms of handholding, so we could very well have all of that AND the new handholding.

>>26757373
Did you just call someone retarded for not using Google to look up how to beat a children's game? Do you actually use Google to figure out a Pokémon's type if you don't know it?

>>26757768
>b-but it's for kids, OP. When gen 8 comes out and the games are just 2 hour cut scenes, i'm still going to shovel masuda's shit into my mouth because REEEEEEEEEEEE MUH CHILDHOOD

>everything gamefreak will ever do will be perfect because they made a game i liked when i was 12

File: 1364662692799.png (511KB, 642x479px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 642x479px

>>26757676
>>26757491
Are these copypasta or have I just been posting in too many of these threads?

>>26757737
because it isn't actually streamlining

>>26757781
Did you quote the wrong guy?

>>26757333
>battle forecasts are pretty damn common in RPGs of all sorts. If anything, Pokemon's just catching up with this.

Most RPGs aren't nearly as easy as Pokémon, is the problem.

>>26757792
The latter, anon.

>>26757807
>Did you quote the wrong guy?
yes, i meant to quote nobody

>>26757792
>>26757822
http://archive.nyafuu.org/vp/search/text/It%27s%20a%20children%27s%20game.%20No%20need%20to%20defend%20it%20or%20complain%20about%20it.%20If%20you%20don%27t%20want%20to%20use%20it%2C%20then%20don%27t%20fucking%20use%20it./

The latter seems to be a copypasta, albeit a really new one.

>>26757276
Hi, buddy, I'm John Gamefreak father. Thank you so much for the kind words. You haven't seen the half, though! There will be so much help in these games to give the younger audience the push they need to keep playing our games in the future.

We always reading your comments, /vp/, and trying to improve based on them too!

Sincerely, xXxJohnx_GamefreaksxXx

>>26757807
>Most RPGs aren't nearly as easy as Pokémon, is the problem.

Sure, I'll give you that.

But as I mentioned, the challenge of pokemon has nothing to do with knowing the type chart. The knowledge is the part that is assumed to be known after figuring out what pokemon is what.

The WORST part coming from it, and I mean the absolute worst is >>26757768
>if you saw Heracross for the first time, you'd probably know it was a Bug and know to use a Fire-type move, but would know figure out it was a Fighting-type just from that first battle?

This is heavily mitigated by us living in the age of free information, though, where literally any kid not only has the means to quickly look this up, but probably already has this information prior.

Besides, that's a pretty minor issue. Compounded by the idea of an easy game being made easier, not much of value was lost.

>>26757807
Most rpgs aren't hard at all. Pokemon is hella easy because its for kids, but the genre itself is piss easy, you can just powerlevel your way through most any rpg, and most of the time an rpgs idea of "hard" is just giving the boss a billion hp and a bunch of 1hit ko moves (ff is a huge user of this)

I fucking love rpgs and grew up on them, but rpgs have never been hard, and streamlining one meant for children has no effect on me or you, i play pokemon for the qt monsters and muh immersion, if i feel like going hard i play smogon or something (which has these types of features already)

File: Welcome_to_the_world_of_pokemon_.png (11KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 640x480px

Pokémon storyline revolves around discovering a new world, new creatures, and trying to learn more and more, hence the pokédex. From the information you gather throughout your journey, you deduce resistances, effectivenesses, and so on.

Giving information about type matchups right from the start negates the actual storyline of the journey to discover the Pokémon world.

I'm not against casualizing the game since a great part of the audience seems to enjoy it, but negating the purpose of the game in itself bothers me.

>>26757923
>you can just powerlevel your way through most any rpg

I base the "difficulty" of an RPG on how easy/hard it is to beat it without ever going out of your way to grind, only fighting the enemies you naturally encounter playing the game instead of deliberately hanging around an area fighting random encounters to gain levels. It's true that you can make your experience easier by grinding but I always consider that to be a pussy way of beating the game unless it's near-impossible to beat the game without grinding and you're more or less forced to do it. I've been playing Final Fantasy Legend II lately and I think I'm going to have to resort to grinding, I just can't beat Apollo and my team is too squishy. I didn't grind at any point before this though. I'm sure others will disagree and regularly grind at any RPG but I think the "proper" way to play and the right way to gauge difficulty is to see how hard it is without ever grinding.

>>26757276
Tbh I wouldn't mind stuff like this at all if they actually made the trainers have decent teams again. Sure, it's not like it will be difficult but I'm getting real tired of each battle lasting less than a minute which adds up and makes the whole game shorter than it could be. I'm also hopeful after seeing Route 1 scaled in game, which was something that retards were claiming was only big enough to be in one screenview but I realistically thought it would be a moderate sized path, like what we saw with the tikis in earlier footage. I didn't think it was a full fledged route albeit somewhat small. But if that's how things are scaled this is good news for the rest of the region.

>>26757973
>Giving information about type matchups right from the start

It doesn't. You have to battle it at least once before it gives you information.

>but negating the purpose of the game in itself bothers me.

It is a very, VERY minor "contradiction", going by technical terms. The impact it'll have is more positive than not.


What people seem to not realize, is that features like this are for children trying to re-enter the game after being away. Most kids dont pick up a game and play it the entire way through. The younger you are, the lower your retention is. This isn't just some bullshit, its a real issue that game dev's struggle with when developing.
>But I played my Pokemon Red aaaaall the way through on my first run!

Well great. Game dev's probably love you. But most kid's don't. Also another strong factor to consider is we as kids did not have the easy distraction of cell phones and tablets that today's youth does, so this struggle is an even bigger one now.
Reconfirming type effectiveness is a step to alleviate a child re-entering the game, and hopefully getting them to eventually finish it.

Doing it this way is a perfect solution. It doesn't "hand out" free information, as you have to make the effort to encounter it and interact with it in some way, and it serves as an "oh yeah!" for easliy frustrated and easily distracted kids to help them get re-sucked in.

>>26758025
this tbqh
for example, the "route 1" in xy which was just pathetic

>>26757973
>Giving information about type matchups right from the start negates the actual storyline of the journey to discover the Pokémon world.
But you don't get it right from the start. The first time you battle a new mon the type effectiveness isn't displayed, but it will be displayed in subsequent battles.
Did people seriously missed when they said that yesterday or are they just being retarded?

What I would like to have is the pokédex working in-battle to get the base stats of the opposting mon, like a /dt on showdown.

>>26758025
Okay okay. Let me level with you, because you seem like youre genuinely trying to discuss it without shitposting.

First, it's important to lay down a few guidelines, since we're dealing with subjective shit here.

>"Ease" to "Difficulty" is a scale. It's a relative scale.
XY were definitely easier than Platinum, for isntance. No Pokemon game has truly been difficult, but there are some easier than others. Generally speaking, the difficulty has been pretty scattered, with Platinum and BW being more difficult than XY or GS for instance.

>"Challenge" is not the same as "Difficulty"

Super Mario 64 is a challenging game. It's not a difficult one. Challenge is to say that it requires some degree of thought/skill/precision/whatever, but it's not mutually exclusive to how difficult a game is. There's a relation between level of challenge and level of difficulty, but it's not 1-to-1.
This is important because a game like Platinum could be described as having challenge to it, but not being a very difficult challenge.


So yeah, youre probably thinking "no shit". But it's important to say that to avoid confusion.


What people want is challenge. We all know that no Pokemon game has been difficult, but a game like XY was both piss easy and not challenging. There was no grinding required (which while not the best form of challenge, is technically one), all the trainers were stupid easy, and you had access to end-game level threats early on. The problem with having an easy game with no challenge is it's essentially just mindless button mashing at that point. You dont even have to focus on what youre doing toplay. It's disengaging.

(cont.)

>>26758059
Do you really think one single battle each is enough to figure out every Pokémon's type? Like I said in this thread (not the guy you're replying to by the way) you could hit them with a Normal-type move, which won't tell you anything about their type if they aren't Rock- or Ghost-type, but you get all that information anyway.

As I and another anon said this thread, there are much better systems for this, like only showing this if you've caught the Pokémon or only showing you type information for types you've already used (like if you hit a Pokémon with a Fire-type attack, it tells you the effectiveness of Fire-type attacks from that point onward for that Pokémon). That way you only have information you've acquired naturally.

>you have to make the effort to encounter it and interact with it in some way

But you don't! One battle does not tell you much about a Pokémon, if you run into a Youngster with a shitty underleveled version of the new Pokémon and you wipe it out instantly with a neutral attack it tells you nothing. The only time it has a chance of working like you describe is if you're fighting a major NPC like a Gym Leader or rival and they have a Pokmon that's never been shown before that point in the game.

>>26758195
(cont.)

So what is this feature then?
Well, like I've said, the challenge of the game didn't come from knowing the type chart. Challenge comes from proper team composition, safely landing the moves, knowing when to use them. The strategy was the challenge.
Knowing the type chart was not difficult. Simply knowing "Electric beats Water" isn't a difficult thing, it doesn't take any skill or mastery. It's pretty straight forward. It's just a matter of attaining that information. Difficulty would be the degree of how much of a better strategy you'd need to win, the level of the opponents, their AI.


This feature doesn't add or remove any semblance of challenge, and doesn't affect the difficulty. I think what people are mainly afraid of is this meaning that the game will have XY's total lack of challenge, but so far we have BW's levelling system, and nothing saying otherwise.

If this game is piss easy and not challenging, then sure, that's something to criticize. But this feature isn't contributing to that problem.

>>26758220
Nigger, once you see them they're registered as seen in the Pokedex, alongside its type. Knowing the type is enough to give you the info on what is effective against a Pokemon and what isn't.

>>26758225
>but so far we have BW's levelling system

Source?

>>26758244
>once you see them they're registered as seen in the Pokedex, alongside its type

That's wrong, unless they changed it for Gen VII. I just checked in my incomplete playthrough of XY, you have to catch it to see the type. And if they did change it that's its own form of casualization.

>>26757373
or i sometimes get the typing wrong. i don't have every type matchup memorized and only look it up when im going against a gym.

>>26758220
If the types were ever meant to be mysterious, I'd agree, but the designers intentionally design the pokemon to be immediately obvious.

Are all pokemon 100% immediately obvious? No. If I didn't know a Lucario, I probably wouldn't be able to tell you that it was Fighting/Steel. But 95% of the pokemon are. In most cases, if it's green and has a leaf on it, it's probably Grass. I don't know that there's a single Fire pokemon that I wouldn't be able to tell from a glance.

You see this as hand holding, I see this as never having been part of the challenge to begin with.

I'm not gonna say there aren't better ways to do it, but I think it's a pretty non-offensive way.

>>26758308
>Source?
>>26757580

>>26758195
>>26758225
Did you mean to reply to me, because I agree with what you said. The things we've seen, while unnecessary and annoying, don't directly make things easier for us, only for those who wouldn't know to begin with. A challenging game would be nice but I'm not even asking for that, I just want a game that feels that it has some depth to it, specifically in terms of trainer battles, routes, and total number of towns. XY was basically just as you said, button mashing to get to the next town, and I never really had to make much of an effort to get through the game. Early game threats are one thing, you don't have to use them, but I think you could play the game with any Pokemon and still have the same problem. You're inherently at an advantage to trainers by using six Pokemon and I could probably speak for most of us when I say that I don't want to train less just to be on an even footing in the game when in a new generation I want to try out as many options as possible. Another complaint that people has is how small they feel Kalos and the routes are, and if they increased the amount of battling it would at least give the impression of a larger region. ORAS being based on older games was at least somewhat better in this regard, because even though the battles still weren't easy, I felt like there was actually a decent amount of stuff to go through in the game. Kalos feels great in the first playthrough but after that you realize how barren it is.

>>26757676
>pokemon isn't hard so making it even easier is ok

ill never understand this logic.

>>26757276
As far as I'm concerned it only makes the game easier if you NEED it.

If you're old enough to get angry at the "casualization" chances are you know the type matchups anyway, meaning you can completely ignore the addition entirely.

It just doesn't bother me that much.

>>26758365
Why is making it easier NOT ok, then? Explain your point of view.

>>26758339
It just sours the experience for the 5% that aren't obvious.

Also it's great that BW's experience is back, that gives me a sliver of hope for the games to not be as easy as XY.

>English Pokédex have meters and kilograms as measurements

They better have a toggle for that in the final version, I'm not some gay European.

>a peripheral feature designed to make your life easier is casualization

Oh yes, and I suppose modern fighter planes are casual because they feature radar and fly-by-wire systems to lessen pilot workload.

It's called "progress". Welcome to 2016, grandpa.

>>26758405
Not him, but I can see both views.

Your logic is essentially, it was easy to begin with yet you stuck around, so that must not be where the value in the game is. Which I agree, Pokemon's not like Dark Souls or Monster Hunter where overcoming a difficult challenge is what makes it, it's the world and the exploration and pokemon themselves.


But on the other hand, you can have a challenging game that's still kid friendly. Again, using Mario 64, I love that game as a kid and as an adult. So in that sense, they can strive to do better and more inclusive.

>>26758356
I thought you were essentially saying that you were on the fence, but yeah, I get ya. Also agreed on the world, that's what im looking forward to the most.

>>26758417
Listen, I dont want to come off like "hurr gamefreek can do no wrong", cause trust me, I have more than my fair share of criticism for the stupid shit that they pull sometimes.
I'd just rather save my pitch forks for when they REALLY do something stupid. Like by keeping certain features exclusive to past games to keep them "special". Seriously, what kind of asinine fucking reasoning is that shit, they actively fight improving over their past selves for such trivial, sentimental bullshit.

>>26758417
>Also it's great that BW's experience is back, that gives me a sliver of hope for the games to not be as easy as XY.
Wait what? I missed this. If it's true I'm so fucking hype, that was honestly a really good cap back in Gen 5 and I didn't understand why they removed it.

>They better have a toggle for that in the final version, I'm not some gay European.
Maybe it was because of the translation but as someone who's in engineering and done problems in both fuck imperial with a hot iron rod. Having inches, feet, miles etc means that depending on the scenario you'll get random combinations for stuff like velocity and density because there isn't a standard, not to mention in some cases they just make up a unit that doesn't convert on a proper number at all. I don't like giving in to what Eurofags want but I hate imperial even more.

>>26758482
>I'd just rather save my pitch forks for when they REALLY do something stupid.

You know, that's a fair opinion to have. Though, if I had that opinion I'd probably just try to filter any threads about the type hint shit, like how I tend to ignore threads complaining about the lack of customization in ORAS since it never appealed to me. I also agree with the spoiler being a bigger issue than the type hint shit.

>>26758503
see >>26757580 for the source.

>>26757491

Gen I and II sure as fuck weren't just for kids. Maybe it's the better graphics that make it look more and more juvenile, but those were some solid old-school RPGs, if only a little easy.

>>26758539
>I also agree with the spoiler being a bigger issue than the type hint shit.
You mean like with customization? :^)
But seriously, I see your point, since I wasn't really expecting customization since it wasn't in there to begin with. I also didn't really expect the Frontier to be in ORAS because that would just be too good to be true and GF doesn't really do that anymore, but I thought there would at least be an expanded Battle Facility and not just literally the same Maison as before. To make it worse they could have just retconned the Battle Frontier but instead they put the model in as a "yeah we remember the frontier, but we're lazy and fuck you we aren't putting that in you'll buy our games anyway". The biggest issue with ORAS though was that there were plenty of changes in Emerald that would be easy to implement and were right there to work with, but they ignored it on purpose. No Battle Frontier would have been fine if they didn't literally backtrack on everything else.
But they often develop something really good only to drop it for no apparent reason, and waste their time on creating new shit, most of which doesn't really appeal to a lot of people to begin with. Oh well, gotta keep the games from being too similar somehow.

>>26757973
>right from the start
Have you missed the part where you have to beat a Pokemon before their type hints appear?

File: 1283385030742.jpg (119KB, 683x720px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 683x720px

>>26758482
>using Mario 64, I love that game as a kid and as an adult. So in that sense, they can strive to do better and more inclusive.

Fucking this 100 years.

>>26758569
The merchandising and anime made it very clear that gen 1 and 2 were for kids.

>>26758673

See

>>26758670

A good game doesn't alienate people over 12, regardless of marketing

File: 1458298769815.jpg (82KB, 604x605px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 604x605px

>>26757373
I, what!? You know, this entire fucking statement!

>>26757276
I agree, it helps newcomer as well, I have no idea people can actually hate the effectiveness

>>26757373
>needing the type advantage to beat the cpu
not even worth posting filthycasual.jpg

>>26758569
Don't fool yourself anon, gen I and II clearly were for children. The problem is that all children this day in age is inflicted with 4chan syndrome, aka (spoiled little whinny retards)!

Is there a compilation of everything known so far?

What the fuck does sure sleeper do?

>>26757317
Anon, if you dont know the typing effectiveness, you're either going to:
1. Look it up. (In which case the feature just saves the hastle.
2. Attack with what you guess would work like an idiot.

The only people the feature hurts are the wilfully ignorant.

>>26759008
immune to statuses that aren't sleep

File: megamanmegaman.jpg (87KB, 1264x710px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1264x710px

>>26758059
*Most kids nowadays
fixed that for you, because god knows I remember a generation that wasn't so brain dead they needed help for every encounter. pic related.

File: ROWLET.jpg (596KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 1000x1000px

>>26757276
H̡́̄̑͋̾ͬ̐͆ͫ̋͋̋̑͊ͪͩͬ̚͏̖͚̞̝̝͇̰͢E̵̎ͮ̉ͬ͟͏̠̳̯̘͕̖̬͙̫̰̪͖̻͈͔̣L̸̶̨̳̻̣̼̪̜̻̯̠̥̟̯̱̀̈̊́̏̿̏̎̀͆͢ͅͅͅĻ̸̢̘̠̮͈̬̹̩͎̰̲̞̟̟͉̤̈ͮͣͨͥ̂͑̒̒̓ͮ̄͋ͣ͋̚Ǫ͈͎͔̼̗͓̦͉̝̼͎̘͙̖̻̋̈́̀̿ͣ͛́̀͡͝ͅ ̪̰̦̜̲͖͙̬̙̻̬͓̻̤̩̂́̏́̌͟͢͠M̠͕͚̱̩͓̤̩̘͈͉͚̝̟͈̯̞͕̓̅̄ͯͥ͆͟Ý͐ͦͦ̆̐̅ͤ̆̆̔͒̃ͮ̉͋͏̡̳͕̙̲̬̭̦̰͔ ̴̶͉͍̥̣̱̜̗̯̳̻͚̮̪͛̈̊̄̔̾̈́͜C̦͎͉̟̟̦̘̬͖̥͇̱̫̥̰̰̣̼̦̓͊͆͌͡͡Ḧ̨̤̘̲̬̩͚̣̠́ͤ̇̅͐̏ͫ͋̍̃́͜͢͞ͅǏ̶̩͖̲̳͓͓̖̒ͨͤ̒͡ͅL̛͈͙̗͓͍̝͈̬̏ͩ̓̾ͯ̂̅̑̊ͤ̋ͣ̇͊́D̎̄͆́̂̋̋ͨͦ̑ͪ͋̃̅̌͝҉̺̯̻̰̟͇̰͕͉̪̹̲̗͘ͅR̷̵̷̞̤̼̫͈̙̞̱̦̹̠̟̱ͭͨ̈́̋̈͐̀̈́ͬ̽̂͑E̜̼̺̬̫̞͚̻̙̯̜̮̤̤̰ͧͪͪͩ͐͛ͦ͢N̵͈̱̻̭͒ͦ̿̌̾̏̍͂̿̅̑̈́̅͌̔̃̒̀͟

>>26758195
>>26758225
this. the thing that determines the 'challenge' in the game is the quality of the opponents in relation to the player. not only now the opponents have fewer pokemon, they are not prepared to battle against things the game itself gives you. I mean XY forces you to catch the legend, and even I did not use it, I'm pretty sure you can stomp the E4 with Xerneas or Yveltal, hell even the mega lucario is fantastic in there.
so, this particular "casualization" contributes nothing to making the game easier, it's only more convenient for new players. it's also a pretty logical addition too, since having a pokedex means you have access to this kind of information.