I would dislike a real time battle system. Stick to tradition.
GF doesn't need to compete with the major console developers. There's no need for an open world game.
False. Like it or not, they're always competing. Gamers only have a limited amount of time and money so they have to make choices between games. And now that the Switch has merged Nintendo's handheld and console markets, the competition is more direct than ever. The Switch is all Nintendo has now, so in order to lure gamers away from Microsoft and Sony they need games of a similar caliber. They need games that show the full capabilities of what the Switch has to offer. And yes, that does mean open world in this case. Pokemon, being one of Nintendo's biggest IPs and being an adventure game, needs to show off how large and open ended the game worlds can get. So yes, there is a need for open world.
I would dislike a real time battle system. Stick to tradition.
There may be a compromise to this whole open world debate, instead of having one giant open world they could just include more optional locations to visit along routes. Basically areas that don't affect the overall story but unique locations to catch rare Pokemon. Some notable examples from past games would be Diglett Cave, Wayward Cave, Old Chateau, Relic Passage, Terminus Cave, Lost Hotel, and plenty of others.
Oh I completely agree on this. It's one of the reasons why I like to see them innovate with formats like Rotation, Triples, or the various stipulations at the Battle Frontier. They maintain the core battle mechanics, but mix up the playing field with different rules. It's just too bad that those things never stick around long enough to really improve, apart from Doubles...I feel like I'm in such a minority when I want an updated battle system. I don't think real-time would work given how ridiculously slow the PGL servers are, but a more elaborate turn-based system with actual positioning and more strategic possibilities would be more than welcome for me, especially for triple, quadruple, or even quintuple battles. The single battle format as we have it now is just too boring for me to stay invested, it's almost purely down to type and stats advantages and switching. The double battle format is interesting in that you can have some nice combinations and collaborations between your pokémon, but I'd love to see more. You can keep the stats and damage calculations the same, maybe just add in a modifier for some moves that scales damage based on distance between attack user and target, modify accuracy based on distance as well, and give attacks a certain range.
Battle Royals were a very neat idea but they didn't really execute it well. The current rules for who wins are fairly balanced, but they introduce them so early in the game you can't really play around with it more at that stage of the game, your unevolved level 20 pokémon simply get blown away by fully evolved level 50 pokémon, and the Battle Royals are never mentioned again after that. They also didn't bring them to the Battle Spot so you can't even get rated battles with them, nor can a meta ever actually develop. The fact that you need to invite people on Plaza for it and you need 4 people for a battle is a serious hindrance to actually get battles going. They should've brought Battle Royal to the Battle Spot, and maybe go even more nuts with it by introducing a Doubles format for it, so that every player has a 4-pokémon team and brings out 2 at a time, so there are essentially eight pokémon simultaneously on the field. Just go nuts with it and see what crazy strategies people can come up with for such formats.
I very much but respectfully disagree with most of this. However, I do agree that Battle Royal was not well implemented.
The main thing that threw it off was that a battle ended after just one player lost. The battle should carry on until one player is left standing.
I'm thinking that these games will have the same battle system as the previous games. There's no need to change the battle system at this point.
Why?
The turn-based battle system has been a part of Pokemon for over 2 decades. Changing it now may alienate older fans, especially competitive players.
The turn-based battle system has been a part of Pokemon for over 2 decades. Changing it now may alienate older fans, especially competitive players.
Older fans have more than likely played other RPGs and video games, and thus will be able to adapt well to any new style of gameplay. It's more so the recent fans who would be hindered.
However, given that the Switch title is beginning a new era of the franchise, I honestly welcome a new battle system. I also do feel most older players would be understanding and welcoming to such a change, especially since many of them have been calling for change in the series.
Older fans have more than likely played other RPGs and video games, and thus will be able to adapt well to any new style of gameplay. It's more so the recent fans who would be hindered.
However, given that the Switch title is beginning a new era of the franchise, I honestly welcome a new battle system. I also do feel most older players would be understanding and welcoming to such a change, especially since many of them have been calling for change in the series.