1. We have moved to a new forum system. All your posts and data should have transferred over. Welcome, to the new Serebii Forums. Details here
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
    Dismiss Notice
  3. If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders
    Dismiss Notice

Would Gen 8 and Future Generations be better off as Open World?

Discussion in 'General Pokémon Discussion' started by Marbi Z, Feb 26, 2019.

  1. Bolt the Cat

    Bolt the Cat Bringing the Thunder

    Eh, Snap's gameplay is a bit too limited. It's mainly just looking for Pokemon and taking pictures, with a few extra mechanics like Apples and Pester Balls to add some more challenge. If that's all you did the entire game, it'd probably get old quick. And sure they could add more onto the gameplay, but it wouldn't feel very natural, Snap's gameplay would do well to maintain its simplicity. So it's really not a good fit for open world.

    If there's any spinoff I'd like to see get the open world treatment, it's Pokepark. Pokepark has sandbox style maps and an action focused gameplay style, especially 2 which leaned more in the direction of action adventure gameplay than minigames, so it already checks most of the boxes that people are looking for in a console game. A 3rd game or spiritual successor that continues in that direction would be a great candidate for open world gameplay. Sadly, the series has been dormant for 7 years and IDK if TPC is interested in continuing at this point.

    Really, now that I think about it, TPC really hasn't made... well any kind of game in the last 5 years that's big on open, explorable maps. The main series has become increasingly linear. Mystery Dungeon is meant to be mazelike and claustrophobic. Ranger and Pokepark have been gone for a while and may be dead at this point. Level design isn't a factor in the likes of Shuffle and Pokken. There's nothing in the entire franchise to really satiate the desire for that kind of experience right now. Is it any wonder why the demand for those kinds of games has become so vocal?
    Sceptrigon likes this.
  2. shoz999

    shoz999 Sonic's the name! Speed's my game!

    I think Pokemon Snap would work and because of it's relaxing nature, it's a better fit for the Nintendo Switch console in handheld mode than most long-term action games.

    As for Mystery Dungeon. I want to see Atlus do there own take on that series, give it a Persona transformation which they obviously can do if they can turn freaking Fire Emblem into a Fire Emblem-lite RPG. As for Pokemon Ranger, I feel like it has great potential to become Pokemon's very own Legend of Zelda. The first Pokemon Ranger is eh but after playing the sequels which revolve more around puzzle-solving, I saw the Legend of Zelda potential in a Pokemon game through Pokemon Ranger.
  3. KillerDraco

    KillerDraco The Enforcer Staff Member Super Mod

    That's the exact opposite of what people are clamoring for. The answer to difficulty has never been "more grinding", because no one wants that; rather, what people wanted to see was full teams, balanced teams as opposed to all same-type, throwaway Pokemon, carrying items, and actually threatening movesets. Gen 7 actually did move in this direction already; if you look at how the totem Pokemon were set up, they were set up with more strategy. The Totem Pokemon would actually hold items; Araquanid held a Waccan Berry, Alola Marowak had a Thick Club, Mimikyu had a Lum Berry, and so on. The movesets and SOS partners had some strategy around them too; Araquanid would summon Masquerain to neuter most flying types with Intimidate, Togedemaru and Skarmory would alternate Bounce + Torment to prevent Earthquake spam, and Kommo-O carried Poison Jab and Thunderpunch to deal with its main weaknesses. This same vein of strategy was why Challenge Mode in B2W2 appealed to people; it wasn't the higher levels, but rather, the actual thought put into the teams and setups.

    And that's not something that level scaling fixes.

    Again, it discourages progression. The idea of level scaling defeats the purpose of moving onto new areas and seeing new things. Why move from route 1 to route 2 when you can just grind to level 50 on route 1 because of the scaling? Not to mention it creates extra levels of development.

    You're confusing "Open world" with "Non-linearity". The two often are used in conjunction, but they're not the same thing; for example, Hollow Knight is a great example of non-linearity without open world. What people have wanted is non-linearity, which is a reasonable request, albeit one that often conflicts with another request that people have; a stronger narrative. As of late people have become nostalgic for what Gen 5 did, in that it had a rather compelling narrative with good character growth and progression. What allowed that was having events happen in a specific order. Open world has a tendency to weaken a narrative because they can't do a sequential story in the same vein as a book or a movie would; BotW for instance gave you bits and pieces of history rather than a story that moves forward. A common criticism of Gen 6 and Gen 7 has been that weak narrative, since people have wanted for the narrative to be more than "Beat all the Trials/Gyms, and then fight the League". Thus, with the whole open world vs. narrative discussion, you run into the issue of "Can't please everyone".

    And again, I would reiterate that the main appeal of open world in games such as BotW and Skyrim has always been "Hey, see that mountain in the distance? You can climb it". Open world is as effective as your ability to interact with it; otherwise, there are ways to achieve nonlinearity without an open world. Optional areas, multiple paths to take, things like that. Simply walking around in an open world is still rather limited, and because of it, would struggle to truly be open because you'd be limited by the amount of paths you can take thanks to standards such as ledges, bodies of water, etc.

    It's okay to want open world, but it's not something that inherently makes a game better without being executed specifically with an open world in mind. You can't just say "Give it an open world" to any game and expect it to work. In particular the reason RPGs don't always go for open world is because RPGs want progression of a story line. You know, the "role playing" part of the game. It puts the RP in the RPG.
  4. Bolt the Cat

    Bolt the Cat Bringing the Thunder

    It takes more than being a relaxing gameplay style to make a good open world game. An open world game, by nature of its size, has to be something that can be sustained for a long time. This is a game that you're going to be spending days, even weeks playing. So it's important that the gameplay is complex and varied enough to sustain interest for that long.

    Just because the game has puzzles doesn't mean it makes a good Zelda clone. Ranger's gameplay isn't much like Zelda otherwise. Zelda's gameplay is about exploring overworlds and dungeons to find new items to help you explore further, and that part of the gameplay isn't quite the same. I actually feel Pokepark is more suited to the Zelda clone role because of its map/progression structure and because you're using the character abilities in 2 similarly to how you would in Zelda.

    It's not supposed to fix difficulty, just complement it. Obviously when they implement difficulty settings they should include all of these things, but the level scaling isn't meant to address that issue. I'm just saying that there would be more of a need to hang back and EV train in the main story if they were playing a Challenge Mode with smarter team design. Level scaling is meant to fix linearity and railroading.

    In theory, they could do that. And in theory, you don't really want to stop them since open world is about choice, if they want to stay there and grind, they can. In practice though, they probably won't. It'll get boring staying in the same place for that long, so exploring would give them variety. Not to mention that moving on to new areas would give them the opportunity to catch more Pokemon and find new items to power them up.

    I understand the difference between open world and nonlinearity, but the thing is that open world is an idealized form of nonlinearity. It's pretty much the polar opposite of linearity. As for the conflict between story and open world, this is where separate branches of the series would be useful. You can't please everyone, but the demand for open world is so high that you could easily see it being profitable, so it's not just something they should just shrug off and say "Welp, I guess we can't please them". If they need a separate line of games to satisfy the demand, that's fine, but they're leaving a lot of money on the table if they don't do something. That style of game has sold very well, and like I pointed out earlier, there's nothing in the entire Pokemon series that comes anywhere close to satisfying that style of play, so that segment of the fanbase is going to end up leaving if they don't come up with something that would appeal to them.
  5. Sceptrigon

    Sceptrigon Armored Guardian

    Yeah it’s been strange to me that the open world kind of aspect hasn’t been included in more Pokémon games recently. I haven’t played Pokepark myself, but from what I’ve seen there’s so much potential there. If only they allowed you to play as more Pokémon (ideally every single one, but that would be understandably super time consuming for developers) and emphasized less on the childish tone, then I would think that the spin-off would be much more popular with fans.

    Here’s hoping that there will be a game that allow for this more open style of play. With the Switch’s capabilities, it seems more likely to be something that developers can be more ensured to follow through.
    Bolt the Cat likes this.
  6. Bolt the Cat

    Bolt the Cat Bringing the Thunder

    Yeah, Pokepark really feels like it was marketed to the wrong audience. The game was advertised more as a collection of wagglefest Wii Remote minigames, but the bulk of the gameplay is exploring sandboxy overworlds and befriending Pokemon through real time battles and chase minigames. I think a lot of people wrote the game off because they thought it was just the former (I was guilty of that too at first until I saw a video of the game), but they'd be more interested in a game that focused on the latter. It's a shame they haven't done more with that style of gameplay, I think a lot of things people want in a console game are already there, they just need to shift away from the minigames, focus on the action adventure elements, and build on the formula from there.
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2019
    Sceptrigon likes this.
  7. Aduro

    Aduro Mt.BtlMaster

    I definitely agree that having higher leveled opponents is not the answer, and it definitely helped that the totem pokemon had some real creative though put into them. But that's not enough for me. Having gym masters with competitively balanced teams or a variety of strategies won't help unless the AI is fixed.

    The trainers still didn't know how to switch or predict the player's actions. They should know when to use phasing or how to create situations where they can set up. Even if it means that the AI cheats and on random occasions sees what move you pick before they pick their own sometimes. I'd actually be happy with that since it would provide a challenge.
    Sceptile Leaf Blade likes this.
  8. Prof. SALTY

    Prof. SALTY The Scruffy Professor

    I'd be hella annoyed if the AI even KNEW my pokemon's moves before a battle. Why would anyone want to be countered in a cheap way?
  9. Sceptile Leaf Blade

    Sceptile Leaf Blade Nighttime Guardian

    The AI already cheats in a way. It always knows the speed matchup before moves are made, even in the absence of abilities that activate when sent out. So in essence it knows your exact speed stat and knows whether you have Swift Swim or other speed changing abilities.
  10. Hydrohs

    Hydrohs 安らかに眠ります、岩田さん。 Staff Member Super Mod

    The AI pretty much has to cheat in order to match human intelligence.
  11. Aduro

    Aduro Mt.BtlMaster

    As Canada Bill Jones said "I know its crooked, but its the only game in town."
    Even if its unfair, at least the AI wouldn't be too much of a pushover to provide any kind of challenge. Real comptetitive pokemon is often about predicting your opponents moves or figuring out and removing their win condition. Not just attacking what's in front of you blindly. If the AI could pretend its playing competently, it would make the game a lot more interesting.
    Plus, wouldn't it feel great to be the heroic trainer who took down the evil team leader with the cheating AI?

    Then it needs to cheat in order to be entertaining.

    It could also be a simple matter of having AIs learn specific matchups and make the NPC's act differently sometimes. It would be simple to programme the AI to make different plays on an arbitrary basis.

    Lets take this for an example.
    The NPC player has Feraligatr out, while the player has a Camerupt in front and something else in the back.
    In real life, anyone would expect the player with the Camperupt to switch out. One water move will do massive damage. So they switch in their dry skin Heliolisk, take no damage and OHKO back next turn.
    Regardless of whether the Feraligatr has some competitively viable Sheer orb set, or whether its running water pulse, its not remotely threatening.
    But lets say that an AI opponent would arbitrarily (let's say 30% of the time) decide to set up a dragon dance. Then next turn it could damage heliolisk with something like earthquake or even just crunch depending on levels and damage.
    Or the AI is able to cheat sometimes and make its move after the player has chosen their move. So they go straight for earthquake and kill the heliolisk, or straight for waterfall an OHKO the camerupt. That imitates a real player's ability to predict a switch on occasion.

    Both a more competitive team and a less predictable AI are absolute necessities to make a challenging opponent. That would be necessary to make players think and improve.
    The more capable NPCs would do this more often (ie gyms and elite 4 members) meanwhile less capable opponents (ie preschoolers and low-level grunts) would always make the obvious plays.
  12. Prof. SALTY

    Prof. SALTY The Scruffy Professor

    ... No? If I wanted a competitive play level challenge I would play competitively. That's just not what I want to be playing in a solo pokemon run. It's not fun for me.
    RileyXY1 and Orphalesion like this.
  13. RileyXY1

    RileyXY1 Young Battle Trainer

    I think so too, and I don't think that GF would want to force competitive strategies onto players.
    Prof. SALTY likes this.
  14. Pokegirl Fan~

    Pokegirl Fan~ There's no tina

    No, I don't think an open world would work for Pokemon tbh
    Orphalesion and RileyXY1 like this.
  15. RileyXY1

    RileyXY1 Young Battle Trainer

    Same here. I don't think that it is required for Pokemon to go open world. I prefer Pokemon the way it is now.
  16. Captain Jigglypuff

    Captain Jigglypuff Leader of Jigglypuff Army

    An open world Pokémon game is a bad idea. It would break the game if you could get the Legendaries right after getting the starter.
    Orphalesion likes this.
  17. Boss1991

    Boss1991 Hardcore Pokéfan

    I think Open World is one way to go, but not necessarily the best way to go.

    I agree that Kalos, Alola (and most likely Galar as well) are very linear regions. They are basically straight corridors: the game. So I understand that this needs a solution.

    But I think there is a more simple solution instead of making Pokémon Open World. The solution would be for Game Freak to simply look back at how Kanto, Johto, Hoenn and Sinnoh were designed. They are not Open World regions, but they are A LOT more exploration friendly and non-linear than the last three regions we've seen.
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2019
  18. Bolt the Cat

    Bolt the Cat Bringing the Thunder

    While the older regions are definitely an improvement over the newer ones, in the grand scheme of things they're still super linear. The only thing they really do better is have more backtracking and optional paths. There are much better ways to enhance the exploration and open endedness than that, games like Xenoblade and the older 3D Zelda games show just how far you can really go without having to go full on open world.
  19. RileyXY1

    RileyXY1 Young Battle Trainer

    I think that they can go for nonlinearity without having to go full on open world like BOTW. Things like optional paths or backtracking can make the experience less like a straight line.
    WishIhadaManafi5 and Boss1991 like this.
  20. Orphalesion

    Orphalesion Well-Known Member

    Kanto forcing you to run through Pewter City and Mt. Moon for a second time after Lt. Surge without offering any new story or exploration opportunities there is NOT a good thing imho. It's pointless busy work and pretty boring. And I always thought the "flexibility" on whether to challenge Sabrina or Koga first was less actual flexibility and more a case where the developers didn't secure that part against sequence breaking.
    So no, Kanto doesn't really scream non-linear or optional paths to me...
    (not that I think a non-linear story is desirable...)
    Edit: That being said I'm all for properly implemented backtracking (new areas to explore and/or story content in old places) optional paths and ex plorable areas, as long as it's all wrapped up in an interesting story.
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2019
    WishIhadaManafi5 and Ignition like this.

Share This Page