on the WII , pokemon is great , but isnt there will ever be a regular pokemon game , first diamond/pearl, then platinum then HG/SS and now blackfor 2011< and all of them are only on the DS , do this piss anyone else than me off ??
This topic is locked from further discussion.
on the WII , pokemon is great , but isnt there will ever be a regular pokemon game , first diamond/pearl, then platinum then HG/SS and now blackfor 2011< and all of them are only on the DS , do this piss anyone else than me off ??
No, because Pokemon belongs on handhelds. I wouldn't mind Pokemon Stadium though, those were alot of fun IMO.
There are many things wrong with the Pokemon franchise, but that isn't one of them. Keep the games on handhelds.
The DS needs a system seller and that is Pokemon. It is strictly a business move, and a smart one at that.
What's wrong is that the Wii doesn't have a Pokemon MMO.GamerForcaNintendo's online system could never support a MMO. The lack of anti-hacking/cheating is a major issue and also the FC system is worse than having to use IP addresses in the early 1990's. Simple online games barely work on the Wii and an MMO would be way too much for it to handle.
[QUOTE="GamerForca"]What's wrong is that the Wii doesn't have a Pokemon MMO.ImproveMindNintendo's online system could never support a MMO. The lack of anti-hacking/cheating is a major issue and also the FC system is worse than having to use IP addresses in the early 1990's. Simple online games barely work on the Wii and an MMO would be way too much for it to handle. ...that doesn't make it any less wrong.
There's nothing wrong with Pokemon being a portable-oriented franchise. The games are just better fits on portables in a number of ways. A major part of Pokemon's draw has always been able to carry the game with you on the go and be able to interact with different people in the ways of trading, battling, and other ways. It's the level of interaction can't be duplicated on a home gaming system of any sort, much less the Wii.
I'm sure it's not impossible to create a full-scale Pokemon game on the Wii, but even if that was ever to happen, the overall experience wouldn't have the same potential as it does now on the DS. Therefore, it's probably best that the formula stays the way it is.
Pocket Monsters. I cant put the Wii in my pocket or play it when Im on the pot. :lol: I do think it's a crime that we havent had a true sequel to pokemon stadium developed by Hal Labratory to compliment the handheld releases.
That it hasn't appeared on a console in it's classic form shows a lack of confidence in the game by the publishers. I'm beginning to believe in the message that they're sending: the Pokemon series is a one-trick pony, forever condemned to small-scale productions to match the small-scale imaginations of the developers.
Its actually not that hard to figure out, think about it like this, Nintendo put Twilight Princess on the Wii first to migrate the fanbase from the cube to the Wii. That is what Pokemon does for the handheld market, when a future Pokemon game is for the 3DS only, you have to upgrade to the next handheld to keep playing. Pokemon serves as Nintendo's migrating game, it moves whatever hardware that its on. Now if you take that and put it on a console, the handheld version may not look so good anymore, especially with the bigger is better mentality that many have. Pokemon got millions to move from the GB to the DS and it will get people to go from the DS to the 3DS, you don't want to potentially upset that by making a bigger better version for consoles. Its not a lack of confidence they have, its a don't rock the boat attitude that they have. Cant blame them, Pokemon is the gravy train.That it hasn't appeared on a console in it's classic form shows a lack of confidence in the game by the publishers. I'm beginning to believe in the message that they're sending: the Pokemon series is a one-trick pony, forever condemned to small-scale productions to match the small-scale imaginations of the developers.
so_hai
[QUOTE="so_hai"]Its actually not that hard to figure out, think about it like this, Nintendo put Twilight Princess on the Wii first to migrate the fanbase from the cube to the Wii. That is what Pokemon does for the handheld market, when a future Pokemon game is for the 3DS only, you have to upgrade to the next handheld to keep playing. Pokemon serves as Nintendo's migrating game, it moves whatever hardware that its on. Now if you take that and put it on a console, the handheld version may not look so good anymore, especially with the bigger is better mentality that many have. Pokemon got millions to move from the GB to the DS and it will get people to go from the DS to the 3DS, you don't want to potentially upset that by making a bigger better version for consoles. Its not a lack of confidence they have, its a don't rock the boat attitude that they have. Cant blame them, Pokemon is the gravy train. If you use Zelda as an example, you have to acknowledge that it exists successfuly on boht handhelds and consoles - what's to say Pokemon can't do the same?That it hasn't appeared on a console in it's classic form shows a lack of confidence in the game by the publishers. I'm beginning to believe in the message that they're sending: the Pokemon series is a one-trick pony, forever condemned to small-scale productions to match the small-scale imaginations of the developers.
Sepewrath
As a gamer, I do find it weird that the consoles can't have one normal Pokemon game. But from a business point of view, it's a handheld cash cow that means insta-sell of Nintendo handhelds.Kenny789Japan has that nice pikachu adventure looking game. Man i would have liked to play that. Sadly from what i hear its not coming to the states. Wouldn't mind seeing the game on the Wii but i can't argue with the majorities point here.
If you use Zelda as an example, you have to acknowledge that it exists successfuly on boht handhelds and consoles - what's to say Pokemon can't do the same?so_haiBecause its easier to go from console to handheld, than handheld to console. Zelda has always been a console game, on a handheld, its smaller Zelda on the go. But if you want the full Zelda experience, you have to stick to the console. A Pokemon on consoles would still be the full experience, but bigger and grander than the handheld version. See the difference? Think of Pokemon Stadium like a handheld Zelda game, its Pokemon, it has its only little flare, but its not the full experience your accustom to, to get that, your going to have to buy the 3DS. You understand now.
[QUOTE="so_hai"]If you use Zelda as an example, you have to acknowledge that it exists successfuly on boht handhelds and consoles - what's to say Pokemon can't do the same?SepewrathBecause its easier to go from console to handheld, than handheld to console. Zelda has always been a console game, on a handheld, its smaller Zelda on the go. But if you want the full Zelda experience, you have to stick to the console. A Pokemon on consoles would still be the full experience, but bigger and grander than the handheld version. See the difference? Think of Pokemon Stadium like a handheld Zelda game, its Pokemon, it has its only little flare, but its not the full experience your accustom to, to get that, your going to have to buy the 3DS. You understand now. The 'full' Zelda experience doesn't always rate as high or sell as much as the handheld edition - so I can't see what that really means... But anyway. I thought the Pokemon fans had more faith in Gamefreak and Nintendos abilities... I guess they'd only make it for fans that would really want it anyway.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment