What did you expect. . otte rco QUE? points off of X and Y' s review score because it still feels like a Pokemon game' Well what the fuck do they expect it he f What did you expect otte rco QUE? points off of X and Y' s review score because it still feels like a Pokemon game' Well what the fuck do they he f
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (324)
[ 324 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
User avatar #4 - nospyonme
Reply +344 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I think that means "they didnt pay us money to test it"
User avatar #46 to #4 - robobloxx
Reply -10 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
It might mean that there are ten pokemon games, and they all play the same way, so maybe Ninty should make something more original with pokemon.
User avatar #63 to #46 - commontroll
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
And every Grand Theft Auto plays the same, and every Battlefield, and every Call of Duty, and every Prototype, and every Mortal Combat game.

And all those get high ratings, despite being the same damn game with slight changes.
User avatar #226 to #63 - folkflunky
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I'm not gonna lie, I don't give a **** they don't change a lot.

You can't expect games to make a 180 degrees turn. I like Battlefield because of how it is, slightly realistic but still not a simulator. I like GTA because of how it is, incredibly silly sometimes, but showing very serious problems.

I don't want GTA to become Saint's Row and I don't want Battlefield to become Call of Duty. I want them to stay how they are.

And what I'm talking about here is about the gameplay. The story can change, I gotta admit I'm a little tired of the generic "america saves the day " ********. But as long as the game is the same, I don't care. Ubisoft changed the **** out of Ghost Recon with Future Soldier and I've never seen such a ********* about it. You can't change because most people will bitch about it. So just leave games be what they are. Let GTA be that silly but serious story. Let Battlefield be that slightly realistic and generic ********. And I could name a lot of games that people complain about but if they changed the bitching would be off the charts, like Dark Souls.
User avatar #315 to #226 - commontroll
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
If you read my other comments, you'd see that's what I'm saying. It's not bad to say a game is the same. It's just retarded to act like it's bad for some and good with others.
User avatar #64 to #63 - robobloxx
Reply -9 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Not every battlefield plays the same, or call of duty, or mortal kombat.
There have only been two prototype games.
I cant speak for GTA as Ive only played V.
Pokemon is the same grindfest every time with new pokemon added in, which doesnt change the way the game is.
Pokemon games have the same basic story everytime as well.
At least battlefield changes the way it plays or feels or even looks, while pokemon does none of that.
User avatar #69 to #64 - commontroll
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
How have the pokemon games not changed how they look? Have you seen the progress they've made throughout the years? The only thing that's the same is the angle that you view the world, which is the same in every Battlefield game.

Now don't get me wrong, I've only played a couple pokemon games. They're fun, but not amazing to me. But they're made for kids, so of course they're basic stories and such. But you can give a game a story, but nobody really cares about it. Not unless it's Gears of War, Halo, Mass Effect, or Elder Scrolls.

All those games I listed there are the same as the game before for the most part, except for slight graphical changes. Sure there's some differences between Call of Duty games. Especially between Treyarch and Activision ones. I actually respect Treyarch because they change it up a bit and try to add new things.

But, they're not that different from the Pokemon games. And here's the thing, nobody cares. Nobody ever cares if a game is the exact same as the one before except the people who dislike it. The people who dislike it will buy the new version that's the same, and then talk about how it's crap compared to the old one because it's too different.

So there we have it. Nobody cares except the haters, so game developers don't bother.
User avatar #105 to #69 - robobloxx
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Pokemon as a whole has been the same over and over with a very slight change in graphics, which means they are rehashes.
Unlike call of duty where the game control changes, the way the game is played changes, and there are different things added in an attempt to keep the series fresh.

You are wrong in the fact that no one cares about story in games.

I agree with you about how GoW, Halo, and Mass Effect are basically the same, I never said they werent.

The elder scrolls have changed more than any pokemon game and if you think otherwise you are retarded.

Everything else I agree on, the review was when the "haters" began to care, which means that Ninty should try something new.


User avatar #122 to #105 - commontroll
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
What? Dude, I was saying GoW, Halo, Mass Effect, and Elder Scrolls are the only games people care about the story with. Good lord, do you not read what other people type?

Besides, Halo has actually been very good about always adding a new feature and always changing up the game in large ways.

Halo 2 introduced two characters with two different abilities and a very good dual wielding system, as well as online matchmaking. You can bet your titties that you use some of the things they integrated into that game, and those things sure as hell were not there in the first one.

Halo 3 introduced Theater and Forge modes, allowing you to go and view your games from any angle you want and make videos and take screenshots with it (and that's a feature that games only started commonly introducing after Halo 3 did it) and the Forge mode lets you make your own maps change things up so they're your own version, still haven't seen that in any other shooter game.

Halo ODST was a game Bungie did not want to make, and they were forced to by Microsoft. Yet they still brought in Firefight mode, which is a damn good game mode. It also changed the game a lot because you were suddenly a fragile and frail regular (comparatively) human instead of a super soldier.

Halo Reach you had a universal character system, and a universal leveling system, and all of the things that had been added into the other games were put into it. They had a commendation system, they had a game that put your character into the cut scenes, they had new weapons (and just just same gun, new skin, completely new weapons, as they did in every game before) and new gameplay. They added assassinations, they added daily and weekly challenges.

Also each game had increasing amounts of customization of your character.

So go ahead, tell me more about how Halo never changes anything, and COD and Battlefield do. COD added diving and zombies. They also had credits and removed them. Halo only removed things when 343 took over.
#132 to #122 - adding
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
adding
User avatar #127 to #122 - robobloxx
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
What do you mean by "GoW, Halo, Mass Effect, and Elder Scrolls are the only games people care about the story with.", then?

Because I read, "The only games where people care about the story are these games."

Also, I never said anything bad about halo, ive never even played halo. And CoD added multiplayer, zombies, different game modes, new controls, new weapons, new looks, and a new story every time.
User avatar #138 to #127 - commontroll
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I mean those are the only games I've run into people actually caring about what the story is and what happens in it.

You said they were all the same, and they're not was the point of my comment. I know that the COD game has changed a lot, but when people talk about how COD, they generally just mean from when 4 came out. Even the first three were all the same for the most part.

But as I've said, it's okay if a game is the same, but to act like some games are the same as the one before, while others aren't is just ridiculous. And to act like a game is worse because it's basically the same thing with slight changes is even more ridiculous. I've just always hated Game Informer's reviews, because they'll say one game is terrible because it's the same thing every time with new maps, and then say the complete opposite about other games.
User avatar #148 to #138 - robobloxx
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
And just to add, most game reviews are stupid because they are payed.
User avatar #147 to #138 - robobloxx
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I agree with you for the most part, you are right, but in my opinion Pokemon has been the same since red, with the only real deviation being emerald and silver, coincidentally my favorite two.
User avatar #151 to #147 - commontroll
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I agree, thing is, we both don't really play pokemon. It's always easy to see things as the same when you're looking at it from the outside. It's like when people think of America. People in other countries think of just one thing, but in America people see how different all the different parts are.
#199 to #127 - chezburgadominator
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #152 to #46 - meganinja
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I don't think you've thought about your statement. Every generation there has been added more and more optional side quests.
User avatar #154 to #152 - robobloxx
Reply -7 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Like?
User avatar #155 to #154 - meganinja
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Secret bases, sand collecting, beauty contests, underground mining, making movies, battle tower, and all deviants of that, game rooms, etc. That's just off the top of my head.
User avatar #157 to #155 - robobloxx
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Those arent "sidequests" those are small games that mean nothing and add nothing to the game.
User avatar #160 to #157 - meganinja
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Well there's your problem. You aren't open to change. They add all this additional stuff to the game, but all you want to do is level your pokemon, and beat the game. Why do you care whether they release additional stuff if you're not going to use it in the first place?
User avatar #162 to #160 - robobloxx
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
If they mattered to the game and changed it at all I would care. Its like hats on tf2 or items on FJ, they dont mean anything.

And thanks you arent my therapist, and Im pretty sure im "open to change", and pokemon is not
User avatar #170 to #162 - meganinja
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I'm guessing double battles, triple battles, rotation battles, the dark grass that has stronger pokemon appear, sometimes as a double battle, the addition of ******** of new itmes, AND THE ******* ADDITION OF FAIRY TYPE aren't changes that effect gameplay either?

What do you want them to ******* do? Switch over to a different genre every time they make a new game to keep it interesting? I mean you can walk diagonally now for ****** sake.
User avatar #174 to #170 - robobloxx
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Ooh walking diagonally.

I lost interest in this argument when I realized you were thumbing me down for no reason, so have fun.
User avatar #186 to #174 - meganinja
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I like the part where you thumbed me down for no reason, so I responded likewise. I'm sorry that you're too stuck up to realize this, but Pokemon has changed a lot. They are continuing to change with every game they make. In addition to the roughly 100 or so pokemon they add every game, they add multiple sidequests, new mini games, and new game mechanics. All of this for a very young fan base where they could simply add a small amount of new pokemon with updated graphics and they'd buy it. They don't have to do it for us, because we're not the main fan base. Sure, we're a large part of the fan base, but we're not the majority.

There's only so much that the creators can do while maintaining the fact that's it's still a pokemon game. And with what they can do, they're doing a lot.
User avatar #189 to #186 - robobloxx
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
<3
User avatar #53 to #46 - nospyonme
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
If it works, dont fix it
#211 to #53 - pudgykoala
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
yeah, CoD is great the way it is
#204 to #46 - anon id: 2492cba7
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
every COD game plays like an fps
every pokemon game plays like a pokemon game.
u say pokemon doesnt add anything each new game? have u played more then 1 pokemon game? or even 1 pokemon game? they add new stuff all the time.
eg:battle tower,battle train,pokemon theather,dream world(online),new pokemon etc .
think of it this way: u play any FPS to shoot ppl ,
u play pokemon to catch/train/battle em all
User avatar #54 to #46 - robobloxx
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
It obviously isnt working for some people.
#67 to #54 - anon id: c182c990
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Because there aren't spinoffs with different gameplay or anything...
User avatar #68 to #67 - robobloxx
Reply -7 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
And if those work, fine but they need to keep changing instead of going back to the same old
#233 to #68 - anon id: 14067b1b
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Actually, changing the established formula is one of the riskiest things you could possibly do to a franchise, as it usually doesn't go over well with the majority of the fanbase. For example, let's take a good look at Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts. That game had a huge change in formula from the first two games. Last time I checked, fans of the other 2 games for the most part outright despise Nuts and Bolts. Changing the formula too much results in the fans getting alienated. You need to change the formula just the right amount to prevent the series from becoming monotonous and keep enough the same to prevent the ire of the fanbase. In my opinion, Pokemon has done just that, took enough risks to keep the series fresh while simultaneously didn't take too many risks to feel too different.
#70 to #68 - anon id: c182c990
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Those spinoffs do get sequels and thats where your varied gameplay comes in. The main series pokemon games should not get a different formula, especially now that they've stuck to it for so long. Even if the games use the same formula, however, you cannot deny that a lot has changed since the old days of red and blue.
User avatar #98 to #70 - robobloxx
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I can deny that a lot has changed since red and blue considering theyre almost the same game.

But its nice to know how many hypocrites are on FJ defending pokemon, but putting down call of duty for doing the same thing pokemon does.
User avatar #200 to #98 - welliguessitsaname
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Okay.

Pokemon is stupid and repetitive and Call of Duty is awesome and original. Does that make you happy?

If you're not a troll, I must commend you for your courage, however
User avatar #290 to #200 - robobloxx
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Its half trolling, half serious. I dont really care for pokemon,but I know enough not to legitimately say it.


The underlined text was kind of the give away huh?
#14 to #4 - anon id: 08f7904b
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Well how do you think those ****** overly repetitive Batman games keep getting 10's according to gameinformer
User avatar #17 to #14 - Gandalfthewhite
Reply -11 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
there's been 2 recent batman games and countless ****** overly repetitive pokemon games
#267 to #17 - iamaniceperson
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
One must not insult the Pokemons on FJ, or red thunbs you shall drown in
User avatar #281 to #4 - ompalomper
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
dude, you know who you can trust nowadays with things like this? i know rockpapershotgun are always fair but other then them?
User avatar #282 to #281 - nospyonme
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
I usually just ask a random person on steam about any game
User avatar #284 to #282 - ompalomper
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
that sounds reasonable, but do we really have time for rational solutions here?
#286 to #284 - nospyonme
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Just pour water on it.
Just pour water on it.
User avatar #5 to #4 - chronomancer
Reply +41 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Truth incarnate.
#6 to #5 - nospyonme
Reply +31 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
User avatar #1 - chronomancer
Reply +277 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
"Like Skyrim with Pokeballs" -IGN
#51 to #1 - feffog
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
actually IGN said x and y was **** for having too linear of a storyline


meanwhile skyward ********* got 10/10, a higher rating than skyrim saying it was the best game of all the zelda series
User avatar #302 to #51 - makonendrak
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Woulda been better if you said "******** Sword"
User avatar #251 to #51 - lolshadowjewtwo
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
I thought Skyward Sword was great. Not the best, but still great.
#203 to #1 - utarefson
+4 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#9 to #1 - deepfriedchocolate
Reply +14 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
skyrim x pokemon? well we can dream
User avatar #262 to #12 - trivdiego
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
holy **** mewtwo is nightmare fuel
#21 - Hightower
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Pokemon has basically been the same game since the first one. Nothing but minor graphical upgrades and changing the pokemon themselves. I mean, the biggest advance in the series is being able to walk at an angle...
User avatar #75 to #21 - xdeathspawnx
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
do you know how long it takes to design 150+ pokemon that all have to be balanced takes? That's a pretty big update in my book. At least they don't just recycle the first 151 pokemon over and over again. Its not like every madden game has different players, the majority of them are the same from the year before.
User avatar #29 to #21 - admiralen
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
except thats the point of sequels, you get more of what you liked last time, they give you new maps, new pokemon, new battles and new graphics etc.
User avatar #22 to #21 - soupkittenagain
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
What about how the characters look more 3D?
#23 to #22 - Hightower
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
"minor graphical upgrades "
User avatar #33 to #23 - alstorp
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Well going from 2D to 3D isn't really minor.
#36 to #33 - Hightower
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Fixed camera angles man. It's not 3D it's 2D, lust like every other entry, just with improved sprites.
User avatar #313 to #36 - alstorp
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
"Unlike previous games in the main series, Pokémon X and Y feature a three dimensional style of gameplay, and 3D modeled characters and creatures are used, rather than sprites like has always been done in the main series."
User avatar #24 to #23 - soupkittenagain
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I see.... Well I hope one day that they realize the potential of how amazing Pokemon could be as a console game. They actually have addressed that not too long ago. They said it probably won't happen...
#25 to #24 - Hightower
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Ya, it's kinda ******. The series had potential to be a major console rpg. Just think of how much of the world could fit onto a console game, and how many other pokemon games could have had their mechanics incorporated into it. They could have had side games like Snap, or Stadium.
#231 to #21 - amonomous
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Not really.
User avatar #280 to #21 - Johnsfer
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
No, you are so wrong it hurts me.
#316 to #280 - Hightower
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
What different gameplay mechanic does the new game offer that wasn't in the first one released in 1998?
User avatar #318 to #316 - Johnsfer
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Breeding
EV Training
Weather
Double/Triple Battles
1v5 pokemon battles
That's just a few
To say that Pokemon Red and Blue are the same game as X and Y is slightly correct, in that you are still catching pokemon, you are still trying to get to the elite four, but there is so much on the side to do now that cannot be done in the first games. To say that is to say that the very first CoD is basically the same as BO2, only graphics change and changes in the guns themselves and thats it.
#320 to #318 - Hightower
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
So in 15 years with 18 sequels there have 4 minor changes to gameplay (weather is not a gameplay mechanic) and you disagree with me why?
User avatar #322 to #320 - Johnsfer
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
I never said those are the only changes *******, quit sticking to this retarded argument without even looking at the other side.
I can see that yes there are obviously going to be similar in gameplay throughout all the games, but that doesn't mean that the only changes are sprites, stats and graphics.
#319 to #318 - Hightower
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
You do realize you are arguing against what the game creators have said, don't you? Junichi Masuda, the director of Game Freak compared Pokemon to the annual sports games and says it hasn't changed much in 15 years. When the games parent company admits it's the same game over and over with, like I said in my post, nothing but minor changes, your argument loses some traction.
User avatar #321 to #319 - Johnsfer
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
And yet I have just finished posting many different things that prove that the game has been changing, no matter what they say, it's not an annual game, while the core game stays similar, there are so many changes I can't even name them all.
Even the core game has changed like I said, Shiny Pokemon, Weather is a gameplay mechanic, if you actually played pokemon you would know, multiple pokemon per battle, sky battles, megaevolutions and even actual plots.
#209 to #21 - anon id: 2492cba7
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
have u ppl played more then 1 pokemon game???? odd how ppl say pokemon doesnt change anything.
changes: characters, towns, maps if those dont matter then dream world(online), battle tower,battle train, NEW pokemon(and dont say gen 1 is the best,geodude was a rock with arms)
I play pokemon to catch/battle/train pokemon. I play COD to shoot ppl. why would they change play style?
#317 to #209 - Hightower
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
The gameplay has not changed in 15 years man. Nothing you said refutes that. Aside from visual changes , the game is the same. Sorry if that offends you in some way, but it's true.
User avatar #30 to #21 - chitownbrownie
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I liked the ones that came out for gamecube, those were awesome
User avatar #32 to #30 - holycrapimacupcake
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
YES!
User avatar #146 to #21 - doctorhue
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
When you can sit on benches in your favorite games, then talk to me.
#206 to #146 - blokrokker
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
*ahem*

But seriously, Altair has some monster ******* hands, goddamn.
User avatar #26 to #21 - subtard
Reply +78 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
While every shooter is exactly the same but with different looking guns
And every sports game is exactly the same but with different names on the back of jerseys.
#208 to #26 - ghettoham
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Are you kidding me? So you're saying shooters haven't changed since Quake, Doom and golden eye yeah?   
   
Because half-life didn't basically invent scripting did it? And Halo didn't begin the whole &quot;two weapon and regenerating health&quot; thing either right? Its just always been that way. And CoD4 didn't show everyone just how good scripting can get right?    
   
Yes, you are correct in saying that in recent times, the shooter genre hasn't really advanced too much. But you look back at when the first pokemon games came out and the shooters at the same time, then look at modern shooters and tell me that things haven't changed.   
   
Pokemon has not had a major change in gameplay style or direction, ever. It hasn't evolved. Maybe because it doesn't need to, but you can't hate the people who say they wanted something more this time.   
   
And no idea about sports games, don't play them.
Are you kidding me? So you're saying shooters haven't changed since Quake, Doom and golden eye yeah?

Because half-life didn't basically invent scripting did it? And Halo didn't begin the whole "two weapon and regenerating health" thing either right? Its just always been that way. And CoD4 didn't show everyone just how good scripting can get right?

Yes, you are correct in saying that in recent times, the shooter genre hasn't really advanced too much. But you look back at when the first pokemon games came out and the shooters at the same time, then look at modern shooters and tell me that things haven't changed.

Pokemon has not had a major change in gameplay style or direction, ever. It hasn't evolved. Maybe because it doesn't need to, but you can't hate the people who say they wanted something more this time.

And no idea about sports games, don't play them.
#27 to #26 - frolite
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
He's right tho. Pokemon games haven't changed much at all since 98 its been pretty much the same thing just adding a new map, new pokemon, better graphics. Call of Duty and most other fps franchines are guilty of the same thing but because we were raised around pokemon it's ok for them to do it but god forbid another franchise decides to follow that blueprint. I loved pokemon i really did Dragonite is still my favorite since Lance mopped the floor with me with his back in Red version. And I'm itching to get back into it might buy me a DS just for pokemon X. But we all know what's to expect it's been the same dam thing since 98.
User avatar #79 to #27 - ZenMacros
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Except that's not true at all given the tons of features that have been added/revamped throughout the years. Saying the only thing they add are maps, Pokemon, and better graphics is an exaggeration.
#90 to #79 - frolite
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Like what exactly the challenge tower back in gold and silver? Other then that there really wasn't anything new. Emerald added an entire island full of those trainer towers. All you do is catch pokemon raise your favorites beat the elite 4 maybe fill the pokedex if you really want And that's about it revamping things isn't exactly adding anything new. I'm not defending CoD in anyway don't like fps titles never really got into them but they're guilty of the same thing revamping and polishing old ideas and adding a little tweak here and there but nothing truely new.
User avatar #103 to #90 - ZenMacros
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Physical/Special split and abilities are the first things that come to mind, and they both had a huge effect on how battles play out. Not to mention adding types and a ******* of moves, fixing the type chart, hold items, and for X/Y, horde encounters and sky battles, and that's only counting things that have/had an effect on actual battles. Other aspects are a different story and there are tons of things that have been added. Sure, you still catch Pokemon and raise them and beat gyms/E4 (and to be honest, I myself am getting tired of that same formula), but that's mainly what Pokemon is about.

I will say that these things are added gradually, so there typically isn't a huge change in between a gen and the following gen (except the first two things I mentioned), but they add up over time. So I will agree they don't put too much effort into changing the games between gens, but saying it hasn't changed much since gen I is just ridiculous.
#243 to #103 - frolite
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
So basically nothing changed until X/Y is what you're saying.
User avatar #252 to #243 - ZenMacros
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Except most of the things I mentioned were implemented long before X/Y. It's like you didn't even read my comment.
#256 to #252 - frolite
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Pretty sure special attacks have been around since Red and Blue. So they just added moves? Kinda like how CoD just adds guns. Holding items have been around since Gold and Silver thats nothing special. Gold and Silver added Steel types as far as i know that was the only new type until X/Y. I'm not saying pokemon sucks or anything but for people to act as if it really changed or done anything substantially different since release is just silly.
User avatar #259 to #256 - ZenMacros
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
First off, saying what Gold/Silver added does nothing for your argument seeing as how you're claiming nothing has changed since Red/Blue.

Second, I know Special attacks have been around since the beginning. I'm referring to the split between Physical and Special. Before, whether a move was Physical or Special depended on its type (eg: Fire type moves were Special, Rock type moves were Physical, etc.). In Gen IV a split between the two was implemented that made it so any type move could be Physical or Special depending on what the actual move itself was. This change was incredibly significant for battling.
#270 to #259 - frolite
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
So since red and blue all they did was split type special attacks add new pokemon. Let you battle more then one pokemon at a time. And what was it horde battles? I'm grossly ignorant to pokemon games after gen 3 never saw it really going in any new direction so i went with a PSP instead. All i played on my GBA was pokemon anyways but it's fine all i wanted to say was that pokemon never really evolved (get it) since Red and blue. But yeah i guess agree to disagree.
User avatar #271 to #270 - ZenMacros
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
No, I actually said they did a lot more than just that. But yeah, agree to disagree.
#197 to #27 - jinkazama
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Pokemon X is to pokemon red what borderlands is to timesplitters. Using the same basic combat doesn't make it the same game. Pokemon has changed massively in the competitive scene and goes very deep as far as strategy is concerned.

Plus you know, double battles, triple batles, rotation battles, sky battles, horde battles, pokemon contests, pokemon movie studio etc...the list goes on.

Pokemon has changed massively. It's still a party based turn based rpg. And if you don't like that then fine, but saying it hasn't changed is just ignorant. If you want an entirely new core mechanic then go play a spin off. There are plenty of good ones like mystery dungeon and ranger which are nothing like the main series.
#245 to #197 - frolite
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
So it took 20 years to make any real changes into the game franchise? Not saying i don't like it i loved pokemon growing up. I'm not looking for something different im just saying that you guys demonize other franchises because of its repetitiveness and almost no change from the previous and pokemon has done this but nostalgia makes you guys ignore it and say that it's changed SO much when it really hasn't. Double battles? Triple battles? really? Thats some innovative stuff right there.
#324 to #245 - jinkazama
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/12/2013) [-]
Gen two: Additional types along with splitting special into special atk and def. Also two regions and time based events.

Gen 3: Double battles. More multiplayer features such as secret bases. Attacks split into physical and special based on their type. Addition of abilities which have massively changed the entire game. Contests added. IVs and EVs massively overhauled (that was the reason for no gen 2 -> gen 3 trading)

Gen 4: Specific moves split into physical and special. No longer type based. Addition of online battling and trading. GTS added. Multiplayer content in the form of the underground. Addition of other things such as poffin making. Contests overhauled.

Gen 5: Much more deep plot. Triple battles. Rotation battles. Memory link in B&W2. Addition of medals (basically achievements). Addition of C gear. Addition of dream world. Addition of global link. Randomized online battles added (friend code not needed). Wifi used for events so they were no longer unavailable to some. Pokemon musicals. Pokemon movie studio. In-game seasons.

Gen 6: Graphical overhaul. Graphics now in full 3d rather than 2d sprites. Mega evolutions. Sky battles. Horde battles. Super training. Pokemon ami. Player search system. Fairy type added. Weather effects nerfed. Some type matchups changed. Trainer customization added. 3d rather than grid based movement.

As you can see there have been significant changes each gen. The only common factor is the very core of gameplay. Party of 6. 4 moves. Turn based. The game now has a massive competitive community due to the depth it has gained.

The problem i have with cod is not that it's similar to older cods. It's that they charge $60 for as much content that you'd get in a borderlands dlc pack. Personally i like cod. I find the gameplay fun. But i only play it at friends houses, because i don't feel like it's worth the money.
#94 to #27 - Visual
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
You forgot to mention that since the originals, they added double battles, triple battles, rotation battles, new types, online matchmaking, each game has it's own little mini-game unrelated to battling, pokemon forms, and a handful more features I can't think off the top of my head right now. I mean sure, it is still based around battling pokemon in a turn-based matches. But they change it up so much that it feels greater every new game, it feels fresh while not feeling entirely new.

Sure it's understandable if you don't like the games, but to say it's not growing or changing is completely untrue.

Although shooters revolve around just point-and-click at enemies and doesn't feel as rewarding (to me at least) compared to outwitting your opponent with a carefully picked and trained team. Don't get me wrong, I still really like shooters, I play Team Fortress 2 and Battlefield 3 a lot.
#141 to #94 - frolite
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
So 20 years into the franchise all they have is adding two more or three more pokemon into a battle? And some mini games? Online matchmaking is pretty much a must nowadays so thats not really anything too amazing. I loved pokemon just as much as the next kid growing up i mean dam i cried so hard when my little cousin reset my crystal version and i lost a 86 dragonite. My point is Pokemon has shown as much innovation as CoD since release. Still getting X tho.
User avatar #107 to #94 - ZenMacros
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Wow, how could I forget about double/triple/rotation battles?
#169 to #26 - prominant
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
That's not actually true about sports games but I see your point
#311 to #169 - anon id: 5eba35cf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Remember everyone here is fat and doesn't like sports.
#276 to #26 - anon id: a41ac90b
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
actually madden has been declining lately, but this year has fixed so much that it is prolly the best madden i have ever played, i no its still the same concept and stuff but the little things make a big difference, i love pokemon to but a good sports game that isnt easy for one person to dominate in is a lot of fun
#196 to #26 - anon id: d0234c2a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Spoken like someone who has never actually played a shooter before. Please go watch some Halo and then go watch some CoD or some BF and tell me how it's guns painted different. They all play differently, have a lot of different features, balance, tactics and all present different oppurtunities. Please actually put some hours into various shooters before you say they're all the same. I know it's 'cool' to hate on shooters because god forbid anyone like anything popular on the internet, but when you espouse these tired opinions you sound really stupid to anyone who has actually played a shooter before.
User avatar #153 to #26 - guidedhand
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I just wanna put it out there that i think FPS games almost have 'speeds' associated with them. Ie COD is a very fast almost twitch game, while Halo is a little slower (you dont just rush spray and die, it takes skill to kill someone), Battlefield is a little slower again and ARMA games are about as slow as you can get
#28 to #26 - Hightower
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
So Left 4 Dead and Bionic Commando are the same game with just different guns? No. The mechanics of gameplay vary greatly within the FPS genre. While I will agree that some games are just a rehash of the last game, Call of Warfare: Modern Duty Battlefield Ops is a good example, there are massive differences within the genre. Sports games are all basically a re-release of last years game with new people, I'll give you that.
Even within the same series games can have massive differences between titles. Morrowind and Skyrim are not the same game, despite being similar in a lot of ways, and belonging to the same series. Look at the differences in simple games like Super Mario. Just between the two most recent console titles there are massive differences in style and gameplay mechanics. If they did like Pokemon the New Super Mario Brothers would be the way all SMB games are, but we also have games like the Galaxy series.
St it IS possible to make sequels that vary from title to title all while maintaining the series structure and integrity.
User avatar #65 to #26 - thekinganon
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
The same little updates pokemon has is the same ones sports games have. I'm saying this as a lover of pokemon and football.
User avatar #31 - ImmortalBaconEater
Reply +37 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I love how the same people who complain non stop about how call of duty is just the same thing every year are the people who go nuts whenever a new pokemon game comes out. It's really just a preference of what kind of game you like. If you really loved the gameplay on the original of a game, small changes are generally enough to keep your interest. I honestly love both the pokemon and call of duty series and always enjoy the new games, even if it is really just small changes. I don't see why there has to be so much hate over companies re-hashing stuff that we loved cause its still fun. And as long as someone is enjoying the game they are playing, it isn't anyones place to tell them that theres anything wrong with it.
#34 to #31 - bluemagebrilly
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I think it's like that because the "new" Pokemon games all have significant differences and the whole point you play them is for the story and collecting Pokemon.

Call of Duty's main focus is the multi-player, and that's been the same thing for a long long time. Only the whole "Nazi Zombie" thing really saved Call of Duty from falling out, and now they're milking it by forcing people to buy their whole games just for that small aspect.

I'll admit Pokemon has been relatively the same the whole time, but it's not a game that can easily change. They could have changed Call of Duty a lot, they just refused
User avatar #38 to #34 - ImmortalBaconEater
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
The call of duty games have also had relatively significant changes to the multiplayer over the years (and its been around for a lot less time than pokemon). And at this point nazi zombies could be marketed as a game by it's self. Even though they could have changed both games a lot, I think they chose not to because thats what people enjoyed. Both franchises really are just making games that the fans want to buy, and people like what is familiar. And honestly, I don't think theres anything wrong with that. I'm not saying that people should only play one game that they like over and over, but that its ok to keep going back to something you really enjoyed. The fact is that neither game is really based on ground breaking new developments, but on gameplay that is engaging over and over. In fact both games are extremely repetitive, pokemon with the same battle system throughout the game, and call of duty with the same combat system in multiplayer. The fun part is finding new ways to win within that limited system. Thats what all competition is based on really. Its the same in sports. You set rules that everyone plays by and its up to the individual to find a way to gain an advantage within those confines.
#227 to #38 - anon id: b418ff85
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Pokemon Z. for Zombies......
#43 to #38 - bluemagebrilly
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I read through what you said but I don't really understand what message you're trying to convey. I can only disagree with the multiplayer aspect you stated at the beginning; Call of Duty hasn't changed much. They take out a perk, put in a perk, nerf a perk, buff a perk, add a gun, change a gun, remove a gun, but the whole thing is relatively the same.    
   
Pokemon hasn't changed much either, but it has definitely changed more than Call of Duty has in the past few years, especially with the recent X and Y.
I read through what you said but I don't really understand what message you're trying to convey. I can only disagree with the multiplayer aspect you stated at the beginning; Call of Duty hasn't changed much. They take out a perk, put in a perk, nerf a perk, buff a perk, add a gun, change a gun, remove a gun, but the whole thing is relatively the same.

Pokemon hasn't changed much either, but it has definitely changed more than Call of Duty has in the past few years, especially with the recent X and Y.
User avatar #44 to #43 - ImmortalBaconEater
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Personally, I disagree that pokemon has changed more, but that is certainly up for debate. Really, the point I was trying to get to is that it doesn't matter that they didn't change much. Its the repetative nature of the games that makes them so fun in the first place.
#49 to #44 - bluemagebrilly
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I don't disagree with that. People can enjoy what they want, I was merely saying my little piece on why people complain about Call of Duty so much and not Pokemon, which is similar in the way it puts out games. It's also possible that most, though not all, Call of Duty fans are very... childish. They just like it for the violence most of the time, at least in my experience.
User avatar #37 to #34 - tacogrenade
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
your fuking stupid there more or less the same...

Collect pokemon, get badges

Kill people, rank up WITH bad ass Campaign...

Cause making BILLIONS of dollars is ALMOST "Falling out"
#42 to #37 - bluemagebrilly
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I think you read two words of what I said then snapped.

But the two games are nothing alike, other than their inability to change a huge significant amount about themselves. You kill people, but you've been killing people the same way for like 10 games. I haven't had a battle with a gym leader that was exactly the same 10 games ago.

Also, this is just a personal opinion really, I never liked the campaign. It was kind of boring. Not saying the Pokemon story is better, since it has its boring moments, but the Call of Duty campaigns didn't really mean anything.

... And don't pretend that if they didn't have Nazi Zombies they wouldn't have fallen out. Yeah they made a huge amount of money, it's impossible not to with them, but that game mode made a lot of people buy that game.
User avatar #45 to #42 - tacogrenade
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Ima admit on the whole get at you ( ******* HATE pokemon fanboys) but i still disagree with you... Pokemon has a HORRIBLE story IF ANY! Call of duty at least trys... Its just the COOL thing to hate cod cause its Multiplayer is frustrating afff i ALLL OF YOUU KNOWW ITT!!
#304 to #45 - anon id: 20461f46
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Pokemon has such a bad story it's sparked a tv show that still continues to this day... As someone who mostly browses the frontpage this is the first time I will ever say "you went full retard." So, seriously dood, you just went full retard with that.
#99 to #45 - Visual
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Call of Duty had an interesting story in Call of Duty 4, then it kinda stopped after Modern Warfare 2 (**** BLACK OPS). But even since CoD4, the story has always been lack-luster because the action situations were very repetitive throughout the story.    
   
Sure Pokemon really has more of a narrative because all you do it battle trainers but at least the trainers mix up their types and you feel a sense of progression rather than waiting for the next checkpoint to come up so you can say &quot;Great at least I know I'm finishing the level&quot;.
Call of Duty had an interesting story in Call of Duty 4, then it kinda stopped after Modern Warfare 2 (**** BLACK OPS). But even since CoD4, the story has always been lack-luster because the action situations were very repetitive throughout the story.

Sure Pokemon really has more of a narrative because all you do it battle trainers but at least the trainers mix up their types and you feel a sense of progression rather than waiting for the next checkpoint to come up so you can say "Great at least I know I'm finishing the level".
User avatar #76 to #45 - xxhadesflamesxx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
your a cunt but its funny watching you get angry
#48 to #45 - bluemagebrilly
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I never said Pokemon had a good story. The stories are pretty goofy, honestly, but they have to abide to kid ratings for some reason. Not really sure what you said at the end there, but Call of Duty does /not/ try. It just sells what it knows will sell to those with money and 'like' the game.
User avatar #50 to #48 - tacogrenade
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
your breaking my balls brilly
#190 to #31 - anon id: ce516122
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Person opinion: pokemon gets a hundred or so new pokemon, Call of Duty gets a lot less new content than that.
#193 to #31 - anon id: 4ac011e3
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
they both are cookie cutter games, if you can skip two games in a the series and NOT feel like you missed out on anything important then you have too many games to have any sort of innovative quality. Imagine if they released a new elder scrolls game every ******* year, the time between Morrowind and Oblivion could have easily taken a decade or more if they were rushing to constantly put a games on the market. But hey you guys love those small differences..........how about some DLC between games but get the games done right
User avatar #325 to #31 - cyborgturtle
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/24/2013) [-]
I know that I am quite damn late to respond. But most people (including me) hate MOST (not all) of Call of Duty's fan base.
User avatar #61 to #31 - ThpiderMan
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I enjoy Call of Duty, I enjoy pokemon, but I only buy new games when they have something new to offer. Last CoD game I bought was Black Ops, because of how much I enjoyed Nazi Zombies in WaW, but i didn't buy BO2 because I played the zombies mode at a friends and it felt the same. Last pokemon game I bought was Pearl, just because it was the first pokemon game on ds, and it was still very similar and not fresh enough. I agree with both sides in that I think both could do a lot more to innovate, I might buy X/Y because of all the new stuff present I've seen, as of yet CoD Ghosts hasn't enticed me, but I'll wait and see.

Not everyone is just mindlessly blathering, both series have been stagnant for a while in my opinion, but considering how much I absolutely loved CoD 2 and the original Modern Warfare, and how ingrained pokemon is into my childhood, more specifically the first 2 generations, It's pretty hard for me to hate either series, regardless of innovative lapses.
User avatar #222 to #61 - kombee
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I completely agree with you
User avatar #84 to #31 - Gandalfthewhite
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
call of duty's popular, you know these ******** have to hate everything that's popular
#184 - arcticassassin
Reply +28 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
5/10
"Not Modern Warfare"
-IGN
User avatar #202 to #184 - kyrill
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
8/10
"not modern warfare, literally unplayable and a waste of money"
-IGN
User avatar #194 to #184 - keatontheghostfox
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I normally go by metacritic
#218 to #194 - furiousmarshmellow
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I normally go by my opinions and tastes.
User avatar #221 to #218 - keatontheghostfox
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Hard to go by if you never played any in the series :p
User avatar #223 to #221 - furiousmarshmellow
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
If I see a game that looks cool, I'll try it. If I don't like it, then that's fine.
User avatar #263 to #223 - acemcgunner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
try gears of war.
User avatar #272 to #263 - furiousmarshmellow
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
I have.


It's not bad. Not amazing, but not god awful.
User avatar #277 to #272 - acemcgunner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
i am a fan boy...so yeah..
User avatar #225 to #223 - keatontheghostfox
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I go by gameplay videos mostly and I use metacritic as a general idea because they go by several reviewers scores which help balance out biased reviews.
#129 - drtrousersnake
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
what about CoD, madden, and every other game they give high scores to?
User avatar #145 to #129 - ithyphallophobia **User deleted account**
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Yes, they are all the exact same thing. Year after year. No difference between the 2003 and 2013 games, nothing at all.
User avatar #253 to #145 - theism
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Well the changes accumulate over time so if you look at the oldest and the newest you'll see an enormous difference. But compare say the most recent 2 and it's pretty similar.
User avatar #310 to #253 - bookyle
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
no, I'll disagree with that. In cod 4 you run around with a mp5 silenced and jump out windows and get kill streaks. In bo2 you run around with mp7 silenced and jump off second floors and climb roofs. It's pretty much plays the same. Of course there are added elements like more perks,attachments, guns, ect... but it still plays the same, that being just rush everywhere and you'll get the most kills.
User avatar #171 to #145 - capslockrage
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I agree that madden is the same thing every year, but CoD's actually change quite a lot, especially recently.
Black ops 2 looks nothing at all like mw3, and Ghosts looks nothing like black ops 2.
User avatar #175 to #171 - ithyphallophobia **User deleted account**
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I know, I was being a sarcastic asshole...lol.
But the maddens are different. you can tell a difference even between Madden 11 and the one out now (Madden 25 but it's technically Madden 14).
User avatar #177 to #175 - capslockrage
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Ah.

Well I haven't really played madden very much, but all I have seen from it is that you play football with the same mechanics and same teams, just with updated stats and some new graphics.
User avatar #240 to #177 - ithyphallophobia **User deleted account**
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Well one example I can give is on Madden 11, there's a creative mode where you can basically make a team from scratch...
You make the jerseys, what color they are, the teams stadium, you pick the players on the team, everything. It was a ton of fun but for whatever reason they took it out of the game in Madden 12 and all the ones since.
User avatar #16 - lorddarkskull
Reply +14 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Yeah, game informer, the magazine funded by sony and microsoft, is known for giving fair reviews to nintendo games
User avatar #35 - tacogrenade
Reply -36 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
HERP A DERRRP CALL OFFF DUTYYYY ISSS DA SAMMME EVRYYYY YEARRRR OMG LOL IT SUXXXXX


POKEMON HASSS TO BE THEEE SAMMEEE !!!! WHAT ELSE IS IT SUPPOST BE LIKEE!???

******* pokemon fanboys -___-
User avatar #238 to #35 - tacogrenade
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
Wow, and they say im butthurt smh
#275 to #238 - furiousmarshmellow
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
You are.
User avatar #55 to #35 - kyuubey
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Difference is that X and Y brought a whole new dynamic and many new features while call of duty doesn't. Having the same core aspect =/= having the same game.
#92 to #55 - kinginyellow
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
-3 game series spanning WW3, deception in the American army, and conspiracy with Russian extremists
-character deaths that made the player feel either sad and pitiful, or angry and ready for revenge
-2 game series covering a conspiracy behind battles fought in the cold war, indoctrination and sleeper cells
-game with 3 different endings depending on how you play certain missions
-a bad guy who doesn't want mass death, but people to feel the pain he was given
-actually admitting faults made by american soldiers
-added multiple game modes and updated zombies with a long running story featuring the end of the world
Ya, nothing at all -___-
#158 to #92 - yisumad
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
User avatar #131 to #92 - mrhotwings
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
The retards who say COD is the same every year are the same people who buy games for multiplayer.
User avatar #97 to #92 - kyuubey
Reply -10 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
- Oh yes murrica saving the day from dem evil terrorist and commies, so original.
- Doesn't have anything to do with adding new features, aside from that nobody plays CoD for the stories or characters.
- Oh boy moar russians
- Never been done before
- Doesn't have anything to do to with new features
- Gamemodes ripped off from older games and milking out the zombie genre

I was talking about new dynamic features that enchance the gameplay, not simple story elements that anyone can make by reading "making games for dummies"
#217 to #97 - furiousmarshmellow
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Yeah. Because it's NOT AT ALL difficult to add new and ORIGINAL game mechanics that have never been done before.
Yeah. Because it's NOT AT ALL difficult to add new and ORIGINAL game mechanics that have never been done before.
User avatar #106 to #97 - kinginyellow
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
-MULTINATIONAL, so no not "murrica" I even said they clearly point out mistakes made by America
-Actually quite a few people play for that, most people like the story, you just make up those "12 year old screaming" strawmen to sound smart when they DO NOT EXIST
- Enemies vary in nationality: Russian, Iranian, AMERICAN, Georgian, ect
-Actually play one of the games before you say it's not true, because you're full of ********
- Pointing out it's not a "murrica" game
-Pokemon didn't invent turned based fighting, air battles, or leveling up characters, or even character types. So you just insulted them

Conclusion: You have never played a game but act like you know all about how "horrible" it is and now someone who's played them is calling you out on bs claims
User avatar #113 to #106 - kyuubey
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
- They still mostly focus on america while other countries being teh baddies
- Yes they do exist, i'm talking to one right now
- I love how these varieties you mentioned mostly consists of the commies and terrorist i talked about.
- I'm saying "never been done before" as a way to say that they only added the multiple ending **** is because it became popular and they needed something to ripp-off.
- Still doesn't have anything to do with new features, and it's still a murrica game mostly
- Gameplay =/= gamemodes. Ofcourse they didn't invent that because they are expected elements on a genre, that's like saying that call of duty didn't invent shooting. Game MODES on the other hand can be innovative despite genres, but call of duty doesn't even bother with any good ones.

I'm done talking with you because your intelligence is clearly far to inferior to even grasp the concept of game design so you end up with loaded claims.
User avatar #123 to #113 - kinginyellow
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
-No, they focus on the multinational special forces, which you don't know because you haven't bothered to play
-so because I pointed out that you were flat out wrong, I'm suddenly bad? Ya just you having a tantrum over being wrong
-Multiple endings have always been popular, they just decided to add it, not "ripping off" or else pokemon ripped off element types by your logic
-Again, you clearly never bothered to play it and make up bs
-Actually most early shooters have already made tons of game modes before Halo or CoD, and they're still used because they're fun, same with pokemon.

You're just getting whiny because you bitched on a game without even playing it, made up bs claims, and was proven wrong. I actually do like Pokemon, but I;m not a dick about it
User avatar #124 to #113 - enclavexremnant
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
"They still mostly focus on america while other countries being teh baddies " No they don't you tard there are always astleast 3 different heros you play as from 3 different countries. Get your facts right *******.
User avatar #130 to #124 - kinginyellow
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Thank you sir. Finally someone who's played the game before getting angry over it
User avatar #133 to #130 - enclavexremnant
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Not a huge fan but i have fond memories of COD.
User avatar #136 to #133 - kinginyellow
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I really liked the story in MW except 3 kinda dropped the ball
But the villain BO 2 really struck me as interesting, especially since he was more human
User avatar #140 to #136 - enclavexremnant
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Could not agree more. BO2 has probably my favorite story but WAW has got to still be my fav game in general.
User avatar #142 to #140 - kinginyellow
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I never got a copy of it and I feel like I missed a lot. I really like the old Medal of Honour when I only had a Wii
User avatar #163 to #142 - enclavexremnant
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
You missed out on the birth of zombies as well as a alright story line That intertwines with BO
User avatar #165 to #163 - kinginyellow
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Oh sweet I'll try borrowing my friend's copy. We played the hell out zombies on that
User avatar #159 to #97 - princessren
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I kinda like cod
#216 to #97 - pudgykoala
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
LIKE DIAGONAL WALKING SO INNOVATIVE MUCH NEXT GEN DEAR GOD THE LEAST AMOUNT OF NEW POKEMON, ****** MEGAS, AND SITTING ON BENCHES SOOOOOOOOO ******* NEWWWWWWWWWW
#135 to #97 - adding
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
adding new features
adding
User avatar #119 to #97 - enclavexremnant
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
"new dynamic features" OH YEAH THEY ADDED 3 NEW BLASTERS ONTO BLASTOISE SO IT'S UH NEW GAME GUISE XDDD. As opposed to a new story, new gamemodes, new items Etc. Pokemon should of ended long time ago they are just milking the franchise because of Fanboys like yourself.
#126 to #119 - kyuubey
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
"As opposed to a new story, new gamemodes, new items Etc"

You seem to forget to mention fairy types, mega evolutions, pokemon-amie, horde encounters, sky battles, super training, player search system, photo spots, customization of trainer and pokemon, trainer PR video's, pokemon bank, global link, new evolution methods, retconning old pokemon and not even mentioning all the 100's of new additional pokemon, items and enemies.

Don't think you're clever by caricaturing something you don't understand.
#215 to #55 - pudgykoala
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Blops 2 was set in the future with all new mechanics including stealth fields and wing suits, new weapons and attachments. Nintendo fanboys are such ******* cunts
User avatar #57 to #55 - sketchE
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
yes it does
User avatar #60 to #57 - kyuubey
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
If having the same core aspect is being the exact same game then by your logic Bioshock Infinite is an exact clone of Bioshock 1.
User avatar #112 to #60 - kinginyellow
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
And no it doesn't. The core of bioshock 1 is survival with minimal health packs and sparse ammo forcing you to scavenge for supplies and navigate dark corridors.
Bioshock Infinite has you navigating wide open spaces, using fast travel tracks, and the core is not survival and scavenging, but action and arcade style shooting.
User avatar #118 to #112 - kyuubey
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I didn't say that bioshock 1 was the same as bioshock infinite, god you're such a little kid.

I said that core aspects (shooting stuff) are not the same as the game features enchancing the gameplay (scavenging, fast travel, ect)

I don't get why i even bother with someone who doesn't even understand simple rhetoric.
User avatar #128 to #118 - kinginyellow
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Core aspects = the core gameplay the game is based around
Bioshock 1 = survival/scavenging
Bioshock Infinite = arcade shooting, maneuvering big environments
And "god you're such a little kid"? So because you get something wrong. you have to bitch to sound superior? I think you need to stop your tantrum and calm down.
User avatar #134 to #128 - kyuubey
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
"The core gameplay the game is based around"

That implies the gameplay of a specific genre, in a FPS you shoot, in a RPG you level up, it's such basic stuff even a four year old could understand.

Arguing with you is like playing chess with a pigeon, no matter how good you are the pigeon will end up throwing away the pieces, ******** on the board and claiming victory.
User avatar #139 to #134 - kinginyellow
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Oh look, the kid can spit out quotes and bitch until he sounds smart.
Bioshock 1 isn't based around shooting, it's based around SURVIVAL. You don't always have to kill, you can leave the enemies and find others ways like hacking machines

You level up in Halo, so is it an RPG? No it isn't
You clearly cannot understand
User avatar #144 to #139 - kyuubey
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
The survival aspect is a part of bioshock. But the genre remains a FPS where you shoot, that is the core of the game.

Just like halo the rpg features are a part but the core is shooting.

Honestly you are just being beyond pathetic now. I'm done here.
User avatar #150 to #144 - kinginyellow
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Survival is THE CORE of bioshock, shooting is entirely optional

ANd you already did the "I'm losing so I'm done with you" pouting and then immediately started barking at me again. You just do that for attention and to sound smarter, and again it makes you look like a toddler.
#241 to #118 - pudgykoala
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/11/2013) [-]
You're a ******* moron. Sorry, but pokemon games are the same. Get over it
User avatar #96 to #60 - sketchE
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
apparently everyone misinterpreted me when i meant call of duty does add new features every time. and the dynamic of pokemone has never really changed
User avatar #100 to #96 - kyuubey
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Have you seen the difference between X and Y and the previous games? It's no longer your typical overhead view with the 2D plane battlefield. It has clearly been enchanced even more so than most of the triple A budget sequels.
User avatar #108 to #100 - kinginyellow
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
So changing the camera view is "a dynamic change"?
User avatar #109 to #108 - kyuubey
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
It adds more enchancement to the experience.
User avatar #111 to #109 - kinginyellow
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Not a big change though, far from dynamic. It's the same style with a different camera
User avatar #104 to #100 - sketchE
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
so do you get to roam around during pokemon battles? thats the point im making the gameplay hast changed moving the camera isnt innovation. and i liked the top down. its not like we havent seen 3d pokemon before either pokemon coliseum and pokemon stadium games before that
User avatar #39 to #35 - articulate
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Pretty sure that's GTA.
User avatar #40 to #39 - tacogrenade
Reply -13 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
I was making a point dumbass
User avatar #41 to #40 - articulate
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Looks more like you're acting like a fool. As bad as people posting comments saying "LE XDDD" to make fun of people who do when in actuality you're now just the one posting the stupid comment. It's still *********** even if you're being ironic.
User avatar #47 to #41 - mustlol
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
He thumbed you down, don't worry bro I got your back.
#74 to #40 - grapefruity
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
#87 to #74 - thehardstudynot
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
#56 to #40 - richardfitzwell
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
You were making a cunt out of yourself, not a point.
You were making a cunt out of yourself, not a point.
User avatar #52 to #40 - infensive
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
You were trying to be funny
#117 to #35 - angrybarts [OP]
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
User avatar #156 to #117 - ivoryhammer
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Can you ******* stop?
#164 to #156 - angrybarts [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
r u mad bro?

The all mighty lord shibe will not accept this intolerance
User avatar #71 - jcjohnson
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
Why and the **** do people think a game getting a 9 is bad...
#198 to #71 - jinkazama
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
It's not the score of the review, but the content of it.

Pokemon may not have been 10/10 good. But if you can't think of a valid negative point then you don't put a retarded one. For example, pong isn't 10/10 goty ****. But it's pong. Not much wrong with it. Saying "it's like tennis" as a negative point in a review is flat out retarded.

The problem is the dumbing down of reviews to small summaries at the end, essentially requiring 3 or 4 points about the good and bad, so what is written there stands out to people, and in this case. Well, lets just say if someone is that **** at their job then i'm sure there are plenty of people who can replace them.
User avatar #72 to #71 - xxhadesflamesxx
Reply +11 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]
its not that its the stupid reason for it being a 9
#11 - jjholt
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(10/10/2013) [-]