# IT'S THE END! (of Pokémon)



## Vex L'Cour (May 19, 2011)

Even if the rapture doesn't come it looks like we will be saying goodbye to our much loved game series:



> It looks like fans waiting for Pokemon Gray may be out of luck. According to one translation, Pokemon developer Gamefreak has stated that "With Black and White, we have concluded this iteration.



comments?


----------



## KlopiTackle (May 19, 2011)

Pokemon white wasn't good,but their most likely to make gen 6...
(Pokemon gray/grey can't come out due to B/W being DSI and the 3DS has come out)


----------



## Ron Ronaldo (May 19, 2011)

I think they meant that they were done with the 5th generation, like KlopiTackle said. I can't imagine them just dropping a cash cow like that. xD


----------



## Psychonaut (May 19, 2011)

Ron Ronaldo said:


> I think they meant that they were done with the 5th generation, like KlopiTackle said. I can't imagine them just dropping a cash cow like that. xD


 this, at very most.

i doubt they'll follow through, though.  just like them to milk a third game.


----------



## Tyeforce (May 20, 2011)

That was a false rumor that was spread a few months back. Shortly after, Junichi Masuda was asked in an interview why there won't be a third version this generation, and he was confused and said that he never said such a thing. Pok?mon Gray, or whatever it will be called (I'm hoping for Pok?mon Chrome), will be made, just like Blue/Yellow, Crystal, Emerald, and Platinum before it.


----------



## Tyeforce (May 20, 2011)

KlopiTackle said:


> Pokemon white wasn't good,but their most likely to make gen 6...
> (Pokemon gray/grey can't come out due to B/W being DSI and the 3DS has come out)


Why can't the third version of this generation be a 3DS game?


----------



## Jake (May 20, 2011)

Tyeforce said:


> Why can't the third version of this generation be a 3DS game?


 
Yes. I was thinking thus, too


----------



## Tyeforce (May 20, 2011)

Bidoof said:


> Yes. I was thinking thus, too


Besides, Pok?mon Black and White seem very suitable for 3D as they are. Just update the graphics, add some new content, and make use of the 3DS's various new features like StreetPass and whatnot, and BAM! 3DS Pok?mon Gray! Then they can start development on Generation VI, which will be built from the ground up for the 3DS.


----------



## Psychonaut (May 20, 2011)

Tyeforce said:


> Besides, Pok?mon Black and White seem very suitable for 3D as they are. Just update the graphics, add some new content, and make use of the 3DS's various new features like StreetPass and whatnot, and BAM! 3DS Pok?mon Gray! Then they can start development on Generation VI, which will be built from the ground up for the 3DS.


 this is what you actually WANT?

jesus, save us all.

i could understand if they had delayed gen 5 and made it a 3ds game, i really could.
i can really see how every connectivity option the 3ds allows would work excellently with a flagship title like pokemon.
i can really get behind a new pokemon game that fully incorporates the 3ds' functionality, except actually implementing 3d into pokemon is kinda pointless as the games stand, imo.

to have them rehash the not even one year old game just because they have been for years and they didn't tailor the new game to the new system is.. unappealing to me.

but hey, not my money/business, i guess.  i'm just going to be kinda disappointed if nintendo does this, i guess.  doesn't really build a good reputation for them, imo.  pokemon isn't really shining outside of the core audience, y'know.


----------



## Tyeforce (May 20, 2011)

Psychonaut said:


> this is what you actually WANT?
> 
> jesus, save us all.
> 
> ...


Is it what I want? No, I'd much rather have a brand new 3DS Pok?mon game. But let's be realistic here, that's not what we're going to get. At least not yet. And yes, I would have preferred Black and White to have been pushed back to the 3DS, but that would have never happened. Generation V was made for the DS for a reason, and it certainly payed off in the end. The games have broken sales records like crazy, becoming the most successful launch in the franchise's history, and the fastest selling DS game ever. None of that would have happened if they had waited to release the games on the 3DS. The reason why Pok?mon Black and White sold so well is because there are so many DS owners out there right now. Many, many more than back when Diamond and Pearl were released. The massive install base was a key to Black and White's success, something that could not be achieved by a 3DS game this early in the 3DS's life. And now that there are so many copies of Black and White out there, what better than a third version on the 3DS to boost 3DS sales? Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely love a unique 3DS Pok?mon game, and that will come in time, but not before a third version to this generation. The so-called "rehashing" of a third game has happened with every past generation, so why wouldn't it happen again this time? I'm just looking at the facts here and predicting what will most likely happen not based on what I necessarily _want_, but what we should _expect_.

And, yeah, I would be perfectly fine with a 3DS version of Black and White to hold me over until the 6th generation games are complete. Better to have some Pok?mon on the 3DS, albeit familiar, than nothing for the next few years, right?


----------



## Vex L'Cour (May 20, 2011)

I agree with Psycho.

3DS shouldn't touch Pok?mon untill it they put Colliseum graphics onto it.


----------



## crazyredd45 (May 20, 2011)

Aeri Tyaelaria said:


> I agree with Psycho.
> 
> 3DS shouldn't touch Pok?mon untill it they put Colliseum graphics onto it.


I also agree but Pokemon battle revolution would be good for in battles


----------



## Vex L'Cour (May 20, 2011)

crazyredd45 said:


> I also agree but Pokemon battle revolution would be good for in battles


 
I mean as in they do the 3D Graphicals. As well as your character walking around like on Coliseum


----------



## Psychonaut (May 20, 2011)

Tyeforce said:
			
		

> The so-called "rehashing" of a third game has happened with every past  generation, so why wouldn't it happen again this time? I'm just looking  at the facts here and predicting what will most likely happen not based  on what I necessarily _want_, but what we should _expect_.


so instead of giving nintendo feedback against this kind of a thing (think a boycott that would never work), we're all just supposed to buy into this sales pattern?

i understand completely, as do plenty of other people, that there is about a 99% chance (lolmadeuppercentages) that there will be a third released within a year.  i'm not trying to kid myself to believe otherwise.  what i am trying to do is to get you to think about if  it is really necessary, and if nintendo is gaining any more of a reputation aside from milking the pokemon franchise.  that is how many people see the series, and with so many games, it's a very justified opinion/stance, in my opinion.


Spoiler









ignore the mario/zelda lists, and focus on pokemon having 40+ games in just over a decade and change.  that's roughly 3-4 games per year.  true most of them are doubles/triples, but still, one game series per year is a bit much, imo.


----------



## JasonBurrows (May 20, 2011)

Psychonaut said:


> Spoiler


 Where, may I ask, did you find that list Psychonaut, could you please send me the link in a PM.


----------



## Tyeforce (May 21, 2011)

Psychonaut said:


> so instead of giving nintendo feedback against this kind of a thing (think a boycott that would never work), we're all just supposed to buy into this sales pattern?
> 
> i understand completely, as do plenty of other people, that there is about a 99% chance (lolmadeuppercentages) that there will be a third released within a year.  i'm not trying to kid myself to believe otherwise.  what i am trying to do is to get you to think about if  it is really necessary, and if nintendo is gaining any more of a reputation aside from milking the pokemon franchise.  that is how many people see the series, and with so many games, it's a very justified opinion/stance, in my opinion.
> 
> ...


Oh, I know very well that it's not necessary. And just like you, I'd much rather have a brand new Pok?mon game than a slightly improved third version. But is it really hurting anything? Yes, people complain about the rehashing, but in the end, we still buy the games and enjoy them. And I'd much rather have them put out a third version every once and awhile to fill the gap while we're waiting for the next generation. Same thing with remakes, though I doubt we'll be seeing any more main series remakes, at least not for awhile. Brand new Pok?mon games take a lot of time to make, and I'd much rather the developers take their time on them instead of rushing them. But while we're waiting for those new games, I don't mind a few similar, yet reworked and improved games in the mean time. No, Nintendo, Game Freak, and The Pok?mon Company don't really need the extra, easy money they get from third versions and remakes, but at the same time, we don't really _need_ to have new Pok?mon games to play. Though, I'm sure any Pok?mon fan would agree that it's very nice to have them, lol.


----------



## Psychonaut (May 21, 2011)

Tyeforce said:


> Oh, I know very well that it's not necessary. And just like you, I'd much rather have a brand new Pok?mon game than a slightly improved third version. But is it really hurting anything? Yes, people complain about the rehashing, but in the end, we still buy the games and enjoy them. And I'd much rather have them put out a third version every once and awhile to fill the gap while we're waiting for the next generation. Same thing with remakes, though I doubt we'll be seeing any more main series remakes, at least not for awhile. Brand new Pok?mon games take a lot of time to make, and I'd much rather the developers take their time on them instead of rushing them. But while we're waiting for those new games, I don't mind a few similar, yet reworked and improved games in the mean time. No, Nintendo, Game Freak, and The Pok?mon Company don't really need the extra, easy money they get from third versions and remakes, but at the same time, we don't really _need_ to have new Pok?mon games to play. Though, I'm sure any Pok?mon fan would agree that it's very nice to have them, lol.








so let me get this straight.

like me, you'd rather have a brand new pokemon game instead of a slightly improved third.  okay, i think we can all agree on that, so long as the new game(s) are good and worth the time/money.

>is it really hurting anything?



			
				my last post said:
			
		

> what i am trying to do is to get you to think about if  it is really  necessary, and if nintendo is gaining any more of a reputation aside  from milking the pokemon franchise.


milking a franchise for sales just because they know they can is an awful way for a company to be viewed, imo.  i know that you're going to be all over them one way or another, but i think you really need to consider what you're doing.  you are feeding nintendo more money and giving them positive feedback for doing a bad thing: milking a franchise because they can.  (i believe i said this in my last post, as well.)  people buy them just because they exist, and nintendo knows this.  it is awful, and needs to be stopped, because nintendo has a bad enough reputation currently.  pokemon is one of the few things i still enjoy from nintendo, one of the others being classic (real classic, not classic remake) snes/n64 games.  i love that there are new installations of the pokemon franchise, but i absolutely hate that the first release of a generation (pokemon-wise) is almost always the lame-duck prototype, and the third is always the one that's worth the money because of small things that should have been in the first.  yellow had some different storylines and pikachu following you, that was cool.  crystal had a new gender, and a lot of extra story, that's acceptable.  emerald had the battle island thing (frontier?), that at least gave some end-game to do, since all of the facilities were kinda fun.  platinum.. was basically emerald + some exclusive move tutors and the battle recorder, if i remember correctly.

now, i may just have my head in the clouds and expect a lot from a company that frankly doesn't give a ****, but i think that the slight changes to each generation of releases could have been included in the first.  you're free to disagree, that's cool, but i really do not agree with the sales model nintendo's got going for pokemon right now.

it is true that brand new pokemon (and virtually any other series) games take a lot of time and effort to create from scratch (basically) and black and white had a lot of excellent content.  i'm not arguing against that.  i'm arguing against the route the games have taken to release 3 games off of one's content.  i can understand two versions to an extent, especially since there's wifi for trading, now.  the third is just.. unnecessary, completely.

i am a very diehard pokemon fan, and i detest the third games.  i dread them.  i wish they didn't exist.  and i would go out on a limb to say i'm not the only pokemon fan who feels that way.

being a fan does not mean being a sucker for every ploy a company tries to push.


----------



## Tyeforce (May 22, 2011)

Psychonaut said:


> so let me get this straight.
> 
> like me, you'd rather have a brand new pokemon game instead of a slightly improved third.  okay, i think we can all agree on that, so long as the new game(s) are good and worth the time/money.
> 
> ...


I understand that they're essentially "milking" the franchise, but that's not always a bad thing, you know. And it really isn't a bad thing in Pok?mon's case, because all entires in the franchise are of pretty high quality. And I think you would have a different opinion about the first versions of a generation if third versions didn't exist. Yes, third versions introduce some new features that could have been implemented in the first versions, but had third versions never existed, do you honestly think you would be complaining that the first versions lacked those things? If anything, you'd be complaining about things that you wish were in the games that aren't in any version, third or first. I think it's just sad that some people look down on the first versions of a generation so much once the third version is released. Yeah, the third version has more content, stuff that could have been included in the first version, but you can't deny that the first versions were still good games. And they keep getting progressively better. Just look at the massive amount of content that Pok?mon Black and White has.

It's not like it's anything new, either. Third versions have been around since Generation I (which actually had a _fourth_ version, mind you). I've never, ever heard anyone complain about third versions like you. I just don't understand your logic here. I think you're just wanting to argue with me just because you can. I mean, seriously, it _isn't_ hurting anything at all. It doesn't effect the quality of the games, it doesn't effect anything negatively at all. And it really doesn't effect Nintendo's reputation, either. I guess there are the few people like you who think it's an abomination for some reason, but is Nintendo losing any money or fans from it? Not at all. Is Pok?mon as a franchise suffering from it? No, it's only seeing improvements and more games as a result. I honestly fail to see the logic on your side of the argument. It's like you don't want more games and improvement.

Does anyone else here even agree with Psychonaut at this point? I'd be amazed if anyone else (non-troll, that is) does, because I don't see how it's possible, really. I can understand someone disliking the idea of third versions, but to honestly believe that they're a bad thing... I just don't get it. Where's the harm?


----------



## crazyredd45 (May 22, 2011)

Aeri Tyaelaria said:


> I mean as in they do the 3D Graphicals. As well as your character walking around like on Coliseum


That may be good but wouldn't it take away the feel of pokemon, i mean i enjoyed how black had its 3d graphics and coliseum could take away the feel.


----------



## Vex L'Cour (May 22, 2011)

crazyredd45 said:


> That may be good but wouldn't it take away the feel of pokemon, i mean i enjoyed how black had its 3d graphics and coliseum could take away the feel.


 
Not as in...

As in the same Graphics as Coliseum, so 3D characters ETC.

But the game play remains the same. How would that ruin the feel? It's like saying LOZ jumping from Snes 2D to N64 3D ruined it, when infact it made it more popular


----------



## Fillfall (May 22, 2011)

I want Hoenn remakes for DS and 3DS.

Did you know..


----------



## Jake (May 22, 2011)

Fillfall said:


> I want Hoenn remakes for DS and 3DS.
> 
> Did you know..
> (Purchasable content)


 
OMG THAT IS SUCH A GOOD SECRET!!


----------



## Vex L'Cour (May 22, 2011)

-sits, warming self by the flame war caused by this- mnnn...Wish I'd bought Marshmellows now


----------



## crazyredd45 (May 22, 2011)

I'd like to see remakes

OFF TOPIC: How do you put pay 400 bells into your post


----------



## rafren (May 22, 2011)

Didn't they say that they didn't completely shut out the idea of gray? :/



crazyredd45 said:


> OFF TOPIC: How do you put pay 400 bells into your post



Like this :


----------



## Slifer Slacker (May 22, 2011)

if they make Hoenn remakes (which i hope) i will start with my mudkip again


----------



## crazyredd45 (May 22, 2011)




----------



## Slifer Slacker (May 22, 2011)

[CHARGE="[B]did this work?[/B]"][/CHARGE]


----------



## KlopiTackle (May 22, 2011)




----------



## crazyredd45 (May 22, 2011)




----------



## Psychonaut (May 22, 2011)

Tyeforce said:


> I understand that they're essentially "milking" the franchise, but that's not always a bad thing, you know.


if you read any of my posts at this point, you would understand i have at least one point that makes these a bad thing. 


Tyeforce said:


> It's not like it's anything new, either. Third versions have been around since Generation I (which actually had a _fourth_ version, mind you). I've never, ever heard anyone complain about third versions like you. I just don't understand your logic here. I think you're just wanting to argue with me just because you can. I mean, seriously, it _isn't_ hurting anything at all. It doesn't effect the quality of the games, it doesn't effect anything negatively at all. And it really doesn't effect Nintendo's reputation, either. I guess there are the few people like you who think it's an abomination for some reason, but is Nintendo losing any money or fans from it? Not at all. Is Pok?mon as a franchise suffering from it? No, it's only seeing improvements and more games as a result. I honestly fail to see the logic on your side of the argument. It's like you don't want more games and improvement.


i somehow thought you'd bring up that the original games had four releases.  if you count green as an american release, you're ****ing stupid, i don't even care.
and as my previous post has already gone over each game and their pros and cons, along with a question of "why couldn't they just release it in the regular two games?", i think this whole paragraph is kind of redundant and pointless.


> Does anyone else here even agree with Psychonaut at this point? I'd be amazed if anyone else (non-troll, that is) does, because I don't see how it's possible, really. I can understand someone disliking the idea of third versions, but to honestly believe that they're a bad thing... I just don't get it. Where's the harm?


i think that you, as often you do, are idolizing nintendo, and making them into something they aren't, or more specifically, making them into something greater than what they are.

to think that it is okay, much less *right* of *any* company to milk a franchise is just flat out ignorant.

would you go and see every batman movie if they made one every year, using half of the stock footage with new audio?  my guess would be no.  would you see a new batman movie every 3-5 years if they completely revamp the story, characters, and set?  unless you just plainly dislike batman (in which case, substitute batman with star wars, another superhero you may like, dreamworks/pixar films, etc), you'd probably love having a new movie, and loathe having a ripoff quick-buck.  

why should the pokemon franchise doing the same thing be treated like it's okay?

i think at this point i need to stop replying, because you are a brick wall.
i only hope that you wise up one day, or you're going to look back and see a lot of wasted money.
except you'll probably see 6+ versions of pokemon as "okay" by then, and look back at the "old days" of 3 versions as nostalgic.
sickening.


----------



## Tyeforce (May 25, 2011)

Psychonaut said:


> if you read any of my posts at this point, you would understand i have at least one point that makes these a bad thing.
> 
> i somehow thought you'd bring up that the original games had four releases.  if you count green as an american release, you're ****ing stupid, i don't even care.
> and as my previous post has already gone over each game and their pros and cons, along with a question of "why couldn't they just release it in the regular two games?", i think this whole paragraph is kind of redundant and pointless.
> ...


Ah, the old brick wall attack. You know, you're as much as a "brick wall" as you make me out to be. You'll never stop attacking me until you feel that you've accomplished your life goal of making me hate Nintendo or something. Listen, I'm not making Nintendo out to be perfect or anything. That's just what you want to believe I'm trying to do, because that's all I am to you, the crazy Nintendo fanboy. You don't even try to accept my point of view on things, you just instantly assume I'm talking crap to make Nintendo look good. Well, that's just not the truth.

And, no, I don't count Pok?mon Red and Green as an American release. Why does that even matter, though? Now you're just bringing up irrelevant things and attacking me for no reason at all. The fact that Red and Green, the original pair of Pok?mon games, didn't make it out of Japan means nothing. They were still made, and then a third version, Blue, was released in Japan, and that third version was split into the Red and Blue that we know outside of Japan. Then Japan got a fourth version in the form of Yellow, which was only a third version to us, but that doesn't change the fact that there were really four (five, even, if you count both Red versions) versions in Generation I. But what does any of this have to do with anything? Nothing at all. I was just being technical when stating that every generation has had a third version, or even a fourth version in the case of Generation I. I was just stating a fact. Why is that any reason to attack me? I don't understand you at all.

And, as I said before, and as you will continue to ignore every time I do it, I did agree with you in that it's not a good thing to "milk" a franchise...depending on the situation, however. There's a big difference between milking a franchise by releasing many low quality games in rapid succession, and releasing a few updated versions or remakes in between generations. If you really insist that there shouldn't be third versions and remakes, there are only two alternatives; either they don't release any additional games between generations, or they rush each generation to get them out sooner. The latter would mean that the quality of the games would likely suffer greatly, not to mention we'd probably be at over 1,000 Pok?mon by now. The former is what I assume you'd prefer, but why exactly? You used Batman movies as an example...but that's a very flawed example. Movies are very different from games. You don't play movies. You can't compare an improved versions of a movie with a few new scenes and such to an improved version of a game with some brand new elements. It's especially true with Pok?mon, because even some of the simplest additions can be a big difference to the game.

I know that you feel that anything new added to a third version could have technically been included in the first pair of games, and that's why you're so opposed to the idea of third versions, and you're right, those additions very well could have been included in the first versions. But Game Freak may not have thought of certain elements until after the games were released, which isn't uncommon in any work of art. After you make something, you think of things that you could have done, and you notice things that could be better and you wish you could fix it. Third versions allow them to do this. Now, I know you would only take this argument seriously if you believed that Game Freak hasn't just been purposely excluding things that they've already thought of in the first versions to save for a third version, and that's also a possibility, but it's impossible for either of us to know the truth about that either way.

But in the end, whatever the case, I don't care, because I still get new Pok?mon games to play. The products are what really matter, not the company behind them. And it's funny that you care so much about what you think Nintendo is doing wrong, and you'll complain as much as you want, but for companies that you like, you have nothing to say but praise. Sounds a lot like me and Nintendo, huh? It's understandable to like a company because you like all the products they make, as I do with Nintendo, but that doesn't mean that it's okay to attack anyone else who has an opposing opinion from yours, or attack them just because they're talking highly of a different company that they like. You don't see me bash Sony or Microsoft, or people who are supporting them, do you? No. At least not anymore, I'm beyond that now. And as much as you'll tell me otherwise, I don't love every single thing Nintendo makes and does. There are some game that they make that just don't interest me at all, or even some that I downright hate, but I just don't bring it up because there's no point to. I like talking about the things I like, not the things I hate. The same goes for Apple. You know I'm a huge Apple fan, I'm sure. But that certainly doesn't mean that I love everything about the company. There are many, many things about Apple that piss me off, and Steve Jobs, as brilliant as he may be, is a real douche. But they make some products that I like, so I'm going to buy their products regardless. Just like I use Google's search engine because it's the best out there, even though the company is being so unethical nowadays. If there's a product I like, I'm gonna buy it. And guess what? I like Pok?mon games. Sure, I'd be disappointed if a low quality Pok?mon game was released, but so far that hasn't happened (spin-offs aside). So I'll keep buying Pok?mon games, because I want to play Pok?mon, dammit! And I want to keep that experience fresh, even if it means having a few similar games now and then. As long as there are new features and such, and as long as there's a brand new Pok?mon game in the works that will be release eventually, I'm perfectly content, and I don't see why any other fan wouldn't be, either.

And, no, I wouldn't like 6 versions of the same game, and the fact that you even think that I would just proves how wrong your true idea about me really is. A third version isn't bad at all. I don't even play both of the first versions, anyway, just the primary one. Then a year or two later when they release a third version, I'll play through it again, but I'll appreciate all the new changes and additions. It's not unlike a second quest in Zelda. Sometimes it's fun to play things over again, and I'm sure you know that. But six versions is definitely way too much, I know that much. It'll never happen, anyway. (If it did, they'll probably run out of colors and gems to name the versions after, lol.) Oh, and it's not wasted money. Not as long as I enjoy every game, right? At least I know it's not as much of a waste as you buying a four pack of Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition is, lol. And I hope that you don't own any of the previous versions of Street Fighter IV, or else you'd just be proving your hypocrisy.


----------



## Slifer Slacker (May 31, 2011)

phew, i want 3ds hoenn. end of.


----------



## robokabuto (May 31, 2011)

you know, they could make two kinds of pokemon gray, one for the NDS/DSi and one for the 3DS, if that's possible, then that way everyone's happy!!!


----------



## crazyredd45 (Jun 1, 2011)

robokabuto said:


> you know, they could make two kinds of pokemon gray, one for the NDS/DSi and one for the 3DS, if that's possible, then that way everyone's happy!!!


 In concept it works but it is kinda pointless. THey could make a 3DS version and that could convince people to buy but could lose buyers. Whereas if they did ands game they could lose customers like me who sold our ds,dsi,dsixl to get the 3ds. But toghether the differences between games would annoy people.


----------

