I've just never gotten into Pokemon. The games just feel like 99% grinding. I'm sure that's an incredibly unpopular opinion, but I still find them unspeakably dull.
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
1 points (66.7% liked)
Ask Lemmy
36026 readers
1354 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
If you look at the first game from a historic perspective
The first game basically was an open world RPG with 151 unique characters with each their strengths and weaknesses, and their own attacks, and all could be customised. Running on a handheld that previously could only play Tetris.
It was a freaking coding masterpiece.
But I agree the gameplay loop hasn't upgraded the way it should. It didn't evolve with the medium and stuck too much to its roots.
Although the grinding in the newer games has been minimised. You can play through the games without grinding once.
I admit I haven't played a recent Pokemon game because of my previous experiences, but I'm open to checking a new one out at some point if the grinding has been reduced. Thanks.
It's weird, because Pokémon didn't invent turn-based RPG's, nor did they even invent the pocket monster genre because Dragon Warrior Monster arguably had a better game than Pokémon out around the same time - with more monsters, breeding, and a better storyline.
But Red/Blue and Gold/Silver were great games of their time. Very basic, but great, mostly because of the world built around them. If you didn't appreciate Pokémon, it's probably easy to see why you'd find it dull.
I don't even mind some turn-based RPGs. I mentioned Wasteland in another comment, which I loved. Wasteland was basically remade as Fallout 1. Fallout 1, 2 and the Wasteland games which now have their own sequels are all turn-based RPGs, but they give you so many more options than Pokemon and they are also about team building since you don't play as a single character.
I guess Pokemon was just not the game for me. 🤷♂️
Worth mentioning, regarding Dragon Quest, the monster teaming up with the player was added in DQ5, back in 1992, something that was arguably first introduced in Megami Tensei 2 (1990). Dragon Quest Monster was released only in 1998, after the first pokemon games.
What set pokemon apart from them was the amount of pokemon you could get. That Game Freak managed to cram another 100 in Gold/Silver, a night/day cycle, berries, friendship, breeding and the entire original Kanto region in a gameboy color cart is a small miracle
They came from a different era. If you didn't grow up taking long road trips with a Gameboy pocket/color for your only distraction then you probably don't get the nostalgia rush that most pmon fans do.
I was born in 1977. I had a Gameboy. I just never cared for Pokemon.
I played Red/Blue as a kid. Enjoyed the crap out of them. And then never played any of the later games ever. I think if I tried now I'd feel the same as you.
Exactly right. We spent hours and hours in a Ford van playing Pokemon red/yellow/blue in the 90s 😂
A significant number of pokemon fans had to make do with emulating the original gameboy games on the family computer. I know I did
Animal Crossing. I have friends who became obsessed with that game. They wouldn't stop pestering me about how much I would love it, and how I should start playing so we could trade turnips or some shit. Anyways, I bought it. What a weird thing to be obsessed with. It was boring, childish, and pointless. But it was hugely popular for a period of time.
I bought it for the same reasons and also hated it. It just felt empty and boring. I then had to bite my tongue so hard when those friends would start gushing about their latest Animal Crossing thing.
Fucking chore simulator. My roommates couldn't be assed to do their actual chores, but every morning during covid they'd get up and make sure their fucking farms had whatever the shit they needed.
I find Smash Bros uniquely frustrating and obtuse.
Buttons go smash.
Animal Crossing.
The entire Final Fantasy franchise, with the exception of Dissidia. I just don't like that style of game play where you have to stop in the middle of fighting, pick what you wanna do, then watch them do it. I'm also not a fan of Pokémon for the same similar reason.
It's not like I totally didn't enjoy it, but Red Dead Redemption 2. The game was good in many ways, and I totally get why it's so we'll loved, but I just have nothing with the setting. I don't like cowboys, I don't like playing as an asshole who makes bad decision after bad decision, and I also don't like a setting where women are basically property. Just not really my vibe. I just came from Cyberpunk 2077 and the contrast was quite big, even though Cyberpunk is supposed to be more dystopian
FIFA. Every man and boy in England loves FIFA, except me. I find it totally boring and pointless.
The game is popular but isn't universally beloved, even the fans hate it, but they got the monopoly in football games
KotoR and Mass Effect. They both just feel so stilted.
I never really got into the Pokémon games. Don't find turn-based combat very fun. I mean, I guess turn-based is easy and relaxing for when you just want to put your game down and take breaks.
Any of the soulsborne games.
If your game is advertised as being "extremely difficult", it just means it is lacking tons of quality of life features and goes out of its way to punish the player by making them repeat the same slog over and over. It is quite easy to make a difficult game, much harder to make a fun game.
Just imagine how much better and shorter Dark Souls would have been with a marker telling you where to go, instead of you fumbling around going through the same areas because you have no idea where to go next. It artificially lengthens the game.
But the worst part about those types of games is the community. They go insane when you even propose an easy or story mode. As if the the difficulty is the only redeeming quality those games have.
I don't have to "git gud", I can just close the game and never play it again while I enjoy actual good games.
Look I think there are valid complaints to be made about the Dark Souls franchise, but criticizing them for not giving you waypoints says more about you than it does the games themselves. The lack of any sort of hand holding was by far the most interesting thing for me when I first played Dark Souls and is the thing that got me hooked. The tension in exploring a new area, having no idea what to expect and being so scared you're going to die is a wonderful feeling, especially when you overcome it and survive to the next bonfire.
You're making me want to write a boomeresque comment about how kids want video games to hold their hands. Don't you have a sense of adventure? Is exploration and mystery not interesting to you?
I can just close the game and never play it again
True and healthy!
while I enjoy actual good games.
blatant copium
I'd like to make a counterpoint here, but first I want to acknowledge that you are 100% entitled to your opinion and maybe souls-like games are just not for you. It's a shame that people are kicking downvotes your way because this is in no way a new or controversial opinion, but like you said, the community can sometimes take their love of the game/series too far and blame the consumer for not liking the same stuff they like, which isn't fair and just makes the souls community looks like clowns.
Anyway, my counterpoint is that I don't feel like these games are as difficult as people make them out to be. IMO, older games were just as hard, if not harder to complete even when playing optimally. In the framework of just about every Souls-like game, you have tools that you can use to almost completely trivialize the toughest encounters if you want. DS1 can be beaten by a complete amateur if you do the gravelord speedrun (which doesn't require any real speedrunning tricks and there are many youtube tutorials that you can follow along with, takes about 10-15 minutes from character creation) and get the gravelord greatsword which can inflict Toxic on all the bosses, so you can just hit them a few times and run away for the rest of the fight, waiting for the poison to finish them off. That's just one example. Just about every installment of FromSoftware's Souls' series has some overpowered cheese that you can research to essentially trivialize the game. Some people might argue that you're not beating the game in the "intended way" if you take such shortcuts, but I disagree. Any way you make it to the end is the right way.
For a lot of people, part of the fun of a game like Dark Souls is the adventure, the discovery, and yes, pounding your head against a tough boss trying to beat it over and over. If you're the type of gamer who gets easily frustrated to the point where you feel like quitting when encountering a challenge that feels unfun or unfair, I can see it not being an enjoyable experience. The thing that keeps most people coming back is the dopamine hit that they get when they do finally overcome that challenge and they are rewarded with more stuff to explore, new items to pick up, and so on. I think if there were any argument to be made against making the game easier for yourself by exploiting broken game mechanics (or with an easy/story mode added or modded in), it's that you probably won't be super invested in the outcome and get bored easily. Without the challenge aspect, the Souls games are very much a bare bones experience. It's essentially a generic fantasy RPG with a story hidden behind item descriptions and cryptic NPC interactions. That doesn't exactly make for the most compelling gameplay, so there's no trail of breadcrumbs to keep the gamer uninterested in the challenge going. There's a sort of intrinsic value in these games that can't be quantified, because everybody gets something different out of it.
Eh, just wasn't made for you. Not everyone needs to listen to death metal either.
Elden ring yawwwwn.
It's beautiful, and it seems like an interesting world, but learning exactly how to dodgerollattack for every enemy with deliberately delayed reflexes is not my kinda fun.
BioShock Infinite. The gunplay is very basic and it's world doesn't make sense.
Like:
- How can Elizabeth be a up beat Disney princess like character? If she lived in her tower and being experimented on for all her life.
- Why Columbia need slaves? When it haves robots and have control of quantum mechanics.
spoiler
Killing Booker will not stop Comstock being made. Because an Booker who didn't go though with the river baptism still can become Comstock. You need to kill one of Lutece twin's parents. So they never be born. Due to them helping Comstock make Columbia in the first place.
Super Mario Brothers. The whole thing us based on ultra-precise timing, which is both miserable for me as well as inordinately stressful.
Lol, the two games you listed are some of my most played games of all time, especially in the last few months.
Isn't that the point of the post?
Yes, but there are lots of universally beloved video games. I was saying that two they chose happened to be the specific two that I'd played the most recently.
Most of the Soulsborne games. The only one I’ve been able to enjoy is Sekiro.
In most Soulsborne games, it seems like difficulty is artificial simply because your character is so damned clunky. I enjoyed Sekiro specifically because the character was snappy and didn’t feel like they were running through waist-deep water. If I lost a fight in Sekiro, it was never because I was animation locked or because my character was too slow; It’s because I was too slow.
It took me a long time to warm to them.
The more armour you wear in the main Souls game, the slower and clunkier you are. It's kind of a gotcha, in that you instinctively think more armour will help, and it does the exact opposite because you get hit more often. There's a lot of shit that isn't really explained at all. Some people like that, but the Wiki is there if you don't.
Parrying was all but impossible for me, I just went with sword and shield for most of it, switching to the massive zweihander for the DLC.
Dark Souls 2 is the worst of them, I'd skip that if you ever try again. Way too many enemies in every area.
Bioshock. I like the story and setting, but I find the actual gameplay to be boring
Dead by Daylight and that genre in general.
"Let's all play a horror game where someone running is like a person casually browsing the mall."
Bloodborne for me. Everyone talked about how hard it is, but the game just encourages grinding until you hit your natural talent level. Plus, the story was gross.