Pokemon is ULTRA overrated

[SuperEliteGamer]

Why would i choose it over other RPGs,that are more serious,have better stories,and gameplay?
The series doesn't have much appeal beyond it's fanbase.
It's very repettitive,very kiddy,never evolves as much as lots of ppl would like.
Everytime it's the same,you're a guy/girl going after an evil organisation,getting badges,and catching Pokemon.
How original!!
X & Y are already overrated by fanboys and others.
I don't see the appeal,unless you're obsessed with monsters and raising them,then i don't see the appeal outside of it's fanbase.
Last game i bought was Emerald.After that,it got too repetitive for me.

[The Adventurer]

As a competitive game it has amazing levels of complexities and depth.

As a single player experience you are probably right. But the majority of Pokefans aren't playing the game for its single player story.

So in that respect the franchise isn't overrated, because at this point it's very refined in doing what it does.

[bb_hood]

Why would i choose it over other RPGs,that are more serious,have better stories,and gameplay?
The series doesn't have much appeal beyond it's fanbase.
It's very repettitive,very kiddy,never evolves as much as lots of ppl would like.


They are games where the target audience are little kids. What would you expect?

[CDiablo]

As a casual Pokemon gamer, I actually didnt play my first pokemon until I was 28ish. I find that the game has an unreal amount of depth and can be quite challenging. I can only assume the competitive scene is super deep with people having all kinds of party builds. I skipped the last 2 versions and will be picking up the most recent version once I buy a 3DS. I do not know of any other game like it with a community as large as it is. I think a lot of people pick up the game and skip a game or 2 and come back to it because its a great game. Now I am no SuperEliteGamer but in your opinion what game offers an alike but better experience? I would give it a try. I dont RPG that often due to time restrictions, but I am interested to see another game where your party can be made up of 3 out of 500+ characters.

[Alpha2099]

Having only played the first two generations, I can't say much about the current line of Pokemon games. The old ones were fun when I was a kid, and even now I can go back and play those and have a lot of fun. But I don't have much interest in the newer ones. That's not to say they're overrated, just that I've outgrown it.

I did have a little spat with a friend the other day regarding Pokemon X and Y. He was enamored by the ability that you can physically call someone through your 3DS and talk to them while you're playing the game, with the caveat that you have to be standing still to talk. I really could not share in his enthusiasm, because if I wanted to talk to someone while playing Pokemon, I'd pick up my real phone and call them! I wouldn't use a 3DS to do it. So, in a general sense, I find that specific feature to be needless and overrated. But the franchise as a whole? Not overrated.

[CDiablo]

I did have a little spat with a friend the other day regarding Pokemon X and Y. He was enamored by the ability that you can physically call someone through your 3DS and talk to them while you're playing the game, with the caveat that you have to be standing still to talk. I really could not share in his enthusiasm, because if I wanted to talk to someone while playing Pokemon, I'd pick up my real phone and call them! I wouldn't use a 3DS to do it. So, in a general sense, I find that specific feature to be needless and overrated. But the franchise as a whole? Not overrated.

Seems like a cool feature. People that do not know eachother (especially in Japan) can hook up through local connections(streetpass?), wifi or messageboards in their games and dont have to give out their phone numbers. Seems cool enough, not to mention children that have friends at school can talk to their friends(while at home) without having to mess about with a phone.

[SuperEliteGamer]

They are games where the target audience are little kids. What would you expect?

True,but my point still stands.
Oh,and,i used to be a kid once upon a time,then i grew up.
There are lots of adult fans you know,and many of them keep buying the games in the hope they see changes,evolutions.
@That guy who said that about making a team of a few membersout of hundreds,that's true,but so what?
My own points still stand.

[bb_hood]

Oh,and,i used to be a kid once upon a time,then i grew up.

Still, other children DO exist and these are generally kids games. Maybe your expectations are a little high? I dont think you are gonna get any super-deep intense storyline or plot. Its pokemon, the game is mostly catching and fighting pokemon.

[JSoup]

A lot of people genuinely enjoy games that they find fun. Fancy that!

[SuperEliteGamer]

Still, other children DO exist and these are generally kids games. Maybe your expectations are a little high? I dont think you are gonna get any super-deep intense storyline or plot. Its pokemon, the game is mostly catching and fighting pokemon.

Yeah,sadly.Nintendo never does that.

[kupomogli]

I agree they're overrated.

When a journalist plays a game, they're usually judging the single and multiplayer experience, not just the single player, not just the multiplayer. I'm going to give the series another chance so I'll get it either one once I find them on sale for $20. The real push towards it is the graphics overall and I also like the idea of getting the new starters as a choice plus one of the original starters later in the game.

So anyways. A common complaint with every single Pokemon released the easy difficulty, the story itself which is generally bad and/or boring. Yeah, the replay value of the series is extended by leveling up your Pokemon to max level with EV and IV which has been removed from X/Y for a different gameplay upgrade mechanic, but that doesn't change that the single player campaign is poorly developed. Not talking about X and Y as I haven't played, but past Pokemon, when you're immediately overpowered shortly after you start the game, that takes a lot of the fun away and what's the point in putting more time into it. You walk in front of another random trainer to be like, great, another waste of time because I'm going to one shot this water Pokemon with my fire ability even though it's strong against it.

I played Blue a lot, got several 100 level Pokemon and played pvp with friends from school before using the Missingno glitch. It was fun, but played a friends copy of Gold and never picked it up. Sometime later I purchased Diamond to give the series another chance and struggled to get to the end game, but the game was so boring that I quit in the town immediately after getting the seventh badge. Gave up and really no longer cared about the possible pvp offerings. The pvp being the only reason I pushed to get as far as I was, because I wanted to quit a lot earlier.

So when journalists review the Pokemon games. I think the scores they give it is pretty bs because the overall games aren't very good at all.

While I'm at it, I want to also mention Ni No Kuni. This isn't a Pokemon title, but it's Level 5's version of Pokemon with the console version exclusive to the PS3. This game also scored pretty high. The idea behind it is good and outside of combat it's great, but the combat in this game, the main aspect of an RPG is pretty poor.

If anything, Pokemon and Ni No Kuni were already going to receive the scores they did because the hype behind them. The same with goes for other games that received high scores because they've had a massive amount of hype behind them but also had major problems with their gameplay. I like Shin Megami Tensei 4, but it had a lot of issues. Took around 10 hours to actually start the game, broken stat system, an already easy game that made it way too easy to make an unstoppable party. Persona 4 whether it's for PS2 or Vita is highly overrated. The gameplay is good, but 20% of the game you actually have gameplay outside of your social link gameplay, so 80% of the game is either story or going back and forth between the same areas, less than 15 screens, repeatedly to increase your social link. This is a game that received a 93 average on Metacritic.

There's no sense in listening to review scores. Watch or read reviews, read up on the gameplay, and watch videos then make up your own judgment before purchasing a game. Hype, popularity, whoever developed it, and money is what scores a game. Games aren't traditionally scored for the reason people actually play games. You know, the game itself.

[Haoie]

Still gotta give it props for popularising the whole mons genre.

[Rickstilwell1]

As a casual Pokemon gamer, I actually didnt play my first pokemon until I was 28ish. I find that the game has an unreal amount of depth and can be quite challenging. I can only assume the competitive scene is super deep with people having all kinds of party builds. I skipped the last 2 versions and will be picking up the most recent version once I buy a 3DS. I do not know of any other game like it with a community as large as it is. I think a lot of people pick up the game and skip a game or 2 and come back to it because its a great game. Now I am no SuperEliteGamer but in your opinion what game offers an alike but better experience? I would give it a try. I dont RPG that often due to time restrictions, but I am interested to see another game where your party can be made up of 3 out of 500+ characters.

Yeah Pokémon does have insanely high amount of characters to choose from. The closest I think would be the Suikoden games where you can use about 70+ characters in battle out of 108 allies you recruit including yourself. If you don't count unevolved forms, the original Pokémon was about the same count but if you do or play the sequels the difference becomes much greater.

I never played Dragon Warrior Monsters. I wonder if that's any better than Pokémon story-wise?

[JakeM]

Battles are awesome, not even the card game was as fun to me. Yes its kiddy, but thats good to me. If you want a similar game but for older people just play Shin Megami Tensei.

[The Adventurer]

The thing is, as great as (the core) SMT games are, it's NOT the same experience as Pokemon. You never grown an attachment to your demons the same way as you do your Pokemon, because they are far more disposable and lack customization. And the SMT games have no multiplayer competitive focus.

[kupomogli]

The thing is, as great as (the core) SMT games are, it's NOT the same experience as Pokemon. You never grown an attachment to your demons the same way as you do your Pokemon, because they are far more disposable and lack customization. And the SMT games have no multiplayer competitive focus.

I mentioned SMT, but I wasn't even mentioning this in my post. If you'll reread my post, I mentioned SMT4, Ni No Kuni, and Persona 4 are overrated with the averages they've received on Metacritic.

Also, in reply to your post, there's really not much of an attachment to your Pokemon either. You'll be attached to your starter Pokemon because you have them since the beginning of the game and end game they're some of the more powerful Pokemon, but closer to end game, if you happen to care for the competitive nature of the game, you won't have any sort of attachment to most Pokemon. There's what? 500+ Pokemon now, and I doubt people care about more than 1/5th of them.

And yeah the SMT games have no multiplayer, but they go for the single player experience and that's why there's no multiplayer. You don't judge a game that's not trying to push multiplayer because it has no multiplayer. A game that offers a large amount of gameplay and depth to its single player game but has no multiplayer, you look solely upon that of the single player. Pokemon might have a decent competitive multiplayer, but it's a competitive multiplayer focused game that has a single player that's complete shit. Mind numbingly easy, boring to play through, etc. You literally have to force yourself to keep playing at times in order to get through it. It's not until the end of a 20 hour or more venture through single player before you can even start with the competitive multiplayer, and even then, the competitive multiplayer aspect of Pokemon consists of EV and IV trained level 100 monsters, so even if you're a much better player, you can be overpowered by brute force because the person you're playing against has much better stats. Even if both of you have all level 100 Pokemon. So as much time you have to put into a single Pokemon to for it to reach its best stats, one major step of competitive multiplayer for Pokemon, also drags down the competitive multiplayer aspect a bit too. Apparently, Pokemon X/Y has super training which removes the EV/IV training.

[The Adventurer]

And yeah the SMT games have no multiplayer, but they go for the single player experience and that's why there's no multiplayer. You don't judge a game that's not trying to push multiplayer because it has no multiplayer. A game that offers a large amount of gameplay and depth to its single player game but has no multiplayer, you look solely upon that of the single player. Pokemon might have a decent competitive multiplayer, but it's a competitive multiplayer focused game that has a single player that's complete shit.

A, Pokemon's single player isn't 'complete shit'. Its not spectacular, and perhaps 'boring' for a certain type of gamer. But it does what it sets out to do, create a singleplayer framework to support the multiplayer experience. Actually its quite well refined at this point, after numerous generations. Also its my understanding that X/Y actively breaks out of the 'Fight Gym Leaders' progression model previous games have relied on. So who knows how more complex the story has gotten this go around. Probably not a bunch of people who haven't played the game.

B, I bring up SMT's lack of multiplayer not as a detriment to the games, but as showing the comparison to Pokemon to be faulty outside the superficial. Both franchises are made to do two different things.

[Satoshi_Matrix]

Why would i choose it over other RPGs,that are more serious,have better stories,and gameplay?

One does not play Pokemon for serious stories, and a different style of gameplay than what you would expect from a monster raising game. I don't think Pokemon should be played "instead" of more hardcore RPGs, but I do think that the main core Pokemon games are worth playing.


The series doesn't have much appeal beyond it's fanbase.
Reallllllllllllllllllly? Pokemon is the most casual RPG there is! Your statement couldn't possibly be more wrong.


It's very repetitive,very kiddy,never evolves as much as lots of ppl would like.

The mPokemon games are designed to be extremely accessible to anyone of any age. That means it has be simplistic enough on the surface to appeal to children, yet have optional layers of complexity to appeal to hardcore adult gamers. As for it being repetitive, that's the nature of the beast. It's the same thing with any game series - Mario, Zelda, Halo, whatever. You're doing the same things over and over in them. If you've got yourself a franchise, then repetitive gameplay is just part of what goes along with it.


Everytime it's the same,you're a guy/girl going after an evil organization,getting badges,and catching Pokemon.
How original!!

Don't expect this to ever change ever. The Pokemon formula is established and like it or not, it works.



X & Y are already overrated by fanboys and others.
Care to..I dunno, explain how you came to this lofty conclusion?



I don't see the appeal,unless you're obsessed with monsters and raising them,then i don't see the appeal outside of it's fanbase.
Exploration and discovery. Pokemon isn't about the end goal of saving the world or rescuing a captured princess like most RPGs. It's all about the journey and what you discover along the way.

As such, the formula is neverending. When one journey ends, another begins, and the next quest can be just as exciting. It's just like traveling to new places in real life.



Last game i bought was Emerald.After that,it got too repetitive for me.
And the ones before Emerald were not repetitive? See, if you're looking at Pokemon as a solely repetitive process with a weak, child-friendly plot, then you're doing it wrong. The plots are just there to be there; to teach morals to kids and nonsense like that. You play because you want to see the world, you want to explore the caves, the trails, the cities and beyond.

Maybe that's just not you. If not, then that's fine, go play something you DO like.

But just because Pokemon doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean it is "overrated".

[kupomogli]

B, I bring up SMT's lack of multiplayer not as a detriment to the games, but as showing the comparison to Pokemon to be faulty outside the superficial. Both franchises are made to do two different things.

And there was no comparison between the games until you brought it up.

[The Adventurer]

And there was no comparison between the games until you brought it up.

You know, except the guy immediately preceding my post bring it up.

Also its a pretty common comparison (especially when these dumb 'serious RPGs' vs 'kids RPGs' arguments crop up)


Care to..I dunno, explain how you came to this lofty conclusion?

"Something I don't care for is popular, therefore....", would be my guess.

[kupomogli]

You know, except the guy immediately preceding my post bring it up.

Also its a pretty common comparison (especially when these dumb 'serious RPGs' vs 'kids RPGs' arguments crop up)

Sorry then. I didn't even notice that post. I assumed you were referring to my post when I brought up other games being overrated.

But yeah it's a common comparison because the games are both based on acquiring monsters to fight for you and that they've got much better single player experiences. While you're right that they're different since Pokemon has that social aspect that's more than the competitive multiplayer. The gotta catch em all thing pushes friends to get separate copies and trade Pokemon you can't find in either version, or those people who buy both copies because they either have no friends or they just want access to all available Pokemon at all times. Although, I think it's so easy for SMT fans to make an argument of SMT versus Pokemon, because without the competitive multiplayer, previous Pokemon games really have nothing going for them, and even with the competitive multiplayer, as an RPG, I don't think there are too big of a percentage out of those that purchase it who are going to constantly battle one another. It's not like Pokemon has a long amount of lasting appeal compared to most multiplayer games. Card, board, fighting, strategy, racing, or FPS games. You can make some pretty diverse Pokemon teams, but I still find it hard to believe that most people will find the multiplayer too long lasting to where they'd put enough time actually playing the multiplayer rather than building their Pokemon compared to one playthrough of SMT Nocturne for just the normal ending and an average amount of secrets.

[The Adventurer]

I think you're making some serious assumptions concerning Pokemon's lasting appeal. Because I know people were still playing Black/White 2 right up until X/Y came out. And a lot of my internet friends are excited to import their old Pokemon the new game, so they can keep using their favorites from years past in new combinations.

[Edmond Dantes]

Wow, SuperEliteGamer posted something I agree wholeheartedly with.

I played Red/Blue back in the day, and at first I was enthused... but then, I just hated it because it was so boring. Pokemon is literally nothing but levelling up your characters. And every time you get a new one, you have to spend hours just levelling it up. And the only way to do this is to fight, fight, fight. There's no depth, no variety. You can't even equip weapons or armor, you're stuck with whatever abilities the Mon itself has. The only hint of depth is some Elemental Rock Paper Scissors system, but its transparent and straightforward and doesn't do a lot to change that in most cases, the Pokemon that'll win is the one with the higher levels.

I get that this game is for kids, but even by that standard the games seem lame. I mean RPGs had come a long way... Final Fantasy VI had Espers and Relics and weapons and armor with special attributes and you could put characters in the back row, Chrono Trigger had a lot of those and team attacks, Shining Force I and II let you move around on a grid and had a choice between ranged and non-ranged weapons and classes with special strengths and weaknesses... and now here's Pokemon, a game so hopelessly backward that it makes THE ORIGINAL DRAGON WARRIOR look advanced by comparison.

Just a few simple things would've made Pokemon a better game:

One, if the game world was non-linear and open-ended. I never understood why Pokemon forces you on a plot railroad when the entire "plot" is you're a kid who wants to be a Pokemon trainer. There's literally no reason you should have to go through a storyline event to earn a device that allows you to teach Cut to a Ratatta so you can open the path to the next town. And doesn't it sort of defeat the whole "collect them all" or "Pokemon Master" thing when SOME Pokemon can only be gotten either as part of the storyline or through very specific means (Farfetch'd can only be gotten by trading with an NPC for example... and then he has a default custom name that you CAN'T CHANGE)?

Two, if there were ways to make your Pokemon stronger besides endless grinding. I remember in the anime, they did cool stuff like having a sandshrew dip in water in order to make it immune to its elemental weakness, or have Pikachu hook electric generators up to its cheeks and run on a windmill in order to enhance its electric powers... why couldn't stuff like that be done in the game? It would not have been THAT much more complicated, and I bet the kids would've even found it cool. Stuff like this was already being done in computer RPGs years before, and I remember loving it in those when I was ten.

Three, have a battle system that has more depth to it than just "highest level wins. If levels are equal, then Elemental Rock Paper Scissors." Even something as simple as a implementing a movement system would've been a huge improvement. And again, don't tell me it would've made the game too complicated for kids to understand. Kids played fucking Yu-Gi-Oh.

But no, we can't do anything other than make the games utterly boring, and so ass-backwards that even Dragon Warrior for the NES is more advanced.

And somehow this series became a phenomenon and is still a money-maker. I remember when Pokemon first hit the GBA, and the big innovation was "you can now have teams of 3-vs-3!" Oh, gee, you know what other game had battles of 3-vs-3? EVERY RPG SINCE DRAGON WARRIOR II ON THE NES! And hell, even many that preceeded it, if you take computer games into account.

Okay, I think I've stated my point well enough. I'll end this rant here. Bottom line, Pokemon sucks, and its sad that it makes money and has a huge fanbase.

[wiggyx]

Pokemon is ULTRA overrated.

Indeed.

[SuperEliteGamer]

@Satoshi Matrix
...lol.
Ofcourse it's overrated,mate.All succesful games are overrated.No game on the planet deserves "god" status.It's just a game.
Casuals are casuals,they get excited easily,and with easy/cute things,like little kids.
What "lofty conclusion"? fanboys like to overrate whatever game they like,Pokemon,Halo,God of War,CoD,anything really.
It's human nature.
And the bleh graphics of X & Y completely killed any desire to explore caves,trails,and cities,for me.(plus still same core formula,it's a giant bleh to me)
It's NOT "derp derp what everyone imagined as a kid" NOOO!
You're a fanboy,grow up.
@Edmond Dantes.
Well,can't disagree on everything!
I agree with your ideas.:)...sadly,Game Freak may take years to implement all of those in a game.

[Rickstilwell1]

That just made me imagine Pokémon swinging swords. Imagine a special type of Knight Pokémon who can equip weapons instead of just berries and junk... WTF did I just watch?

[Satoshi_Matrix]

All successful games are overrated.

...WHAT. I don't think you understand what "overrated" means if you would describe any and all successful videogames as "overrated". Overrated would imply that every successful game is undeserving of its popularity. That may be probable for some games, but it is a statistical impossibility for every popular videogames to be overrated. Think about it.

Unless your statement is born out of a desire to be some sort of super hipster? Do you feel that all popular music is also overrated? All film? All popular food?

If you truly believe such an obviously flawed line of reasoning, I won't even try to debate with you.

[The Adventurer]

Well he certainly gets the Elite(st) part of his name right.

[kupomogli]

I don't agree with SuperEliteGamer that everything popular is overrated, but there are a lot of popular games that are pretty overrated and a lot of it comes off because people happened to play this one "decent" game and because it's their first, thinks that nothing else can compare.

Persona 3 and 4 for example. Atlus was still fairly niche until late in the PS2 life where they gained a lot more popularity because of SMT Nocturne and Disgaea(even though I'm not a fan.) So most Shin Megami Tensei fans started at Persona 3 and/or Persona 4. The Persona 3/4 games have sold 1.1m in the US in comparison to Nocturne that sold 70,000 in the US. Coincidentally, every Persona fan on the internet 100% of them seems to have played Nocturne and it's not as good. It's not as good even though it's your classic RPG style with a detailed world map, dungeons, etc. Lots of exploration and discovery compared to Persona 3 and 4 which have randomized dungeons where including combat you'll spend 30% of the time in, if that, while most of your time will be going back and forth between the same 15 or less screens doing social link tasks.

Call of Duty sells millions. The series has already broke 100 million while the best FPS probably have had their entire series outsold by a single Call of Duty game. I talk about Quake and Unreal Tournament. Quake and Unreal Tournament are extremely skill based FPS games with unique weapons that are varied and balanced. Wall jumps and side dodges to get around the entire map in seconds or avoid being hit. Yet these millions of people who own nothing but war FPS assume that the only FPS worth playing is the next Call of Duty, or maybe something like Battlefield, or Sniper Ghost Warrior, etc. These people probably have no idea what Unreal Tournament is.

That's why popular games are overrated. Because there are too many games that are better that are underrated in comparison.

Btw. Persona 4 being overrated doesn't change the fact that it's a good game. It just doesn't deserve the high praise that it gets. With as much dialogue is in the game, I'm surprised it has as many fans as it does. These same Persona fans are more than likely part of the same group of people that complain about Dragon Warrior 7 or Star Ocean the Second Story have two hour long opening sequences that ruin the game.

Speaking of two hour long opening sequences that supposedly drag down the game. Shin Megami Tensei 4. With an 85 average metacritic, it's like hardly anyone gave a shit about that game having a near 10 hour sequence before the game started. Possibly longer depending on the player. Hype is where the high scores for this game came from, because while it's a good game, deserves a 7 at best.

[The Adventurer]

SMTIV has many problems. Its story pacing is not one of them. If 10 hour opening means "when you get to Tokyo". That's not an opening, that's a first act.

SMTIV's problems stem from a combination of its combat being rather dumbed down from Nocturne/Strange Journey, its quest system being rather unhelpful it telling you where to go, and, ironically, generally being made way too easy. With with no restrictions on your demon team composition (Law and Chaos no longer matter), and it being really liberal with letting you continue with no penalty (by paying Play Coins at game over). I mean, its great that your demons can now fight on when you get random's expelled (super annoying in Strange Journey and Soul Hackers) but it eased the difficultly up way way too much this go around IMO.


And there is no way SMTIV is considered 'overrated'. As it generally got middleing review (and far too many reviews comparing it unfavorably to Persona, when its totally not Persona) and as far as I know didn't sell that great. Its definitely a niche, somewhat under the radar RPG (albeit one with a little bit more promotion then usual behind it, at least online)




And now we're talking about SMT. Not that I mind, I love talking about SMT. But there is no way SMT is 'overrated' (as a franchise for that matter). Not compared to your Calls of Duty and Grand Thefts and Final Fantasys.

[kupomogli]

@TheAdventurer

Yeah.. you really don't understand what overrated means. It can be a great game but still be overrated. Final Fantasy 7 is the most overrated in the series because most of its praise comes from it being the first RPG that most people have played. It's a great game, amazing game in fact, but it's overrated as all hell Final Fantasy itself is overrated to the point that there are a lot of fans that haven't played much outside of the Final Fantasy brand name because it's not Final Fantasy. Does overrated mean that the series is poor, no, well, Final Fantasy has started sucking lately, but overall the series is really good.

And franchises that are niche can be overrated as well. Some games are overrated for no other reason than the fact that they're a niche game. The original Valkyrie Profile. Valkyrie Profile is niche and highly admired but it's one of the most piece of shit RPGs I've ever played and finished. Not as bad as Eternal Eyes, but certainly not too far off. Persona 4 is a great game, but not 90+ good. SMT4 is good but not 83+ good. Sure SMT4 may have been scored unfavorably at one or two sites, but when a site like Metacritic gathers all these sites and comes up with an 83 average, kind of points out that those few unfavorable reviews were overwhelmed with 9s and 10s.

Also, I mentioned SMT4 at the end because I brought up other games that are harshly judged because of their slow starts. My labeling "one" issue about Shin Megami Tensei 4 doesn't necessarily mean it's the only problem. It's one major problem that critics didn't judge. SMT4 has many faults and "story and pacing is one of them." As for 10 hours being a single act, sure, that's fine. We could say the same thing about Final Fantasy 13 being an amazing game after 20 hours but I wouldn't know, because it's a piece of shit all the while before that and I quit around hour seven.

But within that around 10 hours. Including the demon dungeon you go through and had to beat the Succubus, there were eight small maps/floors you could travel around. If you were to dodge monsters and run from the further point of the forest, cover all its ground, and cover all ground in the Naraku dungeon all the way to where you fight Medusa, you'd probably take less than 10 minutes, yet you're in that small section of the game for almost 10 hours. Repeatedly doing menial tasks, going back and forth doing mandatory quests, then finally grind out a party that was good enough to kill Minotaur as well as take a hit. Sure, you might be able to set your party up with characters who all had ice, but damn if that helps from him getting one shot kills. Same with Medusa, except her weakness was Zan, while she also used a medium damage gun attack that hit everyone.

After that 10 hour opening which makes Shin Megami Tensei 4 the slowest starting RPG game ever, you're in Tokyo. From Tokyo onward, the game is a joke when it comes to difficulty, and as you stated, by some chance in hell that you die, you can pay a little bit of money or use Nintendo coins to come back to life right before the battle you died at. I died in one of those optional demon dungeons when I was half the level of the demon, but killed him after. That's not all though, if the game being easy wasn't enough, they allowed you to get rid of every single ability a demon has when it fuses and giving it all the abilities you want it to have, allowing you to easily create the ultimate party. I had more than a few end game demons that couldn't be damaged by anything but one element, if that(and a different element per demon,) and still could use four or five abilities. I could have made as many of them as I wanted as I kept a fodder demon with all void/reflect skills.

The stat system on SMT4 was broken. Strength and Dexterity did nothing for your main characters weapon attack. It was all based on the weapon itself. Strength did nothing compared to dexterity with skills. If you were going to be a melee character, then you don't want to put anything into strength. Put it all into dexterity. You could have 100 strength and you'd only do 60 damage more with an attack that your same level 1 character would do. 100 dexterity on the other hand, while still a pitiful amount, would do 150 more damage. Agility and luck also barely work. Come back to Naraku to do the latet game quests and having over 100 agility, and you'll notice that the enemy hits seem to be doing just fine.

The worst part about the stat system is the broken HP/MP system. There's no reason to have a demon with high HP because in return they have practically no MP and that equals what's practically no damage output. It's always one of three types. High HP/low MP, mid HP/mid MP, and low HP/low MP. No statistics based off HP so any demon that's on the same level has around the same HP/MP depending on which set of HP/MP they're under. It makes any demon that has low MP worthless to use unless it has a decent skill making it worth it to level up.

Another broken feature is the way the main character gains skills. The easiest way to max out a skill with the main character almost instantly is do a fusion to a low level monster, put only the skill or skills the main character will learn, then level the monster up until it learns everything but the final skill. Save it in the compendium, level it up and max the skill out for cheap.

The map of Tokyo in SMT4 is complete ass. There are too many places that look as if you can walk across that are invisible walls. That are places that don't look like you could walk across but you can. Towns/dungeons are all very small. Compare them to just about any SMT game and every single dungeon in SMT4 is probably smaller than the first dungeon than every other. The way you make money is among the worst in the entire RPG genre, alongside MMOs, and Final Fantasy 12.

As many problems as SMT4 has and it gets an 83 average. Journalists need to stop overhyping the hell out of a game that doesn't deserve it.

Also. Didn't you just start playing SMT games? When I say just start I do mean just that. I think it was a few months, but atleast this year. It's obvious you've played Soul Hackers because you threw out some misinformation. Not all SMT games require you to separate law and chaos demons. So throwing that out there with SMT4 just makes it clear that you haven't played too many SMT games. Devil Summoner Soul Hackers is worse than your average RPG btw. It might be more difficult than SMT4, but it's got many glaring issues that make the game a cake walk and most demons useless.

*edit*

One more thing to add. Considering that I finished SMT4 in 35 hours. That means 1/4 of the game time was spent in the beginning of the game. Further proves my point on how ridiculously slow the game starts off and is a major flaw unless you're too blind to see it.

[bb_hood]

Sandshrew is my favorite pokemon

[Rickstilwell1]

Some Pokémon are more tedious to raise than others. Exeggcute was a real pain to raise from level 30 to 42 because for the longest time the only physical attack it knows is barrage and it doesn't do jack for damage against near level opponents. After that Solar Beam helped me get it to level 50 but it definitely took more effort than most other characters' grinding. They probably gave it more moves early on in the later games but I'm not sure.

[SuperEliteGamer]

@kupomogli
*clap clap clap*

[kupomogli]

Some Pokémon are more tedious to raise than others. Exeggcute was a real pain to raise from level 30 to 42 because for the longest time the only physical attack it knows is barrage and it doesn't do jack for damage against near level opponents. After that Solar Beam helped me get it to level 50 but it definitely took more effort than most other characters' grinding. They probably gave it more moves early on in the later games but I'm not sure.

Magikarp to Gyarados. Splash didn't do anything. Only way to level it up was get in combat with Magikarp as your Pokemon and switch to another Pokemon afterwards. Magikarp would only gain some exp for being in combat.