>>25958212
What does this even mean?

I like the back story of Y is X much different?

>>25958227
It means anon prefers to make up his own headcanon.

>>25958212
All pokémon games have backstory though.

>>25958212
>Game takes place in magical world full of magical super monsters
>You have to find all the cool monsters and catch them
>You can fight other people online or in game

>"I need story to be """""IMMERSED""""" and to feel motivated to play, ugh!"

stay fucking pleb

>>25958365
what is reading comprehension?

>>25958212
Story*

>>25958227
The pokemon fanbase hates any narrative more ambitious than the teletubbies.

>>25958365
>needing to be immersed
No, people who want good stories enjoy good stories.

>>25958374
>OP makes fun of people preferring the story taking a backseat
>then makes fun of OP for needing story
Do you know what it is?

>>25958407
Thing is, pokémon stories aren't good.
Even then, how the fuck you can enjoy a story without being immersed is beyond me.

>>25958407
As a person who writes and reads a lot, some games are fine without story. Pokemon is not one of those games.

However there is a huge difference between story and being railroaded into a linear shitfest. There is also lore, which can be subtle and powerful.

I pity anyone who needs something as bland as teletubbies to enjoy themselves.

>>25958427
>>25958427
>Thing is, pokémon stories aren't good.
But there's nothing in pokemon's premise that forces it to have a bad story, it can be good. But fans just want it to be bad which is beyond retarded.


>Even then, how the fuck you can enjoy a story without being immersed is beyond me.
Not being an autist helps.

>>25958463
>But there's nothing in pokemon's premise that forces it to have a bad story, it can be good. But fans just want it to be bad which is beyond retarded.
The stories so far has proven that GF aren't good at it.
>Not being an autist helps.
Oh, you're just a buzzword loving idiot I see. A good story needs to actually grab your interest and make you care about it, and that's what immersion is.

>>25958441

>I pity anyone who needs something as bland as teletubbies to enjoy themselves.

Sadly, that's our fanbase.

>>25958503
>GF aren't good at it
Not entirely true. They do lore well (not top tier but pretty good all things considered.)

The issue is the plot needs to be handholdy enough for children. This is why several spinoffs are seen as having better plots (some of the mystery dungeons, Collosuem games, etc), but the lore in those games is often somewhat lacking (still good though.)

What we need is a plot done by someone who isn't aiming towards children as the primary audience, but keeping the GF lore.

>>25958503
>>25958503

>The stories so far has proven that GF aren't good at it.
Which doesnt support your point.


>Oh, you're just a buzzword loving idiot I see. A good story needs to actually grab your interest and make you care about it, and that's what immersion is.
We have different definitions then. People here often say that they want no story to make them up in their heads and feel like they live in the game's world. Some people even get attached to their game mons. That's the kind of immersion i meant.

If you're playing pokemon for the plot you might want to reevaluate your life. No shit the story's bland, it's a kids game made for fucking 8 year olds, not for the manchildren who browse this shithole.

>>25958212
>using fedora.jpg because someone doesnt nerd around and googles all the made up lore shit
wp

>>25958564
I don't think a lot of people complain about the lore. Well except for gen IV's at times.
>>25958573
Which means that it is not something they should invest a whole lot of resources into. The big problem comes when story takes priority over gameplay.
>getting your definitions from 4chan
At least learn the language you're typing in.

>>25958622
No one said story should be favored over gameplay tho

>>25958681
Then who are you even trying to make fun of with this thread?
The point of the people preferring less story is that they prefer freedom over a stricter narrative.

>>25958573
>We have different definitions then.
Nah you just don't know what immersion is

Good Story>No Story>Shit Story
5>1>4>3>2>6

>>25958212
You mean to say that YOU prefer pokemon games without history?

Hey guys pokemon bw has the best story ever it's so deep like team plasma resembles political corruption and N is so cute *_* because he did nothing wrong, we must fight for freedom too

That's why I think pokemon games should have story, and if you disagree you're probably a child who can't enjoy artistic expression

>>25958785
I didnt make this thread. And muh freedom!= gameplay, you can have good gameplay and story.


And freedom at that, sandbox games have a plot.

>>25958906
I'd rather have people like that and good stories.

This is pokemon after all, where you must take the "good franchise, shit fans" tradeoff anyways.

>>25959217
>freedom!= gameplay
It's strongly connected. Shit like being required to catch the legendaries in gen V and VI with ridiculously low catch rates are good examples of gameplay taking a backseat.

>>25959235
ridiculously high*

>>25959229
Obviously you're not part of the shitty fanbase

>>25959235
>there's an example
>therefore story always limits gameplay

And i'd rather have that than having the legendary sitting somewhere for me to make it asleep and throw ultra balls at it.

>>25959358
I am part of it, yeah.

>>25959470
It was just the most obvious example.
>And i'd rather have that than having the legendary sitting somewhere for me to make it asleep and throw ultra balls at it.
You know if you don't actually like playing the games you can always watch the anime with QUALITY story writing instead.

>>25959534
>thinks a is better than b
>therefore, b is bad

>doesnt like a part of the game
>therefore, he doesnt like the game at all

>recomends the anime to someone who likes good stories
>while also critizicing its writing


Nigga, your logic failed three times there

>>25959577
>thinks a is better than b
>therefore, b is bad
If they are opposing each other, then yes.
>doesnt like a part of the game
>therefore, he doesnt like the game at all
Never said that I don't like the games, just that they would be better without it sacrificing gameplay
>recomends the anime to someone who likes good stories
>while also critizicing its writing
That was a snarky remark at anyone actually thinking the games' writing is good.

>>25959642
>If they are opposing each other, then yes.

Not really, and they arent opposing here.
>Never said that I don't like the games, just that they would be better without it sacrificing gameplay
Exactly. That doesnt prove you right since it has nothing to do with what you're quoting.

>>25959687
>Not really, and they arent opposing here.
Gameplay and a strict narrative very much are opposites.
>Exactly. That doesnt prove you right since it has nothing to do with what you're quoting.
I'm saying I don't like gameplay getting shafted for story purposes. How exactly is that wrong? I never said that a game with more story-focus is unplayable, just worse.

>>25959713
>>25959713
>Gameplay and a strict narrative very much are opposites.
Not at all. You need to play other games.


>I'm saying I don't like gameplay getting shafted for story purposes. How exactly is that wrong?
It is because its not a zero sum problem.>>25959713

>>25959761
>Not at all. You need to play other games.
It is. There are ways to incorporate story while having good gameplay, but it is not through a strict narrative. Which is exactly the approach pokémon has gone for.

>>25958503
They had a great story they told it in gen 1. Then they retold it in gen 2 and it had a more powerful effect due to tech available. Same thing with 3rd gen and so on.
I feel immersed in these games when there's no heavily driven story because I think these are supposed to be ambiguous. We're all the ten year old trying to become a master, no one tells us what Pokemon to get our how to train them.
The moment I get hit with a cut scene about the rival or team I get thrown out of that immersion because GF tries too hard.

Gameplay is autistic because it doesn't take much of a logical leap to figure out why it's inherently broken.

Lore is autistic because it requires childish notions to accept, and if you don't accept it, you are in the wrong franchise.

>>25960019
>>25960019
>It is. There are ways to incorporate story while having good gameplay, but it is not through a strict narrative. Which is exactly the approach pokémon has gone for.
You dont actually think this do you? You're baiting right?

If not then, seriously, play other games. Freedom is not the only indicator of a good gameplay.

>>25960346
Good rebuttal there buddy.
As I said, story can be done well, but not through a strict narrative. Strict narratives end up with shit like cutscenes and QTE's to prevent the player from doing anything not following the narrative.

>>25960404
While I am an advocate of free form play where you can do what you want, I also feel that a story told well makes you WANT to play and see what happens. Favorably if you feel like YOU are the one that did these things. It has forever been one of the largest flaws of JRPGs. One can argue that you signed up for the matter by getting the game in the first place, though. If you didn't want to battle to be the best, then why are you playing pokemon?

>>25960404
>>25960404
>Good rebuttal there buddy.
Nigga, you have no clue what gameplay is and refuse to do so. Here's a hint:it's not doing literally everything you want. Else, no video game would have gameplay.

>>25958212
Yes, I do. If they had good storytelling that wouldn't be the case, but Game Freak could not tell a compelling story to save their life. Gen V came close but XY and ORAS make Gen V seem like a fluke.

If I had the choice between the exact same two games, but one had all the awful shit like Tierno in it, I'd choose the one that didn't have said awful shit.

>>25958407
An immersive story would be fine but it's been shit since Gen 4.

>>25961456
Never said that. How you get weaker gameplay to mean no gameplay is beyond me.
But I'm eager to hear your definition, given your definition of immersion .

I just zoom through the games anyway. It's a bad habit.

>>25961598
None of the games have any real immersion unless you want to have frivolous battles. That is what makes everything having to do with any villain have such a big dissonance with the rest of the game. Even in BW, the premise is changed on you for no reason, and it still functionally the same as if it wasn't there. Yes, I am saying that pokemon's premise demands that it doesn't have a plot.

>>25958564
>What we need is a plot done by someone who isn't aiming towards children as the primary audience, but keeping the GF lore.
Aiming at kids is fine. Plenty of nintendo franchises are kid friendly. Pokemon's stories have been chaotically inconsistent in style and quality.

Gen 4 started having stupid animu curazzzy elements with Team Galactic and fucking Yu Gi Oh tier Eldar Gods.

Gen 5 amped up the animu bullshit. It couldn't decide if it wanted to be New York/ americana, Japanese Animu with ninjas, Knights Templar, Three Musketeers, or Taoism.

Gen 6 was just fucking dumb. I don't even know where to begin. I guess this sums it all up:
https://youtu.be/UYcDhl1noMc?t=1m26s

>>25961673
Well, the same thing has been pointed out about the product guide. They themselves are exempt from it, but if anyone else wants to use it, NO, you HAVE to be as vapid as possible, even if we do otherwise.

http://www.pokemoncrossroads.com/product-approval-manual-sheds-light-on-pokemon-world/

Just scroll down a bit.

>>25961656
Immersion always seemed kind of funny to me. I never feel like I'm not playing a video game. But I'm using it and people generally use it to mean the elements of narrative are compelling. IMO Pokemon would make great use of subtle background details and subtext thrown around throughout the region to give a sense of what the region's history is. I think in Gen 6, this is sorely lacking. So what we got instead of GF's really shitty attempt to make the story more commanding the pace of the game. The sad thing is that the story of Gen 6 though trying to take your hand the whole time was incredibly shallow even compared to previous installments. There was little depth put into the story and sometimes I feel like they decided half way through, fuck it. I really wish they'd slow the fuck down and bring their story telling back down to earth a bit. They started in Gen 4 trying to one up Gen 3 and then Gen 5 trying to one up Gen 4. Eventually we've come from a game about stopping a believable and down to earth crime syndicate with subtextual genetic experimentation to ninjas, gods of creation, and cringy lofty monologues about the beauty of pokemon or some shit.

>>25961767
Well, I guess that is why pokemon seems so lifeless. None of the features have any real relevance to what's going on. Usually there is a reason you're going somewhere to do stuff. In pokemon, your reasons are either because it's there, or because there is a gym there, or in the way of getting to a gym. Even for all of that, you are given no reason why you want to be the best. I suppose that's the best way to sum up my problems with the main series, too. There is no reason. Some may say you make your reason, but even then, you are still forced into what they say is your reason, even if that reason is not explained. Even the simplest games I can think of have a reason for what you're doing, with the exceptions of some board games and games of chance and some puzzle games. Oh yeah, and sports. On this matter, there is a reason why things that have actual meaning were favored for video games. Sadly, for pokemon, that would mean CHANGING THE PREMISE ENTIRELY.

>>25961606
>>25961606
>Never said that.
You did, your entire point is that story can only be improved at the cost of gameplay.

>How you get weaker gameplay to mean no gameplay is beyond me.
There will always be a limit at what you can do because they are games. Your definition of gameplay implies that it only exists when there are no limits to what you can do, so video games,by definition, have no gameplay. Sure, it makes no sense, but that's on you.


And gameplay refers to your interaction with the game which varies according to the genre. In pokemon is all about collecting, breeding, battling and so on, all things that can be done while also having a story. This is obvious for non-retards.


Also, i checked and my definition of immersion was right, but didnt think it was worthwile to bring up.

>>25961606
>>25961673
>>25961673


>Gen 4 started having stupid animu curazzzy elements with Team Galactic and fucking Yu Gi Oh tier Eldar Gods.
Literally nothing wrong with that, unless you're a nostalgiafag.
>Gen 5 amped up the animu bullshit. It couldn't decide if it wanted to be New York/ americana, Japanese Animu with ninjas, Knights Templar, Three Musketeers, or Taoism.
>it has to be this one thing
>what is originality


Not even defending gen 4 and 5 stories but your "arguments" are stupid.

>>25962313
>You did, your entire point is that story can only be improved at the cost of gameplay.
Nope. I said a strict narrative. A story can coexist just fine, but don't forget that a less prominent story can sometimes be the best story.
>There will always be a limit at what you can do because they are games. Your definition of gameplay implies that it only exists when there are no limits to what you can do, so video games,by definition, have no gameplay. Sure, it makes no sense, but that's on you
Nice implications there. Again, not sure where you got the idea that I said that gameplay doesn't exist if there are limits, but let me just say that you're on the wrong track.
>And gameplay refers to your interaction with the game which varies according to the genre. In pokemon is all about collecting, breeding, battling and so on, all things that can be done while also having a story. This is obvious for non-retards.
Let me spell out my problem for you. All games have gameplay, it's literally not a game otherwise. What I don't like is when a game's established gameplay is shafted for narrative purposed, which can be everything from scripted deaths to QTE in games otherwise not filled with them. Large mandatory dialogue dumps and cutscenes can also be very intrusive and limit gameplay.
>Also, i checked and my definition of immersion was right, but didnt think it was worthwile to bring up.
You're calling other anons retards and autists left and right yet you actually believe a definition you got off 4chan to be correct. Let me just say that self insertion != immersion, it's definition is much wider than that.

>>25962361
First guy, why did you quote me?

>>25962420

>Nope. I said a strict narrative. A story can coexist just fine, but don't forget that a less prominent story can sometimes be the best story.
Sometimes, and sometimes "strict" is good, it's a matter of execution. Nice moving of the goalposts though.

>Nice implications there. Again, not sure where you got the idea that I said that gameplay doesn't exist if there are limits, but let me just say that you're on the wrong track.
It's your entire point. You seem to only be able to conceive that story-gameplay is a zero sum game when it itsnt. Not even if the story is "strict" ( as it happens in pretty much every game with a story).


>Let me spell out my problem for you. All games have gameplay, it's literally not a game otherwise. What I don't like is when a game's established gameplay is shafted for narrative purposed, which can be everything from scripted deaths to QTE in games otherwise not filled with them. Large mandatory dialogue dumps and cutscenes can also be very intrusive and limit gameplay.
But its not? I mean, lets see your previous example, the forced capture one, you still have to battle reshiram/zekrom and catch it, the gameplay is intact. You could argue that it's made easier because of the story, but the very fact there is a story doesnt increase the catch rate, the issue is gameplay. And this is a one time special thing, you can still catch most other mons(including legends) just fine. The only alternative is to have no story at all.

Also
>bothered by scripted deaths
Nigga, if there's a story shit should actually happen, are you kidding?
>You're calling other anons retards and autists left and right yet you actually believe a definition you got off 4chan to be correct. Let me just say that self insertion != immersion, it's definition is much wider than that.
I googled it
Also
>!=
>much wider
"Much wider" implies self insertion is part of inmersion.

>>25962443
Accident

>>25962420
Hmmm...I can only think of one modern example of a game telling it's entire story through gameplay rather than cutscenes, and it was a WRPG. Even then, it began with a cutscene and the info dumps might as well have been a cutscene, other than when stuff was told via interactiveable things in the environment. It's a rather interesting approach, but it makes parts missable if you want to know about it. I honestly don't know what to say about that, really. I once made a comment about the opening cutscene of Rocket Knight Adventures: That is all you need to know about a video game, right there. Here is the bad guy, go get him. I cannot question people wanting more story than that, and I will agree gameplay should not be sacrificed for that, nor the other way around. Some even sound like they're trying to hit that balance, but I sort of wonder if it's really possible. There are just some times you'll have to stop sooner or later, or else things go back to the way they were before games became 3D to some extent. Just a chain of environments with no rhyme or reason behind them.

>>25962663
>Sometimes, and sometimes "strict" is good, it's a matter of execution. Nice moving of the goalposts though.
I haven't moved a goalpost. My point from the start have been about a stricter narratives not working well for pokémon when they have tried it.
>It's your entire point. You seem to only be able to conceive that story-gameplay is a zero sum game when it itsnt. Not even if the story is "strict" ( as it happens in pretty much every game with a story).
I have literally never said "no gameplay", I've said less, which is completely different.
>But its not? I mean, lets see your previous example, the forced capture one, you still have to battle reshiram/zekrom and catch it, the gameplay is intact. You could argue that it's made easier because of the story, but the very fact there is a story doesnt increase the catch rate, the issue is gameplay. And this is a one time special thing, you can still catch most other mons(including legends) just fine. The only alternative is to have no story at all.
The gameplay is not intact. You need to actually catch it to progress the story. Sure you can beat it but the game acts like that never happened if you did. It's severely restricting. Like a game claiming it has choices but if you don't pick the correct one they just ask the question again. Also just as less gameplay != no gameplay, less story != no story. Take the gen IV games for example, they didn't have a forced capture, but they certainly had story.
>Nigga, if there's a story shit should actually happen, are you kidding?
Having boss battles that you can't beat and actually need to lose to for the game to progress is extremely shitty game design. I can't believe you're actually defending it.
>"Much wider" implies self insertion is part of inmersion.
Yes self insertion can be a form of immersion, good job repeating my point. That does not mean that self insertion is equal to immersion.

>>25962821
>Some even sound like they're trying to hit that balance, but I sort of wonder if it's really possible
Pretty sure most games try to find a balance. It's just very rarely that the balance is 50/50. Usually depending on how good and original both the gameplay and story is on their own.

>>25962861
To tell the truth, I don't know which mode it is I prefer. I can only say what I already said, for me, it all boils down to reason. If I don't have a reason for what I'm doing, that is not good to me. No matter how you look at it, pokemon doesn't have one. I can also see how that could bite me in the butt since it's possible it is nothing more than you simply want it. After all, this is told from the mind of a child. I will not question the matter that would mean I've been playing the wrong game for a long time. I will still argue it was because the lore made me think otherwise. It's not my fault this game's mechanics and it's lore exist in two separate realities. As I mentioned before, though, it is possible I partially misinterpreted the lore. I sort of found what I was seeking from pokemon in another game, but even that is only temporary. Perhaps my days of being a diehard for anything is over, or perhaps not. The one thing that has remained is the creatures themselves. They are all that have kept me here. Things that to me are nothing more than a design and an idea. Something that exists outside it's context and becomes something more. That is why I've thought that it was never a game I wanted, but a story. A story only I can create.

>>25962833
>. My point from the start have been about a stricter narratives not working well for pokémon when they have tried it.
It wasnt, and just because it didnt work well doesnt mean it cant be done.

>I have literally never said "no gameplay", I've said less, which is completely different.
You said story can only be done at the cost of gameplay, which is false.

>The gameplay is not intact. You need to actually catch it to progress the story.
>Sure you can beat it but the game acts like that never happened if you did. It's severely restricting. Like a game claiming it has choices but if you don't pick the correct one they just ask the question again.
So you now champion the story? Because those complaints are about the story not being complex enough and the gameplay not affecting it, not about the story ruining the gameplay.

>Having boss battles that you can't beat and actually need to lose to for the game to progress is extremely shitty game design.
Not really, would you rather have a cutscene where you can't control the character(so less gameplay) or your character being an invincible mary sue at the beggining?
Also, did pokemon ever even do this? Definitely not as much as other games, which proves you havent played shit besides pokemon.
>That does not mean that self insertion is equal to immersion.
No, but it's part of it.

What would be a good story for a pokemon game to have?

>>25963398
>It wasnt, and just because it didnt work well doesnt mean it cant be done.
Yes it was, fucking moron. Stricter narratives simply do not work well in pokémon as it has been shown in the past. Your point isn't grounded in reality at all and is basically "anything is possible".
>You said story can only be done at the cost of gameplay, which is false.
A stricter one, which is true.
>So you now champion the story? Because those complaints are about the story not being complex enough and the gameplay not affecting it, not about the story ruining the gameplay.
>Because those complaints are about the story not being complex enough
Complex is the wrong word. Their about the story being too strict/linear. Which is what I always have complained about.
>Not really, would you rather have a cutscene where you can't control the character(so less gameplay) or your character being an invincible mary sue at the beggining?
Both options are shit. The best is rather to have an very hard battle that most people lose to, but the battle is not completely impossible.
>Also, did pokemon ever even do this? Definitely not as much as other games, which proves you havent played shit besides pokemon.
No. It was just an example, but
>this is not in pokémon
>this proves you haven't played anything but pokémon
Your logic is astonishing.
>No, but it's part of it.
Yeah, it's a variant of it, but you can easily have immersion without self insertion. So you calling immersion autistic in general because you think self insertion is makes no sense. The fact that you're so fixated on having a more prominent story while hating immersion is out of this world.

>>25963550
>Stricter narratives simply does not work well in pokémon as it has been shown in the past.
>I cant solve a rubik cube
>therefore, it's literally impossible for me to ever do.

> Your point isn't grounded in reality at all
Yeah, it's not like games with good stories and gameplay exist.

>A stricter one, which is true.
Nigga,define "strict" because all your examples pretty much point to story even being there. And again, good games are there with good story AND gameplay.

>Their about the story being too strict/linear.
Which is not gameplay at all.

>The best is rather to have an very hard battle that most people lose to, but the battle is not completely impossible.
then if you win, you have to twist the story for that scenario, making the story investment bigger, which is what you dont want.

>Your logic is astonishing.
Well, if you played anything besides pokemon you'd know its not uncommon. Also, you're allowed to refer to things outside pokemon and I'm not? What kind of logic is that?

>Yeah, it's a variant of it, but you can easily have immersion without self insertion.
So it's not different.

>So you calling immersion autistic in general because you think self insertion is makes no sense.
It does on the definition I used back then, which was explained, do you have ADHD?

> The fact that you're so fixated on having a more prominent story while hating immersion is out of this world.
Not if you actually paid attention to the definition of immersion I previously used.

>>25963636
It's more like me being shit at football, and still insisting on making a living out of it.
>Yeah, it's not like games with good stories and gameplay exist.
Some do. But games with prominent narratives generally have less room for gameplay.
>Nigga,define "strict" because all your examples pretty much point to story even being there. And again, good games are there with good story AND gameplay.
Strict, as in you have to do something in a set order and/or set way to fulfill the narrative, which would otherwise not be the case.
>Which is not gameplay at all.
They're about the story being strict/linear while the gameplay takes a backseat*
Better?
>then if you win, you have to twist the story for that scenario, making the story investment bigger, which is what you dont want.
It's not as strict, which is my point.You can deal with the situation in different ways and the story is either flexible enough or vague enough for that not being a problem.
>Well, if you played anything besides pokemon you'd know its not uncommon.
I didn't say it was uncommon, I sad it was bad and certainly something I hope to not see in pokémon.
>Also, you're allowed to refer to things outside pokemon and I'm not? What kind of logic is that?
Sure you are, I would actually be glad to see some of your examples.
>So it's not different.
Yes it is. It's like saying all people are autistic because autists are autistic.
>It does on the definition I used back then, which was explained, do you have ADHD?
>Not if you actually paid attention to the definition of immersion I previously used.
I'm saying it's a definition that you made up entirely by yourself.

>>25963823
> But games with prominent narratives generally have less room for gameplay.
Not in the case of RPGs. Coincidentially, pokemon is of that genre.

>Strict, as in you have to do something in a set order and/or set way to fulfill the narrative, which would otherwise not be the case.
So like most games with stories?

>You can deal with the situation in different ways and the story is either flexible enough or vague enough for that not being a problem.
Sorry they dont make it vague for you to fit your headcanon.

>I didn't say it was uncommon, I sad it was bad and certainly something I hope to not see in pokémon.
Good. How about something that was IN pokemon?

> I would actually be glad to see some of your examples.
The world ends with you., GTA V, the cave,etc.

>Yes it is. It's like saying all people are autistic because autists are autistic.
You're saying autists are not people.

>I'm saying it's a definition that you made up entirely by yourself.
Which isnt related to the part you're quoting. I stood corrected after that, my arguments were solid based on that definition. You're now applying those AFTER I corrected that.

>buzzwords: the thread

>>25962058
>Sadly
How is changing the premise a bad thing? The main series never needed to always be about getting badges. It was just an easy way to stop the player from burning through the region in a short time.

>>25964108
>Not in the case of RPGs. Coincidentially, pokemon is of that genre.
It's the case for several RPGs as well. FFXIII being one of the worst cases of gameplay being left in the dark.
>So like most games with stories?
No, I'll come back to this later in the post during your examples.
>Good. How about something that was IN pokemon? Well we have the required captures as mentioned before. Another example would be areas locked away for no other reason than to make the narrative slightly better. Stuff like not being able to enter Route 6 in Kalos until you have talked to the Snorlax guys is another example.
>The world ends with you., GTA V, the cave,etc.
I haven't played TWEWY, but GTA is actually an example of a story that is far from strict. You can enter many places and do side stuff long before you need to go to said places during the narrative. You're also for the most part able to deal with the different missions and side missions how you like. You know with some exceptions like the QTE yoga session which is nearly universally disliked.
>You're saying autists are not people.
No, I'm saying autists are people, like like self insertion is a form of immersion. You're saying all people have autism.
>Which isnt related to the part you're quoting. I stood corrected after that, my arguments were solid based on that definition. You're now applying those AFTER I corrected that.
I think your memory is failing you dear anon. It's certainly related. The whole reason why we're talking about your dumb definition of immersion is because you tried to lecture me on another definition, which I found hilarious. You even started defending it and stating your definition was correct.

>>25964426
>It's the case for several RPGs as well.
Yeah, it can be done wrong as much as it can be done right. So I'm right.

>but GTA is actually an example of a story that is far from strict.
But there is one main plotline that you can't avoid if you want to fully complete the game. And the plotline an only be changed near the ending depending on a decision, you can't do everything you want.

> You're saying all people have autism.
Not really.

>I think your memory is failing you dear anon.
I'm not the one that doesnt know about posts order.

> The whole reason why we're talking about your dumb definition of immersion is because you tried to lecture me on another definition, which I found hilarious
And then we stopped and you brought it back on an unrelated post.

>You even started defending it and stating your definition was correct.
Not at first, I mentioned that I googled it and found out it was right but it wasnt worth bringing up because the discussion moved past that. My mistake, I overestimated your reading comprehension by expecting you to have any. You later said that self-insertion is a part of immersion anyways.

>>25964304
It's sad because we all know it can't happen. True, nothing really "needs" to be anything, but it was their intention the entire time that this will only be about some kid's empty quest to be the best. Such a waste, it has so much potential, and some of the spinoffs have shown so, but nooooooooooo, this fandom is too stubborn. 'Tis the curse of being a fanfic writer, I guess. Long have I done the things that the officials refuse to do, to the point that I would even say that if no one else is willing to do it, then I MUST do it. I have even managed to write a totally original work this way. Perhaps it is true that means I was never really a fan of this series to begin with, but I am fine with that if it means I can stop expecting these losers to ever make something worthwhile. They're far better as a vehicle for your own musings.

>>25958212
I couldn't care less about the villain boss or his son.
I just want to get my badges and beat the Elite 4 and champion without 5 hours of dialogue in the way.

>>25964577
>Yeah, it can be done wrong as much as it can be done right. So I'm right.
>But there is one main plotline that you can't avoid if you want to fully complete the game.
Yes, I never stated otherwise? All pokémon games have a set goal of becoming a champion and having to beat 8 gyms to do so. That's not a bad thing. Again you seem to insist on me thinking that the only option to a prominent strict story is no story at all.
>I'm not the one that doesn't know about posts order.
Post order is actually quite irrelevant since you never actually admitted to your definition being wrong.
>Not at first, I mentioned that I googled it and found out it was right but it wasnt worth bringing up because the discussion moved past that. My mistake, I overestimated your reading comprehension by expecting you to have any. You later said that self-insertion is a part of immersion anyways.
Ok, anon, look closely at those two lines:
>all self insertion is immersion
>all immersion is self insertion
Now tell me the difference. Also I would love to see the definition you found that stated that immersion is synonymous to self insertion.

But I'm getting tired of this. Here's a quick summary since barely any of the above is relevant to the main topic:
>I dislike when pokémon games have a stricter, more prominent story that sacrifices gameplay, especially since pokémon stories are not particularly good.
>there are other ways to tell a story by making it less intrusive and restricting, and I'm not opposed to that
>you could potentially get a decent pokémon plot if they hired better plot writers or/and if the current staff invested far more time and effort into plot, which are resources I think are better spent elsewhere.

>>25964870
>Yes, I never stated otherwise? All pokémon games have a set goal of becoming a champion and having to beat 8 gyms to do so. That's not a bad thing. Again you seem to insist on me thinking that the only option to a prominent strict story is no story at all.
Your entire argument is that story should get heavier at the cost of gameplay, which is stupid. If you dont think so, why are you even arguing?

>Post order is actually quite irrelevant since you never actually admitted to your definition being wrong.
>>25958573


>Now tell me the difference.
selfinsertion is part of immersion, therefore they are not different, immersion just has a bigger scope
>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/immersion

>I dislike when pokémon games have a stricter, more prominent story that sacrifices gameplay,
Which never happened nor it has to happen in a significant way


>there are other ways to tell a story by making it less intrusive and restricting, and I'm not opposed to that
Exactly, so if pokemon games get better stories, there's no reason to think it will ruin gameplay.

>you could potentially get a decent pokémon plot if they hired better plot writers or/and if the current staff invested far more time and effort into plot, which are resources I think are better spent elsewhere.
Or you could put more resources period.

>>25964950
>Your entire argument is that story should get heavier at the cost of gameplay, which is stupid. If you dont think so, why are you even arguing?
Because that's exactly what happened in gen V and VI.
>>>25958573
You didn't admit there, you just went "we have different definitions and mine is as good as anyone's".
>therefore they are not different, immersion just has a bigger scope
Good to see that both you, me and the dictionary agrees that immersion is far bigger than just self insertion.However if one has a bigger scope than the other it is by definition not the same
>Which never happened nor it has to happen in a significant way
I have listed several examples of it happening
>Exactly, so if pokemon games get better stories, there's no reason to think it will ruin gameplay.
The reason to think that gameplay will be sacrificed is because it has done so in the past. Same deal with story, just because some games have had more prominent story they haven't had better ones.
>Or you could put more resources period.
Easier said than done.