• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

Discussion ....

  • Thread starter Deleted member 5265
  • Start date
I’d like to add that Pokemon Legends Arceus is the BOTW of Pokemon and Scarlet/Violet are TOTK. I say this because:

• Legends Arceus makes you feel like you’re playing a Pokemon game for the first time. It just gives you that feeling.

• S/V, even though were developee at the same time with Legends, feels like a proper step in the right direction. It just feels so magical to be in an open world that has areas full of diverse Pokemon!
 
kanpachi said:
Is this all there is to this game? Does it open up more later on or does it stay the same?
Click to expand...

That's pretty much all there is to the game, yes. It's not really like BOTW in anything other than the most superficial of ways. the games really don't do enough to earn the comparison to BOTW. While it's definitely true the maps were more open in Pokemon Legends Arceus than other recent pokemon games, that's because from Pokemon Black/White onwards, each map was basically a series of linear corridors that the game shuffled you around in essentially a straight line, not letting the player explore. Roughly speaking, the further back you go, the more the games actually expected some level of exploration of the map from the player, and in that sense, Legends arceus is a return to the games being more open.

Pokemon has a different problem in that it's essentially trying to tack a game series that just wasn't designed as an open world game, and trying to force it to work without any real way to redesign the game to make that so; I don't personally think they've succeeded in the direction they've taken the series unfortunately, but that's just my opinion and it's clearly not done them any harm sales wise.
 
Last edited:
Scarlet/Violet is the closest the series has. I think it would have been BotW-levels of a big deal if not for the bugs and performance issues.

Legends Arceus is like if Nintendo released a Zelda game with Monster Hunter-esque progression and design several months before BotW that also happened to have some of the BotW mechanics.
 
ziggyrivers said:
I’d like to add that Pokemon Legends Arceus is the BOTW of Pokemon and Scarlet/Violet are TOTK. I say this because:

• Legends Arceus makes you feel like you’re playing a Pokemon game for the first time. It just gives you that feeling.

• S/V, even though were developee at the same time with Legends, feels like a proper step in the right direction. It just feels so magical to be in an open world that has areas full of diverse Pokemon!
Click to expand...
tbh , I liked Arceus much more.
The problem with Pokemon is that recent games are just far too undercooked.
Arceus felt less so, because it concentrated on doing fewer things, while a normal mainline games tries to be a jack of all trades.
The new games just fail to achieve this properly ever since they switched to full 3D and then HD.
 
Last edited:
I think the answer comes down to this: what does "The BotW of X" mean?

Breath of the Wild was all about rethinking the conventions of the Zelda franchise. It threads the needle between going in bold new directions (totally open world, complex physics for world interaction, a deemphasis on dungeons in favor of shrines) while also honing in on the initial core appeal of the franchise (exploration, discovery, puzzles, and combat). It was a critically acclaimed title that resonated with audiences new and old and has become influential both in and out of its series.

Pokémon Legends Arceus does go in a new direction for the franchise. Multiple open areas to explore, a greater emphasis on action gameplay, a more direct capture system and a greater focus on catching. But I don't think I'd argue it captures the core appeal of Pokémon to me. Pokémon was always about the mix of catching and battling, and while battles are present in Legends Arceus, they often feel like a step down from prior entries. Many mechanics and moves were removed, and while the FFX style speed mechanics were a neat idea, it disproportionately hurts slower Pokémon and the style shifting never came off as that impact full. Battling felt like something to do as a last resort or when forced to, and it never was as engaging as it is in the other core games. And while it remains to be seen, currently the latest games only take light inspiration from LA and instead feel more like an evolution of the Wild Area and other open areas from Pokémon Sword and Shield. So it lacks the influence and extremely strong reception of BotW.

Now, the way you put it, the "BotW of Pokémon" was meant more in terms of open exploration, and...well, Legends Arceus isn't quite an open world game. It's more like early Monster Hunter with specific open areas to explore and a home base to return to. It doesn't quite hit those same beats as BotW. If anything, if open exploration in a Pokémon game is primarily what you want, you may want to consider Scarlet and Violet (with some caveats). Their reputation as janky, buggy games is unfortunately earned, and I do wish they did more with level scaling the bosses to make the progression truly be approached in any order, but after a slow first few hours, the game is much more open. BotW is definitely more of that genre defining game of the generation than either of these Pokémon games would ever be, so keep that in mind.
 
AllEchse said:
tbh , I liked Arceus much more.
THe problem with Pokemon is that recent games are just far too undercooked and Arceus felt less so because it concentrated on doing fewer things while anormal mainline games tries to be a jack of all trades, which the new games just fail to achieve properly ever since they switched to full 3D and then HD.
Click to expand...
Like a fellow member said: I think it’s a design problem. Games like Zelda are technically “future proofed” for open world because of how they’ve always been.

Pokemon, on the other hand, is a turn based RPG that hasn’t really scaled itself to open world. It’s just an expansion of the existing formula, sprinkled into open world.

Do I love Violet?
Yes.

Was it perfect?
No.

GameFreak should really invest in redesigning the Pokemon formula to fit into open world. Because it’s honestly a series that’s PERFECT for open world.

FINAL FANTASY XV was criticized for its empty open world. Unlike FF15, Pokemon has stuff you can do:
• Find Pokemon
• Wander around for rare encounters
• Find Items
• Find TMs
• Find TM ingredients
 
No, legends is a fun experiment but it isn't a complete experience in the same way that botw was, no where near the same quality which is the separator. I think the next pokemon games will get a little better and merge mainline and legends mechanics but still I don't see them making a Botw level game till they fix their scheduling or license bandai to do it or something. The games need to be more dynamic, they need to run and look better and they need some voice acting. Pokemon Company have been making an anime for like 30 years at this point and yet there's no voice acting in these mainline games. I'm ranting at this point but damn.

For Pokemon to reach a new level I think it needs

  • to develop a cohesive art style
  • more dynamic uses for pokemon
  • voice acting
  • good resolution and consistent framerate
  • better co - op
  • and a bunch of other things i can't be bothered to list
  • better world design
Sidenote they need to make a new pokemon stadium, steal everything from pokemon showdown and just monetise the hell out of it. Then change the mainline battle system to have more real time elements imo.
 
Last edited:
VolcanicDynamo said:
I think the answer comes down to this: what does "The BotW of X" mean?

Breath of the Wild was all about rethinking the conventions of the Zelda franchise. It threads the needle between going in bold new directions (totally open world, complex physics for world interaction, a deemphasis on dungeons in favor of shrines) while also honing in on the initial core appeal of the franchise (exploration, discovery, puzzles, and combat). It was a critically acclaimed title that resonated with audiences new and old and has become influential both in and out of its series.

Pokémon Legends Arceus does go in a new direction for the franchise. Multiple open areas to explore, a greater emphasis on action gameplay, a more direct capture system and a greater focus on catching. But I don't think I'd argue it captures the core appeal of Pokémon to me. Pokémon was always about the mix of catching and battling, and while battles are present in Legends Arceus, they often feel like a step down from prior entries. Many mechanics and moves were removed, and while the FFX style speed mechanics were a neat idea, it disproportionately hurts slower Pokémon and the style shifting never came off as that impact full. Battling felt like something to do as a last resort or when forced to, and it never was as engaging as it is in the other core games. And while it remains to be seen, currently the latest games only take light inspiration from LA and instead feel more like an evolution of the Wild Area and other open areas from Pokémon Sword and Shield. So it lacks the influence and extremely strong reception of BotW.

Now, the way you put it, the "BotW of Pokémon" was meant more in terms of open exploration, and...well, Legends Arceus isn't quite an open world game. It's more like early Monster Hunter with specific open areas to explore and a home base to return to. It doesn't quite hit those same beats as BotW. If anything, if open exploration in a Pokémon game is primarily what you want, you may want to consider Scarlet and Violet (with some caveats). Their reputation as janky, buggy games is unfortunately earned, and I do wish they did more with level scaling the bosses to make the progression truly be approached in any order, but after a slow first few hours, the game is much more open. BotW is definitely more of that genre defining game of the generation than either of these Pokémon games would ever be, so keep that in mind.
Click to expand...

I get this perspective, but I think it kind of undersells both how huge of a departure BotW was from 3D Zelda and how much of the core essence of R/B was still present in PLA.

BotW wasn't just envisioned as just a reinvention of Zelda through rethinking conventions, it was also very specifically meant to harken back to the freedom of exploration and feeling of getting lost the first LoZ brought with it. In the process, it also dropped a lot of the core franchise conventions even looking beyond traditional dungeons. From item gating, combat style, enemy variety, and how the moment to moment gameplay works. I think it's pretty clear to see how a lot of core 3D Zelda fans still find BotW to be a disappointing entry and "not Zelda enough".

PLA in my opinion shares a lot of these points in common with BotW. The game resets the focus back primarily to the loop of catching, training, and battling Pokemon while deemphasizing a lot of the details that got kept and iterated on as the franchise evolved. Similar to how BotW dropped traditional dungeons, PLA dropped gyms. BotW reduced enemy variety and instead shifted the focus towards environmental awareness, PLA reduced traditional trainer battles and shifted the focus to the ARPG elements. And just like BotW was a truly "open" Zelda in the way LoZ was on NES, PLA was the first Pokemon game in a while where catching them all was being actively encouraged. They both also introduced a bunch of contemporary gaming elements that kind of feel out of place. BotW is a Zelda game with Ubisoft towers, survival elements, and weapons with stat modifiers. PLA is a Pokemon game with a hub town, quest emphasis, and crafting. You mention how Pokemon for you has always been about battling, but was battling really any better in Gen 1? Those games had arguably even less complexity than PLA and were definitely more broken in terms of balance.

To be honest, I think the main reason PLA didn't feel like a BotW moment for the franchise has more to do with the game + franchise reception. With Zelda, there was a collective sour feeling coming from the fanbase after SS went too hard with its linearity, and a growing expectation for the franchise to become a trendsetter again. Add to that the fact that BotW effectively tripled the fanbase in terms of popularity and it's no surprise the purist voices get drowned out. Look at Pokemon in terms of fan reception post Gen 5, and the growing consensus is a desire for games to go back to that quality, not for a complete reinvention or return to roots. Whereas with Zelda, it's pretty clear looking at the sales that a reinvention was more needed. I think PLA was a Pokemon BotW moment, just one for a franchise that didn't particularly need it. And one that didn't succeed enough in growing the fanbase the way BotW did.
 
kanpachi said:
Hello,
I'm sort of new here, so I hope I'm doing it right, if not, I apologize
I just started Pokémon Legends: Arceus a few days ago, it's my first ever Pokémon game.
I did hear about the series a lot beforehand and was watching a few videos, but never actually played it myself
I specifically started with this game, as I read online this is the BOTW of the Pokémon series, meaning you can explore more than usual and I love BOTW
I have to admit, so far it's a little underwhelming. I am bombarded with information, I don't feel like I'm really free to do what I want
and doing missions in the Pokedex requires catching the same Pokemon multiple times or defeating them a few times
Is this all there is to this game? Does it open up more later on or does it stay the same?
Thank you
Click to expand...
It does open up more, the tutorial is pretty long.
 
I think the next game, or maybe the one after, will be the one to really get the house back in order considering they :

  • 1) Will absorb the feedback of both Legends and S/V, and see what worked and didnt work
  • 2) Have considerable more experience developing open world and open zone areas (SV is a massive step up compared to the SWSH DLC, which themselves were a massive step up from the Wild Area)
  • 3) Wont be developed in the middle of a society collapsing plauge (We hope)

Whether or not they succseed on the level of something like BoTW, we wont know until we get our hands on it.

Also, BOTW felt like a much larger gap because 3D Zelda's come out a lot less frequently than Pokemon,. Every Zelda game takes massive leaps because they take so long, but Pokemon takes more iterative steps, and we see those steps one at a time.

For example, Skyward Sword to Breath of the Wild was straight from 2011 to 2017.
Imagine if we went straight from Pokemon Black 2 (2011) to Ultra Sun/Moon (2017), ignoring every game in the middle. That would look like a massive jump. It doesnt feel that way because we got to see them take the steps to get to that point, which we dont get for Zelda. We'll never that one single game that shakes up the formula as much as much as BOTW did, we may get a game as good, but we'll see how we got there instead of just jumping in to it like with Zelda.
 
ziggyrivers said:
Like a fellow member said: I think it’s a design problem. Games like Zelda are technically “future proofed” for open world because of how they’ve always been.

Pokemon, on the other hand, is a turn based RPG that hasn’t really scaled itself to open world. It’s just an expansion of the existing formula, sprinkled into open world.

Do I love Violet?
Yes.

Was it perfect?
No.

GameFreak should really invest in redesigning the Pokemon formula to fit into open world. Because it’s honestly a series that’s PERFECT for open world.

FINAL FANTASY XV was criticized for its empty open world. Unlike FF15, Pokemon has stuff you can do:
• Find Pokemon
• Wander around for rare encounters
• Find Items
• Find TMs
• Find TM ingredients
Click to expand...
Scarlet and Vioelt just revolve all around that open world but it really is just hollow.
Engaging with Pokémon just really didn't feel as exciting as Arceus even if there is some neat ideas with how some of them behave.
If you are not engaging with completing the Pokédex then there really isn't that much to do becaue items lie around everywhere basically, so they don't feel special, Trainers are a joke that don't even run towards you anymore and the game seems more like it want you to play Raids anyway which play totally different to the rest of the game.

Even if the Areas in Arceus were smaller I actually wanted to go places, unlikes Scarlet where it just felt shallow.
Arceus is far from a perfect game, but it felt more like it had one vision and didn't try top be everything at once.
I'm not denying Pokémon can't be Open World, it absolutely could be awesome, if it isn't halfassed like this.
 
Scarlet and Violet are probably closer to BotW in design and relationship to the overall series, but even that's a bit debatable.

Legends: Arceus is both not really trying to be super open world (it's more of a mission oriented gameplay loop) and not really intended to be the direction of the broader series. It's probably best thought of as a more action oriented experiment.
 
No, it's not the BotW of the Pokemon series

But still a better game than BotW. Legends Arceus is underrated and is a great game wish it had a better rep
 
kanpachi said:
I sure hope so, since so far it just feels like going through a check list. Maybe Pokémon isn't my cup of tea. I'll keep going for a while, but so far I am a little underwhelmed
I was never really interested in the series until I saw this game, which from what I gathered was more open-world, but so far, I'm not very impressed.
Click to expand...

If you don't like the loop of catching dozens of Pokémon, including many repeats of the same species, for no reason than to fill out literal checklists, that's never going to change. That's the basic gameplay loop of legends Arceus through the entire game.

The focus on catching tons of Pokémon and not doing anything with them is just what the game, and some of the other switch Pokémon games actually, is now.
 
If SV had a better artstyle and no framerate issues, would have been the BOTW of the saga.

I hope Game Freak will use PLA combat system in the next Pokémon game, which was the big thing from the game to me (also Pokémon attacking player)
 
it definitely could've been if GF actually put time into it and didn't relegate to being a "oh yeah we need one more thing to satisfy the masses while we work on next gen"

just an amazing concept and it actually all worked pretty well, if it was just treated like a main game it would've rocked shit
 
I like how the OP is essentially asking "is this game good?" and "should I keep playing it?" And the responses are about the semantics of if Arceus is the Breath of the Wild of the Pokemon series haha

Not that I don't get it. That's literally what the thread title asks. Just funny.
 
It needed an expansion to fully flesh things out because it is a superb experience, but TPC was more interested in shitting out Scarlet Violet because $$ (and they made $$$$) which still run bad a year later.

Whether it was BOTW? In many ways yes, but a sequel could potentially hit that mark. Game Freak probably won't get the time to do it though since they need to release 15 more Pokemon games in the coming years.
 
No, Pokemon hasn't undergone an evolution like Zelda has. It just tried to appeal to the trend Zelda has put out and it has done this in a very mediocre way.
 
I refuse to think the first decent Pokémon switch game and a rushed mess are the Pokémon equivalent of Botw and Totk
 
Legit my favorite Pokemon spin-off and it is just so great and felt so fresh, so I say yes.

How it feels so different but still has a lot of the soul of the Pokemon franchise. I love that it focuses on catching over battling as well. I enjoyed that part also of Pokemon LGPE but its a lot better here. Just feels more viscerally like you are living in that world. Scarlet/Violet is much better at being a traditional Pokemon game, but the world doesn't feel very lived in like Arceus does.
 
VolcanicDynamo said:
what does "The BotW of X" mean?
Click to expand...
I know this isn't the question the OP wanted answers for, but it's what the thread title led us towards haha.

But yeah, BotW and TotK were all about rethinking the conventions of their series in order to capture a sense of adventure. So if I were to "BotW-fy" Pokemon, then I would narrow it down to two core appeals of the franchise: catching monsters, befriending those monsters, and battling using those monsters.

1. Catching monsters - I liked PLA's idea of making the Pokeball throwing real-time, and I would expand on that by making the hunt for Pokemon more involved. Make the player track footprints or discarded feathers or poison trails. Have them plumb the caves, wander the forests and soar the skies. Have them dangle bait and set traps. Don't be afraid to hide away species in hard-to-find nooks in the world.

2. Battling with monsters - There's a lot I, and I mean A LOT, that I would revise about Pokemon's battle system, but assuming we want to keep it mostly intact, I would simply try to make the singleplayer campaign more challenging again. Give trainers full teams, let them use competitive strategies, maybe implement level caps, heck, let the computer cheat like in other RPGs. I'd also love it if Game Freak implemented an official Nuzlocke mode.

kanpachi said:
Does Pokemon Arecus gets any better?
Click to expand...
Now actually answering the OP's question... if you didn't like what you played so far, I doubt your opinion will improve as you go on.
 
kanpachi said:
That's probably my bad. I didn't want to open up a thread literally saying Does Pokemon Arecus gets any better? or something along the lines, since I didn't want it to sound negative, also, I'm new here, and didn't want to break any rules, since I don't know if threads with those kinds of titles are even allowed.
I guess I was trying to start a discussion about the nature of the game in general, while wondering if the game does open up and becomes less linear
Click to expand...
The game 100% gets better after the first few hours. The longer it goes on, the more open, less linear, and more free it becomes. It's pretty wonderful.
 
kanpachi said:
Why can't I just catch one of each kind and move on?
Click to expand...
That’s how it usually works in other Pokemon games. Legends Arceus changed the gameplay loop and made it revolve catching a lot of duplicates, which was a design decision I also wasn’t fond of.
 
0
It's not BOTW at all, but yeah I really really dig the game. I am not a collection type person but the act of catching , the different balls, the threat of the pokemon and building the dex and seeing slowly people's relationship with pokemon develop through doing their sidequests? I really dug it. If you don't find yourself into the loop of catching and searching for pokemon, then it probably won't resonate.
 
to the question, is it the botw of pokemon: not really and yes. It does not take it as far as BotW, and its not as good and well rounded as a game as BotW was.

As an infliction point for a new direction it could have helped... but with S/V we see, they tried to merge some of the old aspects, and removed some of the great aspects, so that i prefere it to S/V.

As a game itself:
It excells in feeling like exploring areas and collecting pokemon. The first game in forever (like, gen 3 or 4) where i bothered to collect all pokemon., the new battle presentation is sublime compared to the old one in my book

Where its lacking: technical, the areas being separated (less of a problem honestly), the story (its still rather childish/flat), the battles ( they are more interesting cause of the mechanics made predominantly for single player, but they did not go far enough and its underutilized), the human settlements (feels there was more potential), it could have profited from a handful of dungeons (the ones that are there are really basic), and a rather long slow introduction with a lot of explanation. i think it took an hour or 2 till i had fredom from interruptions.

But at its core: its running around, collecting resources, and catching pokemon. Trying to find them, stealh arround and hitting them right in the back always fellt fun. Thats the core of the gameplay, and if you don't like that, then im not sure if you'll be happy. For me its the most fun i had with pokemon since White 2 (and partially gen 6, since i liked the designs/region and the way the online worked)

I would wait till the end of the first regions story line. Its not that long, and if by then it did not click, then i would say drop it. thats like...3-5 hours,d depending on how much you explore? (on the other hand, there where people that first tried to do every mission in the first region before moving on, and where at 20h or something?)
 
I feel like what holds it back from that comparison is that inevitably any high praise of Pokemon Legends: Arceus always starts with "It's a great game, but..."

It's very 3 steps forward, 2 steps back which is about par for Game Freak's track record. Don't get me wrong, it's still up in my top five all time favourite Pokemon games including the spinoffs like New Snap, but it remains frustrating that the world's number one multimedia franchise continues to struggle in terms of performance or cut features (Dexit never bothered me much; what bothered me was Dexit happened and Sword/Shield still shipped as it did).

I think you can still enjoy PLA a great deal, but the best thing you can do to truly open your mind up to the wonders of the world is to remove any sort of connection/correlation to BOTW. For my money, I'd sooner compare it to a game like Monster Hunter with sectioned off distinct biomes with a home hub as opposed to a seamlessly connected open world.
 
Sadly no. IMO, it fixed virtually every problem with the modern Pokémon games, but I can’t really say it was the big leap that BOTW was when it was butchered as a result of being developed alongside scarlet and violet. If the game had more time in the oven to itself, I think it would be a yes. I also think that scarlet and violet throwing out tons of the cool shit legends did further makes it clear that legends is gonna be its own thing, not influencing the big games too much.
 
kanpachi said:
That's probably my bad. I didn't want to open up a thread literally saying Does Pokemon Arecus gets any better? or something along the lines, since I didn't want it to sound negative, also, I'm new here, and didn't want to break any rules, since I don't know if threads with those kinds of titles are even allowed.
I guess I was trying to start a discussion about the nature of the game in general, while wondering if the game does open up and becomes less linear
Click to expand...
Legends Arceus is structured fairly linearly. If you're looking for a nonlinear take on Pokémon, Scarlet or Violet would be a better option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom