"Gen 6's shift: a radical change in design philosophy. Or why Pokémon hadn't been the same since."

This was originally written in response to a post talking about someone who enjoyed gen 6 greatly. My aim with this is to try to understand that what happened after gen 5's rejection wasn't just a decline in quality (which is almost another conversation entirely) but a total shift on how the games would be conceived to appeal to the perceived player's interest from then on.If I had to summarize the pre gen 6's design objectives, it would be "adventure through hardships", "immersive world", and "freedom of choice". And the 3 work in tandem."Adventure through hardship" can come in many flavours. Challenging trainers is one of them of course, but also the design of the dungeons, rare pokémon (legendary or not) you have to work for, etc. Victory isn't free, and you have to use the game resources (hidden items/pokémon, alternate paths, choosing the right ones for the boss...) to achieve it. And those hardships are what makes the adventure meaningful."Immersive world" also includes different approaches. Believable characters and an impactful story is one way to achieve it, but also a big breathing world that feels largers than you is one of them. Or lore to discover. Or daily mechanics design to make you come back everyday, like weekly events in HGSS, or the berries, or the battle frontier and the contests (which while you could grind in a few weeks, are also good for playing a bit everyday). Anything that makes you feel like you are inhabiting a living world, not just walking through a stage. You can see how this one works with the previous one: challenge can make the story and world feel more impactful, while the world gives context to your adventure.Lastly, "freedom of choice" capitalizes in Pokémon's premise: you choose where you go, who your teammates are, and how you face this world. The character is not just another hero with capabilities you would never had, he is a kid like you making the same choices you are making behind the screen and performing almost the same actions you could. This is already good, but combine it with the other two, and what do you get? It becomes YOUR adventure, YOUR world. You beat the challenges, you live here, and this pokémon are your partners who you chose and helped you achieve it.This last principle is the only one that survives the design shift, but without the other 2 becomes something different. What are the new principles? I would say "Toys for everybody", "competitive postgame" and "a pretty world".The first one is easy. They don't want the f2p obsessed kids to be turned away by the challenge, so that is gone. Instead, they fill the game with pretty or cool pokémon and features (quite marketable btw), give them to you for free, and let you have simple fun with them. No roadblocks in your way that could halt the enjoyment.The second one. What to do with the older players who want something for them? Relegate all challenge to competitive play (or building competitive teams for the single postgame tower). Make competitive pokémon much more accessible, and add mechanics that shake it up.The last one is the most clear in Kalos. It isn't a big world with lots of secrets to discover, but it is a nice place for sightseeing. You can see benches everywhere to just sit down and enjoy the moment. Or restaurants to make you feel like a tourist. Not that much meaningful, but a nice distraction. Another key element in this are all the new "interactive pokémon", like poke ami and its iterations in the following games. A way to bond with your team and have fun just petting them."Freedom of choice" is still there, mind you. But because the rest change, its function is completely different. It makes the pure power fantasy cooler because you choose your team, competitive play is open (well, depends on who you ask) and you can choose which pokémon accompany in your vacation in this new region and at what pace you travel through it (and what clothes you buy).Now, am I saying that this change is objectively bad? Not at all. What's more, for many people this all where changes for the best. "More competitive play? Hurray! I don't have to worry about teambuilding or grinding at all and just beat the bad guys with my team? Perfect! I get to enjoy a pretty region with no mandatory labyrinthic dungeons? Finally!" Some could say that the problem is that this objectives aren't properly achieved because of the lack of development time and ambition, but that's outside of the scope of this analysis.Hey, even I enjoyed Kalos. I found the appeal in going through a pretty region while bonding with my pokémon. Once I stopped thinking about what the game wasn't (and wasn't trying to be) I even loved parts of the experience.But that doesn't change the fact that Pokémon has given up on what made it special and meaningful to me (and many people). What made it feel like and adventure. A challenge I worked hard to overcome. A big world filled with secrets for me to discover. A world where I lived...And sometimes it is hard not to think on what could have been. Pokémon keeping its ambition, and growing with its players. A challenge that would have kept up with the older players. All the bonding mechanics, with the team that helped you win the hardest battles. A huge world with secrets and dungeons that utilize the power of the new hardware. And a pretty and breathing world, where I live, where I have my fair share of adventures, but also time for just sitting on a bench in front of a waterfall. That's what could have been.Sorry, I didn't expect to get so emotional. But I have been thinking about this for a long time, and I guess I needed to share it with someone.tl/dr: the previous games aimed to create adventure and immersive worlds through story, map design, wide content and challenge. The current ones aim to create undemanding power fantasies and pretty tourist attractions through free cool pokémon, random new mechanics, and ligh hearted interactions. via /r/pokemon https://ift.tt/2TUT0Y5