Who Else Agrees!! New Evolutions, New Types, and Better Moves, and New Wii u pok

[Captain Jigglypuff]

What does Mortal Kombat have to with all this? The last MK game was on the Wii about seven years ago.

[Kerou 犠牲]

Purely from a business perspective a game on the Wii U is not only inevitable but should be implemented.

That being said I'd have no interest in buying it whatsoever

(Although, tbf, Re: Wii U having no games, a lot of games are getting / have better versions for Wii U (watchdogs, Arkham City) and the exclusives for Wii U make PS4 & XB1 exclusives look like garbage - Forza and Gran Turismo can make way for MK8 xD)

Forza and Gran Turismo (even as series) from a technical perspective are much better games than Mario Kart but purely as a fun game Mario Kart is better; it's pretty much a serious v fun comparison, something I'd say in general applies to modern Nintendo v the other major consoles. It just depends what you want from your console, you're more likely to be immersed in a great PS4 / Xbox One game than a Wii U one but the latter you've got more of a guarantee of endless fun I guess?

What does Mortal Kombat have to with all this? The last MK game was on the Wii about seven years ago.

MK as in Mario Kart, not Mortal Kombat.

[SaRo|Rapidash]

Forza and Gran Turismo (even as series) from a technical perspective are much better games than Mario Kart but purely as a fun game Mario Kart is better; it's pretty much a serious v fun comparison, something I'd say in general applies to modern Nintendo v the other major consoles. It just depends what you want from your console, you're more likely to be immersed in a great PS4 / Xbox One game than a Wii U one but the latter you've got more of a guarantee of endless fun I guess?

Forza and GT aren't /better/ from a technical perspective, they're more realistic. Like, Forza and GT have more realistic physics engines and what have you, but that doesn't mean they have a better physics engine as MK is set in a different world where physics may be different anyways.

But I guess the main thing is, MK8 is more unique. Sure, there's Sonic & Sega All Stars transformed, but it's nowhere near on par with MK8, whereas pretty much any realistic racing game can be substituted with another, with the main difference just being the cars they've made available.

[Kerou 犠牲]

Forza and GT aren't /better/ from a technical perspective, they're more realistic. Like, Forza and GT have more realistic physics engines and what have you, but that doesn't mean they have a better physics engine as MK is set in a different world where physics may be different anyways.

But I guess the main thing is, MK8 is more unique. Sure, there's Sonic & Sega All Stars transformed, but it's nowhere near on par with MK8, whereas pretty much any realistic racing game can be substituted with another, with the main difference just being the cars they've made available.

I dunno, I'd personally consider the graphics, the engines, etc., the reason why it's better from a technical perspective. That doesn't necessarily make it a better game though because there's more to games than just being technically good =P

The point about substituting's kinda false because you get some real terrible realistic attempts too. Forza and GT just happen to be good games but over the years there have been many bad ones which is why those two are the front runners; same reason why MK8 is the front runner for that style of racing too.

[SaRo|Rapidash]

I dunno, I'd personally consider the graphics, the engines, etc., the reason why it's better from a technical perspective. That doesn't necessarily make it a better game though because there's more to games than just being technically good =P

The point about substituting's kinda false because you get some real terrible realistic attempts too. Forza and GT just happen to be good games but over the years there have been many bad ones which is why those two are the front runners; same reason why MK8 is the front runner for that style of racing too.

Out of interest, have you played MK8? Because until I had, I know I thought it'd have "Nintendo" graphics, but it's surprisingly competitive. I'm not saying it's PS4 at it's best level graphics, but it certainly makes GT5 look like garbage (haven't played GT6, so can't comment on whether it's as good as those graphics). I certainly don't think graphics hinder MK8 at all - it's a stunning game in that regard.

I suppose another way of looking at it is... Did PS3/4 sales rise by 600% when GT6 came out? No, because it's not as big of a console seller as MK8. Whether that implies it's not as good or not is questionable, but it certainly suggests MK8 is a more influential exclusive, much like a pokemon console game would be

Also, the point is more a complete lack of MK clones. There's literally just sonic and Sega all stars. But being that the conversation stems from MK8 being a better exclusive, I suppose the point is that every console has a pretty good realistic racing game, whereas none other than the Wii (U) have anything close to MK8, with Sonic and Sega Transformed being the closest thing, and the difference in graphics and gameplay is so huge it's barely fair to put them on the same level.

[Kerou 犠牲]

Out of interest, have you played MK8? Because until I had, I know I thought it'd have "Nintendo" graphics, but it's surprisingly competitive. I'm not saying it's PS4 at it's best level graphics, but it certainly makes GT5 look like garbage (haven't played GT6, so can't comment on whether it's as good as those graphics). I certainly don't think graphics hinder MK8 at all - it's a stunning game in that regard.

I haven't but I have played GT6 (which is a lot better graphically than 5, it's very very good for what it is) but even then Wii U technically is next level from PS3 which isn't necessarily the best comparison (although I don't know the differences between U and regular since I've not played a U =P). I would even say the Wii games graphically are bad, quite the opposite, but still not quite as strong as the alternatives but even then it's more suited to that Nintendo style.

I suppose another way of looking at it is... Did PS3/4 sales rise by 600% when GT6 came out? No, because it's not as big of a console seller as MK8. Whether that implies it's not as good or not is questionable, but it certainly suggests MK8 is a more influential exclusive, much like a pokemon console game would be

oh, I agree with this, but at the same time there wasn't really many big games to get people to buy a Wii U beforehand other than Super Mario Bros ^^;
but yeah, GT as a franchise isn't quite as strong as it once was, I'd also say Nintendo in general depends a lot more on its exclusives; Xbox will shine without Halo, PS without Last of Us (as examples) because you still get stuff like CoD and GTA which sell. That's why I think it's important to get the Mario Karts, the Pokemons, the SSB, LoZ, etc. of this world out for Nintendo because it's those specifically which will bring in the £££

Also, the point is more a complete lack of MK clones. There's literally just sonic and Sega all stars. But being that the conversation stems from MK8 being a better exclusive, I suppose the point is that every console has a pretty good realistic racing game, whereas none other than the Wii (U) have anything close to MK8, with Sonic and Sega Transformed being the closest thing, and the difference in graphics and gameplay is so huge it's barely fair to put them on the same level.

If you try and compete with Mario Kart you're essentially competing with Nintendo so there's no point. Even though I was a "Sega > Nintendo" kid there's no reason now to go away from Nintendo for that sort of thing.

Plus brand power is MASSIVE, people will always buy into the Mario Kart brand now (but this is a whole different discussion =P)

[SaRo|Rapidash]

I haven't but I have played GT6 (which is a lot better graphically than 5, it's very very good for what it is) but even then Wii U technically is next level from PS3 which isn't necessarily the best comparison (although I don't know the differences between U and regular since I've not played a U =P). I would even say the Wii games graphically are bad, quite the opposite, but still not quite as strong as the alternatives but even then it's more suited to that Nintendo style.

The thing is, the Wii was an overclocked GameCube. On the inside, there was very little difference and that's why the Wii was so poor graphically in comparison to PS3 & XB360. The Wii U, however, is like what the 3DS is to the DS, an amazing improvement disguised as a similar console. The PS4 is obviously going to be stronger graphically than the Wii U - it had an extra 2 years and is like twice the price - but my comparison to the PS3 was more that the Wii, graphically, was WAY behind the others. MK8 is seriously one of the best games I've played graphically, and anyone who's played MK Wii will know how much of a huge jump that must be, playing MK8 in HD is stunning, and when I switched it into 3D for the first time I decided Sony must have donated a graphics card to Nintendo xD

oh, I agree with this, but at the same time there wasn't really many big games to get people to buy a Wii U beforehand other than Super Mario Bros ^^;
but yeah, GT as a franchise isn't quite as strong as it once was, I'd also say Nintendo in general depends a lot more on its exclusives; Xbox will shine without Halo, PS without Last of Us (as examples) because you still get stuff like CoD and GTA which sell. That's why I think it's important to get the Mario Karts, the Pokemons, the SSB, LoZ, etc. of this world out for Nintendo because it's those specifically which will bring in the £££

Nintendo absolutely thrives on exclusives, yeah, and their consoles generally thrive on a gimmick (Motion controls, gamepad). The Wii U could of been a lot better had they named it something unrelated to the Wii (seriously, everyone thought it was a peripheral for the wii >_>) and they'd had exclusives on launch.

If you try and compete with Mario Kart you're essentially competing with Nintendo so there's no point. Even though I was a "Sega > Nintendo" kid there's no reason now to go away from Nintendo for that sort of thing.

Plus brand power is MASSIVE, people will always buy into the Mario Kart brand now (but this is a whole different discussion =P)

Yeah, there's literally no way anything can take MK's niche anymore, the brand has built up such a reputation it's managing to make people buy a console just for it.

Also, relating to the first post;

-> Evolutions are something I want to see too, stuff like Absol definitely wanted an Evo more than a mega. Mega's are cool and I love them, but I do think it's a bit... Idk, some things want to evolve.

-> If a new type comes, it should be to balance fairies, as they are too OP as a type. I disagree with it being light type though - Dark is actually Evil type in Japan, so it wouldn't make much sense to have light as a counterpart in Japan.

-> Better moves is very.... Subjective. For instance, SB2K suggested a freezing WoW, but I think that'd be horribly broken and awful. So... Basically you can't add better moves, because everyone has differing opinions on what's 'better'

[Spriter]

Nintendo are generally better with their games than with their big consoles, tbh. they trump the rest at E3 >

But yes.

I disagree with Fairies being overpowered as a type. In fact, Dark types seem to be more powerful thanks to Steel no longer resisting it. The Knock Off buff has only made them even better. If anything, Fairy should gain some kind of added weakness. But they aren't OP.

Mega Evolutions are pretty solid as they are really, there's no need to mess with giving things new evolutions really. Mega Evolution propelled Kangaskhan to higher levels than it previously reached, and the same goes for Manectric and Mawile, amongst others.

[SaRo|Rapidash]

I disagree with Fairies being overpowered as a type. In fact, Dark types seem to be more powerful thanks to Steel no longer resisting it. The Knock Off buff has only made them even better. If anything, Fairy should gain some kind of added weakness. But they aren't OP.

Fairy as a type is grossly overpowered, it's just that all the fairies we have are meh.

It's only weaknesses are Steel and Poison, both of which are awful offensive types otherwise. The only things that resist it are Steel, Poison and Fire, only the former of which is a major defensive type, and all of which share a common weakness to Ground. It's resists are Dark, Bug, Fighting and a Dragon immunity. Fighting and Dragon are HUGE. Last gen, they were arguably the best offensive types. Bug is a meh resist, but it does give a resist to U-turn, and Dark would of been meh last gen, but as you said, it's been bugged this gen which makes it a very prominent resist. Then it's Supereffective on Dragon, Fighting & Dark, all of which are pretty prominent (or were, until fairies came, as Dragons have plummeted in usage).

There aren't many overpowered fairies, however, as all of them have huge shortcomings, but as a type it is horrendously overpowered. You give something like Jirachi or Latias Fairy in favour of their Psychic type and they go straight to Übers (certainly in Latias' case, possibly not in Jirachi's as steel gives it a few prominent weaknesses)

Mega Evolutions are pretty solid as they are really, there's no need to mess with giving things new evolutions really. Mega Evolution propelled Kangaskhan to higher levels than it previously reached, and the same goes for Manectric and Mawile, amongst others.

Megas are a good idea, I'm not doubting that, my problem is more things like Absol should really have had a regular evolution rather than a mega, in my opinion, and mega's should be reserved for things that are already evolved (Manectric, Charizard etc.) and even things like Kangaskhan that look evolved (and tbf, should have had a baby kangaskhan prevo).

I guess it's just a matter of which route you prefer on certain pokemon and makes the whole thing pretty subjective, which is most of the problem with a topic like this trying to improve the game when it's very difficult to improve it from everyone's viewpoint.

[SirBlaziken]

also yes, i agree with OP, we need a poison legendary

Honestly, that's the most sense I've seen this week. How come other types get a legend, but not poison. Wait, I don't think bug got one, but who cares about them?

[Delicious_Scout]

Honestly, that's the most sense I've seen this week. How come other types get a legend, but not poison. Wait, I don't think bug got one, but who cares about them?

*cough* BANesect *cough*

[Captain Jigglypuff]

Every type of Pokemon EXCEPT Poison has at least one Legendary associated with it. Arceus COULD be argued to be a Legendary Poison Pokemon when holding a Toxic Plate but it doesn't quite count as Arceus can change types so easily with the Plates.

[The Shrub Dragon]

Every type of Pokemon EXCEPT Poison has at least one Legendary associated with it.

patience is a virtue, virtue is a grace, and you're passionately arguing this on a pokemon forum rather than writing to people who might be able to design one =P

[the bread dragon]

What does Mortal Kombat have to with all this? The last MK game was on the Wii about seven years ago.

..that was pretty bad.