Pokémon Diamond and Pearl smash sales records in Japan
Gotta buy 'em all news now, with Nintendo announcing the obliteration of terrified, Japanese sales records beneath the unstoppable might of their Pokémon franchise. Over five million copies of Pokémon Diamond and Pokémon Pearl for the DS have graced store shelves since last September, a fact which makes them the fastest selling titles in the series thus far.Nintendo also points out that the Pokémon franchise has sold over 155 million games worldwide through September 2006. That not only highlights the unwavering, cross-cultural appeal of Pokémon, but also humanity's overwhelming desire to imprison adorable little creatures in airtight capsules.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
nonpareil @ Feb 2nd 2007 9:50AM
Can anyone explain to me - and this is an honest question - what the draw of Pokemon games are? I'm not really sure what the idea is, but is it just an RPG-style game where you collect Pokemons?
Jason @ Feb 2nd 2007 9:56AM
yeah, that's pretty much the draw of the game. It's an rpg style game, but the reason it's different than your standard rpg is because there are so many different playable characters, i.e. pokemon, you can use. Gotta catch em all.
Grunge @ Feb 2nd 2007 9:58AM
Collection + Artificial Pets + RPG aspects = mad money
See also: Viva Pinata
Diman @ Feb 2nd 2007 9:58AM
Gotta phukem all. I don't know what they see in this,
Szu @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:02AM
@3
http://fanboys-online.com/comic.php?cid=121
Jake @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:03AM
It's for teh kids. Probably the biggest console pusher today. Not my cup o tea, though. That's for damn sure.
icemorebutts @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:09AM
I hate the franchise but I just can't stop playing those damned games. It's still fun. Oh god help me!
32_Footsteps @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:10AM
Well, there are different aspects to its appeal.
the most famous aspect is that many of the critters are cute. Especially since the cute ones tend to be front and center in promotions, that's what grabs alot of people.
Though some designs are also meant to be impressive. The more powerful Pokemon (for examples well-known, Entei and Mewtwo fall in this category) are meant to have a much more aggressive profile, and thus appear to be "cool" to older fans.
For those that appreciate the gameplay, it's because it's a strategic and complex version of rock/paper/scissors. There are thousands of ways to build a team of six (and due to a limit of four moves per Pokemon, quite a few ways to tweak any given team member), and even with careful planning, no Pokemon is impossible to beat (although some are so unbalancing that competition rules ban certain combinations).
RDX @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:13AM
After Gold and Silver, I said to myself that I wouldn't buy another Pokemon game unless Nintendo made some big changes. A few years later, I got sucked in and bought Ruby. And God help me, I'm going to get one of these too. Love em or hate em, the games are fundamentally solid. I know I always have fun with them.
White Rose Duelist @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:13AM
First, the Pokémon games are solid RPGs. As Jason mentioned, you have a TON of options for a party. There are now 500 of the creatures to choose from, and all but 3 or 4 will be accessible from day one.
Two, people like collecting things, and there's lots of it to do.
There's a lot of strategy involved in building a team. Do you use creatures that are more powerful innately, or those with better moves? Getting the best abilities onto a creature is not simply a matter of leveling up and buying/finding new equipment. Can you get Shadow Ball onto Sableye (yes, but only in 4 steps)? Bounce on a Kingdra (no, despite what the strategy guide says)? Stronger moves have less ammunition; the most powerful are inaccurate.
There's also the 17-type rock-paper-scissors extravaganza that makes in-battle decisions more complicated than "I choose 'Fight' until they die." You get bonuses for using your own type and for hitting the Giant Crab's weak point, but it's hard to get a situation where you can do both at once. Status ailments matter more in Pokémon than just about any other game ever.
Most importantly, however, is that Pokémon introduced multiplayer to RPGs, and still has the best PVP available in something that's not a sports game or shooter. Between WiFi, sanctioned tournaments and simply knowing tons of other players, people have limitless opportunities to prove that they are better at the game than anyone else. How can you do that
I've shelled out a lot of money on Pokémon games, but when you consider that I've spent 50-450 hours on each (excepting Ranger; that one is too short), it's definitely worth it.
Monologue over (for now).
Jon @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:14AM
Nintendo did whore the franchise by making a TV show, which is why many people associate Pokemon with kids, even though many of them never actually played any of the games. It's actually a pretty solid RPG series (minus the spin-off games of course). One of those game that is easy to pick up but pretty challenging to master.
RDX @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:15AM
And W.R.D's little speech there makes me want these games even more now. Thanks a lot...
nonpareil @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:16AM
Interesting - thanks guys, this shed a lot of light on the Pokemon franchise.
White Rose Duelist @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:17AM
Jake - Have you actually played one? The games have more strategy than most RPGs on the market. I found R/S more challenging by far than FF12, for sure. It is promoted as a game children can play, but the're plenty to appeal to a more mature gamer (one mature enough to not call it "for teh kids' [sic])
RDX - Happy to oblige.
ice monkey @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:26AM
Off-topic, WRD, how do you link your name to your site? I can't find any information n Joystiq pertaining to it.
Regarding Diamond and Pearl, man I do hope they released it over here soon. Pokemon Mystery Dungeon was okay but Ranger didn't appeal to me. Still have to get over playing FF XII though.
sheppy @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:36AM
Umm, you found R/S to be more challenging in depth than FFXII? I mean, no offense and it's great and all, but in FFXII, you truly own your characters progression and abilities. Not to mention the elaborate behavior structures one can create and constantly have to change.
Meanwhile, on Ruby, I had to restart once because I kept facing plant pokemon roughly my level, my beginner character was a water type, and there was no place to gather a fire type in the game unless your starter character was a fire type. So rather than invest 4-10 hours grinding up pokemon the long and painful way, I lost three hours of gameplay just to get the type of pokemon that could power through those enemies.
I mean, don't get me wrong. I love Pokemon and all that but there is a tad of an imbalance in the single player that doesn't equate to knowing which pokemon to gather, but rather not having a chance to gather such pokemon. This is directly opposed to other series like Dragon Warrior Monsters or Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne where grinding and breeding ultimately defeats any and all advantages the game can throw at you.
32_Footsteps @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:36AM
For the name linking, I think that's because WRD and I have been consistent commenters on Joystiq for over a year each. The system knew which site we link to from repeated uses of it back when "Your Site" was a field to fill out.
I imagine it'll return sooner rather than later.
White Rose Duelist @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:39AM
Something about all my characters having all the useful abilities 2/3 of the way through FF12 made it not so tough. Yes, I had to change my gambits when an enemy was immune to a certain attack type, but I was only truly challenged by a few optional bosses.
F1ghter @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:49AM
I haven't played Pokemon since Blue, but I may try again on DS. I didn't stop playing 'cause I didn't like it, so maybe Diamond/Pearl can draw me back.
AwesomeStuff @ Feb 2nd 2007 11:03AM
Diamond/Pearl for my next Pkmn RPG FTW!~
silkylove @ Feb 2nd 2007 11:09AM
Man. I so wish I had bought some Nintendo stock like two years ago:(
Martez @ Feb 2nd 2007 11:16AM
I'm still waiting for Nintendo to run out of names and actually make a Pokemon Plaid. Actually, all this PokeTalk is making me want to get Colosseum for GC. I haven't played a Pokemon game since I was addicted to Red/Blue on my Game Boy Pocket. Is it still the same storyline and everything? 'Cause I remember them doing that for a while.
Also, is anybody surprised Diamond and Pearl broke sales records? Anybody? No?
White Rose Duelist @ Feb 2nd 2007 11:49AM
Martez - I supported Aluminum and Darmstadtium for the names for this release back in my Trozei! review on Netjak. Stars to the first people to explain why for each of them*. No idea how they're going to top this for generation 5. I'm also disappointed that they chose pink and blue to represent these stones; white for diamonds and black for pearl would have been sweet.
The storyline is pretty much the same as it ever was - you get your first Pokémon and set out to become the champion, and save the country a couple times along the way. Plot was always the weak point of the series.
* yes, I know there are no stars anymore and didn't have the authority to give them
White Rose Duelist @ Feb 2nd 2007 11:50AM
Er, I didn't have the authority to give them when there were.
BPM @ Feb 2nd 2007 12:42PM
Another element of the Pokémon strategy (at least, appling to previous games):
No two Pokémon are exactly identical. You could have two Rattata, for example, but one has better Attack, while the other has better Speed.
The reason for this is each Pokémon has a set of values referred to as "Individual Values," or "IVs" for short. IVs are like a Pokémon's "genes," as they're stats the Pokémon has from the start, you can't change, and you don't know what they are just by looking at the monster.
IVs determine how high any of the Pokémon's stats could go.
In the Color Generation (R/G/B/Y), they were 5-bit data (0-15), and Special was still one stat back then.
In the Metal Generation (G/S/C), they were still 5-bit data, but now Special was split into two visible stats, but they were both still controlled by the same IV.
In the Advance Generation (all GBA and GCN games), IVs were now 6-bit data (from 0 to 31), and Special Attack and Special Defense each had their own IVs.
So, for the really strategic trainer who wants the strongest possible Pokémon, they will catch numerous Pokémon of the same specie, and train them to see who has the best IVs.
Then, there's Effort Values (EVs for short). I'm not sure how they applied (if they did, that is) in the Color and Metal Generation, but here's how it worked in the Advance Generation:
Each specie of Pokémon has a set amount of Effort Points (EPs) that apply to a certain stat (HP, Attack, Defense, Speed, Special Attack, or Special Defense).
If any of your Pokémon fight that Pokémon, and it gets KO'd, then those EPs are applied to your Pokémon's respective EVs.
But... each Pokémon can only earn a maximum of 255 EPs, and no more than 125 to each EV (at least, I believe that's how it works; I'm a bit rusty).
For every three EPs a Pokémon earns to one EV, their visual stats is boosted by one (i.e. 3 HP EPs = +1HP). Once again, I'm not entirely positive about this.
Also, the vitamins (Protein, Zinc, Calcium, etc.) add 10 EPs to the respective EV. But you can only use so many vitamins on a Pokémon, and after they've earned enough EPs, they won't take vitamins, even if you've never used them before!
So, for the strategic trainer, after they've found Pokémon with IVs they like, they'll be EV training these Pokémon. To do that, they'll only fight opponents that give out the EPs they want (i.e. you wouldn't want Gardevoir to KO someone who gives Attack EPs, since an Attack boost is pretty much wasted on a Psychic-type like Gardevoir).
Yeah... If I messed up any of that, feel free to correct me.
generaldane @ Feb 2nd 2007 1:12PM
i am proud of you guys i came here expecting to hear pokemon is for teh kiddie ones lolz!!!!!!!!11111
But instead hear well reasoned opinion
this is one of my favorite franchise while the formula may remain the same the games of the main series are always fun
Grindstone @ Feb 2nd 2007 2:12PM
I wonder if the Pokemon franchise will ever be listed in an animal abuse lawsuit citing, "deliberate topics of 'cock-fighting' and promiting animal violence and cruelty". Hmm, now all I need is a client to proport as much... shouldn't be too hard, just need some kids to spray paint a couple of animals and force them to battle each other.
32_Footsteps @ Feb 2nd 2007 3:04PM
BPM has the gist of the more advanced planning and strategies... though that's the kind of thing usually reserved for the most dedicated Pokemon fan to experiment with.
Keep in mind I'm one of them - the amount of experimenting I've done with the Pokerus is extensive and, for those not dedicated to the advanced strategy, mind-bogglingly boring.
Allen Sorensen @ Feb 2nd 2007 3:30PM
If I gave you diamonds and pearls
Would you
be a happy boy or a girl
Rubang B @ Feb 2nd 2007 3:56PM
I have never played a single Pokemon game in my life, except for say, maybe 4 minutes of Pokemon Snap back in the day, but I might need to buy one of these.
Duscrom @ Feb 2nd 2007 4:37PM
Pokemon Red/Blue i played to death. Till i had a friend who used strong arm techniques to beat me. (My nice balanced team couldn't beat his one pimped out charizzard) Since then, the games, i've found to be copycats with little more then a roster update. Add on to the fact that Nintendo dosen't drop prices on their games. So i wasn't about to pay full price for a 2 year old version of a game I played 10 years ago.
That being said Diamond and Pearl do bring enough new to the table that i can't ignore them. Online play by itself is worth the price of admission. I can't wait to buy it.
But... Nintendo... it's awesome that your making money.. but can you slow down on the "we're making money" announcements and pick up on the "We're making games" announcements?
BPM @ Feb 2nd 2007 6:16PM
@ Grindstone (#27)
Well, all I'm going to say is the chicken-like Pokémon Blaziken is a Fire-/Fighting-type. Draw your own conclusions. :P
@ 32_Footsteps (#28)
Indeed, this more in-depth training method will seem really dull to the average trainer. But, when they face off against someone who has IV and EV trained, they'll most likely be crushed.
@ Duscrom (#31)
Oh, dear, I'm starting see tha Yamaguchi-era egotism rear its ugly head again...
Then again, all companies like to report when they do well, hmm?
But, like you said, more with the game announcements, and less with the money announcements!
Brad Lee @ Feb 4th 2007 8:16PM
"humanity's overwhelming desire to imprison adorable little creatures in airtight capsules." Ludwig
See, Ludwig understands the pokemon appeal. It has nothing to do with playing with cute, cuddly things, it's about capturing the cute cuddly things, imprisoning them in tiny balls, and forcing them to fight for your own amusement.
Don't let the kiddie facade fool you, Pokemon is a pretty twisted series when you think about it.
@ sheppy
Fire, flying, ice, poison, and bug are all super-effective against Grass. True, if it is a Grass/Poison combination then Poison won't work, but then again a Grass/Poison type gets raped by Psychic and Ground attacks. Grass is one of the most vulnerable Pokemon types in the game, if you can't find something super-effective against it, you're probably just not looking hard enough.
Besides, Fire blows anyway, you're better off with a Flying type, which is one of the most common in the game.
And also, its true that Final Fantasy games have always had strong strategic elements, but the problem with FF is that you have no need to be strategical. The games simply aren't that difficult so the strategic elements aren't even needed to play your way through. Pokemon, on the other hand, is virtually possible to beat without a cleverly built team and a decent strategy. Without both, you'll get raped by the Elite Four.