Your opinion on "Continuity of mechanics"?

[Rot8er_ConeX]

Up until - and mostly including - Sun and Moon, Game Freak has done a fairly good job of upholding a "Continuity of Mechanics". What is this, you might ask?

Let us take the Eeveeloutions as an example.

In Generation I, Game Freak introduced the original three Eeveeloutions. Vaporeon, Jolteon, and Flareon. They all evolved through evolutionary stones.

In Generation II, they introduced two new ones. Espeon and Umbreon. These two were created by leveling up your Eevee with maximum friendship during the day and night, respectively. Since they also introduced a Sun Stone in Gen II, they could have made it so you got them by using Sun and Moon Stones on Eevee, respectively. Why didn't they?

This is where the concept of CoM comes in. Eevee existed in Generation I. The Moon Stone existed in Generation I. If they'd made Eevee become Umbreon via Moon Stone, why did it not work in Gen I? Obviously the real-world reason would be that Umbreon didn't exist in Generation I, but what would be the in-universe lore reason?

So instead, they made it so it evolves through friendship - a mechanic that didn't exist in Gen I - during specific times of day - also a mechanic that didn't exist in Gen I.

Same with Leafeon and Glaceon in Gen IV. They could have made the Leaf Stone make Leafeon, and introduced an Ice Stone to make Glaceon. But they didn't, because once again they had a continuity to uphold. Technically, since Gen I and II were disconnected from Gen III and IV, you could argue that the first two gens no longer mattered, but you still had the third generation's lack of Leafeon to contend with.

Instead, they made Eevee evolve via level-up in specific locations, which is explained in-universe as being near specific rocks that didn't appear prior to the Gen IV games.

Sylveon is similar. It evolves via having a Fairy type move - Fairy type being new in Gen VI - and having two or more hearts in Pokemon-Amie/Refresh - a mechanic that didn't exist prior to Generation VI. In this particular case, they could have had a "Pixie Stone" and been done with it, but *shrug*

We also have "baby Pokemon" as an example. Baby Pokemon were introduced in Generation II, with the Day Care system. In Generation II, they could make baby forms of Gen I Pokemon at will, since the Day Care didn't exist in Gen I. But ever since then, any new baby Pokemon of an old species has needed to have a parent hold specific Incenses.

Now, their attempts at preserving the Continuity of Mechanics aren't always perfect. In Generation IV, they made a new evolution method where a Pokemon had to level up knowing a specific move. In some cases, they accidentally made the move required be one that the Pokemon could have learned in a prior generation. But I think that was accidental.

In Generation VII, we have the first time where they have deliberately broken Continuity of Mechanics, with three Alolan Forms - specifically, the three that evolve from non-Alolan Form Pokemon: Alolan Raichu, Alolan Exeggutor, and Alolan Marowak.

HOWEVER, there is an in-universe reason given for these three changes - and in the case of Marowak, we may end up seeing the change becoming permanent, using the Day/Night Cycle to determine which Marowak Cubone evolves into. Because of the in-universe reason being the unique climates of the Alola Region, I have taken to calling these three specific Alolan Forms "WEAFs" - short for "Wormadam-Esque Alolan Forms", because Wormadam is a Pokemon that also changes based on where you are when it evolves from Burmy. Maybe WERVs (Wormadam-Esque Regional Variants) is a better term in case they make more WEAFs, but the term has stuck in my mind.

Here is where your opinions come in. Recently, I have seen a YouTube video where two people discussed evolution methods that bothered them, and discussed new methods that could work for these Pokemon. While the ideas presented in the video were okay (though most of them broke CoM, but in interesting ways, like Kadabra knowing Kenisis and holding a Twisted Spoon while leveling up), it was the comments section that triggered me - yes, I fully think the correct way to describe my feeling was "triggered". So many people were suggesting making all of the Eeveeloutions evolve via stones - Sun Stone makes Espeon, Moon Stone makes Umbreon, Leaf Stone makes Leafeon, Ice Stone makes Glaceon, and (depending on the particular comment) Dawn or Shiny Stone makes Sylveon.

I am not against the idea of making new evolution methods to make an old Pokemon evolve into another old Pokemon. I am fully okay with the change to evolution method for Feebas->Milotic between Generations III and IV. I understand the reason they did it - the Beauty stat, related to Contests, was no longer something you could edit in-game, since Contests were gone. And I agree with the way they did it - they added a new item not available prior to Generation IV, and made you have to trade Feebas holding that item. Continuity of Mechanics was upheld.

I would have been okay if they had made the new Ice Stone possible to generate Glaceon in Sun and Moon - it was a new item not available in previous games (and it would have indirectly made my second favorite Pokemon slightly easier to get). But they didn't do that, so in my opinion it is now too late to go back and make it happen. Even with my bias towards Glaceon, it is too late in my opinion to make the Ice Stone work on Eevee.

But that doesn't mean that we can't make the more aggravating evolution methods less so. Perhaps in future games we could get a chisel that can break off pieces of the Mossy Rock and Frozen Rock, and in this manner make Mossy Fragments and Frozen Fragments that could be used like evolution stones or level-up held items. Maybe we could get a rare Link Stone that so many fangames include, which would allow you to use it like an evolution stone but it evolves trade-evolve Pokemon (and in the case of Shelmet and Karrablast, you'd have to have the other or its evolution in the party when using the stone on one).

I'm okay with allowing female Gallade and male Froslass to exist - but only if they use a new evolution stone that doesn't exist yet, not the Dawn Stone like the current evolution methods. I'm not okay with making male Vespiquen because that evolution line is based on bees and their social structure, but I'd be fine with a new evolution for male Combee that uses a new evolution method (and is slightly weaker than Vespiquen, again for bee social structure reasons). I'm not sure where I stand with the idea of male Salazzle because I don't know enough about which animal that evolution line is based on.

I am okay with them breaking Continuity of Mechanics if and only if they have a good in-universe reason for it. In this case, the Alola region is based on both Hawaii and the Galopegos Islands, the latter of which literally has regional variants of the kind seen in Alola.

Edited November 24, 2016 by Rot8er_ConeX

[Alistair]

Now that was a lengthy but GOOD read!

Having consistent lore and mechanics in games is very important to me, because this kind of details can make or break the player's immersion. In Pokémon's case, GF mostly did a good job at creating and expanding a coherent universe gen after gen, for the reasons you mentioned.

Their attention to details is great. Apparently Alola has no fossils, which makes total sense, because real life volcanic islands don't have fossils either. That's just one example. Almost everything they do makes sense lore-wise.

Because of this, I think it's very important that they preserve CoM. I was going to vote "uphold to highest degree" but I'd be ok with changes if those happen to be really well justified lore-wise. After all, the franchise has to evolve to stay alive, which makes preserving CoM increasingly difficult with each passing gen. Overall I'd say my opinion is mostly like yours.

They better never come up with a male Vespiquen. Or female Nidoking, which is something Reborn unintentionally made possible (had a good chuckle when I saw it tho!)

[Rot8er_ConeX]

Now that was a lengthy but GOOD read!

Thank you. Honestly was expecting a crapton of "TL;DR?" responses.

Having consistent lore and mechanics in games is very important to me, because this kind of details can make or break the player's immersion. In Pokémon's case, GF mostly did a good job at creating and expanding a coherent universe gen after gen, for the reasons you mentioned.

Their attention to details is great. Apparently Alola has no fossils, which makes total sense, because real life volcanic islands don't have fossils either. That's just one example. Almost everything they do makes sense lore-wise.

Because of this, I think it's very important that they preserve CoM. I was going to vote "uphold to highest degree" but I'd be ok with changes if those happen to be really well justified lore-wise. After all, the franchise has to evolve to stay alive, which makes preserving CoM increasingly difficult with each passing gen. Overall I'd say my opinion is mostly like yours.

That's actually really cool that they did that. But...there's fossil Pokemon in the wild?

They better never come up with a male Vespiquen. Or female Nidoking, which is something Reborn unintentionally made possible (had a good chuckle when I saw it tho!)

LOL Whut?

[FairFamily]

I'm in the middle aboutt this one, because how far must you go by maintaining CoM? How about movepools/abilities, new typings? Can you change moves? Can you change the abilities of pkmn? Can you modify typing? Because if you want to be consistent you'l have to sacrifice the option to change all previously generated pkmn/moves and abilities. This woul ruin any chance of balancing the game. Then if you want to be consistent by only introducing new things, you cannot introduce new evolutions like weavile and rhyperior because inconsistency with eviolite. So I think that in some case breaking the CoM for some changes is necessairy.

LOL Whut?

Yep, I got one in desolation which is a similar fangame.

Edited November 26, 2016 by FairFamily

[Rot8er_ConeX]

Then if you want to be consistent by only introducing new things, you cannot introduce new evolutions like weavile and rhyperior because inconsistency with eviolite.

To be fair, Eviolite was introduced in Gen V, and since then the only new evolution to an old Pokemon we've gotten was Sylveon, a branched evolution for a Pokemon that could already evolve and therefore was already compatible with Eviolite.

Eviolite and CoM are the main reason I don't think we're going to see any more new evolutions to previously-Fully-Evolved Pokemon.

Edited November 27, 2016 by Rot8er_ConeX