Suggested Fixes

[Talon87]

-The Top 10 Problems with Pokemon-

List of Videos:
Problem #4: Only Four Moves Per Pokémon!?
Problem #5: Overworld Mode

Sneak Peek: Too Many Pokémon, Many Of Which Aren't Even All That Good

================================================== ======

Let me know if you're interested in seeing more of these audio recordings or if you'd rather I just write out my thoughts. Let me know if you think I shouldn't even bother at all. ^^; But otherwise, enjoy!

[Loki]

Your accent creeps in now and then.

I personally don't have a problem with the current system of using Heart Scales. While it's less effective than your method, it's still within reason. If you bred on an egg move or used a TM to teach a move, why would you delete it and then think "I want that back now..."

We all know every move has its own effectiveness once the Pokemon reaches a certain level and typically we all settle on the strongest moves like Thunderbolt, Icebeam, and Earthquake. And while you could debate about the usefulness of Discharge vs. Thunderbolt or Lava Plume vs. Flamethrower, you will usually know which one you want based on what role your Pokemon is being used for.

So if you suddenly decided to swap a bunch of moves, you're probably also going to swap a lot of things, like EV distribution, personalities, a lot of crap. By that point, you're looking at getting a completely different Pokemon. Granted, it could be the same species of Pokemon, but there could be so many other things about it that would be completely different.

But let's say the Pokemon won't change. It will be something simple like Dusknoir and its elemental punches. Well, usually you will use like Fire Punch because you know your friends use Metagross, and Dusknoir does decently well at blocking his sweep attempts. Suddenly one day, he's no longer got Metagross, but a Gyarados. Suddenly you're left with a Dusknoir that can't stop Gyarados because it has Fire Punch and not Thunderpunch. Now you've gotta... run to the Move Relearner and change it. Is that so bad? Your friend had to raise an entirely new Pokemon to force this minor change and you just had to go into town and give a fat guy a Heart Scale and like 3 minutes of your time.

[Talon87]

What accent? Midwesterners have no accent. We are the Dan Rathers and Brian Williams of the nation. We are the Mouth of Sauron America.

Our friendly joking about our respective accents to the other's ear aside, you're correct imo: my suggested alternative is strictly better but the status quo isn't slit-my-wrists bad. But I've got 11 others of these typed up (despite the "Top 10" nomenclature), so rest assured, Pokemon ain't a vessel with one small leak. She's the friggin' H.M.S. Titanic. [/over-dramatic]

[Loki]

Everyone everywhere has an accent, regardless of how you may view yourself.

"Player", "Pick and Choose", and "Page" is where I can hear a bit of an accent.

Anyway, I'm sure every game has problems. Thus far though, this one is so minor. If you mess up- redo. If you need to change your Pokemon, well, that's when you change the Pokemon.

[Talon87]

Well, here is the oh-so-not-Talon short list of the things I've written on. Take your pick (if any) that you *do* consider serious flaws you'd like to hear me babble on about. ;p

Problem List:
a. too many wild creature encounters
b. too little wild creature diversity (per patch of grass, sea)
c. music too frequently interrupted, begun
d. 4 moves per creature limit is dumb
e. HMs occupying a battle move slot is dumb
f. mistyped creatures
g. inadequate typage
h. paradoxical homogeneity
i. 4x weaknesses are too crippling
j. many crappy Pokemon which need to go
k. effort values are in need of an overhaul
l. one save file per game pak is dumb

In no particular order. For instance, letter L is actually my #1 Problem on the top 10 list. It's been retarded since Day effing One, especially since Nintendo's supposed fear ("oh no! but then the kiddos won't buy a second pak!") is unfounded given the fandom's demonstrated purchasing practices.

[ZoraJolteon]

>f. mistyped creatures

Ah, the one true sign of the n00b.

OMG CHARIZARD IS A DRAGON WHY ISMY cHARCIZAR DNOT A DRAGON NI WANT MY CHAriZAROD TO B E A A DAGON AND MY GYARADOS TOO SHOULD BE A CDRAGON BECAUSSE IT CANt'T EVEN FLY!

[Talon87]

Originally Posted by ZoraJolteon

>f. mistyped creatures

Ah, the one true sign of the n00b.

OMG CHARIZARD IS A DRAGON WHY ISMY cHARCIZAR DNOT A DRAGON NI WANT MY CHAriZAROD TO B E A A DAGON AND MY GYARADOS TOO SHOULD BE A CDRAGON BECAUSSE IT CANt'T EVEN FLY!

Ah, the true sign of a Shoddy battle-blinded fan. Y'know, the creatures' own properties should define the metagame, not the other way around. It's irrelevant whether a type change would transform a creature into UU or Uber as far as I'm concerned: the more important thing is that the type actually match up with the creature. More in the video you've more or less asked for.

[Jerichi]

I'm 99% sure I've had this argument with you before, Talon.

My argument was something about balance or something?

I don't remember really but I do like the idea you're proposing now.

[Kindrindra]

Originally Posted by Talon87

Ah, the true sign of a Shoddy battle-blinded fan. Y'know, the creatures' own properties should define the metagame, not the other way around. It's irrelevant whether a type change would transform a creature into UU or Uber as far as I'm concerned: the more important thing is that the type actually match up with the creature. More in the video you've more or less asked for.

Err...

Zora didn't say anything about type changes changing the tier it's in.

[Emp]

Originally Posted by Talon87

h. paradoxical homogeneity

I know what this means but would you mind elaborating for the sake of a few "slower" forum members? >>;

[Talon87]

It's not your fault: that's a prime example of how the list was atypically Talon. I'll go into it in more detail later, but for now what that means is:

(figures are made-up in many places where I'm too lazy to look up the real answers)

In 1st Gen, we had 151 creatures and 238 moves to choose from. The metagame featured 30 creatures by species and 90 creatures by species x gameplay style. (e.g. Mewtwo sweeper is different from Mewtwo stall-Toxifier)

In 4th Gen, we have 480+ creatures and 689 moves to choose from. The metagame features 28 creatures by species and 58 creatures by species x gameplay style.


Hence, "paradoxical homogeneity." There is much more variety in theory in 4th Gen than there was in 1st Gen courtesy of more monsters and more moves; but in practice, there is much less observed variety in the 4th gen metagame (by comparative ratios) than there was in 1st Gen and the major reason behind this is because ...

... is because since everybody nowadays can pretty much do everything, you have no reason to settle for anybody less than the best when you want to get a particular job done. There is an established best special wall. (BLISSSSSSSEY.) There is an established best physical sweeper. (GARRRRRRRRCHOMP. -_-;; ) There is an established best special sweeper ghost. (You're not going to use a Misdreavus to do a Gengar's job. :P) So on and so forth.

My point is that the solution, just as paradoxically as before, will be to remove all of this so-called "variety" currently in the games and to return things to the way they were before, i.e. to a time where only one or two dudes can learn this sweet-ass move and tough shit to anyone who wanted it on somebody else. In other words ... take Empoleon's best physical wall moveset and ban him from having it. Does it make him shittier? Yeah. But it doesn't kill him. And give the moveset to somebody else (e.g. Cloyster, Omastar) and make it theirs exclusively. Does it make them an uber? No. But it makes them a hotter commodity than they were before.

Paradoxically, the fans killed their own metagame when, back in the RBY days, they bitched and nagged about how bad it was that the best moves were stuck on the shittiest 'mons. The solution is to tell the fans to shut their traps and to let the geniuses who crafted Pokemon work their magic uninterrupted.

[Kindrindra]

An error I noticed. You said that in RBY grass types were limited to 55 in one turn Razor Leaf or 140 in two turns Solarbeam.

However, in the days of RBY, the high-crit ratio moves ALWAYS crit hit. Guaranteed. Which means it was 110 in one turn.


Also, last I checked, I don't think there are only 28 usable pokemon. There are still pokemon that have unique movesets and such. And abilities add to that. I see what you mean (guessing that 28 was hyperbole on your part), but that's why tiers and such were made. I agree that it would be nice to see more unique assets to each pokemon, but it isn't so bad the way we have it.

[deoxys]

Great, now I can't stop reading talon's posts in talon's voice.

In other news, hey you guys, talon's back! The forum is alive again!

[Talon87]

The metagame numbers (e.g. 28 ) are made up for sake of expression of the idea, but refer mostly to the list of ubers, borderline, and most common OUs.

High critical hit moves iirc from way back when when I actually played the games did not always critical hit. It felt more like 50/50 or 70/30. But if I'm wrong, okay then, I'm wrong. And I'll just pick other examples:

* Explosion. Who could learn it back then and who can learn it now. Who had STAB on it back then and who has STAB on it now.

* Choice Scarf Adamant BaseAtkOf110+. Back then there was no such thing, so a good many creatures could weather beatings. In fact, the ancient metric for a Pokemon's utility in battle was for non-tanks whether it could withstand at least 3 hits (i.e. KO'd on the 4th) or not and for tanks whether it could withstand at least 4 hits (i.e. KO'd on the 5th) or not. Now, however, we live in a world where you'd be lucky to see a physical wall withstand as many as three Choice Scarfed Adamant attacks from a beefy physical sweeper. Hell, you'd be lucky to see him withstand two (i.e. KO'd on the third). And it is precisely because of this change in our metric that so, so fewer Pokemon are now deemed acceptable as physical walls.

* Fly and Dig. Back in the old days, before we had Protect or Detect, the equivalent strategy would be to use either of these two moves. There were a great many movesets built around this concept (most of them involving Toxic, surprise surprise) which were all rendered then and forever completely useless by GSC's decision to punish Fly with Thunder and Dig with Earthquake. Were GameFreak to undo this crushing decision, it could make for a fun return to the otherwise dead realm of win-by-Toxic since we'd now have creatures utilizing Fly/Dig in tandem with Protect/Detect. Which reminds me ...

* Toxic. Back in RBY, this was a serious means by which to win matches. Its claws were trimmed by GSC's introduction of the Steel-type and were later ripped out altogether when the Steel-type saw more popularity with its first batch of sweepers (Metagross in Gen3). Who fears Toxic anymore? We all plan for it when building our teams, but how often do we seriously encounter it? Not very often: it's too difficult to set up. Your opponent would have to be a moron to let you set it up. And yet it'd be cool if we could see the return of this once-feared mechanic.


So on and so forth.

[Kindrindra]

The metagame numbers (e.g. 28 ) are made up for sake of expression of the idea, but refer mostly to the list of ubers, borderline, and most common OUs.

Ah, okay. Makes sense. Hyperbole to give an idea of what you're saying.

High critical hit moves iirc from way back when when I actually played the games did not always critical hit. It felt more like 50/50 or 70/30. But if I'm wrong, okay then, I'm wrong. And I'll just pick other examples:

* Explosion. Who could learn it back then and who can learn it now. Who had STAB on it back then and who has STAB on it now.

Going to agree with this. Explosion is given to so many pokemon that can abuse it now, it almost isn't funny. Another thing somewhat releated is that Hyper Beam had the effect of cutting the opponent's denfenses in half (like Explosion) in Gen 1. Not anymore.

* Choice Scarf Adamant BaseAtkOf110+. Back then there was no such thing, so a good many creatures could weather beatings. In fact, the ancient metric for a Pokemon's utility in battle was for non-tanks whether it could withstand at least 3 hits (i.e. KO'd on the 4th) or not and for tanks whether it could withstand at least 4 hits (i.e. KO'd on the 5th) or not. Now, however, we live in a world where you'd be lucky to see a physical wall withstand as many as three Choice Scarfed Adamant attacks from a beefy physical sweeper. Hell, you'd be lucky to see him withstand two (i.e. KO'd on the third). And it is precisely because of this change in our metric that so, so fewer Pokemon are now deemed acceptable as physical walls.

I totally agree with you on this. Battles these days don't seem to last as long. Then again, I hear that the Japanese metagame is based around defense, but still.

* Fly and Dig. Back in the old days, before we had Protect or Detect, the equivalent strategy would be to use either of these two moves. There were a great many movesets built around this concept (most of them involving Toxic, surprise surprise) which were all rendered then and forever completely useless by GSC's decision to punish Fly with Thunder and Dig with Earthquake. Were GameFreak to undo this crushing decision, it could make for a fun return to the otherwise dead realm of win-by-Toxic since we'd now have creatures utilizing Fly/Dig in tandem with Protect/Detect. Which reminds me ...

Funny you should mention that; I have a poke that abuses that very stratagy. Normally I wouldn't find one move to crush either a problem, but seeing as earthquake is so popular, and flyers cannot avoid electrical assualt with Fly... Well, that was problem enough. But now we have about a million moves that hit each. Flyers have to worry about Twister, Sky Uppercut, and Wake-up Slap, of all things. Diggers have loads of things to worry about; Magnetude, Fissure, Submission, Hammer Arm... But, other than completely changing the way many moves work, I don't see how GF could fix this. I hope they do, though.

* Toxic. Back in RBY, this was a serious means by which to win matches. Its claws were trimmed by GSC's introduction of the Steel-type and were later ripped out altogether when the Steel-type saw more popularity with its first batch of sweepers (Metagross in Gen3). Who fears Toxic anymore? We all plan for it when building our teams, but how often do we seriously encounter it? Not very often: it's too difficult to set up. Your opponent would have to be a moron to let you set it up. And yet it'd be cool if we could see the return of this once-feared mechanic.

Yes, with steel the most popular type on both offensive and defensive, Toxic is pretty much forgotten. In addition to the examples you pointed out, would-be toxic users now have to worry about activating a wayward Guts or Quick Feet, if said pokemon hasn't already activated it itself. On another note, not only is Toxic pretty much dead, but the Poison-type itself. With widespread access to so many poison attacks, poison-types only trumping grass, and poison-types tipically having low defences... Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Gengar the ONLY poison-type in OU?

So on and so forth.

Comments in bold.

[Talon87]

For more on this discussion, look forward to "g. inadequate typage".

[Loki]

There's roughly 80 Ubers + OUs + BLs. But this is based on Smogon's usages. There are roughly another half dozen or so who qualify for OU, but aren't popular, thus dropped to a low tier. i.e. Alakazam and Porygon2.

As for damage sponges, this is linked almost entirely to the changes made since Gen3. The combination of personalities, the max IV changing from 15 to 31, and changes to EVs, stats are getting higher than ever. On offensive Pokemon, we now see 400+ Attack and with added items like Choice Band, this becomes like 600.

This causes defense to be more difficult to handle. While base stats for defensive Pokemon tend to be high, they don't get any Choice Defense items, so ~400 is roughly what you get, while attackers have much more.

In addition, the changes to physical/special attacks and EV allocation creates more weaknesses in defenses. This means the perfect special defense Blissey provided in Gen3 is no longer as grand. Granted, a Pokemon of Gengar's caliber would still need +3 boost to score a consistent 2HKO on 252HP/252SpD Blissey with Focus Blast.

And Toxic isn't as unpopular as you might think. In a defensively oriented team, Toxic and Burn are usually key ways to break down a squad along with residual damage from Spikes and Stealth Rock. Toxic Spikes in particular due to the 'Do it twice and you're done', allowing you to keep doing attacks without having it waste more rounds on a non-damaging attack. Also, Roserades, Tentacruel, and Crobat are OU/BL Poison types.

[Talon87]

Video No.2 is up. This one is Top 10 Problems - #5: Overworld Mode wherein I critique Pokemon's overworld map experience and suggest a pretty simple solution which should greatly reduce suffering on our parts.

I didn't like the audio quality of "OMG NEW BATTLE!" but left it as is because (a) attempts to re-record it were surprisingly worse! and (b) because I figured it'd give some of you a good laugh, Excedrin not excepting.

[Talon87]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDRR1p2PfJ0

I finally found the name of this piece which I had been wanting to use for so long. So, sorry for the delay in updates, but here it is, finally.

[Talon87]

Stuff I've been thinking about recently. It ties in to Letters F, G, and I in that list above, as well as some other factors not listed.

* It's stupid that Steelix is weak to ground-type attacks. He lives underground, he is part-Ground, his home and body are wracked by earthquakes all the time. Dumb, dumb, dumb that he should be weak to them. If you want to compromise and say that he's 1x normal to them, fine. (I think he should be resistant or outright immune to them, as should all the Pokémon that live under the goddamn ground, but that's just me. )

* There need to be different axes to typing and not just one brute force axis which merges elements (e.g. fire) with physiologies (e.g. flying). Kind of like what you might have found in a more complex monster game from back in the day, or like what you might find in MtG with its colors, creature types, and class types, there ought to be various things which all add up to determine what sort of damage a Pokemon deals or takes from attacks. Just some of the examples I can think of are ...

• elements (water, fire, grass, electric, ice, ground for certain; also probably poison, psychic, and dark)
• physiology (these are more like attributes and would be where flying and steel go)
• animal type (this is where things like normal, bug, and bird [distinct from flying] would go; this is also where dragon would go as a specific subtype of the parent type, reptile)
• build (body size, body weight, and other similar things would go here)

Partial list, not exhaustive. Just mean to illustrate how the current "17 types all on the same axis" isn't cutting it since it just doesn't make sense.

* Ghost should be immune to all physical attacks. That's what it means to be a ghost, right? I don't really care two hoots about the implications this would have for the metagame. If it matters that badly, just make it so that ghosts are now more fragile or something. But the point is, you can't punch a ghost. You can't kick a ghost. You can't slam into a ghost. It's stupid to be like, "Well, that's for NORMAL attacks. If it's an electrified tackle ...!" No. Ghosts don't take physical damage. Physical stuff just passes right through them. Thunderbolt, yes. ThunderPunch, no.

* The Ground/Rock split was stupid since Day One and it's only gotten dumber as time's gone on. They really need to unify these two types under one mantle (earth) and bring together their logical sum weaknesses and sum strengths, rendering a lot of their current 4x weakness bullshit old hat.

[Sneaze]

Originally Posted by Talon87

Stuff I've been thinking about recently. It ties in to Letters F, G, and I in that list above, as well as some other factors not listed.

* It's stupid that Steelix is weak to ground-type attacks. He lives underground, he is part-Ground, his home and body are wracked by earthquakes all the time. Dumb, dumb, dumb that he should be weak to them. If you want to compromise and say that he's 1x normal to them, fine. (I think he should be resistant or outright immune to them, as should all the Pokémon that live under the goddamn ground, but that's just me. )

Honestly, this is one of those things where it's pretty much just "Why is Ground not resistant to Ground?" which a lot of types suffer from.

* There need to be different axes to typing and not just one brute force axis which merges elements (e.g. fire) with physiologies (e.g. flying). Kind of like what you might have found in a more complex monster game from back in the day, or like what you might find in MtG with its colors, creature types, and class types, there ought to be various things which all add up to determine what sort of damage a Pokemon deals or takes from attacks. Just some of the examples I can think of are ...

• elements (water, fire, grass, electric, ice, ground for certain; also probably poison, psychic, and dark)
• physiology (these are more like attributes and would be where flying and steel go)
• animal type (this is where things like normal, bug, and bird [distinct from flying] would go; this is also where dragon would go as a specific subtype of the parent type, reptile)
• build (body size, body weight, and other similar things would go here)

Partial list, not exhaustive. Just mean to illustrate how the current "17 types all on the same axis" isn't cutting it since it just doesn't make sense.

The only problem that would follow with this is it would make gameplay entirely too complex, and would likely drive away younger potential fans of the games.

Also, build really seems like something that really should only matter for determining attack and defense stats, some of which in the games make NO. SENSE.

* Ghost should be immune to all physical attacks. That's what it means to be a ghost, right? I don't really care two hoots about the implications this would have for the metagame. If it matters that badly, just make it so that ghosts are now more fragile or something. But the point is, you can't punch a ghost. You can't kick a ghost. You can't slam into a ghost. It's stupid to be like, "Well, that's for NORMAL attacks. If it's an electrified tackle ...!" No. Ghosts don't take physical damage. Physical stuff just passes right through them. Thunderbolt, yes. ThunderPunch, no.

Outright immunity would be just plain ridiculous. If anything it should be like how ASB works, taking damage from the elemental energy part of the attack, but not the physical blow, which would make sense as to why Normal and Fighting attacks currently do nothing. Really this change to the system would just result in taking those attacks and reducing their damage output to like, .75x or something.

* The Ground/Rock split was stupid since Day One and it's only gotten dumber as time's gone on. They really need to unify these two types under one mantle (earth) and bring together their logical sum weaknesses and sum strengths, rendering a lot of their current 4x weakness bullshit old hat.

Actually, I think the split itself makes sense, it's just that they decide to do the stupid 4x weaknesses which really make no sense. Either they're soft earth or hard earth, how difficult is that?

[Talon87]

Originally Posted by Sneezey12

Outright immunity would be just plain ridiculous.

I really don't think it would be, and I really don't care for your 0.75x suggestion. See, this is the magic of a large fandom: you run into people every day who can love the same thing as you and yet have radically different opinions about what would improve things. 0.5x damage would be my bare minimum compromise. IMO it's pretty stupid to argue that a thunderpunch is 75% thunder to only 25% punch. If that were the case, then why doesn't it just go ahead and use the special attack stat? The way I see it, the punch is a special kind of punch that has a veil of that element around it, if you will. Veils do not the mainstay of an attack make. They're just veils. Thin, shallow veils. But since you're freaking out at the idea of a ghost only taking 0.25x damage from physical attacks, I'm willing to meet you halfway and say 0.5x.

Oh: and before you freak out any more about it, someone wants to say hi (with regards to this proposal's mirror opposite):

Without the HP that Blissey enjoys and with a similarly nerfed special defense stat (or just nerfed defense stats period), it's not like we'd be unleashing Hell upon the metagame. And like I said: this is one of those "I'm putting my foot down" ultimatums where I really don't care what the consequences would be for the metagame. Make ghosts too strong? I don't care. The penalties to balance them out end up making them too weak and now no one wants to use 'em? Again: don't care. What I care more about is that the only reason ghosts were ever made immune to normal attacks was because of the logic that "ghosts can't be touched by normal means." Physical contact is quite normal: special contact is not. The moment they introduced the physical/special split in Generation 4, this was a revamp which needed to happen and still has not happened. And very likely because of the issues we've discussed here. (Don't punish them in any way and they become God. Punish them in some attempt to make them balanced and you end up nerfing them entirely.)

[Sneaze]

...*looks at post* Whoops, derped when I was typing. I meant reduce BY .75x, not reduce TO .75x. Sorry. x.x;

[Talon87]

Originally Posted by Sneezey12

Actually, I think the split itself makes sense, it's just that they decide to do the stupid 4x weaknesses which really make no sense. Either they're soft earth or hard earth, how difficult is that?

It doesn't, though. The Water/Ice split is already bad enough (especially now that GameFreak is dangerously backpedaling along the tightrope by introducing the concept of heated water in Scald), but the Ground/Rock split is just stupid. Ground is rock for all intents and purposes. You say one's "soft" and one's "hard" and you ask what's so hard to get about it, but let me tell you just some of the ways in which GameFreak hasn't been able to "get" what you think should be so easy to understand:

• saying ground is immune to electricity but that rock isn't. Both are equally good (or equally poor!) insulators
• saying that both the ground and rocks are weak to grass. (Uh, what? Grass consumes the soil, sure, but the rate at which it affects rocks is so slow as to be discussed in terms of centuries, not years.) By your theory, they should have "gotten" this if they understood the soft vs. hard split.
• similarly, saying that both ground and rocks are weak to water. Yes, water erodes rocks, we get it: but the rate at which free-flowing water erodes soil isn't even comparable with the rate at which it erodes rocks. One can be observed in minutes, the other takes place on the geologic time scale. If we're going to argue "Still counts! Water still erodes rocks! Everyone knows it! " then we're also going to have to make it so that Flying is 2x effective against Rock (considering that wind erodes rocks just as well as water does) and we're going to have to make Ice 2x effective against Rock too (considering that water getting into crevices and then turning into ice and expanding is the major player in the erosion of mountains, not free-flowing water). Again: you'd think GameFreak gets this, but apparently the don't. They want to make Rocks weak to water ... and yet not to wind or ice.
• suggesting that ground is normal to fire but that rock is 2x resistant. This doesn't even begin to make sense. How is the ground "weak" to fire? Pretty sure the ground is the one thing that's left standing after a forest fire -- even the fire dies out before the ground so much as breaks a sweat! And as for rocks, well, pretty sure we all agree that while they ought to resist ordinary fire, if we want to take things to their logical extremes, rocks heated to sufficiently high temperatures can be melted. (Providing a basis for the claim that Rocks might actually be weak to intense-enough Fire-type attacks? ) There's no reason for a "soft vs. hard" split here, yet they forced one anyway. It's dumb. Ground resists fire as well as rock does.
• Even if the ground has more give than a brick wall, does it really make tha much sense for me to deal normal damage if I choose to headbutt the ground? Body slam the ground? Stomp the ground? It doesn't, does it? Yet this is exactly what GameFreak tells us again: "soft earth can be stamped, hard earth can't." Even though stamping soft earth does less damage than stamping any other creature type out there barring ghosts and steels. ("But Talon! You're not actually stamping the ground! You're stamping a creature!" This is true. And gets back to my point about how I want there to be more factors than just elemental affinities. I completely agree that there's a difference between stamping an earth shrew and stamping the ground itself. But so long as I'm locked in to discussing one game change at a time, we have to take the element all-or-none as it is.)

So on and so forth. I could go on, but I think you get the point I'm making:

1. There's evidence where in real life the two behave the same yet GameFreak artificially has them acting differently. (e.g. fire, normal)
2. There's evidence where in real life the two may behave differently yet GameFreak has them acting the same. (e.g. water, grass)

So this isn't really about GameFreak intelligently splitting the element into two as it is a challenge that, even if I wanted to keep the element artificially split into two, GameFreak's done a very poor job of things.

[Emi]

Originally Posted by Talon87

l. one save file per game pak is dumb

This is so true. Having more than one save slot makes so much sense. Even some of the most popular games out there: Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts etc, have this feature of more than one save slot. In Kingdom Hearts, you can have 99(though, it is doubtful you will ever play the game 99 times.)