Nintendo Reveals Pokémon X and Y for 3DS

By Jorge Ba-oh 08.01.2013 40

Nintendo Reveals Pokémon X and Y for 3DS on Nintendo gaming news, videos and discussion

The wait is over folks as a Nintendo has lifted the lid on a new Pokémon title that has been teased for over a week.

This morning the company aired a brief announcement video, Pokémon Direct, around the globe officially announcing a brand new pair of games in the longrunning series:

Introducing Pokémon X and Pokémon Y - a new generation of Pokémon games for Nintendo 3DS, to be released worldwide in October 2013 (some countries excluded).


 

Satoru Iwata started by reminiscing about the classic Pokémon games - Red Version and Green Version and how offering two versions of a game was a new idea at the time. Likewise using link cables for connectivity - trading and battling - was a pioneering concept for Nintendo back in the day.

Image for Nintendo Reveals Pokémon X and Y for 3DS


The Nintendo president then recalled the different improvements and functionality introduced in sequels Pokémon Gold/Silver and Pokémon Ruby/Sapphire as the series expanded into new generations of Pokémon. Not content with simply using cables and local wireless adapters, Nintendo roamed into the online world up until the latest games Pokémon Black 2 and Pokémon White 2.

As highlighted with previous entries, these two new games will fully utilise the new functionality introduced in the Nintendo 3DS, including a vibrant new world to explore, a new visual style with critters to meet, battle and collect.

Image for Nintendo Reveals Pokémon X and Y for 3DS


Image for Nintendo Reveals Pokémon X and Y for 3DS


Nintendo also confirmed the three starter Pokémon for the games:

Image for Nintendo Reveals Pokémon X and Y for 3DS


What do you think of Pokémon X and Pokémon Y - with around nine months to go, are you excited? Be sure to vote on our poll below and check out the Official Pokémon X and Y topic.

Box art for Pokémon X and Y
Developer

Game Freak

Publisher

Nintendo

Genre

Turn Based RPG

Players

2

C3 Score

Rated $score out of 10  9/10

Reader Score

Rated $score out of 10  9/10 (42 Votes)

European release date Out now   North America release date Out now   Japan release date Out now   Australian release date Out now    Also on Also on Nintendo eShop

Comment on this article

You can comment as a guest or join the Cubed3 community below: Sign Up for Free Account Login

Preview PostPreview Post Your Name:
Validate your comment
  Enter the letters in the image to validate your comment.
Submit Post

Comments

Cheesing It Up is offline. Cheesing It Up 08.01.2013#26

SuperLink said:
Cheesing it up said:
 it's always an inferior version of the original couple of gens.

That's the only thing that makes you sound like a "moanbag" Smilie

Fair enough if you're sick of the stagnation, I am too, and the main thing that stopped this being a totally positive announcement for me was that it's blatently the same. But the new Pokémon games definitely aren't inferior to the old ones, neither are the new Pokémon themselves - I personally still love getting surprised by seeing creatures I've never seen before when I venture out into the grass.

What would you do with Pokémon instead? (Besides the obvious, get rid of the grid system, change up battle mechanics a little more, etc) Because chances are it'll be done by a spinoff at some point.

I'm cool with roughly half of the new pokemon I see about. Some are just ridiculous (an ICE CREAM pokemon!? Seriously?) and others just seem like clones of ones that have gone before (e.g. Tauros with an afro). Apologies that I don't know the names off-hand.

As for what I would do, that's a very good question and one that's difficult to answer. I'll try anyway:

I want a much faster battle system. Do we really have to waste 3 seconds taking off a tiny proportion of my health EVERY TURN because there's a sandstorm?

More "shapeable" pokemon. You should be able to change or at least unfluence something like a pokemon's nautre. I'm all for pokemon individuality (to an extent), but it should be something you can shape as you train, not something that you're lumped with when you get the thing.

Less new pokemon each gen. Does it really make the game "better" if you're training up a new pokemon instead of a Squirtle? It's like they're trying to overcompensate for the fact that everything's the same by putting in loads new pokemon. In fact I'd be perfectly happy if a new pokemon game had, say, 200 pokemon from various previous gens (although only as a one-off).

A more "normal" story line. I get the impression that pokemon is always trying to "1-up" itself with the story lines. All this stuff about space and time and what-not feels out of place and largely irrelevant to me. Obviously a plot-twist or two would be nice though.

Much more interactive interactions with NPCs. Make them a bit more human.

A revised HM system. Perhaps you need to catch a specific pokemon before progressing due to that pokemon's unique abilities?

Finally, do we REALLY need 2-3 versions for each generation? And do we HAVE to choose between grass, water and fire starters?

I've thought of most of this on the fly, so some of it may not be relevent.

( Edited 08.01.2013 22:12 by Cheesing it up )

 
JayUK is offline. JayUK 08.01.2013#27

-No killing off is required, just have it set in a region that doesn't have 700 different pokemon like Kanto or Johto. They could even add pokemon/regions as DLC. The point is quality over quantity. The fewer pokemon the better the animation, AI and detail in how they behave in the world.
-Pokemon's level up system already has a certain level of complexity, its just mostly not spoken about and hidden away. Skill Trees are used in basically every modern rpg and action game people are used to them. I think treating kids like idiots isn't a good thing. Plus they could just give you the option to have leveling up as automatic/manual like how mass effect does. That way you get to choose and everyone's happy. 
-As for voice acting for Pokemon, anything is better than having all Pokemon sound like robots.

( Edited 08.01.2013 22:13 by JayUK )

 
Cheesing It Up is offline. Cheesing It Up 08.01.2013#28

Could you elaborate of the automatic/manual leveling up? I've never played mass effect so I'm not sure what that means.

 
JoshSL is offline. JoshSL 08.01.2013#29

All good points too.


Cheesing it up said:

I'm cool with roughly half of the new pokemon I see about. Some are just ridiculous (an ICE CREAM pokemon!? Seriously?)

In Vanillish's defense, a stalactite topped with living snow that just so happens to look like an ice cream cone is no less ridiculous than a blob of acid with a face.

As for what I would do, that's a very good question and one that's difficult to answer. Firstly I want a much faster battle system. Do we really have to waste 3 seconds taking off a tiny proportion of my health EVERY TURN because there's a sandstorm?

Did you miss Gen5? Because while it could still be faster, Gen5 sped up the battles loads and sandstorm/rain/etc no longer has its own little animation that takes forever, there's just an icon on the touchscreen to let you know what the weather is. The text also displayed while the move was happening, as opposed to the text needing to finish before the attack is used, etc. The battles could definitely be more streamlines though, i.e. health could continue going down while the next Pokémon takes its turn, I hope they do something to that effect in Gen6.

I think another one of the problems is that the way that pokemon from different species are unique is so uncontrollable. For example natures etc. I'm all for pokemon individuality (to an extent), but it should be something you can shape as you train, not something that you're lumped with when you get the thing.

Basically they need to find something more fun than RNG, agreed.

Less new pokemon each gen. Does it really make the game "better" if you're training up a new pokemon instead of a Squirtle? It's like they're trying to overcompensate for the fact that everything's the same by putting in loads new pokemon. In fact I'd be perfectly happy if a new pokemon game had, say, 200 pokemon from various previous gens (although only as a one-off).

My guess is it's for all those people who want the new-ness, but yeah there doesn't have to be so many new ones. I think they're not trying to go for "better" when it comes to different starters.. but rather, "another first experience", that's how I saw Gen3 and 5 anyway, with barely any old Pokémon returning.

I also kind of get the impression that pokemon is always trying to "1-up" itself with the story lines. All this stuff about space and time and what-not feels out of place and largely irrelevant to me.

More and much better interactions with NPCs.

A revised HM system. Perhaps you need to catch a specific pokemon before progressing due to that pokemon's unique abilities?


Agreed with all these things, I think Pokémon shouldn't really bother with a story until GF actually learn how to write a good plot that works with the source material because what they end up with is usually really generic and pretentious. NPCs need to be way better, and I'm personally hoping that HMs are ditched altogether in Gen6, there desperately needs to be a new field move system and I'm sure a lot of people would agree with your idea.

Finally, do we REALLY need 2-3 versions for each generation? And do we HAVE to choose between grass, water and fire starters?

Well, first reason is because of money Smilie it works, annoyingly.
And second I'm guessing it's because that's the only trio besides Grass/Rock/Flying that's actually fair. Then again it doesn't have to be a trio, it could be a choice of 2, or 4.
But yeah Pokémon has a problem with being formulaic, for certain. I still enjoy it a lot for what it is, but I hope I'm right in thinking these formulas can't go on forever.

EDIT@Jay:
That's basically what they did with Gen5, it had ~150-200 Unova Pokémon to begin with, and only after you completed it could you be allowed to get your favourites from other regions. Isn't that how it's best?

Also, I don't think you know how bad the anime's voice acting is. Most of them are no where near as good as Pikachu.

( Edited 08.01.2013 22:24 by SuperLink )

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery
 
JayUK is offline. JayUK 08.01.2013#30

Cheesing it up said:
Could you elaborate of the automatic/manual leveling up? I've never played mass effect so I'm not sure what that means.

When you level up in Mass Effect it gives you a number of skill points to allocate to different stats and abilities. If you put it on auto, you'd simply level up and the game would allocate the points for you. I think Final Fantasy X did something similar it had a standard and an advanced way to level up. 

Just to clarify I don't want Pokemon to adopt Mass Effects level up system, just the way it allows you to choose your level of involvement.

( Edited 08.01.2013 22:29 by JayUK )

 
Cheesing It Up is offline. Cheesing It Up 08.01.2013#31


In Vanillish's defense, a stalactite topped with living snow that just so happens to look like an ice cream cone is no less ridiculous than a blob of acid with a face.

I'm not saying all the oldies are classics, but I feel as though the "silly" pokemon seem to be steadily incresing every gen. They're still in the minority to be fair.


Did you miss Gen5? Because while it could still be faster, Gen5 sped up the battles loads and sandstorm/rain/etc no longer has its own little animation that takes forever, there's just an icon on the touchscreen to let you know what the weather is. The text also displayed while the move was happening, as opposed to the text needing to finish before the attack is used, etc. The battles could definitely be more streamlines though, i.e. health could continue going down while the next Pokémon takes its turn, I hope they do something to that effect in Gen6.

I did play Black/White (not B+W2 though). I remember people saying that the battle speed was much better, but I don't recall ever actually noticing it. Maybe it's the old memory playing tricks...


And second I'm guessing it's because that's the only trio besides Grass/Rock/Flying that's actually fair.

There's no reason not to have 3 pokemon that are neutral against each other (in fact doesn't DPP have this in their final forms as the Penguin becomes part steel?)

Glad to see some agreement though. Smilie


( Edited 08.01.2013 22:37 by Cheesing it up )

 
JoshSL is offline. JoshSL 08.01.2013#32

Cheesing it up said:

I did play Black/White (not B+W2 though). I remember people saying that the battle speed was much better, but I don't recall ever actually noticing it. Maybe it's the old memory playing tricks...

There's no reason not to have 3 pokemon that are neutral against each other (in fact doesn't DPP have this in their final forms as the Penguin becomes part steel?)

Glad to see some agreement though. Smilie


The battle speed could really be even better than it is, that's by far my biggest worry about it going 3D.. because the slowest Pokémon battles by far are those from the Stadium games.

And, as Starters evolve yeah they sometimes get more types, that makes things a little more interesting.
There's a lot of speculation that these starters will have dark/psychic/fighting as their second types. Personally, I think Froakie looks like it'll become a flying type.. the beard looks kinda like a cloud. And Fennekin is a fennec fox, it makes sense for it to be part Ground type.

EDIT: Actually, I found B/W extremely disappointing and overally one of my least fav Pokémon games, I love the Pokémon in it but the region was boring and the archaic game mechanics were more obvious than ever.

BW2 was much better, had absolutely tons of content, but still suffered from being archaic.

( Edited 08.01.2013 22:46 by SuperLink )

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery
 
DevaGolgotha (guest) 09.01.2013#33

I dislike the blandness of the starters, and this change-of-format in the Pokemon universe frightens me, but I'm very excited nonetheless.  The legendaries sold it for me: just look at them!  Super awesome.

JayUK is offline. JayUK 09.01.2013#34


EDIT@Jay:
That's basically what they did with Gen5, it had ~150-200 Unova Pokémon to begin with, and only after you completed it could you be allowed to get your favourites from other regions. Isn't that how it's best?

Also, I don't think you know how bad the anime's voice acting is. Most of them are no where near as good as Pikachu.

You're right I haven't seen the anime since Gen 2. I was fine with them up to that point. I still think pretty much anything is better than, go Charizard 'Bzzzzt!'

And you're missing my point about keeping the number of Pokemon down to a reasonable number. Keeping the number low would allow for better animation, AI and complex behaviour for Pokemon outside of battle.

 
acer-man is offline. acer-man 09.01.2013#35

WANTT

Will keep my eye on this, and if still interested may pick up a 3DS in October.

 
JoshSL is offline. JoshSL 09.01.2013#36

JayUK said:

You're right I haven't seen the anime since Gen 2. I was fine with them up to that point. I still think pretty much anything is better than, go Charizard 'Bzzzzt!'

A lot of Pokémon in Gen4 and 5 have more complex noises, some of them sound pretty good. For example:  Stoutland's Cry
They could still be better. Also yes, around Gen3/4 the anime voice actors changed, and they are now horrible. Like really.. really bad.

And you're missing my point about keeping the number of Pokemon down to a reasonable number. Keeping the number low would allow for better animation, AI and complex behaviour for Pokemon outside of battle.

Does that mean you suggest there be certain Pokémon that are totally inaccessible in certain Gens? Seems a bit mean to some fans.

Also; you have to remember that the lack of AI and complex behavior and all that sort of thing is more to do with the fact GameFreak aren't very good at dealing with complex technology. If it was an in-house Nintendo developed game, there wouldn't be issues with visuals or animations at all. This is why the spinoffs generally look far better than the mainseries games despite also featuring truckloads (if not all of) the Pokémon - they're developed by developers other than GameFreak.

EDIT: Also, I posted new info in the official thread, including

-The game uses an innovative communication system that makes it feel as if you are playing with other players around the world.
-The bonds between players and Pokemon will deepen, and Pokemon will become stronger with the new battle structure.

Thought some of you guys might find that interesting!

( Edited 09.01.2013 12:59 by SuperLink )

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery
 
JayUK is offline. JayUK 09.01.2013#37

The kind of complexity I'm talking about would mean that 500 straight off the bat would be impossible. I'm talking about each Pokemon having unique movement and reacting differently to other Pokemon in the area. I'm talking about giving the impression of a believable world. Sort of like a more advanced Monster Hunter(that kinda hints at an ecosystem).

A blend of the vastness of Xenoblade(but with no loading times), the sense of an ecosystem and unique AI found in Monster Hunter with the charm and battle system of Pokemon. I really don't think anyone would care if you were given 150 Pokemon to catch with that level of detail. Then with the age of downloadable content, there's nothing to stop them from adding multiple regions gradually in the same kind of detail.

I'm worried, the more Pokemon they keep adding, the less likely we'll get meaningful improvement, as the size of the job gets more difficult with each gen.



( Edited 09.01.2013 13:27 by JayUK )

 
JoshSL is offline. JoshSL 09.01.2013#38

To be honest, you're never going to get that kind of game from GameFreak anyway? They're a pretty small-time developer made up of a bunch of self-taught game amateurs who prefer to operate by themselves than with Nintendo's first parties or resources

As good as that game sounds, unless GameFreak decide to tell Nintendo to make their own Pokémon game (I can't see that happening, GF's games are successful enough) it won't ever reach Xenoblade or Monster Hunter levels, no where near. Depressing, I know.

Pokémon Ranger gives you a bit more of an ecosystem feel and the Pokémon have their own actions reactions and such, they move around a lot, the graphics are really nice too and they have tons of sidequests.
The only problem is that they're a bit repetitive and not that great. Still, you might like them, and it's an interesting example of what non-GameFreak developers can do with Pokémon.

Honestly it just feels to me that GameFreak don't want any games overshadowing their own, it's bizarre that Nintendo won't do an in-house Pokémon game or a home console game to the point where I feel like some kind of "agreement" must have been reached to keep GameFreak happy.

( Edited 09.01.2013 13:37 by SuperLink )

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery
 
JayUK is offline. JayUK 09.01.2013#39

SuperLink said:
To be honest, you're never going to get that kind of game from GameFreak anyway? They're a pretty small-time developer made up of a bunch of self-taught game amateurs who prefer to operate by themselves than with Nintendo's first parties or resources

As good as that game sounds, unless GameFreak decide to tell Nintendo to make their own Pokémon game (I can't see that happening, GF's games are successful enough) it won't ever reach Xenoblade or Monster Hunter levels, no where near. Depressing, I know.

Pokémon Ranger gives you a bit more of an ecosystem feel and the Pokémon have their own actions reactions and such, they move around a lot, the graphics are really nice too and they have tons of sidequests.
The only problem is that they're a bit repetitive and not that great. Still, you might like them, and it's an interesting example of what non-GameFreak developers can do with Pokémon.

The problem I have with the spin offs is the battle systems and the actual catching of Pokemon aren't quite as good. I was just thinking it would be cool if we had a game where we actually saw Pokemon behaving as they're described in the various Pokedex entries.

 
JoshSL is offline. JoshSL 09.01.2013#40

JayUK said:
The problem I have with the spin offs is the battle systems and the actual catching of Pokemon aren't quite as good. I was just thinking it would be cool if we had a game where we actually saw Pokemon behaving as they're described in the various Pokedex entries.

Agreed. Well, game companies change over the decades, so maybe if not immediately soon, we may see something else that's really new and interesting with Pokémon someday. The quality of spinoffs is slowly improving too as Conquest was great.

I'm really not expecting to see a WiiU entry besides the lame Poképark games though..

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery
 

Subscribe to this topic Subscribe to this topic

If you are a registered member and logged in, you can also subscribe to topics by email.
Sign up today for blogs, games collections, reader reviews and much more
Site Feed
Who's Online?
Azuardo

There are 1 members online at the moment.