That's beside the point I think. The argument bandied about here isn't about the merits of portable vs console, it's merely claiming that a game on one shouldn't be on the other because it would 'feel wrong'.
Back when Pokemon first came out, the internet wasn't as propagated as it is now. Even in the following years, part of the appeal was "catchin em all" and with two / even three versions of the game that contained exclusive Pokemon, portability allowed for a relatively faster transfer than anything else. Sure, you needed peripherals and other dongles but at least it was feasible.
Nowadays, something similar can be accomplished with online on Wii U. Nevertheless, with a portable like the 3DS It is convenient to trade a Pokemon right then and there, that it is to go to your house to trade. Of course before I doubt it would have made logistical sense to put out two Pokemon versions and try to trade with your Nintendo 64s or GameCubes (although the GC was portable to an extent.) That is what I was getting at.
At any rate, like I said before, I would like to see a Pokemon game on Wii U. It's going to be a cold day in hell before Nintendo makes puts one of its biggest IPs and handheld system sellers on a home console. My idea of an ideal Pokemon game would be a real-time RPG that controls like The Last Story. That means basically allowing the Pokemon to fight while giving different behaviors and/or attack patterns. And of course no random battles, but we all know that wouldn't happen. Homosexual marriage will be legal in all parts of the globe before that happens.
Have you played Tales of Symphonia 2? I was talking a bit about this in Chat a few days ago, but there is a "Monster Catching" aspect to that game, recruiting enemies if they're the last standing guy in battle. No Random Encounters in that game either, so you can see at least one of the monsters you'll be battling with, and then you can take out all of his buddies (in battle) before you extend your hand.
After doing that, you now have a Lv1 Bear (for instance) in your party, and he will gain levels with your human characters, and when he gets to a certain point..he'll change class, or his class path will branch (to like, "Werebear" or "Cave Bear"), and you have a decision to make (do you want a nimble guy who kinda doesn't look like a bear anymore, or do you want a HUGE GRIZZLY STANDING ON TWO LEGS DOING BODYSLAMS??). He gains increases across the board (SPD, STR, etc), and picks up new skills. It's BASICALLY POKEMON.
Sadly, this game got DUMPED ON because a lot of people who enjoyed Tales of Symphonia wanted to spend more time playing with original ToS characters in ToS2. They're still there, but their levels are locked so it really isn't worth using them for an extended period of time (but that's what Tales of Symphonia was for, soooo..). Roll with the monsters!
I got a good bit of my Beastiary all filled up ("Pokedex"), and I went back and caught another one when my path split ("Living Pokedex"). Pretty awesome, and fills a good role on the Wii. I'd LOVE to see a Pokemon game in this format. The whole time I was playing: "uhh, so why can't a Pokemon game work on a console??"
Just know that the game isn't FOCUSED around them (as Pokemon would be, obviously), and that they fill 2 of your 4 active party spots. And I don't believe you can control them. I do remember one of our Bears (we had the Cave AND the Were- variety; there are a TON of traditional-type RPG monsters, too, not just "actual animals.") hitting someone for a RIDICULOUS amount of damage. He was lumbering, but hit like a sack of bricks.
All this Pokemon talk; instead of going X/Y for 3DS, why not go X for 3DS, and Y for Wii U? "Wanna catch 'em all? Get a friend with a Wii U or 3DS!" Hello, cross-promotion..
EDIT- If you're DEFINITELY going to check out Tales, you should probably start with the GameCube game, though I've heard that is an expensive endeavor now.. It is also one of a few games that allows you to benefit in your Wii game by playing the prequel on GameCube (Fire Emblem Path of Radiance / Radiant Dawn is another pair I can think of).
@deathly_hallows Playing handhelds at home in the best possible way isn't even remotely comfortable, so why the fuck would I wanna play anywhere else? Even the IDEAL handheld playing conditions still suck.
The allure of the handheld is that you can take it on the run with you, an advantage (of sorts) that it has over consoles. IF YOU'RE NOT LEAVING THE HOUSE, that advantage is Nil, and the comparison becomes "playing a game on a giant screen" vs. "playing a game on a tiny screen."
Unless you're a stamp collector or some freak who loves microscopes, nobody SHOULD choose the eye-squinting, hold-it-close-to-my-face option when a "wow, look at that clarity on that HD TV" option is there. It just doesn't make any sense. There is a reason TV's are getting bigger and bigger. Handhelds/phones are getting smaller and smaller for ease of transport.
I dunno, I liken curling up with a portable game to reading a good book. With some headphones in its a very intimate, personal kind of experience. Especially with the headphones it can be very absorbing. Surely one could understand that appeal.
Still, the idea that Pokemon wouldn't work on consoles is stooooooopid. If Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest can work on consoles, Pokemon can. What would really be the kicker would be if you could sync your game to the 3DS. Then you could get some leveling up done while you're on the go, or in bed if the Wii u Gamepad won't reach. Classic RPGs are perfect mindless games to play before heading to la la land.
For starters, I have no idea why you guys wouldn't set up your systems near the most comfortable chairs. If you're setting your consoles up AWAY from those, how can we expect any of this conversation to make sense? You're trying to tell me how great it is because you can sit in some comfortable chair while you play..meanwhile, I'm sitting in a comfortable chair and/or couch EVERY time I'm playing.
"Out by the pool," so you can get ridiculous glare from the sun? And bed is for sleeping/banging. Just like blackouts.
@PogueSquadron You can play console and PC games with headphones and the experience is just as "intimate", dare I say moreso because the huge screen can make things really immersive depending how close you like to sit (I'm a as close as possible kinda person even with my 60 incher*).
Some people are kind confusing my argument a bit, too, btw. I'm not saying even necessarily saying "don't ever make Mario games or Metroid games or sequels on handhelds", I'm saying that there should be a divide between the style of games on both systems, and for them to make it at least fair.
Aside from them being pussies, there's no need for Bravely Default to be on the 3DS when it could easily be on Wii U and be better in every way. Why is that 3DS only? What's the big risk for Wii U? And if there's a risk, build a fucking audience holy shit. Nintendo really has treated their consoles the way third parties do, relatively speaking. They refuse to build an audience on their consoles like they do for handhelds. That's bullshit, and it's not fair.
On the specific subject of direct sequels/remakes switching it up, yes, I do think it's idiotic. And it goes both ways. I would prefer they stuck to a certain style for handheld games versus console games. Yet nowadays the 3DS is getting EVERYTHING. So how is that fair? They're literally taking old console games away that could have very well been on Wii U and IMO should have been, since the people who played it on consoles the first time, might wanna play it there again.
I don't even see how this opinion is controversial. Would handheld fans like it if Dillon's Rolling Western (get that name right?) had a sequel only on Wii U? The next Pokemon? A remake of Pokemon Red/Blue? Link's Awakening 2 for Wii U?? I'm sure Grant would love it if a direct sequel/full on remake of one of the best handheld games of all time was on Wii U. And that's what Nintendo's done multiple times here already. Luigi's Mansion 2, ALBW, Star Fox 64, OOT, Chibi Robo, and numerous others. Where are the huge sequels and remakes on 3DS that Wii U is "stealing"? Nothing but a few downloadables? Oh and they're not stolen, they're just ports. Cuz Nintendo likes to suck handheld dick. I would be fine with a clear series either being exclusive to each console, or that they share both. But no, handhelds have been the only ones to get both. And there's no real reason for this, except for that fact that it's fucking safe and easy. Well Nintendo, grow a pair and create an audience on Wii U. It's not like it can't be done, it could be. If there's SO many great games on 3DS and DS, why not share the wealth instead of hogging them all? Maybe that way the consoles won't have any huge droughts. But nooooooooooo, precious lil 3DS needs all the games. Fuck that.
A bit of a rant, but I just wanted to be clearer about where I stand. Either keep it fair, or don't steal all the games. Not that crazy of a concept.
@Shadowlink Spinoffs, basically. Which is what was happening before, and I didn't complain. 3DS can keep all those other Zelda games. I don't want em. But I did want ALBW.
OOT on 3DS is kind of insulting. A remake of what is still considered one of the very best games of all time shouldn't be moved to another platform. The Wii U is a thing. The Wii U is the console successor to a line of consoles which includes the N64 which the game was on. WHY. NOT. PUT IT THERE? And why not put it on both? I'm of the mind Nintendo should do that, so maybe I do support a hybrid console so I stop losing fucking games to a system I don't really like (relatively).
No one has explained to me yet why this game was on the 3DS instead of the Wii U. Where is the Link's Awakening Remake exclusively for Wii U? Or why not make a Link's Awakening Remake for 3DS instead and give us the OOT remake?? Why did we get WWHD on Wii U at all? Why not just put it on 3DS? The flip flopping is stupid to me. Oh but wait, once again, there is no flip flopping! The Wii U isn't taking any handhelds games away!! NONE!! And before you say 3D World was a stolen sequel, Nintendo basically said themselves 3D Land was a warmup for 3D World.
Would Sony fans like it if an FF7 remake was finally announced and it was for the fucking Vita lol instead of PS3 or PS4? It's the same lunacy. I don't support that shit.
I think it was just a matter of getting out a quick and easy title that they knew would sell on 3DS... same deal with Star Fox 64. And OoT 3D really is nothing of a remake. I'm not sure how Nintendo gets away with calling it that. It's an enhanced port.
They did a good job at it for sure. It's not lazy, but it is still, at its core, the same N64 game with a fresh coat of paint... I don't think the term remake should be thrown around so lightly. I think good examples of true remakes would be Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes, Resident Evil on Gamecube, or Metroid: Zero Mission.