The trailer for Pokémon Go – a new augmented reality (AR) game for smartphones (both
Android and iPhone) which would require players to travel around real-world
locations in order to trade, capture, and battle Pokemon – has been around for
several days already, and everyone is losing their minds about it. It’s “old news” but I would still want to
offer some thoughts about it.
Regardless of my objective belief that Digimon is better than Pokémon – as far as the anime properties
are concerned – it is a fact that, in the past, I experienced how deeply
immersive playing Pokemon games is
(especially back in my tween/early teens).
So I know Pokémon Go’s potential of
becoming a mobile game that everyone will get addicted to – whether via fad or
fandom.
My ultimate gaming experience fantasy isn’t
something confide in virtual reality (that’s so 80’s-90’s). It should have an interface that can
interact in the real world. I don’t have
a clear concept of it in my mind, but the closest illustration of such game is that
of “Greed Island” in Hunter X Hunter –
an RPG existing in a real-world setting.
Thus, I really find the Pokémon Go
trailer awesome. It’s a glimpse of what
my fantasy gaming experience could look like.
That said, my personal feelings for Pokémon Go, as of now, is nothing more
than intrigue. I’m not really too excited
about it.
Firstly, there are no concrete information yet
on how the actual gameplay will look like.
Yes, the trailer looks cool and exciting, but I doubt that the gameplay
is going to be anything like it. If it’s
virtually anything like it – holograms of Pokémon, Poké Balls, and others
popping out – then it’s definitely going to revolutionize gaming as we know it
and, thus, worth going crazy about. But
that’s extremely unlikely, of course.
Secondly, if the gameplay involves having
to hold up your camera phone – so that the game animation can meld with the real-world
environment – for extended periods of time, won’t that be too tiring for the
arm?
Thirdly, consider the fact that Pokémon lives
in different habitats, regions, and terrains, and its implications on the game (as
well as what the game trailer has implied).
Does it mean I have to travel to an exotic or dangerous location in
order to capture a particular rare Pokémon?
Like, will I have to go to the Arctic in order to get a glimpse of
Articuno? Will I have to go to a
cemetery or an abandoned mansion in order to encounter a ghost-type Pokémon? Will I have to go near the mouth of Mayon
Volcano in order to get a Magmar? Will
Manila be exclusively filled with Muk and Grimer?
Pokémon
Go’s premise is an ambitiously unique one.
However, I’m not keen of having a game that would require me to go to a
specific place for the sake of just experiencing an aspect of the game that can only be possible in that place. Seems
like a waste of time and energy.
Furthermore, picture this as well: people,
especially kids, getting into danger or trouble – e.g. trespassing, accidents,
getting lost, etc. – because of the location requirements of this game. Yikes!
Lastly, this game probably won’t be
free. If so, then I won’t ever get to
play it. I don’t buy – or use for that
matter – apps that aren’t free. (Can’t
afford them… or too lazy to partake in a digital transaction for them. I still haven’t encountered an app that is
worth the money and hassle.)
Pokémon
Go could turn out to be the most groundbreaking game in the 21st
century. That would be a pleasant shock,
if ever. But, based on all available (or
lack of) data, I tend to think that it’s more probable that the game won’t
really live up to the hype created by the trailer.
We
have to wait for 2016 to know for real.
For now, I’m more than satisfied of having
this emulator app that enables me to play Fire Red and other Pokémon classics on
my tab.
No comments:
Post a Comment