Siobhan Keogh: Pokemon - gotta play 'em all

A screenshot from Pokemon Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire. Photo / YouTube

Siobhan Keogh reveals her love-hate relationship with the game Pokemon, and why she's probably still going to play the next version.

Try as I might, there are some games that I just can't quit.

I started playing Pokemon when I was in intermediate school. My friends and I played Pokemon, watched the TV show, collected trading cards. I had a talking toy pikachu and a special edition Pokemon Game Boy Color. I loved Pokemon from the moment I first picked up Pokemon Red, I've played each generation for an absurd number of hours. I genuinely don't like to think about the collective time I have spent playing games in the series.

Because of that nostalgia, I still have a little bit of memorabilia in my house. (I wish I still had the Game Boy - I sold it at Cash Converters some years later.)

And yet, I'm not sure I actually like Pokemon anymore. Every time a new generation of games comes out, I play it and quickly remember that virtually nothing in Pokemon has changed since the first generation. You are a kid who captures Pokemon. You have a mentor who's a Pokemon professor, you have battles with your rival, you beat all the gyms and take on the Elite Four. Eventually you become the Pokemon Champion.

Then I get even more frustrated with its limitations - the developer, Game Freak, has had ample time to fix Pokemon's problems in the 18 years since the first games - and declare that I'm done with it. Never again.

Guess what I'm buying when it comes out in late November? The new Pokemon. I remember how I felt after playing the last game, and logically I know that I'm just going to get annoyed all over again, but I just keep wanting to give the series chance after chance after chance. Yes, it appears I'm a glutton for punishment. Besides, my co-op buddy will be disappointed if he has no one to trade with.

I have this problem with a lot of entertainment media. I'm still watching The Walking Dead, even though season two was almost uniformly dull. At times I feel like the network that makes the show, AMC, just doesn't want to invest the money required to make the show consistently good.

Sometimes the problem is simply that I've committed too much time to a show or game already, and I feel like I need to see it through to the end. Take Dexter, which was laughably bad for the last couple of seasons. I hated myself for it, but I kept watching because I had to know how it ended.

The issue with Pokemon doesn't seem to be a budgeting one, though. Nor do I need to know how it ends - you wind up being the Pokemon Champion, always.

The problem with Pokemon is that everything I described above will be seen as a positive for any sensible game company. An addictive quality that keeps wallets open is something that game creators strive for. Here is a company with a franchise that they've barely had to alter since its inception, and it's still making bucketloads of money. Why would you bother changing the formula?

I understand that line of thinking. If most people could make millions by releasing the same thing 20 times then they would probably take that opportunity.

But just once, when I'm asked of I want to join the villainous Team Rocket, I'd like to be able to select 'Yes' and have that decision go somewhere.

- nzherald.co.nz