Not my favorites. Maybe it will be your thing to see it all done up in later gen graphic and mechanics. Personally if I want the Saph/Ruby era experience I will play a fresh emerald rom hack. If I want to relive my childhood I will emulate the old games, or gbc romhacks. There is so much out there. Even in the scope of what only Nintendo have officially released. These games had and have no real niche in my compulsive manchild comfyweb
Yes, they're faithful while also adding new mechanics and features that don't feel out of place at all. If someone wants to start playing Pokemon I'd probably recommend them this first.
Gen 3 is hailed as the best generation of pokemon ever, sure some of the restrictions were motivated my monetary value but the products that came from it are BASED
If you grew up with Gen 1 games then you should be more than aware of its flaws and how the remake fixes them. You CANNOT pretend the remakes don't fix shit.
NTA but to me it doesn't matter. What do they fix, irrelevant "problems"? If you just want to play Gen 1 Pokemon, you're going to beat the game easily no matter what. The only thing that really matters is whether you want it to look like the original games, or look more modern.
These discussions are so tedious because people who argue about technical problems in gen 1 are so disingenuous, none of the so called problems matter, there is no strategy in the single player campaign. You level up Pokemon and plow through enemies with your strongest attack, exploiting elemental weaknesses is the only strategy involved at all.
I was around for Pokémania, was cool times. I think the original games are, in spite of some flaws and rough edges, quite good, Pokémania wasn't all just marketing, these were genuinely fun and engaging entrylevel RPGs which genuinely appealed to people with its real strengths. I remember it fondly.
I got into Pokeyman before the marketing blitz here even started, because my brother had gotten a Game Boy emulator and we had tried a bunch of games for a while, and then Pokémon came around and we got HOOOOKED, more than with any other game. We got maybe almost a year of head start before Pokémon actually began advertising and got launched here in Sweden, and we weren't alone in that either, probably over a dozen kids at my school (that I knew of, probably more) got into Poke A Mon via emulation, people were talking about secrets and strategies, giving tips and hints and what not, just like what everyone would eventually do when they got the games on Game Boy later.
People made sure to actually buy it even if they emulated it already, because everyone wanted to trade and battle. If the games were totally devoid of value and fun, I don't think this would have happened, it'd have taken until the official launch with the cartoons and comics to see any of this at all. Marketing can do a lot, and it did for Pokémon, but you really can't make all that much out of a valueless product with just marketing.
I played FireRed for the first time last year, and I honestly had a pretty good time. There's some things which aren't as cool or interesting, partially it lacks a lot of the mystique, but it's just never the same as when you're a little kid and you're exploring all of this for the first time. That said, I always loved Gen 2 and Gen 3, I had fun exploring those worlds, and I liked the advancements in mechanics, as well as sound and graphics, and Gen 3 was always my favorite, there was a lot I felt wasn't quite as good when Gen 4 came around.
Continuing. I would not say that the Gen3 remakes of the originals are some sort of conclusive replacement, because they just aren't, but I do think they're enjoyable for what they are, and part of this is because I'm very fond of R&S, being the games I enjoyed the very most when they were new.
Partially because there were cute girls and I was a horny little lad, and because I thought the graphics and sound was amazing, but there was just more postgame stuff, there was a lot more to explore, to do, and to figure out. Discovering the Hidden Chamber on my own and having to figure out the Braille thing, with no internet connection at the time, that was exciting and fun.
A lot of people have complaints about the remakes, and while I think some of them are kind of minute, even stupid, I can also see the point in other ones, and I have to agree that there are things about it which just weren't as well made as they should have been.
That said, there are some complaints to be raised about the originals. I like them, but there's a bunch of inconvenient and tedious shit to them too, like the exact way which inventory and PC boxes are managed. The remakes get a lot of love from me just because they don't have as much of that obnoxious busywork.
Some people complain about how a lot of moves are broken or bugged and what not, and sure, I can see the issue, but those things in particular weren't a big deal back in the day, and unless you're a competitive player, they don't really matter, and I honestly can't imagine taking Pokémon seriously enough to play it competitively, the games aren't quite solid enough even with fixed bugs for that to make that much sense to me. I guess I see competitive Pokémon in the same way I see competitive Smash Bros., like it's kind of missing the point of this kind of game.
Pretty good but the make or break for people tends to be the gen 3 balancing of gen 1 mons:
-psychic no longer stupid busted
-extra types with some moves changing types (bite is now dark, gust is flying)
-EV and IVs instead of stat XP
-different TMs
-updated movesets
-natures and abilities
-crit no longer determined by speed
-toxic seed doesn't work like in gen 1
It's a lot more polished than gen 1 but the jank makes it fun. It's really just preference imo
In the context of gen 1's gameplay, I don't mind that some types are clearly better. Psychic and Dragon pokemon should be the best, and there's hardly any of them anyway.
They're amazing. The Sevii Islands are a great addition and one of my favorite Pokémon areas. I'd rank them as best Pokemon games behind HG/SS and Black/White.
They're good.
The hack Fire Red - Leaf Green Plus is the definitive way to play these without shit like making it impossibly and autistically hard or adding every gen into Kanto.
Pokemon Throwback is arguably the second best but I like my hacks with auto-run toggles. Holding B during the whole run should be illegal.
>Pokemon Throwback is arguably the second best but I like my hacks with auto-run toggles. Holding B during the whole run should be illegal.
Throwback walked so Revelation (for Emerald) could auto-run.
This, playing FRLG+ right now. More older Pokemon games need a romhack like that to remove limitations that only made sense at the time (barely) and unlock events that are no longer available officially.
They're good for trying to stay faithful to the originals within the limitations of Gen 3's new mechanics, but the weakest part of the games is how hard it tries to restrict you from cross-gen features until after you beat the game. >no cross gen evos, while also blocking them in an incredibly annoying way >access to held items is extremely limited >no time of day features >no attempt at any sort of compatibility with record mixing between RSE >can't even link up with RSE until after you do the post game quest which is extraordinarily obnoxious if you just want to play pokemon with your friends.
Compared to HGSS which clearly embraced the fact that they were gen 4 games, FRLG felt like it had a real head in the sand approach to everything Gen 3 had to offer up until you hit the post game and suddenly the game goes "okay you can evolve your crobat now". It's hard to fault them for it too much though since it was their first remakes, and they clearly learned their lesson for when it came to approaching the GSC remakes.
The Sevii islands were also a cool addition, although there really isn't all that much to do on them. I thought they should have put way more cross gen stuff on them to increase compatibility with RSE. Like just put berry patches and secret bases (that align with the secret bases in Hoenn) and a battle tower on them, it would have been a good idea.
>but the weakest part of the games is how hard it tries to restrict you from cross-gen features
stuff like this is why i gave up on pokemon with gen 4. i get that they didn't want people to cheese through the game with their lvl 100+ starters but FFS can they at least TRY to make it different in stead of just rehashing red & blue?
They're good, and the Sevii islands are a great addition for post game content - so much so that it's fricking weird that Game Freak couldn't be assed to include them for Lets Go Pikachu/Eevee. It's just a shame that it didn't include some of Gen 3's other additions like berry picking and farming, but the plus side is that the cartridge doesn't need a battery to keep track of the real time clock. If only because Gen 3 skipped out on GSC's day/night cycle entirely.
very cut and dry
i loved the RBYGSC but FRLG felt like a slog
they force you to play them if you want gen3 monsters in bankhome
make of this what you will
the sprites look great on a gb micro
thats about the only thing going for it
it is a VERY lazy port and GF likely were forced into it due to hoenne being SO SHITTY that everyone still hates it to this day unless they're underage homosexual sperglords
On top of the dumb cross gen restrictions mentioned above.
I also dislike that the post game is just some island that were never acknowledged beforehand nor will be acknowledged later + the johto legendaries.
It would've been better if the post game was Red visiting some parts of Johto and then Mount Silver, which would make him capturing the legendaries from there far more reasonable.
Terrible, don't fall for the typical "better than the original in every way" rhetoric. A large part of the appeal of gen 1 is that it depicts the pokemon universe as originally envisioned before it became a billion dollar multimedia phenomenon. Everything gets sanitized, nuances get lost and retroactively trying to shoehorn garbage made up later into the classic experience is one of the most disgusting habits of remakes.
If you wanna experience gen 1 and don't know japanese you should play a Red/Blue hack that restores the graphics of the original japanese Red and Green(1996)
Kanto as it was originally envisioned was Tajiri seething over seeing city development destroy the natural forests that he used to catch bugs in, which remakes ruined. It gets even more blatant in Gen2 when the last great forest of the region has been completely razed to stumps, something that the remakes completely missed the point of when they restored it as a dungeon. Yes, I know it was to save memory in Gen2, but it still had a reason in lore behind it.
>you should play a Red/Blue hack that restores the graphics of the original japanese Red and Green
Were the graphics really casualized/dumbed down/burgerized in the localization of the first gen?
I thought it's just some of the mon sprites were revised but still had the same overall artstyle.
they went off the rails a lot with a much more hit and miss quality, the western red and blue graphics come from the third japanese version pokemon blue(JP) which was just a bonus thing and since by that time there was already the red and green sprites and the sugimori promo artwork it was less crucial that the sprites showcase the pokemon as they are leaving more room for weird liberties. In red and green the sprites were really the only thing there was(the sugimori watercolor only came after) so it best showcases the pokemon as they were originally conceived by their respective designers and obviously had more care put into it.
The entirety of the overworld tileset was also completely different, though the differences are subtle. I'll show it next post.
some details worth pointing out is how the water tileset from red and blue works fine for the ocean but on these little ponds it makes less sense since the water is supposed to be stale(r) not with crazy waves. the signs have a different design. the bollards actually look like bollards instead of some weird bizarre crystals nobody knows what it's supposed to be
yeah it's totally epic for the win xD all its missing is some sunglasses ahah
they went off the rails a lot with a much more hit and miss quality, the western red and blue graphics come from the third japanese version pokemon blue(JP) which was just a bonus thing and since by that time there was already the red and green sprites and the sugimori promo artwork it was less crucial that the sprites showcase the pokemon as they are leaving more room for weird liberties. In red and green the sprites were really the only thing there was(the sugimori watercolor only came after) so it best showcases the pokemon as they were originally conceived by their respective designers and obviously had more care put into it.
The entirety of the overworld tileset was also completely different, though the differences are subtle. I'll show it next post.
I did. The post is conjecture, and the sprites used as an example are cherry-picked (4/151). RB improved on the sprite-work overall.
notice how much overall cleaner red and green
some details worth pointing out is how the water tileset from red and blue works fine for the ocean but on these little ponds it makes less sense since the water is supposed to be stale(r) not with crazy waves. the signs have a different design. the bollards actually look like bollards instead of some weird bizarre crystals nobody knows what it's supposed to be
You are probably the only person in the entire world who is autistic enough to notice and/or care about the difference in the bollard sprites between Pokémon Red/Green and Pokémon Red/Blue.
nta but red and blue are a mess. the ones they improve are marginal, the ones they frick up they frick up hard. besides the ones the other anon already pointed out, kabuto, parasect, kingler, golbat, koffing, exeggcute and pidgeot do a terrible job of depicting the pokemon like they are supposed to be. the silly more dynamic(arguably) poses might work if you are already familiar with the pokemon through the art and the previous sprites but at face value as the de facto representation of the pokemon they are terrible.
Kanto as it was originally envisioned was Tajiri seething over seeing city development destroy the natural forests that he used to catch bugs in, which remakes ruined. It gets even more blatant in Gen2 when the last great forest of the region has been completely razed to stumps, something that the remakes completely missed the point of when they restored it as a dungeon. Yes, I know it was to save memory in Gen2, but it still had a reason in lore behind it.
Some true Capsule Monster scholars ITT. I bow to ya'll. Especially spriteman because I didn't know there were still oldbie spergs out there like me. I literally still play RGB and enjoy the differences.
Also need to chime in to say that story is absolutely present in the early games, and if you think otherwise you are just a casual and that's okay too. I love the story of Kanto. It feels self-contained and like it could have been expanded upon. Growing up, friends and I dreamed of a Northern Kanto game, and also Pokemon Fossil Version set in the ancient past where we can see the likes of Kabutops and such.
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
Are you me? I only ever hear praise for them, but hated FRLG from the get-go. They are hollow shadows of Kanto which absolutely should not be mistaken for Kanto. Every time I see the male protagonist drawn as FireRed instead of real Red, I feel sad. It's an imposter who killed the original, who won and now represents Kanto.
I always found the darkness of pokemon very interesting. It was, as said very short lived since they realized they could make a lot of money and cut down that crap very fast to sell to kids. But still, imho you can find that old stuff here and there. Manga is quite darker in comparison and I've been looking into 1st season of the anime, it is quite dark in some parts. They really had a separate vision, it is a shame how that evaporated over time
I think Generation III was the perfect sweet-spot for gameplay mechanics, movesets, etc. I'm not at all a proponent of the Phys/Spec-split, nor, in retrospect, do I think giving every monster access to dedicated, 80 base power STAB moves was particularly prescient, either.
FRLG is the definitive way to enjoy Kanto, in some ways, but as other anons have pointed out, much of the gritty charm from the earliest entries was scrubbed out in the remaking process. I think a ROM-hack that restores to form Kanto and all of the constituent character models and dialogue would be great; alongside that, you could diversify trainer battles: customizing the Pokémon used (keeping within the original 151), and their movesets.
I liked the addition of the Sevii Islands, too: you can pretend, as I do, that Generation II never existed, and all of the Johto Pokémon you encounter are endemic. Very exotic.
They're good games but not as good as the originals.
Gen 1 Pokemon is a great experience. Everything plays differently from later games in the series. It's even very different from Gen 2. When you feel tired of the gameplay of later entries coming back to it feels totally fresh.
The simple aesthetics and fantastic soundtrack of the original are also wonderful. The brevity of the game means that it never becomes grating (unlike a lot of other Pokemon games).
FRLG feels cheap by comparison. Rather than building the game again from the ground up it feels like they just slapped a coat of paint on it.
It's still quite fun and worth playing, especially for fans of the series, but there's no reason in my mind to play it in place of the original.
If you care about the technicality in single player Pokemon experiences, you're kind of a dip since these games have no real challenge in the first place. The games can easily be cheesed, and are easily beaten even if you basically LARP play pretending strategy matters (using all Pokemon evenly and caring about elemental match ups, having a full team, all things you barely need to do but will have a bit more fun if you pretend you do).
There are only two things to consider when it comes to the originals vs. remakes here, and neither come down to gameplay quirks >A.
Do you want something that will give you the same monsters and story beats but more polished and "modern" looking with some minor QOL adjustments >B.
Do you want to actually experience the original games as we played them in the 90s
Really this is all that matters, and it really only matters to zoomoids who were born after the original Gameboy's lifespan and can't into actual retro aesthetics
>If you care about the technicality in single player Pokemon experiences, you're kind of a dip since these games have no real challenge in the first place
That's why Showdown is better than the actual games
When did I explicitly mention in my post I care about competitive? Competitive pokemon doesn't exist and is a joke.
Are you really going to pretend more than half the points explained in the image aren't real and a detriment to single player experience?
You can steamroll the game just by overpowering a couple Pokemon, it doesn't matter if venom jizz or nipple leak is kind of a shitty or broken move. You don't have to use those moves etc.
Dear god, can you put any more effort into cherrypicking nitpicks?
Story/Lore in pokemon doesn't matter.
Pokemon are on par or as good.
Gameplay technicalities DO affect single player experience and most dumb choices in RBY were fixed in GSC making for a smoother and more fun experience.
Stop hating just for the sake of hating you bitter b***h. Who hurt you?
Story/lore is one of the few things that does matter in these baby games. The general tone of the game which is created by the lore and world building, and the monsters, are the only reason to waste your time on them since they're babbies first JRPG and not a real challenging gameplay experience. No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
>Story/lore is one of the few things that does matter in these baby games. The general tone of the game which is created by the lore and world building, and the monsters, are the only reason to waste your time on them since they're babbies first JRPG and not a real challenging gameplay experience. No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
It's refreshing to see someone else that understands this. Thank you
Some true Capsule Monster scholars ITT. I bow to ya'll. Especially spriteman because I didn't know there were still oldbie spergs out there like me. I literally still play RGB and enjoy the differences.
Also need to chime in to say that story is absolutely present in the early games, and if you think otherwise you are just a casual and that's okay too. I love the story of Kanto. It feels self-contained and like it could have been expanded upon. Growing up, friends and I dreamed of a Northern Kanto game, and also Pokemon Fossil Version set in the ancient past where we can see the likes of Kabutops and such.
No, an insult to the original games. I can't help but cringe when zoomers play this garbage and believe they got the gist of the gen 1 experience
remakes should unironically be illegal
No, I didn't like them. They lack the charm of the original games, they have unnecessary filler and I will never replay them.
better QoL, worse everything else. Avoid them at least if you've never played the originals.
Absofrickinglutely not
?si=Tew2CeuCDOL_c3QZ&t=8
Terrible, don't fall for the typical "better than the original in every way" rhetoric. A large part of the appeal of gen 1 is that it depicts the pokemon universe as originally envisioned before it became a billion dollar multimedia phenomenon. Everything gets sanitized, nuances get lost and retroactively trying to shoehorn garbage made up later into the classic experience is one of the most disgusting habits of remakes.
If you wanna experience gen 1 and don't know japanese you should play a Red/Blue hack that restores the graphics of the original japanese Red and Green(1996)
Are you me? I only ever hear praise for them, but hated FRLG from the get-go. They are hollow shadows of Kanto which absolutely should not be mistaken for Kanto. Every time I see the male protagonist drawn as FireRed instead of real Red, I feel sad. It's an imposter who killed the original, who won and now represents Kanto.
>No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
No. Most people play for online matches and the tournaments now and come up with some really tricky strategies. You seem to ignore the multiplayer aspect that it was designed with from the beginning and just harp on the easy single player. The setting is wallpaper.
>You seem to ignore the multiplayer aspect that it was designed with from the beginning
For trading, fundamentally pokemon was about collecting, hence the two versions with exclusives and trade evolutions. oak sends you on a quest to fill the pokedex. The concept comes from tajiris love for bug collecting, he wanted kids to experience the joy of collecting and the social aspect that comes with it.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Tajiri is a sperg, he didn't care about socializing. Trading was a marketing ploy shoehorned in by Nintendo. Originally Game Freak was designing a single-player SNES game.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Trading was a marketing ploy shoehorned in by Nintendo. Originally Game Freak was designing a single-player SNES game.
Pure fanfiction. Tajiri envisioned bugs crawling though the gameboy link cable
8 months ago
Anonymous
Nice excuse. The lore in the games is so important almost every npc in every game is either a basic game tutorial or a reminder that a game mechanic exists. Really pulls you into the world.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>I know Tajiri personally and I know what I'm talking about
8 months ago
Anonymous
It's especially funny because tajiri has described his bug collecting as a social activity. It was a common hobby among japanese kids and he talks about how he was able to be more successful at it than his friends because he knew the trick of leaving honey under a rock overnight so the next day it would be full of bugs eating the honey
>it's all about the competitive scene
Ok, then go talk about the newest games that are relevant to competitive Pokemon. Nobody is linking up Game Boys here to play the first three Pokemon gens, this is /vr/ not /vp/
Also I can tell you as a straight fact, most people back in those days didn't play Pokemon competitively, sure we all enjoyed the multiplayer when we could, but the serious competitive level was always a minority of people buying the games, most people just were into the world and wanted to use their favorite Pokemon, I never even heard about people doing the really autistic competitive shit until I was an adult, as a kid everybody made teams of their favorites they caught in their playthrough.
>No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
See I'd argue it's the other way around. Aside from the "I get each new gen, do a playthrough, and never touch again" crowd, the majority of adults that still play pokemon in 2023 are turbospergs who take the multiplayer way more seriously than GF does. Hell a lot of them dont even play the actual games, they play it in Showdown and that's where you get autism's final form (I still see a perfectly healthy Arcanine on the field). I should know, I'm part of that crowd.
Hell I'm currently playing Infinite Fusion and half the fun is coming up with the most busted fusions possible that still have cool custom sprites.
It's fair enough to be into that, but not really relevant to the retro games since again, nobody is going back to play R/B/Y or G/S/C for the purpose of playing competitively
I think if you're looking to go back and play these games....people on this board are generally talking about playing the games campaign, not building the best competitive meta team for a bygone era nobody is playing
8 months ago
Anonymous
and you're moving goalposts, real shit you sound like a homosexual and like dick
8 months ago
Anonymous
My goal post is the same. Technical "problems" in Gen 1 don't effect the single player at all and are irrelevant to it.
You sound like someone posing as an OG Pokemon kid, but clearly started with Gen 2, as did every single person who thinks it's the best.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Technical "problems" in Gen 1 don't effect the single player at all and are irrelevant to it.
In what universe? They're part of the game. Of course they affect single player, you can't pretend they don't exist if you don't look at them.
8 months ago
Anonymous
NtA but level/game design is a much bigger problem with gen 1 games than the bugs listed in that pic.
8 months ago
Anonymous
How does certain moves not being good strategy wise matter in a game where strategy doesn't matter? There is only an illusion of challenge in Pokemon games, you can plow through with some overpowered ones and cheese the game easily. It doesn't matter.
>No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
See I'd argue it's the other way around. Aside from the "I get each new gen, do a playthrough, and never touch again" crowd, the majority of adults that still play pokemon in 2023 are turbospergs who take the multiplayer way more seriously than GF does. Hell a lot of them dont even play the actual games, they play it in Showdown and that's where you get autism's final form (I still see a perfectly healthy Arcanine on the field). I should know, I'm part of that crowd.
Hell I'm currently playing Infinite Fusion and half the fun is coming up with the most busted fusions possible that still have cool custom sprites.
>No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
I'm pretty sure it's just a nostalgic holdover for many
Any RPG can be steamrolled if you break the mechanics or overlevel. Early Pokemon games actually have a pretty good difficulty curve if you don't stop to obsessively grind on every route. I don't do nuzlocke rules or anything, but when I play them I usually try to breeze through as much as possible and not cheese things by overlevelling or running back to the pokemon center mid-route.
>Any RPG can be steamrolled if you break the mechanics or overlevel
In Pokemon it's very easy. The real point is though, you really don't have to be that strategic in it at all, so when people harp on about how some of the balancing is off or how certain moves aren't strategically good or are busted, it doesn't really matter because the easiest, thus smartest option in the game anyway is raw power
Are there lots of technical problems in Gen 1 combat? Yes. Does it matter or make the game harder to finish? No. It's a unique case where the jank simply doesn't hinder you at all, and really it only matters on a serious competitive multiplayer level, in which, nobody is playing Gen 1 Pokemon for serious multiplayer competition.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>and really it only matters on a serious competitive multiplayer level
It doesn't even matter there. In fact, Hyper Beam's """glitch""" made it one of the most strategic moves in the game.
some details worth pointing out is how the water tileset from red and blue works fine for the ocean but on these little ponds it makes less sense since the water is supposed to be stale(r) not with crazy waves. the signs have a different design. the bollards actually look like bollards instead of some weird bizarre crystals nobody knows what it's supposed to be
Anon, just because this is /vr/ doesn't mean you have to blindly hate everything new and love the old.
Games DO age and modern standards can set it and it won't make you a traitor or something for preferring them.
No, however that shouldn't be taken as some seal of approval for the originals because Gen 1 was garbage and genwunners are the worst thing to happen to pokemon fans. GF didnt make an actually good game until Crystal. >inb4 some bullshit like "ok zoomer"
Got it for Chirstmas in '98, of course I had higher opinions of it back then, there was nothing else to compare it to. Going back to it just made me realize how low my standards were.
out of the three retro Pokemon gens i think gen 2 has got to be the worst. gen 1 has the nostalgia and charm though its unpolished, gen 3 is the more polished and somewhat perfected experience though it loses the spirit of the originals, there is a pretty even tradeoff there to me. when it comes to gen 2 it's just the awkward middle child...also morning/day/night exclusive Pokemon was always a trash idea and ruins what should be a basic fun little romp of a game
Pokemon being available at certain times was absolutely perfect for that era of Pokemon. People forget that this was still the age of schoolyard stories. Gen 2 Pokemon being a bit rarer and finding different Pokemon at different times completely leans into that.
I think that's a problem that a lot of people have when they play Gen 1 and 2 for the first time. They've played later games, so they KNOW what Pokemon is "SUPPOSED" to be, and it throws them off because Gen 1 and 2 weren't made like that.
gen 2 has more common with gen 1 than anything afterwards. I think it's perfectly fair to lump them together in this context.
8 months ago
Anonymous
It doesn't make them the same. Most of us here have played gens 1 and 2 first so your theory that people only have issues because they started with later games is a crock of shit. I remember the whiplash I got experiencing gen 2 after 1 back then, they are very different experiences
8 months ago
Anonymous
I was a day one Pokemon fan too, buddy. I got the promo VHS from Nintendo Power and everything. Maybe it's becaused I was so obsessed with the francise in general and had already seen a bunch of info on the internet about Gold/Silver before release, but I only ever found it to be a step up (aside from the day/night mechanism, which as I've said earlier in the thread, was more of a cool novelty than anything at the time). What do you have a problem with in gen 2, exactly?
8 months ago
Anonymous
>What do you have a problem with in gen 2, exactly?
Lol I'd be here all day if I were to explain all of it and I'm at work so I don't even have the time.
Terrible new pokemon
Anime seeps into the game(outside of yellow that could be seen as a non canon bonus spinoff)
Terrible new typings
Terrible day/night mechanic
Terrible gender/breeding mechanics
Terrible change in themes/story
Kanto is beyond gimped
Basically it fixes none of the issues I had with gen1 while pretty much everything it adds to the universe I hate.
8 months ago
Anonymous
NTA But if you really hate or at least dislike all the gens after 1, then avoid said titles and jump the ship.
8 months ago
Anonymous
As someone who grew up with Gen 1 and 2 at the perfect age and during Pokemons height in popularity and fell off around gen 4, I cannot fathom hating Gen 2 and these all seem like rather weird criticisms.
However on the other side of the coin I can almost understand what you mean and I respect this viewpoint, dangerously based and the truth nobody is ready to hear.
I see where you're coming from. When it was new, none of those things were interesting to me. Dark and steel types were cool, I didn't care about game balance. Stuff like the day cycle and breeding were just cool new features. I generally enjoyed that the game had a bit more narrative, and even though Kanto didn't have much going on, it made the game feel huge regardless, and I LOVED how non-linear the Kanto stretch of the game was.
In retrospect, yeah the writing was already on the wall, but I don't think a lot of what Pokemon would ultimately become stopped my enjoyment of the games until gen 5.
If I have the patience I'll elaborate a bit when I get home, I've already explained why I hate day/night in a previous post
8 months ago
Anonymous
i think day/night would work a lot better if it wasnt real-time
like if you could wait or sleep to pass time like in an rpg
when its tied to real time it just ends up being this annoying thing you have to occasionally cheese to find certain mons
8 months ago
Anonymous
As someone who grew up with Gen 1 and 2 at the perfect age and during Pokemons height in popularity and fell off around gen 4, I cannot fathom hating Gen 2 and these all seem like rather weird criticisms.
However on the other side of the coin I can almost understand what you mean and I respect this viewpoint, dangerously based and the truth nobody is ready to hear.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I see where you're coming from. When it was new, none of those things were interesting to me. Dark and steel types were cool, I didn't care about game balance. Stuff like the day cycle and breeding were just cool new features. I generally enjoyed that the game had a bit more narrative, and even though Kanto didn't have much going on, it made the game feel huge regardless, and I LOVED how non-linear the Kanto stretch of the game was.
In retrospect, yeah the writing was already on the wall, but I don't think a lot of what Pokemon would ultimately become stopped my enjoyment of the games until gen 5.
8 months ago
Chud Anon
Kanto was a bonus stage you fricking homosexual, they could only fit so much on a GBC cart
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don't like your attitude, but I agree with your sentiment. Gen 2 and gen 3 are way closer than gen 1 and 2. Gen 1 is still great because it's the uncorrupted core of what pokemon is. Gen 2 added much of what is still used in every preceding game. Baby mons/breeding, shinies, pokerus, pokeball making/different kinds, etc... Gen 3 adding nature's and abilities on top of the gen 2 additions and you have the formula for every pokemon game since. If you could trade from gen 2 -3 nobody would think 1 and 2 are more akin. And now you can, some guy was making a converter cable that lets you trade from gen 2 to gen 3. But, they won't be considered og mon if you ever decide to trade them up to bank.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Baby mons/breeding, shinies, pokerus, pokeball making/different kinds, etc....
Not him but I don't necessarily agree with that. I think the gen 2 additions still invoke that sense of wonder that made gen 1 good. If you didn't know any better, someone telling you that they bred a Pikachu and got a whole new Pokemon from an egg sounds like something "that kid" would make up.
8 months ago
Anonymous
That is something a lot inernet people miss, talking about old things, possibly which they were not around to experience: context. Pokemon RGB/GS is not just a rom you play in 2023 on a giant TV or an HD monitor. It is not a modern videogame and should not be treated as such. Most notably, at the time we didn't have every byte of data available at the click of the googlenets; We had to discover everything socially, possibly buy strategy guides, maybe try reading some UNDER CONSTRUCTION fansite Yahoo searches on dial up at night when the phone isn't being used. There is a culture and history surrounding old Pokemon games which made it what it is. If a person ignores that, they will be unable to generate meaningful discussion surrounding it, usually instead charging their participation with emotion and spoiled zoomboom tweetlevel reactionary hollow replies.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Oh yeah also magazines too
8 months ago
Anonymous
exactly! I put hundreds of hours into my Red Version cartridge not just because it was a good RPG video game. A lot of those hours were spent trying all kinds of inane shit like using itemfinder in every spot of Seafoam Islands or beating Elite Four 100 times with Mewtwo so he'd (allegedly) evolve into Mewthree. It's easy to take for granted that things weren't always so well documented after generation after generation of the games being datamined when they leak a week before street date.
8 months ago
Anonymous
they're all just nostalgic for calling things nostalgic and pretending to understand what nostalgia even means
8 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah but at the same time, I moved on because I was a kid. When Gen 2 came out I no longer cared about Gen 1, because that was the old game, not the new one and everyone was playing the new one and so playing the old one was for poor kids aka losers.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Gen 2 sold significantly less than Gen 1, it was kind of the beginning of Pokemania being over as a fad that all kids were into, and just something the nerds were still clinging to. At least among that original demographic of fans.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>it was kind of the beginning of Pokemania being over as a fad that all kids were into
Not really, it was only a year later, pokemania didn't really end until 2002
8 months ago
Anonymous
Thus why I said "the beginning", it wasn't like dead and IIRC "the first movie" did pretty well, but that initial wave of hype where pretty much every kid was into it was ending, a lot of the people who were just part of the initial fad didn't keep buying the new games and cards and it just dropped off majorly from there by the time of Gen 3
It's part of why the original 151 are so iconic and nostalgic to normies despite only being about a year older, a decent chunk of people fell off already and didn't buy Gold or Silver.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>gen 2 additions still invoke that sense of wonder that made gen 1 good
What? No, the whole first half of the game is filled with shitmon. it's got charm in the world but I don't find going back to gen 2 as fun or nostalgic as gen 1.
>Gen 2 does nothing better than Gen 1 other than graphics
Agreed and by graphics I hope you mean just on a technical level as some of the aesthetic quality goes down the drain too: ugly kiddy pokemon simplifed for merch and the anime and a shift from weird science biopunk to traditional temple shrine crap
>it's intentional because johto = kyoto!
I know, it doesn't make it any less uninteresting and not what pokemon was about
>Pokemon are worse.
I completely disagree, most of my favorite pokemon come from gen 2. Gen 1 has like 2 pokemon I've liked no matter how many years pass and it's Nidoking and Snorlax. All the others >skarmory >scizor >crobat >wobbuffet >heracross >octillery >houndoom >hitmontop >tyranitar
premiered in gen 2 >Gameplay technicalities again, do not matter in Pokemon.
Because you've never played against another human being that actually knows what they're doing. I've been doing it for 20 years and while it's still fricked in gen 2 and really isnt unfricked until the physical/special split (which is the sole reason why I think HGSS is better than GSC), it's still substantially better than gen 1 in that regard.
I think Platinum is the best pokemon game ever made but it's not retro.
Fair enough, it is subjective and I'll never begrudge somebody their favorite mons but I don't like a lot from Gen 2, I definitely like more from Gen 1. Some I like though are >Noctowl >Umbreon >Sneasel >Totodile line
Though, regardless of how you feel about any of the Gen 2 Pokemon, the game is mostly full of Gen 1 ones anyway, and to me Pokemon distribution always felt bad in it. And when it comes to these games retroactively what does the competitive aspect even matter once the gen passes. Most people playing these old games are just gonna be doing it single player, not building the perfect team for competitive play, it's not like they remain relevant in that way
>And when it comes to these games retroactively what does the competitive aspect even matter once the gen passes.
Well because people on SD dont all stick to the same gen forever, much like how there are in fact tiers people play in besides OU
Dear god, can you put any more effort into cherrypicking nitpicks?
Story/Lore in pokemon doesn't matter.
Pokemon are on par or as good.
Gameplay technicalities DO affect single player experience and most dumb choices in RBY were fixed in GSC making for a smoother and more fun experience.
Stop hating just for the sake of hating you bitter b***h. Who hurt you?
>be bitter 28 year old gen twoer towards the 30 year old gen wunners >think you're totally in touch with the zoomers
Millennioomers are so laughable and caught in an identity limbo apparently lol
Since when did we start to pretend GSC are kusoges and the worst games of all time? Did I miss a meme or something? Some of you people would prefer to play fricking Shaq Fu over Crystal unironically.
They're fine, but having played through gen 3 recently since I lost most of my pokemon, it's probably the game I'd go back to last out of all of them. It pretty much only exists as cope for the fact that you can't transfer from gen2->3, only instead of something unique (Colosseum/XD for Johto pokemon), they just did a very basic remake. Feels pretty weird in this strange middle ground they do their damnedest to keep you from gen 2+ content (blocking certain evos, not getting any good held items in the campaign, no gen2+ pokemon or RSE trading until postgame), they simply can't keep consistent because of the framework it's built off of (natures/abilities, Steel/Dark type, for some reason berries). Don't know if I'd rather play it over gen 1, I'd say this is more boring, while gen 1 is annoying sometimes.
They're not bad remakes, but they are remakes of bad games as there are no good retro pokemon games aside from arguably Coliseum/XD, and those games both aren't made by GF and are still massively flawed. Pokemon didn't become actually good until gen 4, and stopped being good after 5
theyre fine, probably a matter of preference on sprites, but >cant do the glitches >first turn stat boosts/drops that play animations you cant skip(intimidate, for example) >postgame islands arent anything to write home about
theyre objectively better from a quality perspective, as they fixed numerous janky aspects of the original and fixed most of the bugs and glitches.
however a lot of the fun of the originals were all the janky elements so some will see it as a negative
probably the biggest deciding factor is the music, i vastly prefer the originals and most people ive seen agree
The also add new features added from gen 2 and 3 like natures/abilities/shinies/etc
Yeah they are, but they're rather faithful to a fault. You are limited to the first 151 Pokemon until postgame, this includes Friendship evos like Blissy/Crobat which will be forced to stop evolving until postgame. Also bit of a less annoying point, given that FRLG do not use a Real Time Clock, Espeon and Umbreon are not obtainable at all despite getting an Eevee in the game.
Aside from that, its just Gen 1 with Gen 3 QOL mechanics, if you like gen 3, you'll like it.
Well I traded Eevee to myself, evolved it to Espeon, and traded it back to myself. I wanted my RED to have the Legend Red's team from GSC. I can give the whole team all the game's HMs, one each, so it's a pretty good adventuring team. Too bad you can't breed a surfing Pikachu on your own.
It's not because it's tedious, it's because something later won't be tedious for new players. It's the WoW Epic Mount situation. People weren't mad because they no longer has to crawl a mile through broken glass to get the mount, they were mad that someone new won't have to when they did. It's the pettiness mindset, it's can be summarized of "everyone has to suffer if I did or they don't deserve it"
Yeah, that mindset describes most of /vr/ boomers pretty well. They're proud of having to go through the tedious of doing something in a game and shit on people who don't have to or know it's tedious.
A. if you didn't experience the games discussed on this board when they were released, you don't belong on the board
B. you definitely don't belong on the board if the very minor "tedious hardships" of old Pokemon games is too much for you, these were baby games people beat at age 5, you literally can't handle the difficulty in 90 percent of retro games, so why are you here
>if you didn't experience the games discussed on this board when they were released, you don't belong on the board
I did, shut the frick up. Red was a pain back then and still is now. That infographic is only spitting facts but you're too fricking proud of having endured that game and hate people having QoL now.
You don't have to take EV and IVs into account to play the remakes, you can easily ignore and even for me they're too autistic but at least they're a non-issue compared to shit like the Special stat, Wrap being broken Sleep being stupid.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Red was a pain back then and still is now.
No it wasn't, it was an easy ass game. Dragon Warrior Monsters and Monster Rancher were far more complex.
>That infographic is only spitting facts but you're too fricking proud of having endured that game and hate people having QoL now. >You don't have to take EV and IVs into account to play the remakes, you can easily ignore and even for me they're too autistic but at least they're a non-issue compared to shit like the Special stat, Wrap being broken Sleep being stupid.
Wow, a bunch of irrelevant shit that in no way breaks the game "breaks the game" in your opinion. You're the autistic one for using moves you don't have to use, Pokemon was designed to plow through with strong moves and it is very easily done, again, baby game, some moves being bad is a non issue, you don't have to use those moves, and if you were as strategic as you think you are, you'd have realized they were a poor strategy and just used other attacks long ago.
And I didn't wanna go there but now we're getting to the crux of the issue, and it's that people who play competitive Pokemon are morons who just can't move onto real games. Pokemon is just a monster collecting adventure with multiplayer that's fun to do with your friends as an anime LARP, people who take it super seriously have always been on the spectrum, because the majority of people did not take it that way, it's never been a deep skill based game.
And continuing to think multiplayer matters when discussing past Gens is relevant is just straight up moronic. Nobody is playing Gen 1 competitively in 2023, it literally does not matter, the only thing that matters is the game itself, not the meta.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>No it wasn't, it was an easy ass game
I don't mean pain ass in hard, meant pain as just tedious and slow.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don't really see how dude, to me Gen 1 is the breeziest playthrough. The only part I can think of that feels like a slog is taking down the Team Rocket hideout, which A. can be made significantly shorter if you use a guide/know the right paths to take, and B. I feel is earned anyway as pretty much the conclusion of the games antagonist plot, and does serve as a place to get some hefty experience before moving on
8 months ago
Anonymous
>And I didn't wanna go there but now we're getting to the crux of the issue, and it's that people who play competitive Pokemon are morons who just can't move onto real games. Pokemon is just a monster collecting adventure with multiplayer that's fun to do with your friends as an anime LARP, people who take it super seriously have always been on the spectrum, because the majority of people did not take it that way, it's never been a deep skill based game. > >And continuing to think multiplayer matters when discussing past Gens is relevant is just straight up moronic. Nobody is playing Gen 1 competitively in 2023, it literally does not matter, the only thing that matters is the game itself, not the meta.
Also... yeah, I completely agree with you on that front. Always thought "competitive" pokemon was an afterthought and just play stupid. People forced competitiveness into these games out of... a desire to make it seem serious, maybe? Like "take my children's toy seriously dammit!"
8 months ago
Anonymous
>play
plain*
8 months ago
Anonymous
Nah that's bullshit, competitive play was always an intended aspect which is why there were DVs and Stat Exp from the very beginning, and each game after Gen 1 has only made the competitive play more fleshed out. The main story was extremely easy to clear but it's just there to teach you the basics, no different from say, RTS games.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Pokemon has always been a franchised aimed at younger kids, and the whole series preached at you about choosing your favorites. I don't think the competitive meta of weirdo adults where most of the monsters are useless and every single person uses Tauros and Chansey or whatever cheesey Pokemon dominate is what they had in mind. It's just not a serious game bro, even if they cater a bit to the autists who take it seriously or just try to smooth things out for better multiplayer which they should, but none of this shit defines whether a Pokemon game is good or bad, because most people don't give a shit about competitive sweaty Pokemon, they care about the adventure element and cool monster element
8 months ago
Anonymous
They absolutely did have it in mind, they programmed that stuff in for a reason. Japan has always had games marketed at younger audiences that nevertheless became followed by adults, they were just getting ahead of the curve. These days Pokémon is mainly played by an older audience while kids are busy playing Fortnite and GTA and mobileslop.
8 months ago
Anonymous
They included that stuff so as to make each Pokémon "feel unique" even in their species. Your Pikachu performed differently than your friend's Pikachu. It was supposed to make them feel more real and personal, which is why those unique stats were buried deep in the game and you'd only learn about them by reverse-engineering the code. It wasn't until gen 3 they started building the game with a dedicated competitive element, and gen 6 was when they actively started adding features to appeal to competitive players.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>It wasn't until gen 3 they started building the game with a dedicated competitive element
The absolute latest you can push this narrative is to Gen 2. They introduced Dark and Steel types specifically to rebalance the meta which was being dominated by Normal and Psychic types. They also added Hidden Power which is a useless move unless you know how IVs work in which case it's a solid coverage move, along with breeding mechanics to facilitate getting the IVs and movesets you wanted.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>they added dark and steel to rebalance the meta
Headcanon. Normal and psychic were still massively OP in gen 2, Snorlax by far and away was the best pokemon in the competitive scene. >hidden power
Was meant to be a fun mystery move. It sucks competitively and is only used on pokemon that lack coverage movepools otherwise.
They added FAERY type to rebalance the meta, because Dragon had gotten too powerful. And what gen was Faery added?
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Headcanon
Literally both types are strong against psychic.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Dark was crippled by being created pre-Split. Most of the Dark-types had sucky Sp.A, while most Psychics had strong enough Sp.D to laugh them off. The few good ones like Houndoom and Tyranitar were found too late in the game to matter. Steel fared better with how most Attack-strong Pokemon got it, but its moves were mostly sucky and it was more valued for resisting much of the type chart.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah, despite being created specifically for countering Psychic, it still suffered from the dumb decisions took to approach gen 2 pokemon spread.
I can forgive Special Split but making most useful Gen 2 pokemon literal post-game was dumb.
The remakes fixed it but they're not retro.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah, despite being created specifically for countering Psychic, it still suffered from the dumb decisions took to approach gen 2 pokemon spread.
I can forgive Special Split but making most useful Gen 2 pokemon literal post-game was dumb.
The remakes fixed it but they're not retro.
pychics straight up couldn't punch through something like umbreon and would fold. There were only like 4 dark lines anyway and 3 of them stopped psychics cold meaning it did its job
8 months ago
Anonymous
Psychics just plain laughed as they threw elemental punches instead. I'll give you Umbreon to a point, but it can't fight for shit as it's all defense. Espeon is unironically a better Dark-type than it as it can get Bite AND Psychic.
8 months ago
Anonymous
they get destroyed unless you're going against trash darks like murkrow/sneasel or are overleveled. The rest that aren't hit by a super effective punch kill faster than the psychic or/and wall it for days. This is very apparent in pvp where you're pretty much always forced to switch as a psychic when a dark comes in unless the secondary typing covers you, which is why Starmie was so good
8 months ago
Anonymous
What causes you to claim that Dark and Steel weren't added for balancing purposes while Fairy definitely was?
Yeah, that mindset describes most of /vr/ boomers pretty well. They're proud of having to go through the tedious of doing something in a game and shit on people who don't have to or know it's tedious.
Nu-Pokémon is all about tedious EV grinding, that’s more psychotic than anything in the first two gens
>Nu-Pokémon is all about tedious EV grinding, that’s more psychotic than anything in the first two gens
Gen 1 and 2 had stat experience which was far more of a grind than EVs are.
At most the only thing you had to do back in GSC was to catch the same pokemon a couple of times and compare stats and that still is far more acceptable than the autistic grind that is breeding for IV, EV and personalities with items.
And even then for casual plays you can completely ignore that, it's an autistic issue but at the same time, non issue.
Both are things you can completely ignore and play more than ok.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don't think you understand what "stat grinding" is in the first two gens. There was no cap across stats, each stat could be maxed, and the caps for points take FAR more battles than even unassisted gen 3 EV training.
But again, this is only turboautist stat maxing bullshit that no casual player would ever need to touch.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Exactly, and yet people still bring these as core aspect of the games that you can't ignore.
EV grinding hasn't really been a thing since the 3DS games. The mechanics are barely hidden and pretty much every game since XY has had some way to finish EV training in just a few battles. The Switch games even added ways to change Natures, Abilities, and even IVs themselves, so there's basically nothing you need to do to train a "perfect" pokemon unless they need a specific hidden ability or some specific shit.
(I still prefer the old games to everything else. For what it's worth I didn't play gen 9 but I thought gen 8 was much better than the 3DS gens).
When did Rotom first appear? Was that gen 3 or 4? I was playing Violet casually online with overpowered tough Pokemon and some Japanese girl pounded my ass with her refrigerator Rotom. She had so many tricks it left me dazzled.
Gen4, though its post-game only in vanilla D/P and won't have its appliance forms. Platinum lets you get it after Gym 2, but unless you can hack the game, the appliance forms are off-limits.
I might be wrong about the link cable thing, but Miyamoto maybe gave them the idea of two versions. But I am certain that it was not intially supposed to be a multiplayer game. It was absolutely first and foremost a single-player game. But during Pocket Monsters Game Boy development, it certainly did become central to the concept.
Morimoto: “Originally we didn’t plan to implement link battles, so there were lots of little things that needed to be revised.”
https://lavacutcontent.com/satoshi-tajiri-pokedex-interview/
>There's just a lot of lost history of the early development so I try to keep that alive.
Then you might wanna start by not spreading misinformation
I might be wrong about the link cable thing, but Miyamoto maybe gave them the idea of two versions. But I am certain that it was not intially supposed to be a multiplayer game. It was absolutely first and foremost a single-player game. But during Pocket Monsters Game Boy development, it certainly did become central to the concept.
Morimoto: “Originally we didn’t plan to implement link battles, so there were lots of little things that needed to be revised.”
https://lavacutcontent.com/satoshi-tajiri-pokedex-interview/
Notice how he says "no link battles", not no connectivity/trading
I'm 100% sure the idea for pokemon at th very beginning came from Tajiri imagining bugs crawling through the link cable. It's on interviews and Tajiri's biography manga.
Tajiri didnt even want the game to have battles and it would've been a game-time safari zone. He should not be taken as an authoritative source on how the games should be.
I'm talking about old translated interviews from online like 10+ years ago, not quick 2023 google searches or wiki entries. I don't remember them word for word, I'm relying on memory. I do not doubt your enthusiasm, but before it was even named Capsule Monsters or attempted to be registered as such, it was in development for SNES, which doesn't have a link cable. To be more accurate, it was planned and designed as such. I don't think they mentioned anything about programming an SNES game, it was just the game concept at that point.
In the third version of what we call Pokemon, the Game Boy iteration which was public and everbody knows, yes: Link cables are involved. We know a lot about Red and Green's development which has a lot of information online, but Capumon Game Boy version and earlier has nearly no information being archived, which is what I'm referring to.
Before Red and Green, the game began development before 1990, which was one of the most interesting things for me. It went through a few iterations until it became what we know in Red and Green.
Jesus man, the nostalgia is strong in you even for /vr/
The goggles are fused too firmly in place to even be able to think about it objectively anymore.
>but the creator intended-
No, shut the frick up. Why should I care what the creator's opinion is on his the series should be? Creators often dont understand their own creation and why it appeals to people and are too in love with their own vision to change that.
Ron Gilbert does not understand why fans like Monkey Island.
Kojima does not understand why fans like MGS
NO ONE at Konami or GF understands why fans like Silent Hill or Pokemon, respectively
Imagine, while not creating Mega Man, does understand why fans like it...but he's a complete hack so it cancels out
Nojima does not understand why people like FF7
>SHUT THE FRICK UP
NOPE.AVI
Go ahead and hate the original vision of a creator. Ron Gilbert is no Kojima and vice versa. You might be right with him not understanding (at least not completely) as to why it appeals to the people the way it does. He could have gotten the sense to understand, but he didn't want to. Does not is not the same thing as cannot.
Gamefreak lost its luster starting with eitherX&Y or or S&M.
>Gamefreak lost its luster starting with eitherX&Y or or S&M.
Because the last time GF genuinely tried to make the best game possible, which was either HGSS or B2W2 I forget which, it massively underperformed. So why care anymore if passion isnt rewarded?
That being said Gen IX feels like they genuinely cared and did try, they just cant code for shit so it was an impossibly buggy mess
Not only they can't code if they life depended on it, they're mentally stuck in the handheld era and just can't make a game for modern consoles that doesn't look it's 4 gens behind.
People always post the remake's dialogue as the only argument that supposedly makes this game a literal kusoge.
If you only need this to shit on a game please re-evaluate your life.
This is true, but it does not equally apply to all video game fandoms.
Just to drive my point a bit further trying to not fall into insults, Tajiri stopped being involved with Pokemon long ago. If anything you should see the GBC games as his vision and they did what they could within the GBCs limitations and standards of the time they were released.
The things romhacks add NOW weren't that big of a problem BACK THEN and if anything, you should direct your attacks towards Game Freak, not Tajiri.
I don't know, I think Crystal Clear is better than Crystal which is a romhacks of a GBC game, but at the same time no one would've come up with an idea as ambitious as Crystal Clear back then. If they did then Crystal would be forever cemented as the unequalled best pokemon game.
This is true. Think of George Lucas inserting a bunch of bullshit in the special edition of star wars. I know it is mystical, but i really think art comes out of the divine and the creator is only a tool for the final product. Hearing artists try to understand their own work is always excruciating and they usually have terrible surface level understanding of their own stuff. Anons who disagree are confused about the nature of art and cant separate it from the artist's biography.
>Think of George Lucas inserting a bunch of bullshit in the special edition of star wars
if you have an issue with this you sure as frick should have an issue with all the garbage they added in this piece of shit remake.
Yeah i do, i think it is bad. The change from gen 1 to gen 2 had so much promise and really rqised my expectations for what was possible specificallyfor pokemon but also for videogames. I think removing the day night cycle is a good example of the low effort philosophy of the rest of the series. At the time I had fun with those games but in retrospect it is embarassing that game freak was already removing features by gen 3
The time cycle was ass, nobody is awake/available at all times. Having Pokemon restricted to morning, day, and night means you can only play the game at certain times and have to change your real life schedule depending on which ones you want to catch. Who wants to do that?
Kids do. The games are for kids and that is the audience we should consider to see if it was a success. It is immersive and ties the game to the real world. The game changing to morning and evening pallettes is good and soulful. Your criticism is that it creates a barrier to easily catching everything, but that seems to me like the criticism of someone who wants to speed through and finish rather than enjoy the world of the game. Did you like gen 3 better? Or 4? Seems to me like they added bells and whistles at the expense of the atmosphere and quality of experience.
based. Real life synchronous time cycles are always shit
8 months ago
Anonymous
>WAAAAAAAHHH Why can't every game be without any synchronous time cycles, nor *GASP* real time mechanics BOOOHOOOOOOOOO!
8 months ago
Anonymous
I bet you play mobile games
8 months ago
Anonymous
What does that have to do with my previous post?
I was merely mocking
based. Real life synchronous time cycles are always shit
8 months ago
Anonymous
Mobile games are the ultimate time cycle game. They are 100% based around "Come back tonight when the new daily missions reset. Come back on Wednesday for the new story chapter. Come back at 5 PM for your 100 free gatcha gems."
I ask, what benefit does having a real world time cycle (instead of an in-game mechanic) have for a game like Pokemon?
There's nothing atmospheric about tying the game to the real world, it's completely immersion breaking. The game is an abstraction, you can cross a city in 20 seconds, so if space is compressed and you're hellbent on showing passage of time it should be compressed as well. By tying the time to irl you're basically implying that whenever you're not playing time is still passing in the game so if you stop playing Sunday and only resume next Friday you're character and all the trainers surrounding him were standing still on the exact same spot when you left him. And no this idea that kids can play all the time is fallacious. If your mother only lets you play after school/homework/activities/chores the bulk of your pokemon experience will be in the evening stuck with zubats and hoothoot. And yeah you could change the clock but that would only frick with the immersion further.
I liked the time cycle when gen 2 was new. It was pretty mindblowing to me that the game tracked what day and time it was. I agree now though that time based stuff is wholly inconvenient and doesn't actually add anything worthwhile to the game. Later gens got really bad about this sort of thing (in particular gen 6 in which you could ONLY obtain most of the mega stones by talking to a random NPC specifically between the hours of 6 and 7 PM or something).
>Creators often dont understand their own creation and why it appeals to people and are too in love with their own vision to change that.
Often very true, just reading a ton of interviews confirm this way too frequently.
Yes. Red and Blue were the games that needed remakes the most, and not only are FRLG good remakes, they added a lot of content and new areas that make it one of the best remakes in the series.
Yeah they are good. The only thing I wish they had was the improvements to combat from the very gen after it. They improved upon combat making a difference between physical and special moves. So an Ice Punch from a Machamp would scale with its attack power instead like it should have always done. A lot of monsters in the prior gens had attacks that while made sense, unfortunately they couldn't utilize the move proper due to how the scaling worked. So FR and LG are unfortunately missing this.
i feel like the physical/special split kinda fricked a lot of gen 1 mons irreparably since they were originally specced out with the older system in mind
much better they got their remake as something resembling the original
offensively it buffed all of them and made some of them outright ridiculous like gyarados. Fringe defensive mons like weezing got worse at tanking though. You could argue that it kickstarted powercreep but that largely came later with massive movepool expansions and the overabundance of high power, low downside moves. Of all the pre-split mons pretty much the only one that got nerfed aka felt noticeably weaker all around was typlosion
by fricked i kinda mean it just fricked everything around and not really in a good way imo. it was the second new huge mechanic change that had been grafted onto the same mons
but that's the thing, it didn't frick anything in the grand scheme of things. At worst you can say it upped the offensive floor of things. Even then there were an abundance of walls, tanks, and stoppers. In exchange you get an attacking system that actually makes sense with every pokemon being able to use its type's moves
>since they were originally specced out with the older system in mind
you're full of shit and i hope you know that, gen 1 is full of pokemon that could not even use their own types/signature moves because they were on the opposite split (kingler, gyarados, gengar, etc)
the only gen 1 mon that got fricked by the split was alakazam, and it was a minor nuisance compared to losing access to the elemental punches in gen 3 anyway
youre missing the point moron
im saying they wouldve been shitty remakes if they changed the game so fundamentally like that. fights wouldve likely been alternatively boring, or bullshit, in equal measure. unless they also changed a lot of the line-ups, which is also a bad idea for doing a remake imo
Yeah but Alakazam could take it because in literally every gen up to current, Psychic is one of the best types in the game. Alakazam never went below UU in the entire history of pokemon, the nerf was barely a nerf. Psychic is like Water, it will never be bad ever.
Someone already said it but typhlosion is like the only offensive pokemon that actually got outright fricked by the split, basically every other offensive pokemon benefitted from it.
Objectively better than the originals. I bought Red on release day after watching the Nintendo Power video, so I'm not letting nostalgia get in the way. They are better games.
That being said, the extreme jank/shit movesets etc of the originals were kind of part of the gen 1 experience.
yea thats definitely the worst part
pokeymans sound font in the GBA era was absolutely atrocious. not that the GBA really sounds great even on a good day
I don't personally like them since they make Kanto seem more bland, the remixes are bad, and the new content for the most part is lackluster.
There's also bs limitations like not letting golbat evolve
I thought they were alright, but at the time when they came out I remember being annoyed that Game Freak was going back to Kanto AGAIN. By that point, we had: >Kanto (red/blue) >Kanto but with Pikachu (yellow) >post-game gimped Kanto (gold/silver) >post-game gimped Kanto with Japan-only features cut in the western release (crystal)
Finally in gen 3 we seemed to be out of Kanto for good, then lo and behold.
It's interesting how a lot of people ITT wished that the gen 2 pokemon weren't locked out of the main campaign until post-game. I'm doing a campaign right now out of the Essence romhack and haven't really felt like the campaign suffers from not having gen 2 mons until the post-game. But at the same time I've thought about how cool it'd be for Kanto to be full of gen 1 and 2 mons with gen 3 mons being the ones locked out until the post-game so that you could fill up the national Pokedex with just one game (I've even considered making a romhack like that), but I get that Game Freak wouldn't have done that since they wanted kids to buy the other gen 3 games (FRLG basically only existed so that kids could get the missing gen 1 mons that weren't in RS and Colosseum).
I absolutely loved FireRed when I played it, but I think it's not for everyone. If you don't care much for the originals, an old game with slightly better graphics won't be much interesting either. On the other hand, if you're a hardcore fan of the originals and you do shit like naming your pokemons with specific names and placing them in specific places because you know exactly how the RNG works, these remakes will be worthless. But if you're somewhere in between those extremes, I think they're very enjoyable.
Not sure why HeartGold and SoulSilver are beloved masterpieces and these games are so hated and shit on constantly when they basically did the same thing by porting an old game to the current gen, with all the benefits and failures involved. The discrepancy is pretty huge.
probably because gen 4 brought so much noticeable QoL stuff and advancements in general compared to gen 3. HGSS rides that wave while having all the gen 2 nostalgia stuff
FRLG tries to stay strict to the originals and avoids a lot gen 2/3 features until after the post game in a really annoying way, whereas HGSS actually take advantage of being a gen 4 game from the get-go with a lot of new content available immediately and giving you the freedom to trade and get cross-gen shit whenever you want.
If you're gonna have all these new features eventually anyway then HGSS did it the better way. People would probably b***h about HGSS too if they also locked a bunch of things behind the post game.
Its really hard to beat the charm of Gen 1. I love the mostly terrible sprites especially the back sprites, I love how broken the battle mechanics can get, the numerous somehow iconic glitches, plus just the atmosphere of pokemania at its peak in the real world it was all just a perfect storm and I still come back to Gen 1 and 2 pretty often to relive it all. Stadium 1 and 2 connectivity also really elevated things to the next level. I continued to play Pokemon after it peaked, and while I enjoyed some stuff from Gen 3 and did get pretty into the Sinnoh games(definitely my 3rd favorite gen), they never recaptured the magic for me.
I personally gave up with Gen 5, the games became way too easy and formulaic and I hated how serious the stories started to take themselves and shove copious amounts of slow and uninteresting text boxes in your face to try to tell a "real" story that falls flat on its face and is embarrassing to read. The games Gen 5 and onwards stop you dead in your tracks to dump text at you so frequently it puts Metal Gear Solids codecs to shame(not a diss I love MGS but it has a good story). Even if I could look beyond that what's especially killed it for me is the Pokemon designs and the world designs and layouts. Gen 5 was a literal hallway iirc and it didn't get any better from what I can see. I can't really articulate what made the monster designs of Gens 1-4 better, theres a number I simply just hate the concept of Car Keys, trash bag, ice cream, chandelier, but even the ones that don't immediately offend me just lack that X factor I can't put my finger on and aren't memorable or interesting.
Oh right this is about FRLG. They're ok. Favorite thing about them is probably the music, the trainer battle theme is insane. Plays and looks perfectly fine but if I'm playing Gen 1 I'm going for the soulful originals. Im actually playing Blue right now! Started a new file the other day and am trying to use Pokemon Ive never picked before picrel
Gen 7 was particularly awful for long, inane dialog dumps. 6 wasn't as bad, but it was probably the most BABYMODE BRAINDEAD easy of the series. I personally liked Gen 8 more than I expected, but I mostly just liked the parts where I was doing normal Pokemon things on normal routes and not any of the open area raid battle shit. Haven't played Gen 9 because at this point my interest is finally dead.
this game is fricking horrible with the text dumps too, it got so fricking boring
regardless, i agree, the actual gameplay was decent, but practically everything else was terrible
sure
the gen 3 mechanics lend themselves well to the mons and battles
theres some minor line-up changes, but especially in regards to gym leaders, generally for the better
They're better than the originals but worse than the originals if you include Pokemon Stadium
Only Pokemon remake that's not better than the original is Gen 3 remakes
Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee are way better than Pokemon Yellow
The mod support is insane. Bump the difficult, randomize items/‘mons/trainers within reasonable constraints, and do nuzlocke, and it’s genuinely a thrilling experience. I’ll never understand why liking this gen gets you branded a genwunner. It’s good, and I can only think of a few gens that are better.
this might surprise you but most people just want the same stuff over and over again with the obviously bad stuff fixed, some new content, and sensible tech progressions
I don't play new Pokemon games personally, I just learn about the new Pokemon and like or hate their designs.
Honestly, I'm one of those people who makes fun of the of modern Pokemon design philosophies a lot, but a good portion of my favorite designs are modern ones too. I just think they tend to go really overboard with object mon and too on the nose cultural references. Like oh wow you put a top hat on Wheezing cause....British, location based on the UK, I get it!! you made Wheezing lamer gj.
>games within the same series have the same basic gameplay
Wow, no shit, moron. It's almost always like this, especially with RPGs, unless they decide to frick with the winning formula like they did to Final Fantasy and fans usually end up hating it when they do.
No. Not only are they barebones in most regards, they actively refuse to implement certain new mechanics through obtuse workarounds, like preventing you from getting new evolutions of Gen 1 mons by making friendship evolutions simply not work until you get the national dex and not having a day/night cycle for Eevee. There's also the lack of the pokemart theme despite it having already been introduced in Ruby and Sapphire. If they'd allowed newer evolutions into the Kanto dex and used the pokemart theme, among other things, I'd respect these remakes a lot more.
I'm replaying Blue and Silver at this very moment and so far I fail to see how RB is as good as you say.
Right now in Blue I got to Saffron and in Silver defeated Chuck.
You people say GS is a literal kusoge and the game that killed the franchise but I'm feeling more compelled to finishing Silver than Blue.
Every single point that makes R/B look supposedly better than FR/LG showcased in this thread is a case of "I spend more time regurgitating arguments I saw online than I do actually playing the games I'm discussing".
It's not bad, but it's dull.
It doesn't take advantage of the more capable software to improve on the originals and be its own thing. The only time they go off track it's when they shoehorn the sevii islands sidequest after Blaine.
GSC and RSE have different themes for rival encounters and villain team, that's just one thing I find is missing. It is a bit tiring that literally all battles but the gym leaders' and E4 and champ have the regular trainer battle theme in the BG.
Also they didn't even bother to animate the sprites.
They're pretty good, although I admit I randomized my play through, which included adding third gen pokes into first gen areas.
Not my favorites. Maybe it will be your thing to see it all done up in later gen graphic and mechanics. Personally if I want the Saph/Ruby era experience I will play a fresh emerald rom hack. If I want to relive my childhood I will emulate the old games, or gbc romhacks. There is so much out there. Even in the scope of what only Nintendo have officially released. These games had and have no real niche in my compulsive manchild comfyweb
Yes, they're faithful while also adding new mechanics and features that don't feel out of place at all. If someone wants to start playing Pokemon I'd probably recommend them this first.
you would recommend the WORSE generation of games? holy fricking bait
>WORSE
Bro you can't emphasize a word like that and be wrong.
Its "worst"
Gen 3 is hailed as the best generation of pokemon ever, sure some of the restrictions were motivated my monetary value but the products that came from it are BASED
>Gen 3 is hailed as the best generation of pokemon ever
Yeah Hoenngays WOULD say that
The 3ds games are worse
He's kind of right though. If you didn't grow up on Gen 1 I imagine it's not as appealing as a remake that's designed to improve and update it.
If you grew up with Gen 1 games then you should be more than aware of its flaws and how the remake fixes them. You CANNOT pretend the remakes don't fix shit.
NTA but to me it doesn't matter. What do they fix, irrelevant "problems"? If you just want to play Gen 1 Pokemon, you're going to beat the game easily no matter what. The only thing that really matters is whether you want it to look like the original games, or look more modern.
These discussions are so tedious because people who argue about technical problems in gen 1 are so disingenuous, none of the so called problems matter, there is no strategy in the single player campaign. You level up Pokemon and plow through enemies with your strongest attack, exploiting elemental weaknesses is the only strategy involved at all.
People like you pretending these problems didn't exist and aren't annoying is equally disingenuous.
Might as well play the fast more bug-free game.
I was around for Pokémania, was cool times. I think the original games are, in spite of some flaws and rough edges, quite good, Pokémania wasn't all just marketing, these were genuinely fun and engaging entrylevel RPGs which genuinely appealed to people with its real strengths. I remember it fondly.
I got into Pokeyman before the marketing blitz here even started, because my brother had gotten a Game Boy emulator and we had tried a bunch of games for a while, and then Pokémon came around and we got HOOOOKED, more than with any other game. We got maybe almost a year of head start before Pokémon actually began advertising and got launched here in Sweden, and we weren't alone in that either, probably over a dozen kids at my school (that I knew of, probably more) got into Poke A Mon via emulation, people were talking about secrets and strategies, giving tips and hints and what not, just like what everyone would eventually do when they got the games on Game Boy later.
People made sure to actually buy it even if they emulated it already, because everyone wanted to trade and battle. If the games were totally devoid of value and fun, I don't think this would have happened, it'd have taken until the official launch with the cartoons and comics to see any of this at all. Marketing can do a lot, and it did for Pokémon, but you really can't make all that much out of a valueless product with just marketing.
I played FireRed for the first time last year, and I honestly had a pretty good time. There's some things which aren't as cool or interesting, partially it lacks a lot of the mystique, but it's just never the same as when you're a little kid and you're exploring all of this for the first time. That said, I always loved Gen 2 and Gen 3, I had fun exploring those worlds, and I liked the advancements in mechanics, as well as sound and graphics, and Gen 3 was always my favorite, there was a lot I felt wasn't quite as good when Gen 4 came around.
Continuing. I would not say that the Gen3 remakes of the originals are some sort of conclusive replacement, because they just aren't, but I do think they're enjoyable for what they are, and part of this is because I'm very fond of R&S, being the games I enjoyed the very most when they were new.
Partially because there were cute girls and I was a horny little lad, and because I thought the graphics and sound was amazing, but there was just more postgame stuff, there was a lot more to explore, to do, and to figure out. Discovering the Hidden Chamber on my own and having to figure out the Braille thing, with no internet connection at the time, that was exciting and fun.
A lot of people have complaints about the remakes, and while I think some of them are kind of minute, even stupid, I can also see the point in other ones, and I have to agree that there are things about it which just weren't as well made as they should have been.
That said, there are some complaints to be raised about the originals. I like them, but there's a bunch of inconvenient and tedious shit to them too, like the exact way which inventory and PC boxes are managed. The remakes get a lot of love from me just because they don't have as much of that obnoxious busywork.
Some people complain about how a lot of moves are broken or bugged and what not, and sure, I can see the issue, but those things in particular weren't a big deal back in the day, and unless you're a competitive player, they don't really matter, and I honestly can't imagine taking Pokémon seriously enough to play it competitively, the games aren't quite solid enough even with fixed bugs for that to make that much sense to me. I guess I see competitive Pokémon in the same way I see competitive Smash Bros., like it's kind of missing the point of this kind of game.
Pretty good but the make or break for people tends to be the gen 3 balancing of gen 1 mons:
-psychic no longer stupid busted
-extra types with some moves changing types (bite is now dark, gust is flying)
-EV and IVs instead of stat XP
-different TMs
-updated movesets
-natures and abilities
-crit no longer determined by speed
-toxic seed doesn't work like in gen 1
It's a lot more polished than gen 1 but the jank makes it fun. It's really just preference imo
In the context of gen 1's gameplay, I don't mind that some types are clearly better. Psychic and Dragon pokemon should be the best, and there's hardly any of them anyway.
They are good as entry games to the franchise.
As remakes? They feel alright but lazy.
No, an insult to the original games. I can't help but cringe when zoomers play this garbage and believe they got the gist of the gen 1 experience
remakes should unironically be illegal
They're amazing. The Sevii Islands are a great addition and one of my favorite Pokémon areas. I'd rank them as best Pokemon games behind HG/SS and Black/White.
thank you for having the correct pokemon opinions
They're good.
The hack Fire Red - Leaf Green Plus is the definitive way to play these without shit like making it impossibly and autistically hard or adding every gen into Kanto.
Pokemon Throwback is arguably the second best but I like my hacks with auto-run toggles. Holding B during the whole run should be illegal.
>Pokemon Throwback is arguably the second best but I like my hacks with auto-run toggles. Holding B during the whole run should be illegal.
Throwback walked so Revelation (for Emerald) could auto-run.
This, playing FRLG+ right now. More older Pokemon games need a romhack like that to remove limitations that only made sense at the time (barely) and unlock events that are no longer available officially.
is there a rom hack that combines fire red/leaf green with ruby/sapphire/emerald? i'd love to go through gen 3 as one big game.
No, I didn't like them. They lack the charm of the original games, they have unnecessary filler and I will never replay them.
better QoL, worse everything else. Avoid them at least if you've never played the originals.
The original cartoony Trainer designs had so much soul compared to how they're now properly-proportioned and dull.
>worse everything else
Nice examples.
They're good for trying to stay faithful to the originals within the limitations of Gen 3's new mechanics, but the weakest part of the games is how hard it tries to restrict you from cross-gen features until after you beat the game.
>no cross gen evos, while also blocking them in an incredibly annoying way
>access to held items is extremely limited
>no time of day features
>no attempt at any sort of compatibility with record mixing between RSE
>can't even link up with RSE until after you do the post game quest which is extraordinarily obnoxious if you just want to play pokemon with your friends.
Compared to HGSS which clearly embraced the fact that they were gen 4 games, FRLG felt like it had a real head in the sand approach to everything Gen 3 had to offer up until you hit the post game and suddenly the game goes "okay you can evolve your crobat now". It's hard to fault them for it too much though since it was their first remakes, and they clearly learned their lesson for when it came to approaching the GSC remakes.
The Sevii islands were also a cool addition, although there really isn't all that much to do on them. I thought they should have put way more cross gen stuff on them to increase compatibility with RSE. Like just put berry patches and secret bases (that align with the secret bases in Hoenn) and a battle tower on them, it would have been a good idea.
HG/SS is inferior to Crystal. There, I said it.
>but the weakest part of the games is how hard it tries to restrict you from cross-gen features
stuff like this is why i gave up on pokemon with gen 4. i get that they didn't want people to cheese through the game with their lvl 100+ starters but FFS can they at least TRY to make it different in stead of just rehashing red & blue?
I give it a 3/5
They're good, and the Sevii islands are a great addition for post game content - so much so that it's fricking weird that Game Freak couldn't be assed to include them for Lets Go Pikachu/Eevee. It's just a shame that it didn't include some of Gen 3's other additions like berry picking and farming, but the plus side is that the cartridge doesn't need a battery to keep track of the real time clock. If only because Gen 3 skipped out on GSC's day/night cycle entirely.
>Lets Go Pikachu/Eevee
If you thought FR/LG was soulless, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Absofrickinglutely not
?si=Tew2CeuCDOL_c3QZ&t=8
They censor this, but not the other Channeler who says "Give me your blood!" Talk about inconsistent.
blood is blood. stealing souls has too strong a demonic association after there being a moral panic in regards to pokemon being satanic
when i was a kid i used to think the channeler's hands were them having giant boobs
you were in fact correct
very cut and dry
i loved the RBYGSC but FRLG felt like a slog
they force you to play them if you want gen3 monsters in bankhome
make of this what you will
the sprites look great on a gb micro
thats about the only thing going for it
it is a VERY lazy port and GF likely were forced into it due to hoenne being SO SHITTY that everyone still hates it to this day unless they're underage homosexual sperglords
On top of the dumb cross gen restrictions mentioned above.
I also dislike that the post game is just some island that were never acknowledged beforehand nor will be acknowledged later + the johto legendaries.
It would've been better if the post game was Red visiting some parts of Johto and then Mount Silver, which would make him capturing the legendaries from there far more reasonable.
Terrible, don't fall for the typical "better than the original in every way" rhetoric. A large part of the appeal of gen 1 is that it depicts the pokemon universe as originally envisioned before it became a billion dollar multimedia phenomenon. Everything gets sanitized, nuances get lost and retroactively trying to shoehorn garbage made up later into the classic experience is one of the most disgusting habits of remakes.
If you wanna experience gen 1 and don't know japanese you should play a Red/Blue hack that restores the graphics of the original japanese Red and Green(1996)
Kanto as it was originally envisioned was Tajiri seething over seeing city development destroy the natural forests that he used to catch bugs in, which remakes ruined. It gets even more blatant in Gen2 when the last great forest of the region has been completely razed to stumps, something that the remakes completely missed the point of when they restored it as a dungeon. Yes, I know it was to save memory in Gen2, but it still had a reason in lore behind it.
>you should play a Red/Blue hack that restores the graphics of the original japanese Red and Green
Were the graphics really casualized/dumbed down/burgerized in the localization of the first gen?
I thought it's just some of the mon sprites were revised but still had the same overall artstyle.
they went off the rails a lot with a much more hit and miss quality, the western red and blue graphics come from the third japanese version pokemon blue(JP) which was just a bonus thing and since by that time there was already the red and green sprites and the sugimori promo artwork it was less crucial that the sprites showcase the pokemon as they are leaving more room for weird liberties. In red and green the sprites were really the only thing there was(the sugimori watercolor only came after) so it best showcases the pokemon as they were originally conceived by their respective designers and obviously had more care put into it.
The entirety of the overworld tileset was also completely different, though the differences are subtle. I'll show it next post.
Tentacruel with his tentacles crossed is the best sprite from that gen though
yeah it's totally epic for the win xD all its missing is some sunglasses ahah
>deal with it!1
😀
damn right
autism
English please?
The Pokémon sprites in RBY were an objective improvement over what were in RG.
refer to
I did. The post is conjecture, and the sprites used as an example are cherry-picked (4/151). RB improved on the sprite-work overall.
You are probably the only person in the entire world who is autistic enough to notice and/or care about the difference in the bollard sprites between Pokémon Red/Green and Pokémon Red/Blue.
nta but red and blue are a mess. the ones they improve are marginal, the ones they frick up they frick up hard. besides the ones the other anon already pointed out, kabuto, parasect, kingler, golbat, koffing, exeggcute and pidgeot do a terrible job of depicting the pokemon like they are supposed to be. the silly more dynamic(arguably) poses might work if you are already familiar with the pokemon through the art and the previous sprites but at face value as the de facto representation of the pokemon they are terrible.
>Jpeg
Pathethic.
I always found the darkness of pokemon very interesting. It was, as said very short lived since they realized they could make a lot of money and cut down that crap very fast to sell to kids. But still, imho you can find that old stuff here and there. Manga is quite darker in comparison and I've been looking into 1st season of the anime, it is quite dark in some parts. They really had a separate vision, it is a shame how that evaporated over time
Give me a single good reason for sludge bomb to be a post gane TM.
Can't be because it didn't exist in gen 1 since Brick Break also didn't.
I think Generation III was the perfect sweet-spot for gameplay mechanics, movesets, etc. I'm not at all a proponent of the Phys/Spec-split, nor, in retrospect, do I think giving every monster access to dedicated, 80 base power STAB moves was particularly prescient, either.
FRLG is the definitive way to enjoy Kanto, in some ways, but as other anons have pointed out, much of the gritty charm from the earliest entries was scrubbed out in the remaking process. I think a ROM-hack that restores to form Kanto and all of the constituent character models and dialogue would be great; alongside that, you could diversify trainer battles: customizing the Pokémon used (keeping within the original 151), and their movesets.
I liked the addition of the Sevii Islands, too: you can pretend, as I do, that Generation II never existed, and all of the Johto Pokémon you encounter are endemic. Very exotic.
They're good games but not as good as the originals.
Gen 1 Pokemon is a great experience. Everything plays differently from later games in the series. It's even very different from Gen 2. When you feel tired of the gameplay of later entries coming back to it feels totally fresh.
The simple aesthetics and fantastic soundtrack of the original are also wonderful. The brevity of the game means that it never becomes grating (unlike a lot of other Pokemon games).
FRLG feels cheap by comparison. Rather than building the game again from the ground up it feels like they just slapped a coat of paint on it.
It's still quite fun and worth playing, especially for fans of the series, but there's no reason in my mind to play it in place of the original.
I'd NEVER go back to the original GB games.
If you care about the technicality in single player Pokemon experiences, you're kind of a dip since these games have no real challenge in the first place. The games can easily be cheesed, and are easily beaten even if you basically LARP play pretending strategy matters (using all Pokemon evenly and caring about elemental match ups, having a full team, all things you barely need to do but will have a bit more fun if you pretend you do).
There are only two things to consider when it comes to the originals vs. remakes here, and neither come down to gameplay quirks
>A.
Do you want something that will give you the same monsters and story beats but more polished and "modern" looking with some minor QOL adjustments
>B.
Do you want to actually experience the original games as we played them in the 90s
Really this is all that matters, and it really only matters to zoomoids who were born after the original Gameboy's lifespan and can't into actual retro aesthetics
>If you care about the technicality in single player Pokemon experiences, you're kind of a dip since these games have no real challenge in the first place
That's why Showdown is better than the actual games
When did I explicitly mention in my post I care about competitive? Competitive pokemon doesn't exist and is a joke.
Are you really going to pretend more than half the points explained in the image aren't real and a detriment to single player experience?
You can steamroll the game just by overpowering a couple Pokemon, it doesn't matter if venom jizz or nipple leak is kind of a shitty or broken move. You don't have to use those moves etc.
Story/lore is one of the few things that does matter in these baby games. The general tone of the game which is created by the lore and world building, and the monsters, are the only reason to waste your time on them since they're babbies first JRPG and not a real challenging gameplay experience. No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
>Story/lore is one of the few things that does matter in these baby games. The general tone of the game which is created by the lore and world building, and the monsters, are the only reason to waste your time on them since they're babbies first JRPG and not a real challenging gameplay experience. No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
It's refreshing to see someone else that understands this. Thank you
Speak for yourself.
Some true Capsule Monster scholars ITT. I bow to ya'll. Especially spriteman because I didn't know there were still oldbie spergs out there like me. I literally still play RGB and enjoy the differences.
Also need to chime in to say that story is absolutely present in the early games, and if you think otherwise you are just a casual and that's okay too. I love the story of Kanto. It feels self-contained and like it could have been expanded upon. Growing up, friends and I dreamed of a Northern Kanto game, and also Pokemon Fossil Version set in the ancient past where we can see the likes of Kabutops and such.
Are you me? I only ever hear praise for them, but hated FRLG from the get-go. They are hollow shadows of Kanto which absolutely should not be mistaken for Kanto. Every time I see the male protagonist drawn as FireRed instead of real Red, I feel sad. It's an imposter who killed the original, who won and now represents Kanto.
Trigger warning
Post one of Red in the Let's Go games. That'll give him an aneurysm for sure.
Holy crap the original art and sprites looks so good. I never played FR/LG and this cements my thoughts that I probably never will. Take me back.
Jesus man, the nostalgia is strong in you even for /vr/
>No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
No. Most people play for online matches and the tournaments now and come up with some really tricky strategies. You seem to ignore the multiplayer aspect that it was designed with from the beginning and just harp on the easy single player. The setting is wallpaper.
>You seem to ignore the multiplayer aspect that it was designed with from the beginning
For trading, fundamentally pokemon was about collecting, hence the two versions with exclusives and trade evolutions. oak sends you on a quest to fill the pokedex. The concept comes from tajiris love for bug collecting, he wanted kids to experience the joy of collecting and the social aspect that comes with it.
Tajiri is a sperg, he didn't care about socializing. Trading was a marketing ploy shoehorned in by Nintendo. Originally Game Freak was designing a single-player SNES game.
>Trading was a marketing ploy shoehorned in by Nintendo. Originally Game Freak was designing a single-player SNES game.
Pure fanfiction. Tajiri envisioned bugs crawling though the gameboy link cable
Nice excuse. The lore in the games is so important almost every npc in every game is either a basic game tutorial or a reminder that a game mechanic exists. Really pulls you into the world.
>I know Tajiri personally and I know what I'm talking about
It's especially funny because tajiri has described his bug collecting as a social activity. It was a common hobby among japanese kids and he talks about how he was able to be more successful at it than his friends because he knew the trick of leaving honey under a rock overnight so the next day it would be full of bugs eating the honey
>it's all about the competitive scene
Ok, then go talk about the newest games that are relevant to competitive Pokemon. Nobody is linking up Game Boys here to play the first three Pokemon gens, this is /vr/ not /vp/
Also I can tell you as a straight fact, most people back in those days didn't play Pokemon competitively, sure we all enjoyed the multiplayer when we could, but the serious competitive level was always a minority of people buying the games, most people just were into the world and wanted to use their favorite Pokemon, I never even heard about people doing the really autistic competitive shit until I was an adult, as a kid everybody made teams of their favorites they caught in their playthrough.
It's fair enough to be into that, but not really relevant to the retro games since again, nobody is going back to play R/B/Y or G/S/C for the purpose of playing competitively
I think if you're looking to go back and play these games....people on this board are generally talking about playing the games campaign, not building the best competitive meta team for a bygone era nobody is playing
and you're moving goalposts, real shit you sound like a homosexual and like dick
My goal post is the same. Technical "problems" in Gen 1 don't effect the single player at all and are irrelevant to it.
You sound like someone posing as an OG Pokemon kid, but clearly started with Gen 2, as did every single person who thinks it's the best.
>Technical "problems" in Gen 1 don't effect the single player at all and are irrelevant to it.
In what universe? They're part of the game. Of course they affect single player, you can't pretend they don't exist if you don't look at them.
NtA but level/game design is a much bigger problem with gen 1 games than the bugs listed in that pic.
How does certain moves not being good strategy wise matter in a game where strategy doesn't matter? There is only an illusion of challenge in Pokemon games, you can plow through with some overpowered ones and cheese the game easily. It doesn't matter.
>No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
See I'd argue it's the other way around. Aside from the "I get each new gen, do a playthrough, and never touch again" crowd, the majority of adults that still play pokemon in 2023 are turbospergs who take the multiplayer way more seriously than GF does. Hell a lot of them dont even play the actual games, they play it in Showdown and that's where you get autism's final form (I still see a perfectly healthy Arcanine on the field). I should know, I'm part of that crowd.
Hell I'm currently playing Infinite Fusion and half the fun is coming up with the most busted fusions possible that still have cool custom sprites.
>No grown person who plays games for a hobby is going to be playing Pokemon games for any reason other than they're interested in the world and creatures, the gameplay is not the appeal.
I'm pretty sure it's just a nostalgic holdover for many
Any RPG can be steamrolled if you break the mechanics or overlevel. Early Pokemon games actually have a pretty good difficulty curve if you don't stop to obsessively grind on every route. I don't do nuzlocke rules or anything, but when I play them I usually try to breeze through as much as possible and not cheese things by overlevelling or running back to the pokemon center mid-route.
>Any RPG can be steamrolled if you break the mechanics or overlevel
In Pokemon it's very easy. The real point is though, you really don't have to be that strategic in it at all, so when people harp on about how some of the balancing is off or how certain moves aren't strategically good or are busted, it doesn't really matter because the easiest, thus smartest option in the game anyway is raw power
Are there lots of technical problems in Gen 1 combat? Yes. Does it matter or make the game harder to finish? No. It's a unique case where the jank simply doesn't hinder you at all, and really it only matters on a serious competitive multiplayer level, in which, nobody is playing Gen 1 Pokemon for serious multiplayer competition.
>and really it only matters on a serious competitive multiplayer level
It doesn't even matter there. In fact, Hyper Beam's """glitch""" made it one of the most strategic moves in the game.
Over half of these are reasons why RBY are worth playing over FRLG
>"Look mom! I'm being a contrarian on /vr/!
Someone has got to make a better infographic
This one is incredibly gay and nitpicks a lot of shit that aren't real problems
notice how much overall cleaner red and green
some details worth pointing out is how the water tileset from red and blue works fine for the ocean but on these little ponds it makes less sense since the water is supposed to be stale(r) not with crazy waves. the signs have a different design. the bollards actually look like bollards instead of some weird bizarre crystals nobody knows what it's supposed to be
they really went and changed the position of the sun on every sprite
they're good. even better than the originals. but i miss glitches like missingno. really added a sense of mystery and wonder to pokemon.
>they're good. even better than the originals.
leave
Ganker is an 18+ site
Leaf Green is almost 20 years old you bitter old c**t.
Anon, just because this is /vr/ doesn't mean you have to blindly hate everything new and love the old.
Games DO age and modern standards can set it and it won't make you a traitor or something for preferring them.
I know, right? In just a year or so, PS3 games will officially be retro! Exciting times to live in, anon.
Leaf green was my first game and I loved it
No, however that shouldn't be taken as some seal of approval for the originals because Gen 1 was garbage and genwunners are the worst thing to happen to pokemon fans. GF didnt make an actually good game until Crystal.
>inb4 some bullshit like "ok zoomer"
Got it for Chirstmas in '98, of course I had higher opinions of it back then, there was nothing else to compare it to. Going back to it just made me realize how low my standards were.
Gen 2 does nothing better than Gen 1 other than graphics. Story/lore is worse, Pokemon are worse.
Gameplay technicalities again, do not matter in Pokemon. These are barely real JRPGs.
out of the three retro Pokemon gens i think gen 2 has got to be the worst. gen 1 has the nostalgia and charm though its unpolished, gen 3 is the more polished and somewhat perfected experience though it loses the spirit of the originals, there is a pretty even tradeoff there to me. when it comes to gen 2 it's just the awkward middle child...also morning/day/night exclusive Pokemon was always a trash idea and ruins what should be a basic fun little romp of a game
Pokemon being available at certain times was absolutely perfect for that era of Pokemon. People forget that this was still the age of schoolyard stories. Gen 2 Pokemon being a bit rarer and finding different Pokemon at different times completely leans into that.
I think that's a problem that a lot of people have when they play Gen 1 and 2 for the first time. They've played later games, so they KNOW what Pokemon is "SUPPOSED" to be, and it throws them off because Gen 1 and 2 weren't made like that.
Stop lumping gen 2 to gen 1
gen 2 has more common with gen 1 than anything afterwards. I think it's perfectly fair to lump them together in this context.
It doesn't make them the same. Most of us here have played gens 1 and 2 first so your theory that people only have issues because they started with later games is a crock of shit. I remember the whiplash I got experiencing gen 2 after 1 back then, they are very different experiences
I was a day one Pokemon fan too, buddy. I got the promo VHS from Nintendo Power and everything. Maybe it's becaused I was so obsessed with the francise in general and had already seen a bunch of info on the internet about Gold/Silver before release, but I only ever found it to be a step up (aside from the day/night mechanism, which as I've said earlier in the thread, was more of a cool novelty than anything at the time). What do you have a problem with in gen 2, exactly?
>What do you have a problem with in gen 2, exactly?
Lol I'd be here all day if I were to explain all of it and I'm at work so I don't even have the time.
Terrible new pokemon
Anime seeps into the game(outside of yellow that could be seen as a non canon bonus spinoff)
Terrible new typings
Terrible day/night mechanic
Terrible gender/breeding mechanics
Terrible change in themes/story
Kanto is beyond gimped
Basically it fixes none of the issues I had with gen1 while pretty much everything it adds to the universe I hate.
NTA But if you really hate or at least dislike all the gens after 1, then avoid said titles and jump the ship.
If I have the patience I'll elaborate a bit when I get home, I've already explained why I hate day/night in a previous post
i think day/night would work a lot better if it wasnt real-time
like if you could wait or sleep to pass time like in an rpg
when its tied to real time it just ends up being this annoying thing you have to occasionally cheese to find certain mons
As someone who grew up with Gen 1 and 2 at the perfect age and during Pokemons height in popularity and fell off around gen 4, I cannot fathom hating Gen 2 and these all seem like rather weird criticisms.
However on the other side of the coin I can almost understand what you mean and I respect this viewpoint, dangerously based and the truth nobody is ready to hear.
I see where you're coming from. When it was new, none of those things were interesting to me. Dark and steel types were cool, I didn't care about game balance. Stuff like the day cycle and breeding were just cool new features. I generally enjoyed that the game had a bit more narrative, and even though Kanto didn't have much going on, it made the game feel huge regardless, and I LOVED how non-linear the Kanto stretch of the game was.
In retrospect, yeah the writing was already on the wall, but I don't think a lot of what Pokemon would ultimately become stopped my enjoyment of the games until gen 5.
Kanto was a bonus stage you fricking homosexual, they could only fit so much on a GBC cart
I don't like your attitude, but I agree with your sentiment. Gen 2 and gen 3 are way closer than gen 1 and 2. Gen 1 is still great because it's the uncorrupted core of what pokemon is. Gen 2 added much of what is still used in every preceding game. Baby mons/breeding, shinies, pokerus, pokeball making/different kinds, etc... Gen 3 adding nature's and abilities on top of the gen 2 additions and you have the formula for every pokemon game since. If you could trade from gen 2 -3 nobody would think 1 and 2 are more akin. And now you can, some guy was making a converter cable that lets you trade from gen 2 to gen 3. But, they won't be considered og mon if you ever decide to trade them up to bank.
>Baby mons/breeding, shinies, pokerus, pokeball making/different kinds, etc....
Not him but I don't necessarily agree with that. I think the gen 2 additions still invoke that sense of wonder that made gen 1 good. If you didn't know any better, someone telling you that they bred a Pikachu and got a whole new Pokemon from an egg sounds like something "that kid" would make up.
That is something a lot inernet people miss, talking about old things, possibly which they were not around to experience: context. Pokemon RGB/GS is not just a rom you play in 2023 on a giant TV or an HD monitor. It is not a modern videogame and should not be treated as such. Most notably, at the time we didn't have every byte of data available at the click of the googlenets; We had to discover everything socially, possibly buy strategy guides, maybe try reading some UNDER CONSTRUCTION fansite Yahoo searches on dial up at night when the phone isn't being used. There is a culture and history surrounding old Pokemon games which made it what it is. If a person ignores that, they will be unable to generate meaningful discussion surrounding it, usually instead charging their participation with emotion and spoiled zoomboom tweetlevel reactionary hollow replies.
Oh yeah also magazines too
exactly! I put hundreds of hours into my Red Version cartridge not just because it was a good RPG video game. A lot of those hours were spent trying all kinds of inane shit like using itemfinder in every spot of Seafoam Islands or beating Elite Four 100 times with Mewtwo so he'd (allegedly) evolve into Mewthree. It's easy to take for granted that things weren't always so well documented after generation after generation of the games being datamined when they leak a week before street date.
they're all just nostalgic for calling things nostalgic and pretending to understand what nostalgia even means
Yeah but at the same time, I moved on because I was a kid. When Gen 2 came out I no longer cared about Gen 1, because that was the old game, not the new one and everyone was playing the new one and so playing the old one was for poor kids aka losers.
Gen 2 sold significantly less than Gen 1, it was kind of the beginning of Pokemania being over as a fad that all kids were into, and just something the nerds were still clinging to. At least among that original demographic of fans.
>it was kind of the beginning of Pokemania being over as a fad that all kids were into
Not really, it was only a year later, pokemania didn't really end until 2002
Thus why I said "the beginning", it wasn't like dead and IIRC "the first movie" did pretty well, but that initial wave of hype where pretty much every kid was into it was ending, a lot of the people who were just part of the initial fad didn't keep buying the new games and cards and it just dropped off majorly from there by the time of Gen 3
It's part of why the original 151 are so iconic and nostalgic to normies despite only being about a year older, a decent chunk of people fell off already and didn't buy Gold or Silver.
>gen 2 additions still invoke that sense of wonder that made gen 1 good
What? No, the whole first half of the game is filled with shitmon. it's got charm in the world but I don't find going back to gen 2 as fun or nostalgic as gen 1.
>Gen 2 does nothing better than Gen 1 other than graphics
Agreed and by graphics I hope you mean just on a technical level as some of the aesthetic quality goes down the drain too: ugly kiddy pokemon simplifed for merch and the anime and a shift from weird science biopunk to traditional temple shrine crap
>it's intentional because johto = kyoto!
I know, it doesn't make it any less uninteresting and not what pokemon was about
>Pokemon are worse.
I completely disagree, most of my favorite pokemon come from gen 2. Gen 1 has like 2 pokemon I've liked no matter how many years pass and it's Nidoking and Snorlax. All the others
>skarmory
>scizor
>crobat
>wobbuffet
>heracross
>octillery
>houndoom
>hitmontop
>tyranitar
premiered in gen 2
>Gameplay technicalities again, do not matter in Pokemon.
Because you've never played against another human being that actually knows what they're doing. I've been doing it for 20 years and while it's still fricked in gen 2 and really isnt unfricked until the physical/special split (which is the sole reason why I think HGSS is better than GSC), it's still substantially better than gen 1 in that regard.
I think Platinum is the best pokemon game ever made but it's not retro.
Fair enough, it is subjective and I'll never begrudge somebody their favorite mons but I don't like a lot from Gen 2, I definitely like more from Gen 1. Some I like though are
>Noctowl
>Umbreon
>Sneasel
>Totodile line
Though, regardless of how you feel about any of the Gen 2 Pokemon, the game is mostly full of Gen 1 ones anyway, and to me Pokemon distribution always felt bad in it. And when it comes to these games retroactively what does the competitive aspect even matter once the gen passes. Most people playing these old games are just gonna be doing it single player, not building the perfect team for competitive play, it's not like they remain relevant in that way
>And when it comes to these games retroactively what does the competitive aspect even matter once the gen passes.
Well because people on SD dont all stick to the same gen forever, much like how there are in fact tiers people play in besides OU
Dont stick to the current gen, I meant
Dear god, can you put any more effort into cherrypicking nitpicks?
Story/Lore in pokemon doesn't matter.
Pokemon are on par or as good.
Gameplay technicalities DO affect single player experience and most dumb choices in RBY were fixed in GSC making for a smoother and more fun experience.
Stop hating just for the sake of hating you bitter b***h. Who hurt you?
>Story/Lore in pokemon doesn't matter.
moron
>Pokemon are on par or as good.
moron
C'mon you can do better than that.
Fricking this
These aren't meant to be replacements, Gen 2 was a complement to Gen 1. A lot of people fail to realize this.
>he doesn't know
>Gen 2 was a complement to Gen 1
It was more like an insult.
Ok, boomer.
>be bitter 28 year old gen twoer towards the 30 year old gen wunners
>think you're totally in touch with the zoomers
Millennioomers are so laughable and caught in an identity limbo apparently lol
> Gen 1 was garbage and genwunners are the worst thing to happen to pokemon fans.
t. obsessive berry picker/autistic EV min maxer
I'm just glad they finally added Mew under the truck next to the S.S. Anne
Good remakes? No, they are masterpieces.
Since when did we start to pretend GSC are kusoges and the worst games of all time? Did I miss a meme or something? Some of you people would prefer to play fricking Shaq Fu over Crystal unironically.
They're fine, but having played through gen 3 recently since I lost most of my pokemon, it's probably the game I'd go back to last out of all of them. It pretty much only exists as cope for the fact that you can't transfer from gen2->3, only instead of something unique (Colosseum/XD for Johto pokemon), they just did a very basic remake. Feels pretty weird in this strange middle ground they do their damnedest to keep you from gen 2+ content (blocking certain evos, not getting any good held items in the campaign, no gen2+ pokemon or RSE trading until postgame), they simply can't keep consistent because of the framework it's built off of (natures/abilities, Steel/Dark type, for some reason berries). Don't know if I'd rather play it over gen 1, I'd say this is more boring, while gen 1 is annoying sometimes.
They're not bad remakes, but they are remakes of bad games as there are no good retro pokemon games aside from arguably Coliseum/XD, and those games both aren't made by GF and are still massively flawed. Pokemon didn't become actually good until gen 4, and stopped being good after 5
theyre fine, probably a matter of preference on sprites, but
>cant do the glitches
>first turn stat boosts/drops that play animations you cant skip(intimidate, for example)
>postgame islands arent anything to write home about
Nidoking is quite clearly Baragon
>Bollards
SOVL
Hard to find art of them. The RED fan video by Pedro Araujo has it, though, I think.
theyre objectively better from a quality perspective, as they fixed numerous janky aspects of the original and fixed most of the bugs and glitches.
however a lot of the fun of the originals were all the janky elements so some will see it as a negative
probably the biggest deciding factor is the music, i vastly prefer the originals and most people ive seen agree
The also add new features added from gen 2 and 3 like natures/abilities/shinies/etc
Yeah they are, but they're rather faithful to a fault. You are limited to the first 151 Pokemon until postgame, this includes Friendship evos like Blissy/Crobat which will be forced to stop evolving until postgame. Also bit of a less annoying point, given that FRLG do not use a Real Time Clock, Espeon and Umbreon are not obtainable at all despite getting an Eevee in the game.
Aside from that, its just Gen 1 with Gen 3 QOL mechanics, if you like gen 3, you'll like it.
Well I traded Eevee to myself, evolved it to Espeon, and traded it back to myself. I wanted my RED to have the Legend Red's team from GSC. I can give the whole team all the game's HMs, one each, so it's a pretty good adventuring team. Too bad you can't breed a surfing Pikachu on your own.
These are good, the thing is this board HATES QoL with passion.
If it isn't tedious or bug ridden, they'll hate it.
It's not because it's tedious, it's because something later won't be tedious for new players. It's the WoW Epic Mount situation. People weren't mad because they no longer has to crawl a mile through broken glass to get the mount, they were mad that someone new won't have to when they did. It's the pettiness mindset, it's can be summarized of "everyone has to suffer if I did or they don't deserve it"
Yeah, that mindset describes most of /vr/ boomers pretty well. They're proud of having to go through the tedious of doing something in a game and shit on people who don't have to or know it's tedious.
A. if you didn't experience the games discussed on this board when they were released, you don't belong on the board
B. you definitely don't belong on the board if the very minor "tedious hardships" of old Pokemon games is too much for you, these were baby games people beat at age 5, you literally can't handle the difficulty in 90 percent of retro games, so why are you here
>if you didn't experience the games discussed on this board when they were released, you don't belong on the board
I did, shut the frick up. Red was a pain back then and still is now. That infographic is only spitting facts but you're too fricking proud of having endured that game and hate people having QoL now.
You don't have to take EV and IVs into account to play the remakes, you can easily ignore and even for me they're too autistic but at least they're a non-issue compared to shit like the Special stat, Wrap being broken Sleep being stupid.
>Red was a pain back then and still is now.
No it wasn't, it was an easy ass game. Dragon Warrior Monsters and Monster Rancher were far more complex.
>That infographic is only spitting facts but you're too fricking proud of having endured that game and hate people having QoL now.
>You don't have to take EV and IVs into account to play the remakes, you can easily ignore and even for me they're too autistic but at least they're a non-issue compared to shit like the Special stat, Wrap being broken Sleep being stupid.
Wow, a bunch of irrelevant shit that in no way breaks the game "breaks the game" in your opinion. You're the autistic one for using moves you don't have to use, Pokemon was designed to plow through with strong moves and it is very easily done, again, baby game, some moves being bad is a non issue, you don't have to use those moves, and if you were as strategic as you think you are, you'd have realized they were a poor strategy and just used other attacks long ago.
And I didn't wanna go there but now we're getting to the crux of the issue, and it's that people who play competitive Pokemon are morons who just can't move onto real games. Pokemon is just a monster collecting adventure with multiplayer that's fun to do with your friends as an anime LARP, people who take it super seriously have always been on the spectrum, because the majority of people did not take it that way, it's never been a deep skill based game.
And continuing to think multiplayer matters when discussing past Gens is relevant is just straight up moronic. Nobody is playing Gen 1 competitively in 2023, it literally does not matter, the only thing that matters is the game itself, not the meta.
>No it wasn't, it was an easy ass game
I don't mean pain ass in hard, meant pain as just tedious and slow.
I don't really see how dude, to me Gen 1 is the breeziest playthrough. The only part I can think of that feels like a slog is taking down the Team Rocket hideout, which A. can be made significantly shorter if you use a guide/know the right paths to take, and B. I feel is earned anyway as pretty much the conclusion of the games antagonist plot, and does serve as a place to get some hefty experience before moving on
>And I didn't wanna go there but now we're getting to the crux of the issue, and it's that people who play competitive Pokemon are morons who just can't move onto real games. Pokemon is just a monster collecting adventure with multiplayer that's fun to do with your friends as an anime LARP, people who take it super seriously have always been on the spectrum, because the majority of people did not take it that way, it's never been a deep skill based game.
>
>And continuing to think multiplayer matters when discussing past Gens is relevant is just straight up moronic. Nobody is playing Gen 1 competitively in 2023, it literally does not matter, the only thing that matters is the game itself, not the meta.
Also... yeah, I completely agree with you on that front. Always thought "competitive" pokemon was an afterthought and just play stupid. People forced competitiveness into these games out of... a desire to make it seem serious, maybe? Like "take my children's toy seriously dammit!"
>play
plain*
Nah that's bullshit, competitive play was always an intended aspect which is why there were DVs and Stat Exp from the very beginning, and each game after Gen 1 has only made the competitive play more fleshed out. The main story was extremely easy to clear but it's just there to teach you the basics, no different from say, RTS games.
Pokemon has always been a franchised aimed at younger kids, and the whole series preached at you about choosing your favorites. I don't think the competitive meta of weirdo adults where most of the monsters are useless and every single person uses Tauros and Chansey or whatever cheesey Pokemon dominate is what they had in mind. It's just not a serious game bro, even if they cater a bit to the autists who take it seriously or just try to smooth things out for better multiplayer which they should, but none of this shit defines whether a Pokemon game is good or bad, because most people don't give a shit about competitive sweaty Pokemon, they care about the adventure element and cool monster element
They absolutely did have it in mind, they programmed that stuff in for a reason. Japan has always had games marketed at younger audiences that nevertheless became followed by adults, they were just getting ahead of the curve. These days Pokémon is mainly played by an older audience while kids are busy playing Fortnite and GTA and mobileslop.
They included that stuff so as to make each Pokémon "feel unique" even in their species. Your Pikachu performed differently than your friend's Pikachu. It was supposed to make them feel more real and personal, which is why those unique stats were buried deep in the game and you'd only learn about them by reverse-engineering the code. It wasn't until gen 3 they started building the game with a dedicated competitive element, and gen 6 was when they actively started adding features to appeal to competitive players.
>It wasn't until gen 3 they started building the game with a dedicated competitive element
The absolute latest you can push this narrative is to Gen 2. They introduced Dark and Steel types specifically to rebalance the meta which was being dominated by Normal and Psychic types. They also added Hidden Power which is a useless move unless you know how IVs work in which case it's a solid coverage move, along with breeding mechanics to facilitate getting the IVs and movesets you wanted.
>they added dark and steel to rebalance the meta
Headcanon. Normal and psychic were still massively OP in gen 2, Snorlax by far and away was the best pokemon in the competitive scene.
>hidden power
Was meant to be a fun mystery move. It sucks competitively and is only used on pokemon that lack coverage movepools otherwise.
They added FAERY type to rebalance the meta, because Dragon had gotten too powerful. And what gen was Faery added?
>Headcanon
Literally both types are strong against psychic.
Dark was crippled by being created pre-Split. Most of the Dark-types had sucky Sp.A, while most Psychics had strong enough Sp.D to laugh them off. The few good ones like Houndoom and Tyranitar were found too late in the game to matter. Steel fared better with how most Attack-strong Pokemon got it, but its moves were mostly sucky and it was more valued for resisting much of the type chart.
Yeah, despite being created specifically for countering Psychic, it still suffered from the dumb decisions took to approach gen 2 pokemon spread.
I can forgive Special Split but making most useful Gen 2 pokemon literal post-game was dumb.
The remakes fixed it but they're not retro.
pychics straight up couldn't punch through something like umbreon and would fold. There were only like 4 dark lines anyway and 3 of them stopped psychics cold meaning it did its job
Psychics just plain laughed as they threw elemental punches instead. I'll give you Umbreon to a point, but it can't fight for shit as it's all defense. Espeon is unironically a better Dark-type than it as it can get Bite AND Psychic.
they get destroyed unless you're going against trash darks like murkrow/sneasel or are overleveled. The rest that aren't hit by a super effective punch kill faster than the psychic or/and wall it for days. This is very apparent in pvp where you're pretty much always forced to switch as a psychic when a dark comes in unless the secondary typing covers you, which is why Starmie was so good
What causes you to claim that Dark and Steel weren't added for balancing purposes while Fairy definitely was?
Casual WoW is so good, it’s dying
Nu-Pokémon is all about tedious EV grinding, that’s more psychotic than anything in the first two gens
>Nu-Pokémon is all about tedious EV grinding, that’s more psychotic than anything in the first two gens
Gen 1 and 2 had stat experience which was far more of a grind than EVs are.
No one actually cared about that shit though.
Competitive players did, and they're the only ones who care about EVs too which the namegay brought up. You can easily just ignore both.
At most the only thing you had to do back in GSC was to catch the same pokemon a couple of times and compare stats and that still is far more acceptable than the autistic grind that is breeding for IV, EV and personalities with items.
And even then for casual plays you can completely ignore that, it's an autistic issue but at the same time, non issue.
Both are things you can completely ignore and play more than ok.
I don't think you understand what "stat grinding" is in the first two gens. There was no cap across stats, each stat could be maxed, and the caps for points take FAR more battles than even unassisted gen 3 EV training.
But again, this is only turboautist stat maxing bullshit that no casual player would ever need to touch.
Exactly, and yet people still bring these as core aspect of the games that you can't ignore.
EV grinding hasn't really been a thing since the 3DS games. The mechanics are barely hidden and pretty much every game since XY has had some way to finish EV training in just a few battles. The Switch games even added ways to change Natures, Abilities, and even IVs themselves, so there's basically nothing you need to do to train a "perfect" pokemon unless they need a specific hidden ability or some specific shit.
(I still prefer the old games to everything else. For what it's worth I didn't play gen 9 but I thought gen 8 was much better than the 3DS gens).
When did Rotom first appear? Was that gen 3 or 4? I was playing Violet casually online with overpowered tough Pokemon and some Japanese girl pounded my ass with her refrigerator Rotom. She had so many tricks it left me dazzled.
It's in the old Chateau in Sinnoh, not too far from Spritomb
Gen4, though its post-game only in vanilla D/P and won't have its appliance forms. Platinum lets you get it after Gym 2, but unless you can hack the game, the appliance forms are off-limits.
well since then Rotom has been easy to get (I think they might be in the wild now) and you can easily and freely change its forms
>girl pounded my ass with her refrigerator
ow
I might be wrong about the link cable thing, but Miyamoto maybe gave them the idea of two versions. But I am certain that it was not intially supposed to be a multiplayer game. It was absolutely first and foremost a single-player game. But during Pocket Monsters Game Boy development, it certainly did become central to the concept.
Morimoto: “Originally we didn’t plan to implement link battles, so there were lots of little things that needed to be revised.”
https://lavacutcontent.com/satoshi-tajiri-pokedex-interview/
Well it's better for it and has more longevity. If it was purely single player it would have petered out and died on the vine as quickly as PLA did.
Definitely, the social aspect is how it became so popular. There's just a lot of lost history of the early development so I try to keep that alive.
>There's just a lot of lost history of the early development so I try to keep that alive.
Then you might wanna start by not spreading misinformation
Notice how he says "no link battles", not no connectivity/trading
I'm 100% sure the idea for pokemon at th very beginning came from Tajiri imagining bugs crawling through the link cable. It's on interviews and Tajiri's biography manga.
Tajiri didnt even want the game to have battles and it would've been a game-time safari zone. He should not be taken as an authoritative source on how the games should be.
Game-wide*
This was the approach taken in Let's Go, which was a nice change of pace.
I'm talking about old translated interviews from online like 10+ years ago, not quick 2023 google searches or wiki entries. I don't remember them word for word, I'm relying on memory. I do not doubt your enthusiasm, but before it was even named Capsule Monsters or attempted to be registered as such, it was in development for SNES, which doesn't have a link cable. To be more accurate, it was planned and designed as such. I don't think they mentioned anything about programming an SNES game, it was just the game concept at that point.
In the third version of what we call Pokemon, the Game Boy iteration which was public and everbody knows, yes: Link cables are involved. We know a lot about Red and Green's development which has a lot of information online, but Capumon Game Boy version and earlier has nearly no information being archived, which is what I'm referring to.
Before Red and Green, the game began development before 1990, which was one of the most interesting things for me. It went through a few iterations until it became what we know in Red and Green.
The goggles are fused too firmly in place to even be able to think about it objectively anymore.
>but the creator intended-
No, shut the frick up. Why should I care what the creator's opinion is on his the series should be? Creators often dont understand their own creation and why it appeals to people and are too in love with their own vision to change that.
Ron Gilbert does not understand why fans like Monkey Island.
Kojima does not understand why fans like MGS
NO ONE at Konami or GF understands why fans like Silent Hill or Pokemon, respectively
Imagine, while not creating Mega Man, does understand why fans like it...but he's a complete hack so it cancels out
Nojima does not understand why people like FF7
I can keep going but I think I've made my case
>imagine
Fricking autocorrect. Inafune
>SHUT THE FRICK UP
NOPE.AVI
Go ahead and hate the original vision of a creator. Ron Gilbert is no Kojima and vice versa. You might be right with him not understanding (at least not completely) as to why it appeals to the people the way it does. He could have gotten the sense to understand, but he didn't want to. Does not is not the same thing as cannot.
Gamefreak lost its luster starting with eitherX&Y or or S&M.
>Gamefreak lost its luster starting with eitherX&Y or or S&M.
Because the last time GF genuinely tried to make the best game possible, which was either HGSS or B2W2 I forget which, it massively underperformed. So why care anymore if passion isnt rewarded?
That being said Gen IX feels like they genuinely cared and did try, they just cant code for shit so it was an impossibly buggy mess
Not only they can't code if they life depended on it, they're mentally stuck in the handheld era and just can't make a game for modern consoles that doesn't look it's 4 gens behind.
>HGSS did it the better way.
It's just as bad, if not, worse.
People always post the remake's dialogue as the only argument that supposedly makes this game a literal kusoge.
If you only need this to shit on a game please re-evaluate your life.
Bruh you're projecting so hard it hurts. You shut the frick up, you don't know what you're talking about.
The fact that fan romhacks are often better than the official product tells me the fans DO know what we want more than the creators
This is true, but it does not equally apply to all video game fandoms.
Yeah, you, the random Ganker autist who types every key with anger and will to insult other people, you know better than the own creators.
Just to drive my point a bit further trying to not fall into insults, Tajiri stopped being involved with Pokemon long ago. If anything you should see the GBC games as his vision and they did what they could within the GBCs limitations and standards of the time they were released.
The things romhacks add NOW weren't that big of a problem BACK THEN and if anything, you should direct your attacks towards Game Freak, not Tajiri.
I don't know, I think Crystal Clear is better than Crystal which is a romhacks of a GBC game, but at the same time no one would've come up with an idea as ambitious as Crystal Clear back then. If they did then Crystal would be forever cemented as the unequalled best pokemon game.
This is true. Think of George Lucas inserting a bunch of bullshit in the special edition of star wars. I know it is mystical, but i really think art comes out of the divine and the creator is only a tool for the final product. Hearing artists try to understand their own work is always excruciating and they usually have terrible surface level understanding of their own stuff. Anons who disagree are confused about the nature of art and cant separate it from the artist's biography.
>Think of George Lucas inserting a bunch of bullshit in the special edition of star wars
if you have an issue with this you sure as frick should have an issue with all the garbage they added in this piece of shit remake.
Yeah i do, i think it is bad. The change from gen 1 to gen 2 had so much promise and really rqised my expectations for what was possible specificallyfor pokemon but also for videogames. I think removing the day night cycle is a good example of the low effort philosophy of the rest of the series. At the time I had fun with those games but in retrospect it is embarassing that game freak was already removing features by gen 3
The time cycle was ass, nobody is awake/available at all times. Having Pokemon restricted to morning, day, and night means you can only play the game at certain times and have to change your real life schedule depending on which ones you want to catch. Who wants to do that?
Kids do. The games are for kids and that is the audience we should consider to see if it was a success. It is immersive and ties the game to the real world. The game changing to morning and evening pallettes is good and soulful. Your criticism is that it creates a barrier to easily catching everything, but that seems to me like the criticism of someone who wants to speed through and finish rather than enjoy the world of the game. Did you like gen 3 better? Or 4? Seems to me like they added bells and whistles at the expense of the atmosphere and quality of experience.
based. Real life synchronous time cycles are always shit
>WAAAAAAAHHH Why can't every game be without any synchronous time cycles, nor *GASP* real time mechanics BOOOHOOOOOOOOO!
I bet you play mobile games
What does that have to do with my previous post?
I was merely mocking
Mobile games are the ultimate time cycle game. They are 100% based around "Come back tonight when the new daily missions reset. Come back on Wednesday for the new story chapter. Come back at 5 PM for your 100 free gatcha gems."
I ask, what benefit does having a real world time cycle (instead of an in-game mechanic) have for a game like Pokemon?
There's nothing atmospheric about tying the game to the real world, it's completely immersion breaking. The game is an abstraction, you can cross a city in 20 seconds, so if space is compressed and you're hellbent on showing passage of time it should be compressed as well. By tying the time to irl you're basically implying that whenever you're not playing time is still passing in the game so if you stop playing Sunday and only resume next Friday you're character and all the trainers surrounding him were standing still on the exact same spot when you left him. And no this idea that kids can play all the time is fallacious. If your mother only lets you play after school/homework/activities/chores the bulk of your pokemon experience will be in the evening stuck with zubats and hoothoot. And yeah you could change the clock but that would only frick with the immersion further.
I liked the time cycle when gen 2 was new. It was pretty mindblowing to me that the game tracked what day and time it was. I agree now though that time based stuff is wholly inconvenient and doesn't actually add anything worthwhile to the game. Later gens got really bad about this sort of thing (in particular gen 6 in which you could ONLY obtain most of the mega stones by talking to a random NPC specifically between the hours of 6 and 7 PM or something).
>Creators often dont understand their own creation and why it appeals to people and are too in love with their own vision to change that.
Often very true, just reading a ton of interviews confirm this way too frequently.
Tajiri knew exactly what he wanted, and all Pokeautists agree with his vision. It all went to shit when he stepped down.
Yes. Red and Blue were the games that needed remakes the most, and not only are FRLG good remakes, they added a lot of content and new areas that make it one of the best remakes in the series.
Yeah they are good. The only thing I wish they had was the improvements to combat from the very gen after it. They improved upon combat making a difference between physical and special moves. So an Ice Punch from a Machamp would scale with its attack power instead like it should have always done. A lot of monsters in the prior gens had attacks that while made sense, unfortunately they couldn't utilize the move proper due to how the scaling worked. So FR and LG are unfortunately missing this.
i feel like the physical/special split kinda fricked a lot of gen 1 mons irreparably since they were originally specced out with the older system in mind
much better they got their remake as something resembling the original
offensively it buffed all of them and made some of them outright ridiculous like gyarados. Fringe defensive mons like weezing got worse at tanking though. You could argue that it kickstarted powercreep but that largely came later with massive movepool expansions and the overabundance of high power, low downside moves. Of all the pre-split mons pretty much the only one that got nerfed aka felt noticeably weaker all around was typlosion
by fricked i kinda mean it just fricked everything around and not really in a good way imo. it was the second new huge mechanic change that had been grafted onto the same mons
but that's the thing, it didn't frick anything in the grand scheme of things. At worst you can say it upped the offensive floor of things. Even then there were an abundance of walls, tanks, and stoppers. In exchange you get an attacking system that actually makes sense with every pokemon being able to use its type's moves
>since they were originally specced out with the older system in mind
you're full of shit and i hope you know that, gen 1 is full of pokemon that could not even use their own types/signature moves because they were on the opposite split (kingler, gyarados, gengar, etc)
the only gen 1 mon that got fricked by the split was alakazam, and it was a minor nuisance compared to losing access to the elemental punches in gen 3 anyway
youre missing the point moron
im saying they wouldve been shitty remakes if they changed the game so fundamentally like that. fights wouldve likely been alternatively boring, or bullshit, in equal measure. unless they also changed a lot of the line-ups, which is also a bad idea for doing a remake imo
Yeah but Alakazam could take it because in literally every gen up to current, Psychic is one of the best types in the game. Alakazam never went below UU in the entire history of pokemon, the nerf was barely a nerf. Psychic is like Water, it will never be bad ever.
Ok Baphomet gay.
The split definitely fricked Typhlosion by taking away Thunderpunch though that was obviously a Gen 2 pokemon
Someone already said it but typhlosion is like the only offensive pokemon that actually got outright fricked by the split, basically every other offensive pokemon benefitted from it.
A real gen 1 fan would be disgusted by them
Hey is anyone around? I got a question about HGSS if anyone is kind enough to answer
ask google
what is it
Objectively better than the originals. I bought Red on release day after watching the Nintendo Power video, so I'm not letting nostalgia get in the way. They are better games.
That being said, the extreme jank/shit movesets etc of the originals were kind of part of the gen 1 experience.
>Objectively better than the originals
impossible, considering how shitty the music sounds in the remake
yea thats definitely the worst part
pokeymans sound font in the GBA era was absolutely atrocious. not that the GBA really sounds great even on a good day
RSE wasn't totally horrible, at least the music was made with the samples used in mind. GBA games generally had pretty terrible sound, yeah
>Objectively better than the originals.
cringe
I don't personally like them since they make Kanto seem more bland, the remixes are bad, and the new content for the most part is lackluster.
There's also bs limitations like not letting golbat evolve
yes. I can only play alone because the colorful graphics and pretty animations make my pee pee stiffen:/
I thought they were alright, but at the time when they came out I remember being annoyed that Game Freak was going back to Kanto AGAIN. By that point, we had:
>Kanto (red/blue)
>Kanto but with Pikachu (yellow)
>post-game gimped Kanto (gold/silver)
>post-game gimped Kanto with Japan-only features cut in the western release (crystal)
Finally in gen 3 we seemed to be out of Kanto for good, then lo and behold.
It's interesting how a lot of people ITT wished that the gen 2 pokemon weren't locked out of the main campaign until post-game. I'm doing a campaign right now out of the Essence romhack and haven't really felt like the campaign suffers from not having gen 2 mons until the post-game. But at the same time I've thought about how cool it'd be for Kanto to be full of gen 1 and 2 mons with gen 3 mons being the ones locked out until the post-game so that you could fill up the national Pokedex with just one game (I've even considered making a romhack like that), but I get that Game Freak wouldn't have done that since they wanted kids to buy the other gen 3 games (FRLG basically only existed so that kids could get the missing gen 1 mons that weren't in RS and Colosseum).
I absolutely loved FireRed when I played it, but I think it's not for everyone. If you don't care much for the originals, an old game with slightly better graphics won't be much interesting either. On the other hand, if you're a hardcore fan of the originals and you do shit like naming your pokemons with specific names and placing them in specific places because you know exactly how the RNG works, these remakes will be worthless. But if you're somewhere in between those extremes, I think they're very enjoyable.
Lotsa pokemon on /vr/ lately
yes, though a lot of people don't like the difficulty being decreased a bit.
Not sure why HeartGold and SoulSilver are beloved masterpieces and these games are so hated and shit on constantly when they basically did the same thing by porting an old game to the current gen, with all the benefits and failures involved. The discrepancy is pretty huge.
probably because gen 4 brought so much noticeable QoL stuff and advancements in general compared to gen 3. HGSS rides that wave while having all the gen 2 nostalgia stuff
FRLG tries to stay strict to the originals and avoids a lot gen 2/3 features until after the post game in a really annoying way, whereas HGSS actually take advantage of being a gen 4 game from the get-go with a lot of new content available immediately and giving you the freedom to trade and get cross-gen shit whenever you want.
If you're gonna have all these new features eventually anyway then HGSS did it the better way. People would probably b***h about HGSS too if they also locked a bunch of things behind the post game.
Its really hard to beat the charm of Gen 1. I love the mostly terrible sprites especially the back sprites, I love how broken the battle mechanics can get, the numerous somehow iconic glitches, plus just the atmosphere of pokemania at its peak in the real world it was all just a perfect storm and I still come back to Gen 1 and 2 pretty often to relive it all. Stadium 1 and 2 connectivity also really elevated things to the next level. I continued to play Pokemon after it peaked, and while I enjoyed some stuff from Gen 3 and did get pretty into the Sinnoh games(definitely my 3rd favorite gen), they never recaptured the magic for me.
I personally gave up with Gen 5, the games became way too easy and formulaic and I hated how serious the stories started to take themselves and shove copious amounts of slow and uninteresting text boxes in your face to try to tell a "real" story that falls flat on its face and is embarrassing to read. The games Gen 5 and onwards stop you dead in your tracks to dump text at you so frequently it puts Metal Gear Solids codecs to shame(not a diss I love MGS but it has a good story). Even if I could look beyond that what's especially killed it for me is the Pokemon designs and the world designs and layouts. Gen 5 was a literal hallway iirc and it didn't get any better from what I can see. I can't really articulate what made the monster designs of Gens 1-4 better, theres a number I simply just hate the concept of Car Keys, trash bag, ice cream, chandelier, but even the ones that don't immediately offend me just lack that X factor I can't put my finger on and aren't memorable or interesting.
Oh right this is about FRLG. They're ok. Favorite thing about them is probably the music, the trainer battle theme is insane. Plays and looks perfectly fine but if I'm playing Gen 1 I'm going for the soulful originals. Im actually playing Blue right now! Started a new file the other day and am trying to use Pokemon Ive never picked before picrel
Gen 7 was particularly awful for long, inane dialog dumps. 6 wasn't as bad, but it was probably the most BABYMODE BRAINDEAD easy of the series. I personally liked Gen 8 more than I expected, but I mostly just liked the parts where I was doing normal Pokemon things on normal routes and not any of the open area raid battle shit. Haven't played Gen 9 because at this point my interest is finally dead.
Legends Arceus is the only 3D era pokemon game worth playing.
this game is fricking horrible with the text dumps too, it got so fricking boring
regardless, i agree, the actual gameplay was decent, but practically everything else was terrible
sure
the gen 3 mechanics lend themselves well to the mons and battles
theres some minor line-up changes, but especially in regards to gym leaders, generally for the better
Not a big fan
Did Gen 4 have the most complicated dungeons or was it 3?
I think Sinnoh did. And I think it is because of how sloggy that game was that they made Unova as linear as it was.
>sloggy
Normalgay cancer killing Pokemon confirmed.
They're better than the originals but worse than the originals if you include Pokemon Stadium
Only Pokemon remake that's not better than the original is Gen 3 remakes
Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee are way better than Pokemon Yellow
embarrassing post
FR/LG has the Battle Tower, there's no need for Stadium
No, it did not. It had a gimped imitation of it that was about mindless speed and not actual tactics.
What tactics? There are less tactics involved in Stadium since there are less battle mechanics in general.
Working around being limited in Pokemon and not being allowed to use your own items, for one.
The mod support is insane. Bump the difficult, randomize items/‘mons/trainers within reasonable constraints, and do nuzlocke, and it’s genuinely a thrilling experience. I’ll never understand why liking this gen gets you branded a genwunner. It’s good, and I can only think of a few gens that are better.
Pokemon games are all the same trash. Its like FIFA for nerds. Same shit rehashed over and over again with new players/Pokemon
this might surprise you but most people just want the same stuff over and over again with the obviously bad stuff fixed, some new content, and sensible tech progressions
Yeah most people are morons
I don't play new Pokemon games personally, I just learn about the new Pokemon and like or hate their designs.
Honestly, I'm one of those people who makes fun of the of modern Pokemon design philosophies a lot, but a good portion of my favorite designs are modern ones too. I just think they tend to go really overboard with object mon and too on the nose cultural references. Like oh wow you put a top hat on Wheezing cause....British, location based on the UK, I get it!! you made Wheezing lamer gj.
>games within the same series have the same basic gameplay
Wow, no shit, moron. It's almost always like this, especially with RPGs, unless they decide to frick with the winning formula like they did to Final Fantasy and fans usually end up hating it when they do.
No. Not only are they barebones in most regards, they actively refuse to implement certain new mechanics through obtuse workarounds, like preventing you from getting new evolutions of Gen 1 mons by making friendship evolutions simply not work until you get the national dex and not having a day/night cycle for Eevee. There's also the lack of the pokemart theme despite it having already been introduced in Ruby and Sapphire. If they'd allowed newer evolutions into the Kanto dex and used the pokemart theme, among other things, I'd respect these remakes a lot more.
I'm replaying Blue and Silver at this very moment and so far I fail to see how RB is as good as you say.
Right now in Blue I got to Saffron and in Silver defeated Chuck.
You people say GS is a literal kusoge and the game that killed the franchise but I'm feeling more compelled to finishing Silver than Blue.
You guys are full of shit.
Every single point that makes R/B look supposedly better than FR/LG showcased in this thread is a case of "I spend more time regurgitating arguments I saw online than I do actually playing the games I'm discussing".
It's not bad, but it's dull.
It doesn't take advantage of the more capable software to improve on the originals and be its own thing. The only time they go off track it's when they shoehorn the sevii islands sidequest after Blaine.
GSC and RSE have different themes for rival encounters and villain team, that's just one thing I find is missing. It is a bit tiring that literally all battles but the gym leaders' and E4 and champ have the regular trainer battle theme in the BG.
Also they didn't even bother to animate the sprites.
What do you lads think about pokemmo?