why did gen 3 drop the ball so hard after a perfect set of sequels? they should have just skipped GBA hardware and all that ruckus
 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
|
why did gen 3 drop the ball so hard after a perfect set of sequels?
why did gen 3 drop the ball so hard after a perfect set of sequels? they should have just skipped GBA hardware and all that ruckus
|
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
|
>why did gen 3 drop the ball so hard
Mainline Pokemon games have only ever had three good directors, coincidentally between they made the only worthwhile Pokemon games
>Satoshi Tajiri (creator, gens 1 and 2)
>Shigeki Morimoto (Emerald, HG/SS)
>Takao Unno (Black 2/White 2)
I've been saying this for years. Pokemon fans are subhuman brainlets.
What happened to the creator after gen 2?
Replaced by diversity hires to gain brownie points on Twitter
Was that shit even a thing back then?
Twitter went online in 2007.
so no
It was obviously a joke making fun of the people who unironically believe this about everything bad that happens.
Tajiri envisioned gold and silver to be the final Pokemon games. Others wanted to keep milking the cow.
enjoying his billions in his mansion, what else
That Morimoto guy is the only one worth shit
>one actual creator and two dudes who only know how to address issues of pre existing games
Turns out pokemon only had one worthwhile director.
Holy shit, this.
Only trannies and zoomers disagree so don't even bother (You)in' me you filthy rats.
lol gen2 was awful. Johto was boring as frick with shit lvls and kanto was a letdown. not even the new pokemon saved it.
Most of the new pokemon weren't even in Johto
They were in Kanto and severely underleveled
Gen 2 was both loved and hated for the same thing. Adding Kanto. Adding Kanto ruined the level curve, caused tons of emptiness, and caused uneven pokemon distribution. But the hype of going back to Kanto made it loved. If GameFreak wasn't incompetent and Iwata wasn't smarter than an amateur coder, Gen 2 might have been vastly more enjoyable.
>Adding Kanto ruined the level curve, caused tons of emptiness, and caused uneven pokemon distribution.
This is hindsight talk. No one at the time analysed these games to death like we do now. The hype was just dying down in general, as all trends do.
were you around for HG and SS remakes? the hype was sky high because it was gen 2, the peak of the series
>Adding Kanto ruined the level curve, caused tons of emptiness, and caused uneven pokemon distribution
Literally stuff no one ever gave a shit about.
Nevermind the level curve is a non issue in gen 2 and by the time you beat all 16 leaders you are leveled up enough to destroy red.
Kanto ruined the level curve, caused tons of emptiness, and caused uneven pokemon distribution
>Literally stuff no one ever gave a shit about.
yes people did. there was a lot of hate when the remakes got released.
>there was a lot of hate when the remakes got released.
Yeah, that was many years later after people analysed the frick out of the Pokemon games. The bunch of 10 year olds that played GSC gave zero shits about the level curve.
>no D/P/Pt
kek nice shit taste
Diamond and Pearl are god awful, what are you smoking?
Oh shit, it’s true. All bangers.
It's a shame that I skipped Gen 2 during my childhood. I played Pokemon Emerald back in 2005 and I thought it was alright I guess. I later played Pokemon Crystal on emulator back in 2011. I thought it was pretty fricking good and I would've been let down by gen 3.
What's so good about Black 2/White 2??? I've never played B/W.
I've never played HG/SS when it came out. Should I give it a chance???
I've been playing since R/B/Y and gen 3 is my favorite.
Does this confirm that Jesus existed in the Pokemon universe? I wonder what his team was?
the apostles were hypnos
>jesus had 12 pokemon around at anytime
fricking cheater
Hw was like N and always got whatever Pokemon were in the area to obey him
All Pokemon, but probably Mew as his primary
i thought this guy was pokejesus?
No, he was a king who accidentally became an immortal hobo after launching his recreational mcnuke.
ah i see
mainline pokemon games are pure shit cause from gen 1 to 9 its just the same teambuilding scheme of: starter, route 1 bird, the three new common pokemon and box legendary, with absolutely no strategy in mind cause you can just get a set of 4 max power moves for each mon and steamroll through the game
each gen was a reboot except for G/S/C/HG/SS
first route has ferrets
What is Hoothoot?
can't teach that b***h fly, so it must be some kind of squirrel too
Thats when gamefreak realized they could get away with it
You misstyped gen 4 there.
>why did gen 3 drop the ball so hard after a perfect set of sequels?
Simple, they didn't.
GSC and the lacklustre tertiary media for the gen crashed the pokemania hype train with no survivors to the extent where GF was afraid of the next games not selling as well.
horseshit, mania peaked out during gen 2, and gen 3 DROPPED THE BALL it's why i phrased it
>mania peaked out during gen 2
Nope, you can see it in the sales of both the games and merchandise mid gen and again, GF weren't sure the following games wouldn't sell. That's damning evidence in itself.
But hey, that's what happens when you make a game that looks the same as the first one and makes the new pokemon rarer than the old pokemon.
you better check those sales bruh, gen 3 blew it
He's right though, gen 2 tanked in the middle of the gen.
Gen 3 basically saved pokemon.
???
You don't quite understand what "mid gen" means do you.
I guess not, what do you mean by it?
There's no such thing as "mid gen" when there were only two gens at that time, it wasn't an established series yet. Pokemania for RBY was extreme and was finally starting to burn out. GSC revitalized pokemon despite this.
>There's no such thing as "mid gen" when there were only two gens at that time
Of course there was anon, the middle of a generation isn't determined by the next but rather the beginning and end of production and sales.
If pokemon began and ended at 1 then we would still have a mid point where sales began to decline.
In any case 2 began to decline rapidly at that point.
>anon says middle
>goes with first games
Johtoddlers everyone.
So you mean yellow and the like? Why would you call those middle and why are you so concerned with them?
>that's what happens when you make a game that looks the same as the first one
It literally went from black and white to color, and the art finally looked like the anime.
Here it was basically over when gen 2 rolled around.
Same in bongtopia. More people were starting to get into yugioh at that time.
Wrong.
>pokemania peaked out during gen 2,
It was different. I was eating Poliwhirl cereal.
Gen 3 was the first time it felt by the numbers to me. Groudon, Kyogre and Ray look like digimon compared to the legendary birds and dogs. Hoenn isn't very memorable. In RBY Team Rocket was a fun evil gang, and it was nice to completely disband them in GSC. In Gen 3 'Team New Flavor" starts its trend.
>wow pokemon really fell off after the one I played as a little kid!
Pokemon has always been shit for toddlers. Why do you even care anymore?
Nah. It got slightly better again with gen 4 and 5, then dived back down. 3 is a clear hole in the road.
>STILL hasn't been topped to this day
How did they do it?
She was topped even before her introduction.
And just one episode later.
i cannot help but imagine a hypno luring them behind some bushes *just* out of sight for half an hour and then they return back to where they were with no memories, and mr mime too
Gen 2 better
do you think her pussy gets wrinkly like her feet if she spends enough time in the water?
Does your dick get wrinkly in water?
Except you're completely wrong, and it's the best gen
t. played 1st gen on release and all subsequent gens up to gen 4
I wish ash had the same sass that he did when he traveled with misty and brock
Gen 3 is pretty damn kino, a little easy but it's awesome
IGN was unironically right about too much water, even the originals had that issue.
Black person it's like the entire mossdeep area and nothing more
i wish we would get a too much forestry now, the treetop village in Emerald really gets the noggin joggin
The GBA and DS era were the golden age of quality pokemon games, dummy. And don't claim Gen 3 was the one that droppwd the ball when Gamefreak themselves said that Gen 2 was the biggest drop in popularity in the franchise history.
they should have stuck with GBC graphics on GBA, and included all regions up to that point in the game, able to choose where to begin and advance to and end at, to maximize replayability
and then on DS they should have made Pokemon Stadium 3, and if you insert your gen 3 you get to store pokemon back and forth and play with your teams and such, maximum qol features, play against people online using your GBA pokemon
and then gen 4 could have been on 3DS, without all the crappy games gen 3-6, gen 4 on 3DS would have shined like a fricking diamond, and the graphical quality jump would have been fricking insane, and the 3D effect could have been ironed and polished to a T and work with zero slowdown
that's my head canon and i'm yet to be refuted. less pokemon = more.
All regions in one game will always be moronic. The level curve isn't designed for it at all.
it can be, the whole point of even using numbers like in RPGs is to provide an objective metric for advancement, it would be stupid easy to balance it anywhich way, which is the point
-start in kanto, go to johto, go to hoenn
-or start in hoenn, go to kanto, go to johto
-all the numerical values adjust as you go
-all the teams shift around to match yours
2ez
>it would be stupid easy to balance it anywhich way
It wouldn't. Not unless you took all of the player's Pokemon with each new region, which would defeat the purpose of there being just one game.
Look at any Pokemon's learnset. They generally stop learning new moves around the 60s. So about halfway through region 2 you'd just have nothing to learn, your Pokemon would be completely stagnant. Then you have to worry about the level cap being 100, and raising that is a whole new discussion on moronation.
And what are you going to do with wild encounters? Spawn level 80s in the first route of Sinnoh?
>It wouldn't.
it fricking WOULD
you never play a god damn tabletop RPG before?!
if everything is fricking statted, then you can just have underlying mechanics shift things around on the fricking fly
How are you going to handle learnsets? Evolutions? Wild encounters?
You're moronic.
it's fricking obvious how you handle those you fricking moron.
YES high levels in the wild, and YES there would be moves to learn at high level too, and even YES you can optionally turn in your high levels and start over with a new team of low levels, it might even be a wise choice, such as if you elect to do so at the beginning of a region then you get a free starter again, and once you make it to the elite four then you can unlock using your previous pokemon too
like, it's just too awesome for you to comprehend or something, wow
So you just cut out all progression toward the latter half of the game? That's dumb and your game ideas suck.
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT YOU FRICKING IDIOT
You're not ever going to fill out a full learnset for a Pokemon all the way to level 100, not without it having huge gaps that makes the individual regions way less fun.
why not, why not add in more moves, that's what you want right? that's also what i said before above
>why not, why not add in more moves
The game already has so many of them, and other moves are going to get power crept real hard just to suit your stupid idea. Are you just going to buff Fire Blast to 300BP so you can fit in a dozen more Flamethrower clones?
why would you buff Fire Blast, you can just add in more moves, Volcanic Torch sounds cooler imho
And how would you possibly balance those moves?
i don't like large gaps without learning moves either, so i would add more moves, i've had an idea where some levels you gain additional stats than normal too, the most important thing is you hear a ding followed by acquiring something
later Pokemon games are adding all kinds of stuff i had always thought were needed for the series, so i'm not full of it, i'm thinking about the future and i'm pretty good at it so far
>so i would add more moves
And how would you possibly balance those with the current moves?
At this point, you're completely restructuring the game just for one idea.
yeah, that's game design for you
you change a few things and you have to change other things to accommodate them.
i wouldn't even make Pokemon games the way they are now if i were leading. but RPGs are perfect for scaling things up or down as needed throughout the game, it's the point.
Dismantling an entire game just to fit in one idea is not good game design.
Not that anon, but Pokemon's game design is archaic and should be rebuilt from the ground up.
why would you possibly think that? you like retreading the same water? too much water, famalam
>but RPGs are perfect for scaling things up or down as needed throughout the game, it's the point
This. Levels ruin RPGs. It should always be about stat management if it needs to be.
>Levels ruin RPGs.
Elaborate?
You just have base stats throughout the entire game and layer in skills/moves. You don't need levelling and Exp in Pokemon.
Having a system like that would work better for what they want to do with Violet being open.
And if you want grinding, just have the levelling attributed to a single stat like health or whatever.
Sounds like that would damage the sense of progression?
Any Level system in any game ruins progression because there's a bar. Either you're at the enemy's level, above or below it.
Even scaling statistics hurt progression.
Pokemon would be better off if progression focused on move sets and team compositions for specific areas. That encourages capturing, TM hunting in dungeons and some grinding.
With levels, your starter just becomes overlevelled and your team stays static because of the exp investment you put it.
>your starter just becomes overlevelled and your team stays static because of the exp investment you put it
Yeah, but your way would make them interchangeable. Don't you want the player to experience a bond with their team, and try to make it through the encounters with them, instead of just switching to counter whatever obstacle?
I'm not saying you're wrong, I just have some doubts. I'm currently making a game that involves this, so I'm curious to hear dissenting ideas.
there should be a game mechanic that causes you to bond with different pokemon you have, like in the yellow version, but for all your pokemon
they should jump out of balls and demand to follow you on foot sometimes until you pet them and feed them and use them for some battles
^all of that would be so much better than being stuck with a single overleveled monster
Yeah but game mechanics aren't what the player is feeling. A "bond bar" or whatever doesn't make me feel for the mons.
So your concern is with overleveling one or two mons? What if exp gain from fighting lower levels was severely capped?
i think there's better forms of progression the series could take, to make it enticing and exciting to capture all the pokemon for instance.
at its core pokemon is part collectathon, so it could take some inspiration from banjo-kazooie and super mario 64 even.
you mentioned bonding, so i figured i would chime in on that, and as i was saying it would be neat if your pokemon acted more real instead of robots you command to fight.
>i think there's better forms of progression the series could take
Hey, I'd love to hear it. Maybe I just don't know better.
>at its core pokemon is part collectathon
Yeah, maybe a Pokedex that gets filled with aditional information as you capture more of the same species or something.
>it would be neat if your pokemon acted more real instead of robots you command to fight
Yeah, that seems like a lot of work though. You'd have to go deep on the whole petting zoo aspect.
That's why Pokemon is cozy. It's your team of 6 for 20+ hours.
But then I think about the Box and the way the game pushes you to capture things (at least in the marketing) but all these Pokelads just sit on the computer. What's the point then?
Yeah, good point. The "gotta catch them all" line was for the American release though, not in Japan. But yeah, no one wants to replace their team members all the time. Even the early anime rarely did that, and made a huge deal about it when it happened.
Ah, so like how the TWEWY games do it? The only thing leveling affects in those games is HP and drop rate for your pins. ATK, DEF, and Style/Bravery are all entirely up to the player.
you get it, and like i said i wouldn't even make Pokemon the way it's made right now, why can't it have real-time combat for instance, why isn't every battle a double or triple like virtually every other JRPG in existence, then it would make more sense to use stat boosting and nerfing moves with your party.
i think it would be great to adopt the Pokken Tournament combat in an open world game, where you get into fighting game combat for battles, at least then there would be more skill involved, it has to be more engaging than
>i take a turn
>you take a turn
I think more dynamic switching of Pokemon during battles is more interesting rather than immediate party size.
Something like elemental attack combos.
that sounds cool, i like that idea
the anime gave me all kinds of ideas when i watched that, it makes battles seem much more exciting when you can dodge, when you can use the environment
You always want to capture the feeling of the anime. Everyone remembers the "Onix getting wet" scene in the first season.
Gentle puzzle situations like that would give the series more impact in Gym battles.
I always remember Ash reaching a gym and getting knocked back, only to go find and capture a nearby Pokemon to use in the gym.
that was my favorite parts too, Pokemon was a very slice of life anime, and it explored the setting more
>why can't it have real-time combat for instance
Because that would suck massive balls. The whole point of the weakness system would be gone if it became a twitch skills game. My fire beats your water because I'm just a better player.
i first beat Red version with just a charizard i would just tank water types, lol
do you not like the idea of a fire type beating a water type because you played it better? seems more engaging than
>i beat your fire type with my water type because you're simply weak against it
The main quest was always easy.
It shifts the focus away from tactics towards twitch skill, making the entire purpose of types useless, which is pretty much the core of its gameplay. Why even play Pokemon at that point?
well it could be a good idea to have every battle be two-four at a time, so the tactics can be more tactical
the neat thing about Pokemon is how you can build your party from hundreds of various monsters, would be nice to have them all in a battle at once
Oh absolutely, it should have been a 3v3 game form the start imo. But real-time, as cool as it sounds, would go against the formula.
Different anonymous, but your idea sounds like complete shit. Not only would I refuse to buy that game, I would complete boycott all further Pokémon games after.
then don't, you're a fricking idiot
i proposed a really great game
and you're just horrendously stupid
>more content?!
>replayability?!
you excited for yet another reboot of Pokemon buddy pal chum o' mind? what's it at, gen 9, gen 10? still doing the same thing, i bet you hated gen 6, and gen 8, didn't you homosexual?
>Gen 2 was the biggest drop in popularity
Yeah, from megahype to just extremely popular. Nothing stays a hype forever, gen 2 was well loved, gen 3 was mixed.
The Pokemon games have gotten better and better with each gen save for X and Y.
Gen 3 actually felt like progression instead of just Kanto with extra stuff
>why did gen 3 drop the ball so hard after a perfect set of sequels
Even though gen 3 blew the frick out of 2 people weren't interested in it as much as 2 because
1) 2 rode the coattails of 1
2) 2 being a near carbon copy of 1 visually ran into the "you already have it effect" which killed pokemon's popularity mid gen.
>2 being a near carbon copy of 1 visually
Where did you get this idea? 3 looks more like 2 than 2 like 1.
>3 looks more like 2 than 2 like 1.
Are you blind or something?
Anon, 2's overworld sprites are downgraded versions of 1's.
Yeah, but they made the jump to color and more importantly, the pokemon and their moves look waaay better compared to the first game.
>Yeah, but they made the jump to color
Moot point. They're still visually the same while the only visuals gen 2 and 3 shares are a handful of back sprites.
Not a moot point at all, moving to color was a big change at the time. Gen 1's spites were absolute dogshit and didn't look like they did in the concept art or the anime, that was another big change.
>Not a moot point at all
Oh course it is, color doesn't change base design at all.
Irrelevant, it's a leap in graphics on its own. You also keep ignoring the Pokemon sprites being much improved, and the SFX being way better. In no way did gen2 look the same as gen1. The jump to gen3 wasn't as impressive at the time, and more importantly, the Pokemon looked off.
>You also keep ignoring the Pokemon sprites being much improved,
Which they weren't. What happened was that pokemon settled on a design style once the anime came out, that's why there isn't much difference in design from Yellow to gen 2.
>and the SFX being way better.
It used the exact same sound effects anon. It seems like you're allowing nostalgia to blind you.
>The jump to gen3 wasn't as impressive at the time
Also false, the new visuals were the first thing people noticed about gen 3 obviously. I still have magazines where readers praised it over gen 2.
>the Pokemon looked off.
The only pokemon that looked off were the ones not found natively in RSE making that a moot point.
>What happened was that pokemon settled on a design style once the anime came out
Correct, and that's important for visual appeal. The sprite work in 1 was also just pretty terrible.
>It used the exact same sound effects anon.
Special effects anon, what the moves looked like.
>the new visuals were the first thing people noticed about gen 3 obviously
Visuals are always the first thing people notice. The jump was smaller, since they got color out of the way already.
>The only pokemon that looked off were the ones not found natively in RSE making that a moot point.
Wrong way round. The designs for gen 3 were an obvious departure from the previous games, and not in a good way.
>Correct
Which means you accept that this point of your argument was false.
>Special effects anon
Which is also false, the majority of animations were the same. For example
As you can see minus the color the only difference is that GS is missing the charge animation. Only a handful of moves actually changed between gen 1 and 2.
>The jump was smaller, since they got color out of the way already.
Anon, color isn't a particularly large leap especially for game like GSC that just colored existing assets. Not to mention the first color pokemon game was was yellow anyway.
>The designs for gen 3 were an obvious departure from the previous games, and not in a good way
At this point you aren't even trying to form an argument. In any case no one felt the same way you did since the designs followed a similar design philosophy to gen 2 to the point where the rarer gen 2 monsters were seen as gen 3 mon such as Skarmory for example.
>Which means you accept that this point of your argument was false.
Might wanna absorb the rest of my sentence instead.
>Which is also false, the majority of animations were the same. For example
Sorry, but that's a cherry pick. Many moves were vastly improved.
>Anon, color isn't a particularly large leap
Of course it was. You just added a whole new dimension of visuals.
>the first color pokemon game was was yellow anyway.
Even as a little kid at the time I could see that was just tinting.
>no one felt the same way you did
Obvious horse shit anon. Gen 3's monsters are relatively unpopular and it sold relatively poorly. Gen 1 had the Toriyama feel, gen 2 made it more cute, gen 3 looked like aliens.
>gen 1, derivative shit (from toriyama)
>gen 2, derivative shit (from gen 1)
>gen 3, mysterious and unique set of monsters
Accidental self-own?
>Might wanna absorb the rest of my sentence instead
I did, it didn't have anything that wasn't already covered previously.
>but that's a cherry pick
It's an example. There are many other moves that are the same, have minor differences or are straight up worse.
>You just added a whole new dimension of visuals.
No, it didn't. Color isn't as important a factor as much as details are and Gen 2 had far less detailed environments than any other game. Then you have animations on top of that, even something as simple as the doors opening, water rippling and reflections gave the world new life that wasn't present in previous games.
>Even as a little kid at the time I could see that was just tinting.
Moot point both yellow and GSC used the same method. Almost every gbc game did and considering you didn't know that I doubt you identified that as a child.
>Gen 3's monsters are relatively unpopular and it sold relatively poorly.
You are aware that the most unpopular generations in that regard are 2, 4 and 5 correct?
>gen 2 made it more cute, gen 3 looked like aliens.
I don't even know what you mean by that because none of the gen 3 mon look particularly strange compared to gen 2. The only difference is probably that in gen 3 monsters with lines and circles on them didn't just have them placed haphazardly on them like gen 2.
>it's a leap in graphics on its own.
NTA but GS was still compatible with the original GB, that's why it was visually on par, or worse in some cases, than gen 1.
and thankfully they were compatible, that's how i experienced them
>he really don't know what "mid gen" means
Reminder that in gentoo only 4 of the Johto gym leaders had gen 2 Pokemon.
but muh kanto
and that is a problem, why?
>why did gen 3 drop the ball so hard
GF never had possession of the figurative ball, they just kept getting lucky.
Oof, true. I think they're still doing it.
Gen 3 is when the gameplay became slower to try to keep longevity for shorter games
Compare the walking speed alone in gen 1 or 2 to the GBA ones
It's about 50-60% slower o n the GBa
same with battle animations, etc
The whole point was to make the game seem 'as long' as the first two gens while actually being far shorter
It's extremely fricking noticeable if you play the G/S 'remakes' on the DS
This is probably a good theory. Diamond/Pearl did the same thing.
Who won?
Who's next?
You decide.
>Wow it took all of you to kill me
>pokemon holds not just the top 1, but the top 3 GBA games sold
>why did it fail?
Why are you frickers so out of touch? Do you honestly believe that RS were met with mediocre reception?
Posting a smug anime girl doesn't make you less wrong.
Oh no, it only sold 15 million despite the fact that pokemania was already dead before it launched, how awful.
Different times. You'll never get a Pokemon Red Blue situation ever again.
You realise your chart shows that the "hole" formed at crystal, correct?
It confirms what everyone has been saying this entire time that GSC killed pokemania.
I liked it aside from everything after mossdeep and before sootopolis
Gen 3 was the first gen that actually tried to expand the setting and in a meaningful way and deviate from the original artstyle, so its not surprising it gets the most shit from mentally ill 30 YO nostalgiagays
How was gen 3 a letdown? If anything gen 2 was the letdown. That shit was so boring to me as a kid that I never even bothered with the Kanto gyms.
i loved it, it was MORE pokemon, and of course the end game rewards
>...
https://github.com/Rangi42/polishedcrystal/releases/tag/v3.0.0-beta-nightly
Good excuse to revisit gen 2, if you were wanting to.
qrd?
I've played a bit of Crystal Clear but I'm guessing it's pretty different from that given how much of a crazy overhaul CC is
Polished Crystal pretty much adds as much later-gen content to the game as possible. Abilities, physical/special split, redesigning the PC storage to be more like gen 3+, cross-gen evos, regional forms, adding some side areas to Johto based on HGSS or Pokewalker areas, stuff like that.
It also better makes use of the GBC hardware, making maps look better and running at 60fps.
https://github.com/Rangi42/polishedcrystal/blob/master/FEATURES.md
polished is takes the base game and just builds on top of it, kinda like how CC's main point is the open world nature.
polished offers optional phsy/spec split, abilities, improved bag space, optional level curve (up to 100), restored (all of kanto) and expanded/extra maps (connecting water ways i.e. goldenrod to olivine, bonus dungeons) etc.
the primary complaint is the current beta release cut pokemon for the other reply's additions. the probably-near-complete 9bit branch doubled the dex capacity and can be compiled instead to restore them along with the new dex interface.
Never played a Pokemon game in my life. Give me a good Pokemon game for a new coomer with nice girls in it
just go to a booru
Emerald and BW2.
The best part is that they're also the best games in the series.
Sun and Moon have the best coomer females, but skip them
Marnie's game!
Cute Marn
Sun and Moon have the best grills. However, you're better off just jacking off to fanart if your aim is to coom.
pmd explorers of sky is the best game in the franchise imo
The world, the music, the characters, all of it blends together perfectly to create a unique experience you don't get form other games in the series.
Even rescue team didn't have the partner growth from being that timid at the start.
pokepark was also a pretty fun series, and did the action battles first. I wish this franchise had more games where it was just pokemon in their own world.
take me back
I can't believe they ended the pmd ova with
>to be continued
I'm so glad when my mom took me shopping for my birthday all those years ago, I chose pic related instead of that other game I was looking at.
Why does the mainline series get stuck with
>angry dragon on colored background
For covers
But the spin offs get shit like
Cover makes them look tiny and unthreatening.
Design is plastic and makes them look like children's toys rather than badass monsters
not when you're a 10 year old holding it in your hands
That's exactly what we said about Ho-oh and especially lugia back in the say.
close up makes them look big. Angry/frowning faces make them look badass.
>holy shit it's the episode 1 legendary bird
>holy shit it's Lugia from the second movie
>close up makes them look big. Angry/frowning faces make them look badass.
Not really, everyone saw then as goofy birds and one phrase is distinctly remember from when I was a kid is "skin teeth" which turned off a lot of pokemon players back then.
The second movie also didn't help lugia out much because no one liked the plastic sheen it had.
>skin teeth
Here it was flesh teeth.
>Angry/frowning faces make them look badass.
homie no one looked at Ho-oh and saw it as anything more than a moronic turkey back then.
They slapped Entei and Raikou on the cover then they would've looked bad ass, especially Entei
typhlosion and feraligatr would have sufficed and followed gen 1's hint.
it being box legends since gen 2 sucks.