The VG Resource

I'm not denying or forgetting generation 3 had some great new features for it's time (double battles, battles where you had to work with someone else, improved berry system, etc.)

What I am trying to point out is what a lot of people seem to forget why generation 2 was pretty good despite the lack of exploration and shitty region. New features and improvements and what makes pokemon well, pokemon. Making it so that the idea of catching them all would constantly be expanding and evolving. Which means there will always be new strategies you'd have to develop facing newer pokemon that you're probably not familiar with, or not sure what they can do. G/S/C kind of got the ball rolling in that area.

---

(02-13-2012, 10:36 PM)Koopaul Wrote: [ -> ]But Gen 3 had the worst Pokemon in my opinion.

And it was such simple stuff too, that could easily be fixed.

Doesn't that look a thousand time better? All I did was change the eye and its charm level went up tenfold!

To be honest, Lunatone is missing a whole lot of character without red eyes.

I know you don't like how the majoity of pokemon look soulless in gen 3, or for their complexity. but christ, just because a pokemon has red eyes does not make it complex or bad.

Not all pokemon need to have a sort of charm to be likable to you. How the hell do you think venasaur managed to keep it's ugly looks, or how magnimite looked dull as hell, or even how fucking dugtrio were just three naked guys hiding under dirt with their heads out, hell you could even point out that magmar was ugly as shit back then.

My point is the way the design is made doesn't mean it's going to appeal to everyone, in fact that's why there are so many of them to begin with, to appeal to everyone. not just you. You can't really change the fact that there will be designs that everyone else likes and you won't. so why complain about it to begin with.

(02-13-2012, 10:37 PM)Radular Bastard Wrote: [ -> ]I really don't like that...
I love the designs in Gen 3 and it's are a large reason of why I consider it the best.

Well you got to understand I like simple, brightly colored, and cartoony. Makes things more iconic and recognizable.

That's why I never got into Digimon or Yu-Gi-Oh or whatever because their monsters where too complex or serious for me to love.

(02-13-2012, 10:38 PM)DioShiba Wrote: [ -> ]Not all pokemon need to have a sort of charm to be likable to you. How the hell do you think venasaur managed to keep it's ugly looks, or how magnimite looked dull as hell, or even how fucking dugtrio were just three naked guys hiding under dirt, hell you could even point out that magmar was ugly as shit back then. My point is the way the design is made doesn't mean it's going to appeal to everyone, in fact that's why there are so many of them to begin with.

Actually I don't think Venasaur or Magmar are ugly. I think they are goofy looking. I like goofy looking Pokemon too.

But Lickilicky was just lazy Gen 4!

Anyway these are my opinions.

I didn't really like the atmosphere in gen 3. Between the music and graphics and storytelling, it just didn't sit right with me. It lost some of that mysterious and naturey feeling that made me like the first two.

Could've been a matter of growing older or the GB->GBA transition, but I didn't dislike the atmosphere in Pokemon Black, which is newer.

Gen 3 is the best game in terms of interesting and new environmental mechanics. Aesthetically it is also one of the most appealing because I felt they took a risk when designing their Pokemon, while the ones from gen 4 were rather lackluster. Gen 3's designs were great - I just wish that it's successor's had taken the time to portray the designs as professionally as Gen 3 did. Gen 4 + 5 sprites for Gen 3 are either the same (in gen 4's case) or outright awful.

Mechanically, the Pokemon in gen 3 left a lot to be desired. Base stats were distributed rather poorly considering the lack of Physical/Special split, rendering a lot of Pokemon that were more physically inclined like Crawdaunt, Azumarill, Mightyena, etc. without reliable STAB thanks to Water/Dark being Special. Pokemon like Lotad and Seedot were hard to evolve with the Leaf Stone and Water Stone unavailable till late game. The Elite Four was such a gigantic difficulty curve it was ridiculous without some form of grinding.

Also the plot was cool at it's base but ended up being really dumb but w/e.

I still enjoy gen 3 a lot. It's the second best Pokemon game (B/W is the best imo).

B & W would be #1 for me if it wasn't for practically having to grind throughout the entire game. I hated that I was always behind everyone even though I trained as much as I could. I also don't like that you don't really et to rebattle trainers.

(02-13-2012, 10:51 PM)Cshad Wrote: [ -> ]Also the plot was cool at it's base but ended up being really dumb but w/e.

Emerald's plot is what got me back into Pokemon. I fell out of love with the little shits at the end of middle school but finally picked this game up (not even sure how) and started playing it nonstop for weeks. My team was Gardevoir, Manectric, and Breloom and I was very satisfied with all of them. This was before I had seen any of the new Pokemon and before I like any of the starters (felt uncomfortable with all of them). By the time it came to catch/meet Rayquaza in his tower, the game felt so epic for me.

That reminds me, actually, another thing I absolutely loved about Emerald is catching the legendaries. Catching Rayquaza in his epic tower in the middle of the ocean, deep sea diving to find a small cave with Kyogre in it, following the weather patterns to find the cave Groudon was in, solving the puzzle to unlock the 3 regis. All of it was bad ass, I wish they would have made more legendary encounters like this.

EDIT: I will admit it kind of throws out o a lot of the mysticism that the old games had, but shit, so did B/W (more so than R/S/E I think). I think D/P/P brought the mysticism that Koop was talking about but lost it 5th gen.

Expanding on what I said - I meant to say I felt Team Magma/Aqua were really, really dumb - at least what they turned into. I like the idea of expansion vs conservation but they just screwed it up somehow along the line. I loved the way the game went about making the Legendaries part of the plot and capturing them and shit like that (those additions Emerald had are what made Gen 3 enjoyable because R/S were lackluster by themselves) I just wish Team Magma/Aqua had been better.

I never really liked the 3rd gen, to be honest. Then again, I haven't really played it all that much. I had a copy of Emerald a while back, and got through most of the game (not all of it, for reasons I will explain in a minute). It felt really stiff and clunky to me, but I'm not sure why. I don't like a lot of the Pokemon designs, though some of them are very nice (and compared to gen 4, they are wonderful). So, I wasn't incredibly affiliated with it to begin with, but what really killed it for me was that, after going through most of the game, I hit a rather serious bug. I checked a walkthrough, and apparently I was supposed to go down some stairs in a cave to talk with someone. When I went down these stairs, I ended up in a Pokemon Centre, with no-one there, and the exit. The only way out was using Dig or Teleport. Since I couldn't progress with the game, it kind of ruined it in my eyes, and I've never tried it again (for fear that the same bug will happen again). I do mean to pick up a copy of Ruby to try, though, because I feel I should.

I do like Black and White so far, though. The designs are much truer to the original style, for the most part, and playing it somehow felt really nostalgic (where the 3rd gen games just didn't feel anything like the Pokemon I was familiar with). My favourite games, though, are probably HG/SS. I loved Gold and Silver as a child, and also Red and Blue. I played Leaf Green, but something felt wrong about it. I still can't explain what it was, but something about the style of the 3rd gen just felt... off. Soul Silver, on the other hand, was wonderful. It reawakened all the nostalgia I had from playing Gold version. It was fantastic.

In short, I've never felt much of a connection to the gen 3 games, unlike all of the rest (though less so with Pearl. It was a little more of the right style than I felt the gen 3 ones were, but not quite). I have absolutely no idea, or reason, for saying this is the case, but something made the games just hit a discord with me. That's not to say I think they were bad, though. On the contrary, they did some wonderful things to the game engine, and some of the new Pokemon were great. (In fact, Gardevoir is one of my favourites, now, and is part of my general main team, which consists otherwise of Gen 1 Pokemon).

(02-13-2012, 10:36 PM)Koopaul Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2012, 04:22 PM)Cshad Wrote: [ -> ]Expanding on what I said - I meant to say I felt Team Magma/Aqua were really, really dumb - at least what they turned into. I like the idea of expansion vs conservation but they just screwed it up somehow along the line. I loved the way the game went about making the Legendaries part of the plot and capturing them and shit like that (those additions Emerald had are what made Gen 3 enjoyable because R/S were lackluster by themselves) I just wish Team Magma/Aqua had been better.

But... it's a kid's game, though. Can they really delve too much more into the themes that Magma/Aqua represent without getting way too serious? I mean, the whole "should Pokemon be free" thing with Team Plasma had a ton going for it, but when the game is for kids and the game is based around actually using these things they had to use a cop-out answer like "it's just better when humans and Pokemon are together". So... I don't know, what did you expect/want? What would have made Team Magma/Aqua in your eyes?


Oh and I like Gen III's world and designs the most, though I may be slightly biased. I don't think so though, because I have the most irrational nostalgia for Gen II, seeing as it was my first game that I really put a lot of time into, even though I had Yellow. I just really like the direction they took things in R/S/E, where not all of the Pokemon have to be super cartoony. I think Gen V probably has the best balance between the two sort of styles though.

(02-15-2012, 04:22 PM)Cshad Wrote: [ -> ]Expanding on what I said - I meant to say I felt Team Magma/Aqua were really, really dumb - at least what they turned into. I like the idea of expansion vs conservation but they just screwed it up somehow along the line. I loved the way the game went about making the Legendaries part of the plot and capturing them and shit like that (those additions Emerald had are what made Gen 3 enjoyable because R/S were lackluster by themselves) I just wish Team Magma/Aqua had been better.

But... it's a kid's game, though. Can they really delve too much more into the themes that Magma/Aqua represent without getting way too serious? I mean, the whole "should Pokemon be free" thing with Team Plasma had a ton going for it, but when the game is for kids and the game is based around actually using these things they had to use a cop-out answer like "it's just better when humans and Pokemon are together". So... I don't know, what did you expect/want? What would have made Team Magma/Aqua in your eyes?
[/quote]

B/W had a much less child-ish plot and went into many themes that children should be thinking about, like accepting different ideas and viewing the world with a less black and white mentality. They used two extremes that didn't really have anything outright 'wrong' about them in the "Pokemon and People should be together because the mutual relationship they share makes them happy" vs "There are too many people who abuse and mistreat Pokemon and to protect them Pokemon and trainers must be separated" to do this.

R/S/E could have easily gone along the lines of "People need more room to expand, it's natural for our survival" vs "Humans have inhabited too many areas and are threatening the existence of many Pokemon - we must expand their habitat so they survive" which is very easy to understand and I would have much preferred that.

Hm, yeah, I guess you're right. Now that I think of it, Aqua/Magma were very two-dimensional, like there wasn't much reason for the types they used other then "YEAH, WATER/FIRE IS THE COOLEST" and "HEY LET'S FLOOD/DRY OUT THE WORLD BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD IDEA."

Yeah, there should be more evil teams where the line is a bit more blurred, like Plasma. Hm, what are some other issues or sides that they could do for a potential Gen VI? Unless we want another pure evil, crime-all-the-time team like Team Rocket was. That might be fun to get back to.

I want the return of a simple plot. None of this world being threatened by god Pokemon.

I'm not so sure what exactly is simple about a group trying to create a clone of a Pokemon not seen in fucking millenniums and creating one just to have it become an elitist mother fucker and try to take over the world with clones because clones are better.

Or do you mean the whole fight team whatever, rivals, and gym leaders? If you seriously mean this then I'm confused because this is literally the plot to all of the games.

(02-19-2012, 02:54 AM)Cshad Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2012, 04:22 PM)tellis Wrote: [ -> ]But... it's a kid's game, though. Can they really delve too much more into the themes that Magma/Aqua represent without getting way too serious? I mean, the whole "should Pokemon be free" thing with Team Plasma had a ton going for it, but when the game is for kids and the game is based around actually using these things they had to use a cop-out answer like "it's just better when humans and Pokemon are together". So... I don't know, what did you expect/want? What would have made Team Magma/Aqua in your eyes?

B/W had a much less child-ish plot and went into many themes that children should be thinking about, like accepting different ideas and viewing the world with a less black and white mentality. They used two extremes that didn't really have anything outright 'wrong' about them in the "Pokemon and People should be together because the mutual relationship they share makes them happy" vs "There are too many people who abuse and mistreat Pokemon and to protect them Pokemon and trainers must be separated" to do this.

R/S/E could have easily gone along the lines of "People need more room to expand, it's natural for our survival" vs "Humans have inhabited too many areas and are threatening the existence of many Pokemon - we must expand their habitat so they survive" which is very easy to understand and I would have much preferred that.

Kids who play the games at a young age are probably not going to give a shit about the plot of the games they play when they care more about the game play itself.

I mean, it's one thing for kids to learn themes to build upon their morals but in the end they are playing a game for their own entertainment. Not to learn.

(02-19-2012, 04:39 AM)Kat Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not so sure what exactly is simple about a group trying to create a clone of a Pokemon not seen in fucking millenniums and creating one just to have it become an elitist mother fucker and try to take over the world with clones because clones are better.

That never happened in the games. That was solely the first movie.

Mewtwo's role in the Gen I games was very limited, and at best a sub-plot.