Pokemon: Why I'm Glad I Didn't Start Playing With Generation One

[Jim Morrison]

I think a lot of people are realizing that Pokémon is actually horrible gameplay and rehashed **** every single gen. There's nothing Nintendo can really do to improve it and not ruin the whole Pokémon thing, but it's just too many games being exactly the same. A lot of people got sick of just contiously training pokemon, getting 8 badges, beating the league, every single gen.

It's my personal expierence at least. Gen 1 was completely new and holy **** amazing. Gen 2 was still during the Pokémon craze, and it was also 2 worlds with 16 badges, and as Teran said, the thematics etc. I played Gen 3 and still enjoyed it, but realized I've already done this with the predecessors. You just grow out of it after a while, and just look back at the ones you enjoyed the most.

 

[Dre89]

Kink- It's pretty clear Pink Reaper doesn't have a strong understanding of the early gen metagames.

I think a lot of people are realizing that Pokémon is actually horrible gameplay and rehashed **** every single gen. There's nothing Nintendo can really do to improve it and not ruin the whole Pokémon thing, but it's just too many games being exactly the same. A lot of people got sick of just contiously training pokemon, getting 8 badges, beating the league, every single gen.

It's my personal expierence at least. Gen 1 was completely new and holy **** amazing. Gen 2 was still during the Pokémon craze, and it was also 2 worlds with 16 badges, and as Teran said, the thematics etc. I played Gen 3 and still enjoyed it, but realized I've already done this with the predecessors. You just grow out of it after a while, and just look back at the ones you enjoyed the most.

You could say that about any franchise though. You could just say that Zelda is going through a dungeon, pick up a key item, use that item to beat the boss and unlock the next dungeon and repeat.

Also, pokemon 'enthusiasts' (ie. people who go beyond just doing a playthrough each gen and continually come back to the games) don't just keep doing standard playthroughs. They get into things like competitive battling, whether it be on catridge or online, nuzlockes, solo runs, monoetype runs, NFE runs, glitching, scramble challenges, playing the stadiums etc. In that sense pokemon has more replayability and content than many other franchises.

 

[Jim Morrison]

Also, pokemon 'enthusiasts' (ie. people who go beyond just doing a playthrough each gen and continually come back to the games) don't just keep doing standard playthroughs. They get into things like competitive battling, whether it be on catridge or online, nuzlockes, solo runs, monoetype runs, NFE runs, glitching, scramble challenges, playing the stadiums etc. In that sense pokemon has more replayability and content than many other franchises.

Those generally aren't the nostalgia***s though so that's why I don't really include them in this subject.

 

[Teran]

I think a lot of people are realizing that Pokémon is actually horrible gameplay and rehashed **** every single gen. There's nothing Nintendo can really do to improve it and not ruin the whole Pokémon thing, but it's just too many games being exactly the same. A lot of people got sick of just contiously training pokemon, getting 8 badges, beating the league, every single gen.

It's my personal expierence at least. Gen 1 was completely new and holy **** amazing. Gen 2 was still during the Pokémon craze, and it was also 2 worlds with 16 badges, and as Teran said, the thematics etc. I played Gen 3 and still enjoyed it, but realized I've already done this with the predecessors. You just grow out of it after a while, and just look back at the ones you enjoyed the most.

Honestly I think the fans are one of the biggest hindrances. People criticised Colosseum and XD for restricting Pokémon you could catch, as if they would catch and train so many in the normal adventures anyway. Thing is, it was completely different. The premise was markedly diffrerent, the story followed a completely different path. Those games were really special but underappreciated.

The problem with starting a phenomenon is you absolutely CANNOT branch out without major consequence. Sonic's fall from grace is an example of this, your own fans are your worst enemy artistically.

I think Pokémon has infinite possibilities, and I really think its underlying mechanics can be tweaked and improved, but well it's probably never going to happen. Still, fingers crossed for the ultimate nostalgia trip game that incorporates all worlds up to the point of release.

Will never happen.

You could say that about any franchise though. You could just say that Zelda is going through a dungeon, pick up a key item, use that item to beat the boss and unlock the next dungeon and repeat.

That doesn't invalidate the point of criticism, it just shows that there is a problematic tradition among game developers.

But eh some people see same old same old as something good, definitely the most vocal fans it would seem.

 

[Pink Reaper]

I don't really think it was the fans that caused sonic to suck lol

 

[Teran]

Actually it sort of was. They costantly flip flop screaming for this and that, and not actually liking any of what they get because they don't really know what they want.

That in part led to the suckage, it's a two way thing. You don't just go from gold to garbage on your own.

 

[Pink Reaper]

I'm reasonably certain it had more to do with huge programming glitches, awful gameplay(knuckles) and the inability to make a workable camera in the 3D games that caused it.

And before anyone says it, I'm not defending the sonic fanbase. I hate sonic lol. I never considered the series good though I enjoyed ****ing around in adventure 2. But even as someone who doesn't like the franchise its easy to see where it went wrong.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Why does it seem like I'm the only one who gets really really pissed at people saying things like "Nintendo went wrong with the Pokemon franchise with such and such." The publisher has nothing to do with the design choices made by gamefreak.

 

[Firus]

Why does it seem like I'm the only one who gets really really pissed at people saying things like "Nintendo went wrong with the Pokemon franchise with such and such." The publisher has nothing to do with the design choices made by gamefreak.

Probably because everybody else is too lazy to care or make sure they know exactly who's responsible for it when it's easier to say the company name, and everybody knows what you mean.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

Because Nintendo actually has several iconic series associated exclusively with it. Microsoft and Sony, really do not. So when stuff comes out for those platforms, people actually look at who made it so they know who makes good games. But stuff that comes out for Nintendo platforms, don't come out on other platforms, so people just know to buy Nintendo if they like it.

 

[The Good Doctor]

Because Nintendo actually has several iconic series associated exclusively with it. Microsoft and Sony, really do not. So when stuff comes out for those platforms, people actually look at who made it so they know who makes good games. But stuff that comes out for Nintendo platforms, don't come out on other platforms, so people just know to buy Nintendo if they like it.

Sony- Twisted Metal
Microsoft- Halo

Just pointing this out.

 

[Life]

Am I the only one that thinks Pokemon has gotten continuously better with each gen?

The game mechanics get a little deeper each game (special attack and defense in 2, abilities in 3, P/S split in 4, Dream World and various minor streamlining in 5), the story gets refreshed every other gen (To Be A Master and Gotta Catch 'Em All in gens 1 and 2, averting catastrophes in 3 and 4, and the whole host of little subversions and deconstructions [I'm speaking troper-ese again aren't I] in 5), there's generally more to do...

And I speak as someone who is only slightly older than Pokemon itself, ie. I literally grew up with it (the first game I ever owned was Pokemon Blue when I was like three) and I should be wearing the nostalgia goggles harder than anyone.

Although I didn't play Black as much for some reason. I look at the game and see it's objectively better, yet I just kind of stopped playing it for some reason I can't put a finger on.

Maybe I'm just growing old.

 

[The Good Doctor]

Am I the only one that thinks Pokemon has gotten continuously better with each gen?

The game mechanics get a little deeper each game (special attack and defense in 2, abilities in 3, P/S split in 4, Dream World and various minor streamlining in 5), the story gets refreshed every other gen (To Be A Master and Gotta Catch 'Em All in gens 1 and 2, averting catastrophes in 3 and 4, and the whole host of little subversions and deconstructions [I'm speaking troper-ese again aren't I] in 5), there's generally more to do...

And I speak as someone who is only slightly older than Pokemon itself, ie. I literally grew up with it (the first game I ever owned was Pokemon Blue when I was like three) and I should be wearing the nostalgia goggles harder than anyone.

Although I didn't play Black as much for some reason. I look at the game and see it's objectively better, yet I just kind of stopped playing it for some reason I can't put a finger on.

Maybe I'm just growing old.

It kinda started feeling like Madden after Gen 3 for me. Gens 1 & 2 felt brand new and exciting to me, by the time Gen 3 hit I was in high school and had better things to do than grind a bunch of pokemon up all over again. Especially since I'm a perfectionist and completed Gen 1 & 2 poke'dexs.

 

[Teran]

Am I the only one that thinks Pokemon has gotten continuously better with each gen?

The game mechanics get a little deeper each game (special attack and defense in 2, abilities in 3, P/S split in 4, Dream World and various minor streamlining in 5), the story gets refreshed every other gen (To Be A Master and Gotta Catch 'Em All in gens 1 and 2, averting catastrophes in 3 and 4, and the whole host of little subversions and deconstructions [I'm speaking troper-ese again aren't I] in 5), there's generally more to do...

And I speak as someone who is only slightly older than Pokemon itself, ie. I literally grew up with it (the first game I ever owned was Pokemon Blue when I was like three) and I should be wearing the nostalgia goggles harder than anyone.

Although I didn't play Black as much for some reason. I look at the game and see it's objectively better, yet I just kind of stopped playing it for some reason I can't put a finger on.

Maybe I'm just growing old.

No, you're not. However mechanic improvement and refinement is usually a given with console advancements. I've already talked about things like thematic and artistic direction and for me that's the main clinching factor for each game. I mean if we count Colosseum and XD as part of the whole Gen 3 umbrella, I'd say pretty much every gen has been very strong, and that 5 only slightly loses out in the fact that it didn't push forwards far enough considering it was a whole new generation.

Honestly, I don't see why people think "having a story" in B/W's case makes it such a revelation. It was a nice story and all but it wasn't particularly engrossing. You know what's also great? Minimalist design. Why does there need to be some sort of SUPER DEEP ie cliché plot about being some sort of chosen destined hero to take on a legendary cataclysm? Yeah, how many of those kinds of stories have we come across? It has to be absolutely masterfully done for us to be truly blown away.

Now what did Gen 1 and 2 do? They were like well you're some kid and in this world when one is of age they go out on a journey. Oh hey I'm Oak and I think you're cool, go fill my encyclopedia, and have an adventure. Oh look my grandson is a ****, try to like, one up him or something. Oh look some bad guys just sort of got in the way of your progress, should probably take care of them. etc etc

It was minimalist and engaging enough. The characters were still pretty colourful, but it didn't fill in a bunch of cracks with cliché nonsense, you filled in the cracks with your own imagination, making the experience YOURS, and making it ten times more awesome. The game did use a couple themes like dedication and caring etc, but they were used in a non gay way. Like how how your constant striving and adherence to your goal is what allowed you to finally topple your rival on the ultimate stage, and such things earning the respect of even guys like Giovanni.

I love legends and fables etc, but unless they're going to go way out there and deliver a mindblowing saga (they won't), I am going to be consistently less engrossed than I was by the first two generations and Colosseum/XD.

Diamond and Pearl I actually rank really high as well because although there was the whole big Spear Pillar legend stuff, there was also Cynthia, a reflection of your own journey who you meet in an ultimate showdown to test the fruits of your labour, and what you reaped from the trials of your hardship.

I loved it when Pokémon's theme was that of just... growth. I guess that's what I'm getting at. The theme was prevalent throughout the entire game in so many facets. Ah yes, good times.

Smell ya later!

 

[ndayday]

As long as I enjoy them I don't give a **** what they do. All I know is that every time I play one of these games, there's always something that makes me smile, and that's a lot of what I play video games for. I like collecting Pokemon too, but seeing the ash fall from the sky in Ruby was one of my favorite moments ever for some reason. It just blew me away when my brother was like "Look, it's SNOWING!" It's stuff like seeing a Zigzagoon for the first time or standing in the Game Corner just to listen to the music that I remember.

And for the record, I've already been amazed with the new gyms etc. in B2W2 (

Spoiler

Elesa's gym is all sorts of awesome, and so are the tournaments

).

 

[Teran]

I have to give the new games massive props on their awesome gym designs, they really have done a great job of one upping themselves with each generation when it comes to gyms.

 

[Shorts]

For me, now, I won't play a Pokemon game thats not Gen III or higher, because Gen III is where Pokemon REALLY got more advanced. And, because, well, you can't trade Silver/Red Pokemon over to Black.

Pokemon just keeps getting better with each installment IMO. Better storyline, more abilities/moves/pokemon. Better design overall. It's kind of amazing really.

Also, props to Teran for mentioning Cynthia. That ***** is the TRUE Pokemon master. Not chump *** Lance/Red/ect.

 

[Teran]

Better storyline,

Well this is all subjective so I won't say this is incorrect, but I will say the storylines have become a **** ton less original.

And I'm not referencing it as though it's because it's some sort of rehash of the earlier gens' stories because that's actually not the case at all.

 

[flyinfilipino]

I've always thought that the recent Champions have become kind of stalker-ish, what with the way they always seem to keep running into you at opportune times.

But yeah, it would be nice to get away from the "seemingly bad organization tries to get a hold of super-powerful legendary Pokemon to take over the world" main plot for a while.

 

[Shorts]

I kind of wish being a legendary Pokemon meant something. Like, Iunno, they actually act legendary and junk. Not easily captured and getting taken over up by human villains.

 

[flyinfilipino]

Maybe instead of the Champion of the region following you around and meeting you at various points in the game, it should just be a legendary Pokemon instead. Although come to think of it, I think that's what Suicune did in Crystal and HG/SS. Maybe instead you'd have to battle a legendary Pokemon more than once, and you wouldn't be able to capture it right away (Pokeballs would miss like they used to do in Gen I, which was pretty annoying). It might be more interesting than having an anticlimactic encounter just once, and then bam, it's captured. Would be nice if the legendary Pokemon put up a fight against the bad guy organization too.

 

[Dre89]

I personally thought GSC's Team Rocket was the best villanous organisation out of all the gens. They had the cool backstory of Giovanni abandoning them and then them reforming on their own, and the villanous stuff they did was actually pretty cool. First they sold slowpoketails for money, then they sent out out some form of waves to evolve pokemon early, then they sent out radio messages to try and contact Giovanni.


Teran- Sorry, but RBY/GSC did send messages like 'care for the weak and love your pokemon ' in a corny way.

What makes it more annoying is that the games had nothing to do with treating your pokemon well. Even the happiness mechanic had so little impact on your main objective.

I just remember Oak telling Gary after the final battle in RBY that the reason why he lost to me is because he forgot to treat his pokemon well. I personally thought it had more to do with the fact that I had a level 100 mewtwo that was almost double the level of his pokemon with nearly maxed out stats.

 

[Sephirothxxx]

^^^ I LOVE this post right here. The team rocket in GSC was my personal favorite, however I did also grow pretty attached to team magman and team aqua.

EDIT: If only they still made the teams seem so evil as they did in GSC.

 

[Teran]

Teran- Sorry, but RBY/GSC did send messages like 'care for the weak and love your pokemon ' in a corny way.

What makes it more annoying is that the games had nothing to do with treating your pokemon well. Even the happiness mechanic had so little impact on your main objective.

I just remember Oak telling Gary after the final battle in RBY that the reason why he lost to me is because he forgot to treat his pokemon well. I personally thought it had more to do with the fact that I had a level 100 mewtwo that was almost double the level of his pokemon with nearly maxed out stats.

How is the explanation for his failures at the climax of the gam corny? Levels are just an indication of how much/how well you've trained your Pokémon.

Besides, I don't see how "treat these fictional beings that you use for your collecting and battling amusement with respect" is even a corny theme in itself. If it constantly spouted it about treating people with respect sure, but they reiterated it as what should be done with the monsters in your team. It is implied that through all the arduous tasks you go through, you've learned such things and your teamwork is what got you through.

You know what's really ironic? Is that treating the series with love and respect is what actually affects you enough to complete your objective.

Well actually maybe not.

I don't think you are the very best, like no one ever was.

 

[Dre89]

How is the explanation for his failures at the climax of the gam corny? Levels are just an indication of how much/how well you've trained your Pokémon.

Besides, I don't see how "treat these fictional beings that you use for your collecting and battling amusement with respect" is even a corny theme in itself. If it constantly spouted it about treating people with respect sure, but they reiterated it as what should be done with the monsters in your team. It is implied that through all the arduous tasks you go through, you've learned such things and your teamwork is what got you through.

You know what's really ironic? Is that treating the series with love and respect is what actually affects you enough to complete your objective.

Well actually maybe not.

I don't think you are the very best, like no one ever was.

The Oak comment is only one example. It's even worse in GSC where your rival just blatantly keeps saying how he only cares about strong pokemon for no reason all the time.

What they're telling you to do not only is unimportant to your main objective, but you can't really do it anyway. There's no real way to treat your pokemon with respect in RBY except maybe the happiness mechanic with pikachu, but even that is really only important for getting bulbasaur, and so insignificant to the objective of the game.

There also isn't any reason to use weak pokemon in battles unless it's purposely to challenge yourself or because you simply like the pokemon. The only things weak pokemon are good for from an efficiency standpoint are sacrifices for free switches/item use, and being HM slaves.

The reality is to suceed in the game you don't treat your pokemon with respect or love at all. You just pick strong pokemon and overtrain them and inject them with whatever you see fit. Respect has nothing to do with success.

I mean, even if I tried to to do a playthrough where I treated them with love and respect, I wouldn't even know what that would entail. What would I do, feed them lots of vitamins and never let them faint? Not train them too much and constantly let them rest at the pokecentre?

 

[Teran]

The Oak comment is only one example. It's even worse in GSC where your rival just blatantly keeps saying how he only cares about strong pokemon for no reason all the time.

What they're telling you to do not only is unimportant to your main objective, but you can't really do it anyway. There's no real way to treat your pokemon with respect in RBY except maybe the happiness mechanic with pikachu, but even that is really only important for getting bulbasaur, and so insignificant to the objective of the game.

There also isn't any reason to use weak pokemon in battles unless it's purposely to challenge yourself or because you simply like the pokemon. The only things weak pokemon are good for from an efficiency standpoint are sacrifices for free switches/item use, and being HM slaves.

The reality is to suceed in the game you don't treat your pokemon with respect or love at all. You just pick strong pokemon and overtrain them and inject them with whatever you see fit. Respect has nothing to do with success.

I mean, even if I tried to to do a playthrough where I treated them with love and respect, I wouldn't even know what that would entail. What would I do, feed them lots of vitamins and never let them faint? Not train them too much and constantly let them rest at the pokecentre?

Yes because everything has to tie into your "main objective" because games have to be perfectly linear with no sense of thematic branching. Great.

And you're right, there isn't, but you're to imagine you are. I mean, I dunno man it's a Gameboy game, how could they really facilitate such things anyway? This where the idea of doing the best they can with their medium comes in.

You do realise that thanks to the whole overtraining part, any Pokémon sans say Magikarp or something becomes comparatively strong, right? Yes obviously it is easier to get an Alakazam and just sweep the entire game or something, but it is also perfectly manageable and very easy to do that with just about any team of Pokémon.

Also, personally I see just the fact that I like to take a bit further than just thinking of them as pixels and stuff as doing so. Yes it's kind of sad, but it also makes the game much more engaging and fun. Oh yeah because that's what I did as a kid I, you know, engaged my mind. Seriously with multiple restarts of Red etc I still have all my treasured Pokémon within Stadium or moved back to the GB cart because I actually have attachments to them. All the Pokémon I've been through the journeys with I have a pecial place for, because even outside of just immersing myself in the world, they are direct reminders of great times I've had past or present.

So yeah, I treat them with love and respect, while being aware of most of the in depth mechanics that governed the games as a child.

Deal with it.

 

[flyinfilipino]

Being sentimental with my Pokemon is the reason I don't have enough room in the boxes in my PC.

 

[Teran]

Being sentimental with my Pokemon is the reason I don't have enough room in the boxes in my PC.

Man forreal.

Definitely in the earlier gens, glad there's so much more box space nowadays, although the fact that you don't get a mass storage system for multiple files is insulting.

If they did that I'd be really happy. Like seriously Ranch won't let you transfer back to a different file? Who the hell needs 1000 slots for one file? x__x

 

[Kink-Link5]

My biggest gripe with Gen V is that it introduced nothing new mechanics-wise.

Gen I introduced IV's, EV's, TM and HM moves, and most other basic gameplay mechanics.

Gen II introduced Held items, breeding and egg moves, move tutors (In limited form), a special attack/defense split, a redone crit system to replace the speed-based one, weather effects and the first field trap- spikes -, 2 new types, and rebalanced the rest of the type matchups

Gen III introduced a new EV system, Natures, and Abilities, off the top of my head.

Gen IV introduced a Special/Physical split for specific moves, rather than associating types with a particular attacking stat, and online battling, though the latter is not quite as important.

Gen V is just, more of the same. More abilities, more moves, stuff that is ho-hum and relatively minor. There is still the random nature, problem easily identifying, and overall imbalancing nature of the outdated IV system (as well as its association with Hidden Power as it stands) and the "expansive roster problem" that comes from the methodology of Gamefreak's balancing process. Rather than simply giving characters who do not preform as well as others numerical buffs and specifically unique niches for the game, as most developers do when balancing a game, Gamefreak tends to homogenize the approach by adding more and catering gameplay around what was added, rather than melding it with the old. Oh, Dunsparces stats just aren't up to snuff for it to fill its evident role? Let's make a new pokemon that does what Dunsparce did, only better, so that role can be filled. [Pokemon Name] Is dominating the metagame? Well we have a solution for you! It's [New Pokemon Name]! The new Pokemon that is even better than [Pokemon Name]! Now [Pokemon Name] has some competition for its role! Luckily [New Pokemon Name] doesn't learn two of the moves [Pokemon Name] can, so it gets that niche filled, at least until next gen when all the other Pokemon get to learn those two moves and [Third Pokemon Name] comes along to outclass both of the other two.

One does not even have to look at what could be considered a problem with the game for ideas of "what to change." Most games evolve and experiment as the series goes on. Even if a new mechanic isn't well received, it's a part of the process that goes into designing a long series, and it is something that needs to be done to keep games fresh.

I love the Pokemon series, which is why I am so saddened to see it treading in a rut and afraid to take risks. I am not a fan of Stealth Rocks, as a small example, but I can see where the developers were trying to make something new and unique. The problems were obviously seen, and there was an attempt to solve the problem through the introduction of more fighting and steel types than any other generation, as well as the changes made to Magic Coat and the new ability, Magic Mirror. The problem with all these changes is that in attempting to build around the metagame of the previous generation, the game seems to forget that it can offer something new as well. It is that staleness that makes continual generations look less and less appealing, as less and less is being added or changed about how the game goes about its conventions. We've already seen what the last generation can do, now let us see what new things the next one can do.

 

[vanderzant]

[collapse=Relevant]

[/collapse]

On topic: I think it's naive to assume that you wouldn't view the Pokemon series in the same light if you'd started with RBY. Despite the various changes to mechanics over time, all 5 generations use the same formula of "go on adventure to collect and build a team of pokemon and ultimately become the strongest dude in all the land." I think if you truly enjoy this aspect you'll like all of the games, and any gripes you have will simply make you like certain gens more than others.

Most, if not all of the criticism geared to each new generation since about Ruby Sapphire was that Game Freak didn't try to reinvent the franchise or take it in a different direction. I can't claim to have read every review for every Pokemon game but I don't think I've ever seen criticism of the later gens that didn't call the gameplay "outdated" or make a comparison to Red/Blue.

A lot of RBY's popularity these days is how it's become socially acceptable to talk about playing your old Gameboy and Pokemon games. They've achieved somewhat of a cult status among the generation that grew up with them. On facebook it's crazy how many people I know who are fans of "Original Pokemon" groups who never would of admitted it 8-10 years ago. If I go to the fanpage for Pokemon Black/White, I only have 2 friends who Like it yet I can think of at least 6 friends who own the game.

The mold is starting to break though. There are a lot of people nowadays who started with Gen 3 or later. If you go to a pokemon related forum you'll see a lot of people saying Gen 3 is their favourite, which was unheard of 8 years ago. I have a 7 year old cousin who thinks Pokemon B/W is the greatest game ever invented, and I have no clue how he'd react if I showed him my old Blue Version. People who bash the later gens should try playing RBY again and see if it really is all that they remember it to be. Sure, the formula has remained the same all these years and it might not be everyone's cup of tea, but there are a lot of fans (myself included) who get incredibly hyped for every new release and will always enjoy each new experience.

Spoiler

Gen 1 & 2 Kid Fo Lyf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Teran]

Gen I's music still gives me major goosebumps.

In terms of route music I think Gen I is the best, battle music isn't so varied but the trainer, gym, and champion themes are amazing. The later gens had some really good themes for some routes and some specific battles, but I dunno, I do have to give the overall music to Gen I, and music really has a great effect on a game which is literally just pixels and sprites for a world.

I mean I dunno I don't even feel the route themes are used to create some sense of adventure pacing and drama like in earlier gens. Everyone knows Route 1's light and bouncy theme, perfect for a rookie kid skipping off on his adventure.

Then you got Viridian Forest, with its mysterious and ominous theme, sort of reflecting the feeling a ten year old would get on his first major obstacle if you will on his adventure. The adventure has actually started to become a real thing and it's sinking in.

Spoiler

[yt]NPH9bT2Agc0[/yt]

Course then after the arduous task of getting your first badge and trudging through Mt. Moon (remember you're 10 years old), the Route music changes to add some sense of hopeful adventure, a triumphant fanfare that blares after you've faced such hardship

Spoiler

[yt]cmV3PKLsm34[/yt]

I could keep going on like this but instead I want people to actually listen to the route themes and such when they play next time, rather than just sort of be "oh hey nostalgia tune ha".

Devs really used to pay attention to their music/sound design and it shows. It's not to say that Pokémon is suffering now, quite the opposite, the compositions are still stellar, but I think they're saving their best efforts for moments like legendary battles or something, instead of trying to have music that really blends with the entire experience at every turn.

So anyway here have these

Spoiler

[yt]JNJJ-QkZ8cM[/yt]

[yt]u8NktOkmRvM[/yt]

 

[infiniteV115]

My biggest gripe with Gen V is that it introduced nothing new mechanics-wise.

I didn't read your entire post so forgive me if what I'm about to ask was answered in your post, but

Didn't Gen V introduce triple battles and rotation battles?

 

[Teran]

That really wasn't particularly revolutionary.

Just... double battles with *gasp* one more pokémon.

Rotation battles are interesting but again nothing to write home about, kind of a gimmick battle.

 

[_Keno_]

I'm glad that Grimer/Muk was brought up, because I must say that a lot of the evolution's in the first generation were kind of boring. Things turning into bigger things or adding two more and calling it something new.

I don't think you quite understand...evolutions weren't supposed to make a Pokemon into something "new," they were literally just supposed to make the Pokemon into a better version of itself. While this was true generally, some evolutions like magicarp were hilariously ironic on purpose. You're looking at this with the eye of someone who expects the ridiculous transformations of the later generations.

As for Pokemon like Grimer/Muk, I don't see why he's absurd. If you think about where you catch him and the whole storyline, he's in a laboratory complex for experimenting on Pokemon that was abandoned due to the results of failed and catastrophic experiments. They are just a failed experiment. (I'll grant that Magneton's transformation was kind of lame looking back, but I hardly noticed at the time).

@OP
Having never experienced first generation Pokemon in the time period of it's release, you can not ever understand what you missed and why you should be incredibly distraught you missed it.

And yes, I'm a 90's kid who only played first generation. I regret nothing.

 

[Dre89]

BW also slightly tweaked the level-up system.

Yes because everything has to tie into your "main objective" because games have to be perfectly linear with no sense of thematic branching. Great.

So basically, because they attempted thematic branching, that automatically makes it good? If they want to make thematic branching, at least make it somehow doable and relevant to the objective.

They're thematic branching was a corny, cliche message that wasn't doable and nothing to do with the main objective. If that's not bad thematic branching then I don't know what is.

And you're right, there isn't, but you're to imagine you are. I mean, I dunno man it's a Gameboy game, how could they really facilitate such things anyway? This where the idea of doing the best they can with their medium comes in.

Except that they never had to do it. Honestly the theme of respecting your pokemon is so insignificant and plays so little a role in the story that it would have made no difference if it was removed.

You do realise that thanks to the whole overtraining part, any Pokémon sans say Magikarp or something becomes comparatively strong, right? Yes obviously it is easier to get an Alakazam and just sweep the entire game or something, but it is also perfectly manageable and very easy to do that with just about any team of Pokémon.

Also, personally I see just the fact that I like to take a bit further than just thinking of them as pixels and stuff as doing so. Yes it's kind of sad, but it also makes the game much more engaging and fun. Oh yeah because that's what I did as a kid I, you know, engaged my mind. Seriously with multiple restarts of Red etc I still have all my treasured Pokémon within Stadium or moved back to the GB cart because I actually have attachments to them. All the Pokémon I've been through the journeys with I have a pecial place for, because even outside of just immersing myself in the world, they are direct reminders of great times I've had past or present.

So yeah, I treat them with love and respect, while being aware of most of the in depth mechanics that governed the games as a child.

Deal with it.

Mate your logic is whack. None of this has anything to do with I said. I never said people can't use weak pokemon or have an imagination. The thing is is the game is telling people to do things they can't do, and telling them to consider pokemon that will hinder their efficiency for no reward.

It'd be like MM telling you to run around with the Bremen Mask instead of the Bunny Hood. There's nothing wrong with doing that, but there's no reason to do that unless you're deliberately imposing restrictions upon yourself or you enjoy that mask for some reason.

And stop acting like all I do is treat pokemon like pieces of data and all I care about is getting badges and cups. I do nuzlocke runs, which are designed not only to give you a challenge, but to build an attachment with weak pokemon that you wouldn't normally use for battle. I played gold version three hours straight just so I could get a baby koffing in my PC back at the start of the game so I could solo the game with one of my favourite, yet not so efficient pokemon. It bothers me that my koffing is female, data-wise all that means is having a specific symbol and a lower attack IV, but obviously that's not how I'm looking at it.


Also, preferring RBY music is just nostalgia. Objectively GSC suprasses it. It has that same old school style, but greater depth. Nothing gives me as big a nostalgia rush as the Pallet Town theme though, except maybe Dire Dire Docks.

 

[Teran]

BW also slightly tweaked the level-up system.

So basically, because they attempted thematic branching, that automatically makes it good? If they want to make thematic branching, at least make it somehow doable and relevant to the objective.

They're thematic branching was a corny, cliche message that wasn't doable and nothing to do with the main objective. If that's not bad thematic branching then I don't know what is.

No it doesn't automtically make it good, but it also doesn't make it bad because because it is not tied to your main objective.

And you know what? The funny thing is in the first Gen specifically, that theme is barely touched on except for the end. Otherwise most of it is really touched upon in the Pokémon Tower and generally stopping Team Rocket which *gasp* advances the story and gets you closer to your main objective!

I know you're going to be all "LOL LOGIC I KNOW WHAT THAT WORD MEANS AND WILL KEEP USING IT" to say oh but Team Rocket are just an obstacle stopping you from getting to the next gym! Yeah you know that's not really how it's supposed to work, within the minimal amount of narrative there is, this is abundantly clear.

So yes you actually show love and respect towards Pokémon by stopping their blatant mistreatment and exploitation. No this isn't really a present theme beyond XD because Pokémon aren't abused and exploited by the respective teams, they're just part of their ultimate goals which aren't even inherently evil (well except Ghetsis whatever).

Except that they never had to do it. Honestly the theme of respecting your pokemon is so insignificant and plays so little a role in the story that it would have made no difference if it was removed.

Yes because it's not just meant to apply to all Pokémon in general. Also it does make a huge difference. The theme is what makes the whole thing more than glorified cockfighting.

Mate your logic is whack. None of this has anything to do with I said. I never said people can't use weak pokemon or have an imagination. The thing is is the game is telling people to do things they can't do, and telling them to consider pokemon that will hinder their efficiency for no reward.

Yes my logic is whack, whatever the **** that means.

And yes, you know what the reward is? Enjoyment, Last I checked, the enjoyment of a game playthrough wasn't measured in efficiency, I mean unless you're autistic or something I don't see how that **** is even relevant. It's telling you to consider the fact that pretty much any Pokémon can be used successfully in the game, so just because you may think they may not be exceptionally powerful at a glance, does not mean they are useless. Also ironically if we're judging by 1P mode, most of the average top tier competitive Pokémon are not that accessible and easy to train in an efficient manner. The pseudo legendaries are pretty much out, stallers and tanks aren't particularly useful, so really, you can play with Pokémon you like and have a ****ing blast building a dream team and kicking Pokémon League arse with it. Sounds like a reward to me.

Go collect Xbox achievements or something brother.

It'd be like MM telling you to run around with the Bremen Mask instead of the Bunny Hood. There's nothing wrong with doing that, but there's no reason to do that unless you're deliberately imposing restrictions upon yourself or you enjoy that mask for some reason.

Nice straw man there. Completely not applicable since MM is an entirely different game with different everything.

I mean really?

And stop acting like all I do is treat pokemon like pieces of data and all I care about is getting badges and cups. I do nuzlocke runs, which are designed not only to give you a challenge, but to build an attachment with weak pokemon that you wouldn't normally use for battle.

That's so great. You know what I do? I play it and have fun.

I played gold version three hours straight just so I could get a baby koffing in my PC back at the start of the game so I could solo the game with one of my favourite, yet not so efficient pokemon. It bothers me that my koffing is female, data-wise all that means is having a specific symbol and a lower attack IV, but obviously that's not how I'm looking at it.

Cute

Also, preferring RBY music is just nostalgia.

Preferring Classical music to Jazz music was just like, totally nostalgia in the 1900s.

Objectively GSC suprasses it. It has that same old school style, but greater depth. Nothing gives me as big a nostalgia rush as the Pallet Town theme though, except maybe Dire Dire Docks.

Greater deoth huh. How so? It uses 8 bit channels/the same hardware so it is objectively impossible for them to add "more depth" to the music,

I dunno man maybe there's something I'm missing here is there like, additional harmonic depth or something? Are there some sort of special candences that somehow make the music of GSC more refined?

No.

Also you're forgetting the part where I mentioned the use of the music on routes. It creates a journey in music, it weaves a tapestry.

Also Gen I seemed to have much more busy pieces in general. Since I dunno let's be all like OBJECTIVE DEPTH dude and like, pick GSC tracks apart compared to RBY.

[yt]hAOGtJLMHlc[/yt]

There's pretty much GSC's gold standard composition. (no pun intended)

Not saying it isn't great, but we're talking objective depth, right?

A relatively simple piece based mostly off the main Pokémon theme. Pretty much a single line of melody with a quite subdued accompaniment.

Let's try to do a totally "fair" analysis and compare it to the Gary theme

[yt]DHjciyJZIiA[/yt]

Now take this. A furious piece, it has a melody that stands out, but underneath it are furious decorative runs up and down, accompanying said melody, as well as an offbeat accompaniment and a counter melody to add to the spice.

Yes.

"Less depth"

Oh and the musical journey so to speak is longer, the music develops far more within that piece than the GSC champion theme.

This kind of thing is prevalent in basically all the battle themes, and somewhat less so in the city themes but they're still very much not "simple" and "objectively worse" because of it as you put it.

I don't know man.

I just...

don't know.

I'm a rock.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Dre do you ever feel like you're actually winning these ridiculous arguments or do you just refuse to give up?

 

[Firus]

Accurate stuff about music that I'm not going to quote in order to conserve space

Totally agree here, although I extend it through the first three generations. First gen definitely had some of the most awesome, memorable music of all. Each route had a fitting and memorable composition attached to it. The same, I feel, applies to second and third gen, though not to quite the same extent.

Starting with fourth gen, the sound quality was much better, but I hardly remember any of the music. People ranted and raved about the soundtrack for BW, but I honestly didn't care for most of it. At least with DPPt, they had notable "epic" songs, but I didn't even really care that much for those tracks in BW. The route music all blurs together, and the rest of the music was pretty forgettable in my opinion, too.

I didn't read your entire post so forgive me if what I'm about to ask was answered in your post, but

Didn't Gen V introduce triple battles and rotation battles?

I actually laughed after I read this.

You're absolutely correct, but those things aren't innovations at all. From the very start those seemed like annoying gimmicks to me, and I didn't really feel any differently after trying them out for myself.

I don't think you quite understand...evolutions weren't supposed to make a Pokemon into something "new," they were literally just supposed to make the Pokemon into a better version of itself. While this was true generally, some evolutions like magicarp were hilariously ironic on purpose. You're looking at this with the eye of someone who expects the ridiculous transformations of the later generations.

As for Pokemon like Grimer/Muk, I don't see why he's absurd. If you think about where you catch him and the whole storyline, he's in a laboratory complex for experimenting on Pokemon that was abandoned due to the results of failed and catastrophic experiments. They are just a failed experiment. (I'll grant that Magneton's transformation was kind of lame looking back, but I hardly noticed at the time).

@OP
Having never experienced first generation Pokemon in the time period of it's release, you can not ever understand what you missed and why you should be incredibly distraught you missed it.

And yes, I'm a 90's kid who only played first generation. I regret nothing.

On the Grimer/Muk thing, aren't Trubbish and Garbodor along those same sort of lines? Radioactive waste meeting with garbage to create them? Granted, you can fault the creators for lack of creativity in the similarities between the two, but you can't go off defending Grimer and Muk and then act horrified with Trubbish and Garbodor because they're stupid conceptually. Either both are stupid or neither are, and there's just a lack of creativity in the latter.

Also, your note to the OP is basically you admitting that you're one of the crazy nostalgics, and you're basically saying that the only thing the games have going for them are nostalgia. (Which is bogus, but it sort of discredits your argument.) If A) you haven't even played the other games and B) OP can't really appreciate the games without playing them in the time frame of their release, then what does that mean? By your argument, the games aren't good enough to appreciate without having nostalgia attached.

I don't buy into that crap anyway, though. It's the same thing in every fandom: "If you didn't play/watch/read this back when it first came out you're not a true fan and you can't ever really appreciate it!" It's bull that people make up to get an e-peen and feel better about themselves because they got there first. And maybe you're not trying to go for that argument, but your logic is stemming from the exact same roots as that argument.

 

[Teran]

I wish they would take a leaf out of Coloseeum/XD's book with the music capabilities from higher quality audio.

Those tracks were bursting with character and the battle music was also appropriately epic if the battle was supposed to be so.

I also have the same "problem" so to speak route music that Firus mentioned, I would like to believe that the other route tracks are burned into my mind but they're not. I don't necessarily call it nostalgia because I mean Diamond and Pearl came out five years ago, which in gaming terms is ages. I loved D/P but I only really remember a couple of the battle themes, maybe one route theme. I have a total of like 500 official hours in all of 4th gen so quite frankly even if **** weren't memorable I'd have expected it to be burned into my mind.

Earlier games had truly gripping tracks, and I mean this generally. **** I never played Punch Out as a kid but we all know how awesomely addictive that bicycle training theme is.

When I step back and play a retro game I've never really bothered to try but do because my friends insist, I always find some remarkably memorable music.

I don't remember **** with most games nowadays, kinda sad, I think they just kinda think "oh it sounds kinda like Hans Zimmer so it's cool".

 

[Firus]

I wish they would take a leaf out of Coloseeum/XD's book with the music capabilities from higher quality audio.

Those tracks were bursting with character and the battle music was also appropriately epic if the battle was supposed to be so.

God yes. I've said it once and I'll say it a million times more, I actually didn't mind losing shadow Pokémon in XD because it means you get to battle Miror B. Dude had some catchy music. The boss music was also excellent, as well as all the other battle music, in both games. And the town music was all amazing and completely representative of the location. Pyrite Town, 'nuff said.

Earlier games had truly gripping tracks, and I mean this generally. **** I never played Punch Out as a kid but we all know how awesomely addictive that bicycle training theme is.

When I step back and play a retro game I've never really bothered to try but do because my friends insist, I always find some remarkably memorable music.

I don't remember **** with most games nowadays, kinda sad, I think they just kinda think "oh it sounds kinda like Hans Zimmer so it's cool".

I completely agree with this as well. Occasionally, a game will come along with an awesome, memorable soundtrack -- speaking in terms of recent games I'd definitely say Bastion and Amnesia, off the top of my head -- but I find that a lot of video game music nowadays is so played up with the fancy orchestration that very little of it is very memorable anymore.