3rd Gen Is there any reason to play FRLG anymore?

[BettyNewbie]

Now, knowing that RBY will not only be playable on the 3DS, but also compatible with Pokémon Bank and the upcoming Sun/Moon versions, it seems like the originals have ironically rendered their own remakes obsolete.

Sure, FRLG still have full color, the modern stat system, and Dark/Steel, but they also still lack 3D graphics, Day/Night, Fairies, and Megas just as much as RBY. And, they can't be played on current hardware, nor use Pokémon Bank and directly transfer to any games newer than Gen 4. They also aren't as easy to get a hold of as the RBY VC release. The presence of Gen 2 and 3 Pokémon in FRLG means little when they can't be obtained outside of the postgame.

Funny how this worked out, although GF is very obviously using the RBY re-release as a substitute for RBY or FRLG remakes. How do you feel about this?

 

[mew_nani]

In a sense a lot of the other games have been rendered obsolete, as you can no longer transfer your mons without paying for Pokemon Bank first. That coupled with the fact that the official servers that the older games used to use are gone, makes them obsolete unless you're playing them for fun or nostalgia.

As for FR/LG in particular, they're still fun to play even though they've been replaced by the originals in terms of transferability.

 

[Flowerchild]

I think that most of the Pokémon that I would care about transferring from FRLG are pretty easily obtainable in Gen VI anyways (Kanto starters, Mewtwo, etc.) so it won't really be a mark against the game in my books. I just play Gen III for nostalgia anyways, so no biggie.

 

[LusoTrainer]

Sure, FRLG still have full color, the modern stat system, and Dark/Steel, but they also still lack 3D graphics, Day/Night, Fairies, and Megas just as much as RBY.

Missing those isn't necessarily a bad thing at all. The improvements are still there, and they were always the major selling point of the remakes.

 

[SaniOKh]

I have the Gameboy Player on my Gamecube, so I can use the excuse of being able to play them on TV... this also applies to the original cartridges... shoot... never mind.

I don't have any particular feelings towards GF using VC releases as substitutes for remakes, I find it to be a good thing. Because, you know, time spent on remaking something is time spent not working on a new game, one remake per generation is enough.

I am a little upset they chose RBY though. FRLG would have been a better choice, IMHO: less archaic game mechanics, more content, better graphics... not sure whether the sounds were better, I was not a fan.

 

[BettyNewbie]

Missing those isn't necessarily a bad thing at all. The improvements are still there, and they were always the major selling point of the remakes.

But, that's my point, those things aren't there. No version of Gen 1/Kanto has Day/Night, a P/S Split, Fairies, or Megas.

I am a little upset they chose RBY though. FRLG would have been a better choice, IMHO: less archaic game mechanics, more content, better graphics... not sure whether the sounds were better, I was not a fan.

Because, then, they would've had to release the games on the Wii U and not the 3DS. Besides, more people have nostalgia for RBY than FRLG, and the 20th Anniversary celebration is mainly about the originals.

 

[loser]

I can see firered/leafgreen still being played because of randomization. Randomizing the gen 1 games is a thing but it doesn't have as many pokemon or moves as firered or leafgreen.

 

[Elysieum]

The release of RBY on 3DS undoubtedly reduces the number of reasons to play FRLG presently, but having said that, I don't think the appeal of FRLG has been anything other than nostalgia-based for some time now, so I don't think there is much of an impact.

 

[Arylett Charnoa]

I don't really see much of a reason to play it myself, to be honest. Having no real love or caring of Generation III, plus the fact that transferring all the way from there is a pain in the ass, I'd rather just go with the old Gen I clunkers on virtual console. I find something strangely enjoyable about these broken systems and their simplicity when compared to the shinier but still not fully refined remakes. And I don't even have much nostalgia for Gen I games because my first ones were Gen II.

But they still exist as a nice option for Gen III enthusiasts or those who really cannot stand the primitive graphics of the originals. (Can't say I blame you: some of those sprites are atrocious lyrics ugly.) So I suppose those are reasons to play them.

 

[Squirrel]

The games have some cool quirks and interesting features so I don't really think the re-releases of RB will remove those aspects, but I guess there are only so many times you can play an old game before wanting to move on to something a bit more fresh. Personally I still play FRLG quite regularly, but that's mostly just because it's the easiest ROM to use on my phone and I'm not a big fan of lectures!

 

[BettyNewbie]

I don't really see much of a reason to play it myself, to be honest. Having no real love or caring of Generation III, plus the fact that transferring all the way from there is a pain in the ass, I'd rather just go with the old Gen I clunkers on virtual console. I find something strangely enjoyable about these broken systems and their simplicity when compared to the shinier but still not fully refined remakes. And I don't even have much nostalgia for Gen I games because my first ones were Gen II.

This is mostly how I feel, too. The original RBY have an old school charm to them, and the ability to transfer to Sun/Moon is a huge bonus.

In fact, that latter part, I think, is one of the biggest issues with FRLG nowadays. Let's face it, the games were never really made with anything but National Dex completion in mind, so while FRLG served a very useful purpose in the Gen 3/early Gen 4 days, they instantly became obsolete as soon as HGSS came out (which had all the Gen 1-2 Pokémon that couldn't be obtained in DPP). The fact that the DSi and 3DS dropped GBA compatibility didn't help matters either.

I guess FRLG are still worth it if you're nostalgic for Gen 3 or really hate RBY's graphics, but otherwise, you're really better off just getting the originals on the VC.

 

[LusoTrainer]

But, that's my point, those things aren't there.

What things? And like I said, the improvements the remakes provided are still there.

No version of Gen 1/Kanto has Day/Night, a P/S Split, Fairies, or Megas.

So...? The games don't need those (specially Mega Evolutions), and nothing has changed in that regard. The situation is the same as last month/year/decade.

 

[Al3x]

Only reason to play FireRed imo is for trading really. I personally like Pokemon Colosseum and recently played through it again, I traded over some pokemon to my FireRed so I could use some of the move tutors and the TMs that aren't available in Colosseum.

 

[BettyNewbie]

What things? And like I said, the improvements the remakes provided are still there.

I'd need more than just washed-out GBA graphics to want to go hunt down a 10 year old game (and handheld) on eBay. ;) RBY can be played on a 3DS and will be compatible with Pokémon Bank and Sun/Moon. Who cares if the sprites are ugly when it's actually compatible with the latest and greatest?

 

[BreakingHeart]

FireRed and LeafGreen are probably my second favourite games in the series (BW2 being the first) and I always enjoy them when I playthrough them. As much as I love the original games, I don't think I can go all the way back to Gen 1 because of how slow it is and the game mechanics. I'm still wondering if I should get them on the Virtual Console.

These games definitely still have relevance, especially if you're still playing Generation IV and V and own the older DS with the GBA slot. They're very fun to play.

 

[Elysieum]

I'd need more than just washed-out GBA graphics to want to go hunt down a 10 year old game (and handheld) on eBay. ;)

Well the nice thing about GBA games these days is that they can be played on your smart phone using an emulator app. No need to go find the hardware if you are a fan.

 

[LusoTrainer]

I'd need more than just washed-out GBA graphics to want to go hunt down a 10 year old game (and handheld) on eBay.

There would have to be washed-out GBA graphics to begin with, which is not the case.

RBY can be played on a 3DS and will be compatible with Pokémon Bank and Sun/Moon. Who cares if the sprites are ugly when it's actually compatible with the latest and greatest?

That's a flawed logic. Why not play what you call "latest and greatest" then? We are talking about the game itself, not what's compatible with. That's an extra.

 

[BettyNewbie]

Well the nice thing about GBA games these days is that they can be played on your smart phone using an emulator app. No need to go find the hardware if you are a fan.

Yeah, but that's not entirely "legal," you know. ;)

There would have to be washed-out GBA graphics to begin with, which is not the case.

You're seriously going to argue that this looks as good as this or even this? I mean, yeah, FRLG have nicer graphics than RBY, but that's an extremely low bar. The Gen 3 games, in general, had mediocre graphics even for the time, and they look even worse nowadays.

That's a flawed logic. Why not play what you call "latest and greatest" then? We are talking about the game itself, not what's compatible with. That's an extra.

Because, *gasp* some of us actually like both RBY AND the latest and greatest! :rolleyes2:

And, I find it mightily ironic that you're using this argument to defend FRLG when FRLG were made for the sole reason of, wait for it, compatibility. RBY/GSC couldn't trade with RS, so there needed to be a way to get the older Pokémon into the newest games, hence FRLG. If compatibility really wasn't that big of an issue, then FRLG would've never been made in the first place (especially since RBY/GSC were, otherwise, far more playable in 2004 than FRLG is nowadays... the games were still less than a decade old--as old as HGSS and BW are nowadays--and they could still be played on the then current GBA).

 

[illumine]

And, I find it mightily ironic that you're using this argument to defend FRLG when FRLG were made for the sole reason of, wait for it, compatibility.

This is misleading. Compatibility, which could just as well be made up for by including Pokémon in a game, wouldn't necessarily lead to a whole sequence of two games, being by itself a fairly minor point, which were rather also there to bring attention to those games, possibly update them, etc. 'Sole' may overstate the case here. In any case, FR/LG is other than this just an 'updated' version of R/B, while the current version is not, so if people were so drawn to the newer games they might well think that FR/LG are better games, whether or not they also find R/B useful - and presumably that would depend on how much they care about completing their Pokédex in S&M. It's not reducible to compatibility, and may be more entertaining, just as S&M may not be reducible to its abbreviation, if less entertaining. They didn't just try to put in the R/B Pokémon, and then change the graphics, features, etc., by accident.

That's a flawed logic. Why not play what you call "latest and greatest" then? We are talking about the game itself, not what's compatible with. That's an extra.

To be fair, you suspect that's mostly just phrases, Sun and Moon aren't even released yet. If someone liked R/S/E, of course, then they needn't also like Sun and Moon, but may prefer FR/LG, in which case most of this does not apply. FR/LG is, of course, a more modern game than R/B, so if that's what you're looking for then it's hardly out-dated.

Touching on Elysieum's post, the 'latest and greatest' is what you'd be paying for, presumably, so like if you really want to encourage the team of Sun and Moon...

Some people who like R/B might be alright with them taking a break by this point.

It might be possible for people to consider R/B and FR/LG as games independently, without feeling a compulsive need to bypass these entirely to transfer to S&M. If people were just settling for a lesser game, but they could transfer things to use them elsewhere (and not receive more modern types, generally, so this is mostly one-way), then they are settling, and this doesn't worsen the other games. It just becomes a feeder game, which is surely a lesser role for a game to play. It seems a bit strange to think that new features and graphics that are likeable have only been added since D/P.

So...? The games don't need those (specially Mega Evolutions), and nothing has changed in that regard. The situation is the same as last month/year/decade.

By R/S/E, etc,. the games did have new features and graphics, so it seems a bit unnecessary to just point out that they didn't have the features that they don't have. If you were playing for features, then FR/LG have a few new ones. You wonder if pressing both R/S/E and R/B into just being suppliers of Pokémon for the modern versions isn't a bit degrading, though.

 

[LusoTrainer]

You're seriously going to argue that this looks as good as this or even this?

Yes, I do. Like I said, sprites do age better than low-res 3D graphics.

The Gen 3 games, in general, had mediocre graphics even for the time, and they look even worse nowadays.

No, they didn't.

Because, *gasp* some of us actually like both RBY AND the latest and greatest! :rolleyes2:

You just answered your own OP.

And, I find it mightily ironic that you're using this argument to defend FRLG when FRLG were made for the sole reason of, wait for it, compatibility.

I'm not defending anything. You're the one pretending the remakes are obsolete when they aren't. Just like the originals were not obsolete when the remakes were released. And no, the remakes weren't made for the sole reason of compatibility. You don't need to remake anything in order to make Kanto Pokémon available. They chose to remake it and in doing so, Kanto Pokémon were made available. That was a consequence, not the cause.

RBY/GSC couldn't trade with RS, so there needed to be a way to get the older Pokémon into the newest games, hence FRLG.

Again, flawed logic. Trading wasn't a reason to release any game ever. Not FR/LG, nor HG/SS, nor OR/AS.

If compatibility really wasn't that big of an issue, then FRLG would've never been made in the first place (especially since RBY/GSC were, otherwise, far more playable in 2004 than FRLG is nowadays... the games were still less than a decade old--as old as HGSS and BW are nowadays--and they could still be played on the then current GBA).

Opinion (not fact) noted. That doesn't make it true though.