The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Previous Generations (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=200)
-   -   5th Gen Why do you think Black and White has recieved so many bad remarks? (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=284536)

Ninjagon July 16th, 2012 4:31 AM

Why do you think Black and White has recieved so many bad remarks?
 
Why do you think Black and White has recieved so many bad remarks as oppose to the other main series games?

Is it because the pokemon seem much more fake than the others?
Is it because the of lack of post-game?

Personally, even though i stayed with Pokemon since the original 151, I think there is room for change, technology is changing drastically around us. Black and White in my mind are some the best pokemon games i've played.

Everyone and anyone, put your opinions here.

Haseyo July 16th, 2012 6:22 AM

I don't know too many people that hated it outside of people who cannot look beyond their "childhood" (which I find very sad) and refuse to play anything new, even though it is far better with content and story.

It's true that not everyone will be pleased, but I feel those who hated it just never gave it a real chance. Or just wanted all old Pokemon and didn't want to accept new things. B2/W2 will change that for them, but if they still think that's a bad game, they are just fooling themselves.

Katie the Friendly Ghost July 16th, 2012 9:16 AM

The only reason I can think of is the Pokemon. People are always hating on the names and designs, for whatever reason I don't know. I definitely don't agree. Overall I feel like the games get better with every generation. Nostalgia is nostalgia, but I love new opportunities.

Atomic Pirate July 16th, 2012 9:26 AM

There's effectively no postgame, many of the new designs were lackluster, there were yet again too many legendaries, the region was boring, the Pokemon themselves were overly detailed with tons of spikes, armor, and markings, there was no good battle facility (I.E. Battle Tower, Battle Frontier), no Safari Zone, no good rivals, the starters were boring, and the game was too bloody easy.

Even the Online Random Matchup mode isn't any good because everyone uses a hacked team of max-stat WonderTombs and the like.

And I'm not saying this because of nostalgia. I started out with Sapphire Version, and I still don't like Black and White too much. Especially after HeartGold and SoulSilver. With HG/SS, Game Freak set a new standard for Pokemon games. You had conveniences like the running shoes toggle, series mainstays like the Safari zone, fun options such as the Pokemon-following-you feature, great challenges such as Red, and a great roster of Pokemon.

Harmonious Fusion July 16th, 2012 11:06 AM

I personally think Black and White were just okay. Going solely on their own merits, they were fine, but compared to HeartGold and SoulSilver, they felt like a step backward. That could just be the nostalgia talking though, since the Johto games were always my favorites.

As for the Pokemon themselves, I disliked most of them at first, but they've really grown on me. In fact, I'd say that design-wise, Gen V is my favorite so far.

voicerocker July 16th, 2012 1:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninjagon (Post 7255993)
Why do you think Black and White has recieved so many bad remarks as oppose to the other main series games?

Is it because the pokemon seem much more fake than the others?
Do you think it's a bad game altogether?
Is it because the of lack of post-game?

Personally, even though i stayed with Pokemon since the original 151, I think there is room for change, technology is changing drastically around us. Black and White in my mind are some the best pokemon games i've played.

Everyone and anyone, put your opinions here.

Some people just love to hate things, especially when it comes to Pokemon. Nostalgia is great, but you can't run off of it completely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
There's effectively no postgame

Many non-Unova exclusive Pokemon become available.
Trainers like Cynthia, Morimoto are available to battle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
many of the new designs were lackluster

Strictly opinion only, with no evidence either. Compared to older Pokemon designs, these were very thought out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
there were yet again too many legendaries

Gen 4 and 5 both introduced 13 Legendary Pokemon. Gen 4's total new Pokemon were 107, which means 12.1% out of them all were Legendary, however plenty of old Pokemon were in these games as well.

Gen 5 introduced 156 Pokemon, with 8.3% being Legendary, so going by percentage, there were less Legends introduced compared to standard normal Pokemon. And since each of these Pokemon are limited to only 1 per game, there cannot be too many Legendary Pokemon unless you are hacking them all because 3 are automatically unavailable being Event Pokemon, and 2 of them are version exclusive, with the Kami trio needing both of them to gain access to the other. In-game, you can only catch 7 of the Legendary Pokemon without outside assitance, as compared to the 4 in Red/Green/Blue/Yellow. 3 is hardly a major increase out of 649 Pokemon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
the region was boring

No evidence of this, considering only consisted of totally new Pokemon at the start.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
the Pokemon themselves were overly detailed with tons of spikes, armor, and markings

Which contradicts your earlier statement about them being lackluster, which usually translates into "They don't look like Pokemon". But Pokemon like Voltorb or Muk or any Gen 1 Pokemon was just extremely creative compared to Pokemon like the Tao Dragons, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
there was no good battle facility (I.E. Battle Tower, Battle Frontier), no Safari Zone, no good rivals, the starters were boring, and the game was too bloody easy.

World Tournament in B2W2, B/W were all about the new Pokemon so no need for a Safari Zone (Plus older Pokemon appear postgame, which you complained about), what defines a "good rival"?, starters are no better or worse than any others, and "too easy" doesn't matter since these games allow you to set your own difficulty by the way you play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
Even the Online Random Matchup mode isn't any good because everyone uses a hacked team of max-stat WonderTombs and the like.

So you're blaming the game for sucking because people hacked it? Blame the hackers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
And I'm not saying this because of nostalgia. I started out with Sapphire Version, and I still don't like Black and White too much. Especially after HeartGold and SoulSilver. With HG/SS, Game Freak set a new standard for Pokemon games.

What standard was set with a remake? They took an old game and updated it. Don't get me wrong, I loved SoulSilver because my original Silver died on me, but I don't see where it set a standard, other than people expecting remakes every generation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
You had conveniences like the running shoes toggle

And that was amazing? That was probably only because the original G/S/C didn't have them. The running shoes were a great addition for keeping the longer routes from taking forever to clear. I don't see why anyone would not want them, nor how the ability to turn them off and on is such a big deal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
series mainstays like the Safari zone, fun options such as the Pokemon-following-you feature, great challenges such as Red, and a great roster of Pokemon.

I liked the Safari Zone in HG/SS, but it was too much work to get the better Pokemon having to leave items out and wait for days as they "leveled up".

Pokemon following was nice, but I feel extremely overrated. It's cool to see your Pokemon following you, but is it really THAT big of a deal that people deem it absolutely horrible that Gen 5 didn't have it too? Besides, the Pokemon following you rarely served a purpose other than just being there.

As said earlier, B/W has Morimoto and Cynthia, not to mention rematches with Cheren and Bianca. This was also the first time becoming Champion was saved for postgame, so there was plenty to do postgame, as well as plenty of powerful trainers to face.

"Great roster of Pokemon" seems like an opinion, considering there were plenty of interesting Pokemon introduced in B/W, while B2W2 focused on the return of the older ones.

Cyclone July 16th, 2012 2:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by voicerocker (Post 7256585)
As said earlier, B/W has Morimoto and Cynthia, not to mention rematches with Cheren and Bianca. This was also the first time becoming Champion was saved for postgame, so there was plenty to do postgame, as well as plenty of powerful trainers to face.

I never thought about it this way. Suddenly, I feel like I am not actually on the pinnacle of impending success; I am merely taking out the enemy before actually trying to become Champion.

Cyclone

ShinyUmbreon189 July 16th, 2012 2:35 PM

I played Black and White and like it and all but the reason why I hate it is because all of the Gen 5 Pokemon suck. They don't look anything like real Pokemon it seems like GameFreak didn't even try on this one. The game had a good story and all just like all the other's but the pokemon look ridiculous.

chaos11011 July 16th, 2012 2:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256697)
I played Black and White and like it and all but the reason why I hate it is because all of the Gen 5 Pokemon suck. They don't look anything like real Pokemon it seems like GameFreak didn't even try on this one. The game had a good story and all just like all the other's but the pokemon look ridiculous.

This is what puzzles me every time. You say it doesn't look anything like a real Pokemon, but what exactly is a Pokemon? Isn't it a monster designed by Gamefreak and co.? Are you implying that these Pokemon weren't made by GF? This is just a huge case of nostalgia, as, to be honest, these Pokemon look as normal as the ones in Gen I.

----

For me, I loved this generation and I honestly don't see why people think so negatively of it. The only reasons I could think of were the fact that people are so nostalgic and the minimal postgame material. Another factor, I suppose, could be the fact that some people aren't used to the new EXP system?

ShinyUmbreon189 July 16th, 2012 2:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chaos11011 (Post 7256707)
This is what puzzles me every time. You say it doesn't look anything like a real Pokemon, but what exactly is a Pokemon? Isn't it a monster designed by Gamefreak and co.? Are you implying that these Pokemon weren't made by GF? This is just a huge case of nostalgia, as, to be honest, these Pokemon look as normal as the ones in Gen I.

----

For me, I loved this generation and I honestly don't see why people think so negatively of it. The only reasons I could think of were the fact that people are so nostalgic and the minimal postgame material. Another factor, I suppose, could be the fact that some people aren't used to the new EXP system?

They don't look anywhere near as normal as the Pokemon in Gen 1. I never said GameFreak didn't make them, your getting way ahead of yourself. Yes, every gen does have some Pokemon that makes you think wtf but Gen 5, they are all like that. Also I don't like that there are 12 legendaries. Don't you think you went a little overboard GameFreak?

Spinosaurus July 16th, 2012 3:39 PM

Why do these threads always get my attention?

I've mentioned it in the other thread that the flaws this gen had that are far more noticeable than other. Being someone who liked all gens (especially 3 and 4, so if anything I'm a "newbie".) save for this one, I hope people don't blindly accuse my opinions to be biased and nostalgia-filled.
Anyway, I'll make my points smaller and more straight to the point this time than the other thread. I'll also list them in bullet points.
  • The design decisions that underwent in this game are very questionable. Most notable is the region, being void, dull and lifeless. There are a few exceptions, but they are just that, exceptions. You won't even stay in them a lot because the game is too linear.
  • Linearity, like I mentioned above. Unlike various other games in the mainline series, this game is too linear and pretty straight forward. A main Pokemon game should not be this linear.
  • The region is small too, and coupled with the linearity, it makes the game feel absolutely short, limited and especially easy.
  • Ah, yes, the difficulty. B/W is arguably the easiest in the series. Why is that? Because of the various ridiculous gen 5 Pokemon available, even early on. Get a good Pokemon like Krookodile with Moxie, train it a bit against Audino and voila. The gym leaders weren't very challenging as well. Ghetsis is the only note-worthy "boss" that can actually get you to straight up your mind and think. This is the only Pokemon game that I actually didn't see myself using any single items except against Ghetsis. Oh, and recyclable TMs.
  • Graphics are just awfully pixelated.
  • Metagame is also arguably the worst because of the ridiculous new moves, items, abilities and Pokemon. It's like DBZ level of ridiculousness (nice analogy huh?), except with Pokemon and without the exciting actions.
  • Gen 5 Pokemon being the only ones available until post-game. Before you jump the gun and start labeling me as a nostalgic-filled person, I like the new Pokemon, they're a step-up from past gens, and they were the only things done right in the questionable design choices that has happened in these two games. However, Pokemon is known for the variety available and the fun of catching them all. I'm not saying B/W isn't really varied and that you can't "catch them all", but having a team solely built of one generation kills some of that, makes the experience more boring. Gen I had the excuse of being the first in the series, this doesn't apply to B/W. I am against nostalgia glass, just to clarify.
  • Niche story, questionable dull characters. Killing the usual formula of Pokemon games just for an attempt at a dark story is not a positive. It also has the worst evil team and the horrible, predictable plot twist.
  • The gen has not introduced a single thing that changes the way the game system is played. Gen II changed types completely, Gen III had EVs, IVs and natures, and Gen 4 had the physical/special split. (which is huge) And 5? Third, more restricted abilities? lol
  • Post-game. Yep, no need to say anything.
Overall this is a poor attempt at a reboot and I felt it changed the things that shouldn't have been changed and kept the things that shouldn't have been kept. The points above make the game much less memorable than the others.
That is not to say B/W is a bad game by any standards, as for what it has, it is still a fun, full-fledged Pokemon game, but it doesn't have anything to make it the best, let alone NOT the worst.
It is marketed towards newer and more casual audience, what with it being short, easy and simple, and as such the points I have made above are kind of moot to the bigger % of those who have bought the games.

Fortunately, B/W2 fixed most of these "flaws".

voicerocker July 16th, 2012 3:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256697)
I played Black and White and like it and all but the reason why I hate it is because all of the Gen 5 Pokemon suck. They don't look anything like real Pokemon it seems like GameFreak didn't even try on this one. The game had a good story and all just like all the other's but the pokemon look ridiculous.

What is a "real Pokemon"? All 649 Pokemon are REAL Pokemon.

Would you like to compare? I can find you several Pokemon that look odd in every generation.
http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/1/19/Spr_5b_103.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/0/0e/Spr_5b_124.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/9/9c/Spr_5b_122.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/c/cb/Spr_5b_097_m.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/4/4a/Spr_5b_235.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/6/65/Spr_5b_272_m.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/7/73/476.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/0/07/Spr_5b_400_m.png
So, how are these any better than the ones in Gen 5? They aren't. They're all Pokemon. Just because they look different doesn't mean they don't look like a Pokemon.

And "didn't even try"? How about these?

http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/8/8a/Spr_5b_100.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/b/b5/101.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/6/68/050.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/8/81/051.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/7/78/088.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/7/77/089.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/b/bc/081.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/6/63/082.png
These Pokemon were very simple, but the only reason people don't complain about them is because they came first.

How is this:
http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/6/68/Spr_5b_003_m.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/e/e1/Spr_5b_006.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/3/3d/Spr_5b_009.png
any more or less creative than this?:
http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/9/99/497.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/b/be/500.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/5/53/Spr_5b_503.png
Answer: they're not. Game Freak has to find ways to make new Pokemon stand out from older Pokemon, which is why the don't all look alike. Don't get me wrong, I grew up with the first Gen, but those are some of the most basic designs of them all. There is nothing wrong with any Gen 5 Pokemon. The Taoism theme with the Unova dragons was a great idea, so I don't know how anyone can say they "didn't try" with such a great concept.

http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/3/3c/643.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/f/f3/Spr_5b_644.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/d/d9/646.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/3/3b/646B.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/4/40/646W.png

And no, they didn't go overboard. They introduced 13 Legendary Pokemon with 143 regular Pokemon. In all, 47 Pokemon are Legendary while 602 are not. That is only 7.2% of all Pokemon.

ShinyUmbreon189 July 16th, 2012 3:54 PM

^
1. Don't try to argue with me cuz I know im gonna win
2. Blastoise is a turtle, Charizard is a dragon and idk exactly what Venasuar is. Idk wth the 5th Gen are?
I also stated that all gen's have some pokemon that make you think wtf. I never said they weren't pokemon, they just don't look like "Pokemon" compared to the other Pokemon. They look like they were half assed. Pokemon used to look like a lot of animals to an extent and a lot of the Pokemon were just monsters but when you get Pokemon like Ice Cream cones and chandlers then you know they ain't "true" Pokemon.

Spinosaurus July 16th, 2012 4:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256775)
^
1. Don't try to argue with me cuz I know im gonna win
2. Blastoise is a turtle, Charizard is a dragon and idk exactly what Venasuar is. Idk wth the 5th Gen are?
I also stated that all gen's have some pokemon that make you think wtf. I never said they weren't pokemon, they just don't look like "Pokemon" compared to the other Pokemon. They look like they were half assed. Pokemon used to look like a lot of animals to an extent and a lot of the Pokemon were just monsters but when you get Pokemon like Ice Cream cones and chandlers then you know they ain't "true" Pokemon.

I don't get this kind of thinking. What makes the new Pokemon any less Pokemon?

The above poster made a very good point, while your argument is pretty baseless and just makes you seem biased. ELABORATE on your points about them not looking like Pokemon, instead of making this tiring statement.

Also, simplicity does NOT equal to creativity.

EDIT: Although I do think Zekyurem/Kyureshiram or whatever they're actually called to be bad designs. It's not that they're too digimon-like (I actually like Digimon), they're just flat out ugly and messy.

voicerocker July 16th, 2012 4:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256775)
1. Don't try to argue with me cuz I know im gonna win

Don't be so sure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256775)
2. Blastoise is a turtle, Charizard is a dragon and idk exactly what Venasuar is. Idk wth the 5th Gen are?

Serperior - snake. That's rather obvious.
Emboar - boar/pig. Again, rather obvious.
Samurott - otter/sea lion. Really, just looking at their names will tell you what they are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256775)
I also stated that all gen's have some pokemon that make you think wtf. I never said they weren't pokemon, they just don't look like "Pokemon" compared to the other Pokemon.

Again, what defines what a Pokemon looks like? Your opinion? It's not a Pokemon unless it looks like one according to YOU? Nope. A Pokemon looks like a Pokemon because it IS a Pokemon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256775)
They look like they were half assed.

And Voltorb, Electrode, Grimer, Muk, Magenmite, Magneton, Diglett, and Dugtrio were not? Compared to Gen 1, Gen 5 had far more thought put into them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256775)
Pokemon used to look like a lot of animals to an extent and a lot of the Pokemon were just monsters but when you get Pokemon like Ice Cream cones and chandlers then you know they ain't "true" Pokemon.

Magnemite was not an animal, nor was Gastly, Geodude, Jynx, Mr. Mime, Ditto, Voltorb, Oddish, Bellsprout, Jigglypuff, Clefairy, Exeggcute, Koffing, Hitmonlee, Hitmonchan, or Porygon.

And why can't a Pokemon be based off ice cream? We had one based on eggs and a pineapple, which oddly enough are part of the same evolutionary line. And chandeliers either? What about a living Pokeball, or living magnet? What's the difference?

Again, what is the definition of a "true Pokemon"?

Spinosaurus July 16th, 2012 4:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by voicerocker (Post 7256796)
Serperior - snake. That's rather obvious.
Emboar - boar/pig. Again, rather obvious.
Samurott - otter/sea lion. Really, just looking at their names will tell you what they are.

The beauty of these three are what they also took inspiration from.
Serperior is a combination of both a serpent and a vine, while having the characteristic and design of a royal figure.
Emboar is a flaming, gruesome boar that has the looks of a bulky wrestler.
Samurott is a sea lion that takes inspiration from a Samurai.

To add to that, they also seem to resemble figures from various chinese and japanese mythology. It's things like these that makes you appreciate the design of these Pokemon. While Venusaur and Blastoise took inspiration from a wild flower and a tank respectively, they just added a huge flower on the back of a frog/saurian hybrid and two cannons on a bipedal tortoise.

BW starters have much more creative designs, while gen 1's are simple.

ShinyUmbreon189 July 16th, 2012 4:24 PM

IMO Pokemon are suppose to look something like oversized animals or "living" creatures; it it be flowers, trees, vines, bugs, etc. like they did in the early gen's. This is gonna be long but I"m gonna show you exactly what I mean.
Bulbasaur is a creature with a root on its back, then evolves into Ivysaur which has leaves coming out of the roots meaning its "GROWING" then finally into its final evolution venasaur which is a tree with leaves and a mushroom/flower. Now Blastoises whole evolutionary form is "turtles", Charizard is a dragon, Butterfee and Beedrills evolutionary chain is a Caterpillar, into a cacoon, into a Butterfly/Bee, Pidgeots is "birds", Raticates "rats", Fearow "birds", Arbok "snakes", Pikachu "mouse", Ninetales "fox", Crobats "bats", Vileplumes "creatues with flowers" same with Bellossom, Parasects "mushrooms", Persians "Cats", Primeape "monkey/pig lol", Arcanines "dogs", Machamps "roided up human beings", Victrebell "flowers, kinda", Rapidash's "horses", Farfetch'd and Dodrio's "birds", Dewgong's "sea lions", Kinglers "crabs", Kangaskhan "kangaroo", Seaking "fish", Tauros "bull", Magikarp "fish", Aerodactyl "dinasaur/bird", Zapdos, Molters, Articuno "birds", Dragonite "dragons". The rest are made up creatures but could easily pass for an animal or living creature if they wanted to. Now 5th gen.

up to Stoulands evolutions forms is nothing, Stoulands "dogs", Liepard "cats", Unfenzant "birds", Zebstrika "zebras", Basculin "pirahanna", Swanna "ducks", Sawbuck "deer", Buffoulant "buffalo", Mandibuzz "vulture" and that's all, the rest look nothing like they could be living creatures. Did I make a point this time?

I know they're all Pokemon I never said they weren't quit jumping to conclusion! I still play the game so STFU about then not looking like Pokemon cuz they don't.

Spinosaurus July 16th, 2012 4:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256819)
IMO Pokemon are suppose to look something like oversized animals or "living" creatures; it it be flowers, trees, vines, bugs, etc. like they did in the early gen's. This is gonna be long but I"m gonna show you exactly what I mean.
Bulbasaur is a creature with a root on its back, then evolves into Ivysaur which has leaves coming out of the roots meaning its "GROWING" then finally into its final evolution venasaur which is a tree with leaves and a mushroom/flower. Now Blastoises whole evolutionary form is "turtles", Charizard is a dragon, Butterfee and Beedrills evolutionary chain is a Caterpillar, into a cacoon, into a Butterfly/Bee, Pidgeots is "birds", Raticates "rats", Fearow "birds", Arbok "snakes", Pikachu "mouse", Ninetales "fox", Crobats "bats", Vileplumes "creatues with flowers" same with Bellossom, Parasects "mushrooms", Persians "Cats", Primeape "monkey/pig lol", Arcanines "dogs", Machamps "roided up human beings", Victrebell "flowers, kinda", Rapidash's "horses", Farfetch'd and Dodrio's "birds", Dewgong's "sea lions", Kinglers "crabs", Kangaskhan "kangaroo", Seaking "fish", Tauros "bull", Magikarp "fish", Aerodactyl "dinasaur/bird", Zapdos, Molters, Articuno "birds", Dragonite "dragons". The rest are made up creatures but could easily pass for an animal or living creature if they wanted to. Now 5th gen.

It's funny how you mention Bulbasaur line-up, Pikachu (he doesn't not look like a mouse much more than Emboar looking like a boar), Oddish lineup, Parasect, Machop lineup, Bellsprout line-up, Mankey/Primeape, Kangaskhan, etc. and forgot about the starters, Patrat, the monkeys, Drillbur, Tympole, Sewaddle, Venipede, Sandile and their evolution to name some. Also, Conkeldurr looks more human than Machamp, but they're both not really close.
Haxorus is also more realistic of a living creature than Charizard because of it being based on a herbivorous dinosaur, whereas the latter is a Dragon, a mythical creature.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256819)
I know they're all Pokemon I never said they weren't quit jumping to conclusion! I still play the game so STFU about then not looking like Pokemon cuz they don't.

See, this is funny, because:
Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256697)
I played Black and White and like it and all but the reason why I hate it is because all of the Gen 5 Pokemon suck. They don't look anything like real Pokemon it seems like GameFreak didn't even try on this one. The game had a good story and all just like all the other's but the pokemon look ridiculous.


voicerocker July 16th, 2012 4:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256819)
IMO Pokemon are suppose to look something like oversized animals or "living" creatures; it it be flowers, trees, vines, bugs, etc. like they did in the early gen's. This is gonna be long but I"m gonna show you exactly what I mean.
Bulbasaur is a creature with a root on its back, then evolves into Ivysaur which has leaves coming out of the roots meaning its "GROWING" then finally into its final evolution venasaur which is a tree with leaves and a mushroom/flower. Now Blastoises whole evolutionary form is "turtles", Charizard is a dragon, Butterfee and Beedrills evolutionary chain is a Caterpillar, into a cacoon, into a Butterfly/Bee, Pidgeots is "birds", Raticates "rats", Fearow "birds", Arbok "snakes", Pikachu "mouse", Ninetales "fox", Crobats "bats", Vileplumes "creatues with flowers" same with Bellossom, Parasects "mushrooms", Persians "Cats", Primeape "monkey/pig lol", Arcanines "dogs", Machamps "roided up human beings", Victrebell "flowers, kinda", Rapidash's "horses", Farfetch'd and Dodrio's "birds", Dewgong's "sea lions", Kinglers "crabs", Kangaskhan "kangaroo", Seaking "fish", Tauros "bull", Magikarp "fish", Aerodactyl "dinasaur/bird", Zapdos, Molters, Articuno "birds", Dragonite "dragons". The rest are made up creatures but could easily pass for an animal or living creature if they wanted to. Now 5th gen.

up to Stoulands evolutions forms is nothing, Stoulands "dogs", Liepard "cats", Unfenzant "birds", Zebstrika "zebras", Basculin "pirahanna", Swanna "ducks", Sawbuck "deer", Buffoulant "buffalo", Mandibuzz "vulture" and that's all, the rest look nothing like they could be living creatures. Did I make a point this time?

No, you didn't. You're saying that Pokemon should only look like real animals? Then why not just make a game about animal fighting then? Why make Pokemon at all if they're supposed to be realistic? That is a totally flawed view of the franchise. Pokemon aren't supposed to be realistic. They never have been, and never will be.

Besides, you purposely left out many animal Pokemon in Gen 5 and included some from Gen 1 that would never pass as "real", like Blastoise with its cannons, and a Venusaur with the tree on its back. That's not realistic. Your attempts to make Gen 1 seem far better or more creative are only proving how simple those designs were compared to now.

ShinyUmbreon189 July 16th, 2012 4:48 PM

That's because gen I-IV are better creations.

voicerocker July 16th, 2012 4:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256850)
That's because gen I-IV are better creations.

So the best Pokemon are the ones that are simple in design? Then how can you say Gen 3 or 4 is any better than Gen 5? Gen 4 introduced the Sinnoh Creation trio and the Alpha Pokemon. Those were far from simple. Do those suck too because they aren't generic Pokemon?

How is the fire breathing dragon Charizard more of a Pokemon than ANYTHING in Gen 5? Yes, it is a cool Pokemon, but...it's just a fire breathing dragon.

ShinyUmbreon189 July 16th, 2012 5:06 PM

They put too much creations in Gen 5, I'm not trying to say they aren't Pokemon they just eh, don't seem like Pokemon anymore. Maybe it's cuz I grew up with the 1st gen, idk. The gen 5 Pokemon look like digimon more than Pokemon.

crystalzapdos July 16th, 2012 5:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
There's effectively no postgame,

It had more of a Postgame than R/S, yet, for whatever reason, I never see any one complaining about their postgame. The only thing there was to do is the Battle Tower. B/W where about even with D/P.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
many of the new designs were lackluster,

*sigh* Voltorb, Ditto, Magnemite, Grimer, Jynx, Seel, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
there were yet again too many legendaries,

Less than D/P, so it was an improvement, but yet again you ignore the previous releases and you only complain about the most current.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
the region was boring,

I love how supported this statement is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
the Pokemon themselves were overly detailed with tons of spikes, armor, and markings,

Obviously Lillipup is covered in Spikes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
there was no good battle facility (I.E. Battle Tower, Battle Frontier),

The game doesn't have the Battle Frontier because it is the first set of games, just as R/S and D/P didn't have one. Yet again, you seem to ignore that previous releases did the same thing.

Also, the game had the Battle Subway, which is the same thing as the Battle Tower.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
no Safari Zone,

Oh no, we can't chunk balls at Pokemon in a Safari-like atmosphere. Whatever will we do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
no good rivals,

I don't even get this one. What exactly constitutes as a "good rival"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
the starters were boring,

See above.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
and the game was too bloody easy.

Well of couse your going to find a GAME MADE FOR EIGHT-YEAR OLDS too easy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
Even the Online Random Matchup mode isn't any good because everyone uses a hacked team of max-stat WonderTombs and the like.

I'm sure if precious, oh-so perfect HG/SS had Random Matchup, it would be the same situation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
And I'm not saying this because of nostalgia. I started out with Sapphire Version, and I still don't like Black and White too much.

You keep telling yourself that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
Especially after HeartGold and SoulSilver.

And cue the HG/SS fanboyism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
With HG/SS, Game Freak set a new standard for Pokemon games.

They set a new standard with remakes...... right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
You had conveniences like the running shoes toggle,

Good, you know how hard holding a button is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
series mainstays like the Safari zone,

Oh yeah, if I wait 100 days I can throw balls at a Bagon. How fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
fun options such as the Pokemon-following-you feature,

I hated that feature. It added nothing to the game and served no purpose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
great challenges such as Red,

Red had a team with terrible move sets. All he has is levels. You can beat him with a team of level 60s, which is extremely underleveled compared to Red.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7256330)
and a great roster of Pokemon.

Again, Voltorb, Grimer, Dunsparce, Seel, etc.


I'm sure you'll never respond to this, but if you do it'll be something like, "Hurr huur B/W has Ice Cream Pokemanz!!!!"

Meowthison July 16th, 2012 5:19 PM

I've despised Gen V all up to maybe about a week ago. xD
I thought the Pokemon were incredibly stupid. (Trubbish, the ice cream cone, Timburr..)
But now I realize there are some good ones like Snivy and Galvantula, imo.

Ho-Oh July 16th, 2012 5:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyUmbreon189 (Post 7256819)
I know they're all Pokemon I never said they weren't quit jumping to conclusion! I still play the game so STFU about then not looking like Pokemon cuz they don't.

Guys keep in mind that posts like this aren't really warranted and you should all debate/discuss with each other respectfully. Just remember not to be rude when you're debating and you'll be fine. I'd also like to remind you guys that this thread is about why others dislike them, not your own personal bias for or against. For example, gen IV being better creations as a reason is your own personal opinion and doesn't really cut it as debating why the games got bad remarks from others. Oh and one last thing, I know this is really active and all but there is a thread for whether the designs look like Pokemon or not right here, so try not to go too much into that and bring it back to your original points otherwise we'll have an issue. Thanks :)

Just keep in mind this isn't for your own personal opinion, rather it's for why you think others dislike them.

AxeyWaxyWoo July 17th, 2012 5:43 AM

I bought Black and White when they came out, and I will admit, at first I didn't like majority of the designs. I think at they just looked 'strange' to me because I wasn't used to seeing them pop up in the wild. XD

But they have grown on me and I can't wait to play Black and White 2. :D

Though I've seen hate from people who haven't actually even played BW.
Like, they have already decided they don't like it when they haven't gave it a chance.
That annoys me, lol. :)

Black and White 2 = <3 :P

Xander Olivieri July 17th, 2012 6:12 AM

Honestly other that here in general I have not seen any real "Bad" reviews of the games. Majority of the complaints I've ever found were here, and maybe 1 or two elsewhere but other than that, its been nothing but praise or indifference.

For me there is nothing wrong with the games. I don't get why so many gripe about them. I've been with the series since the US got them, so I've been with it almost since its birth. I love the route that things are going with the games.

Spinosaurus July 17th, 2012 7:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XanderO (Post 7257717)
Honestly other that here in general I have not seen any real "Bad" reviews of the games. Majority of the complaints I've ever found were here, and maybe 1 or two elsewhere but other than that, its been nothing but praise or indifference.

For me there is nothing wrong with the games. I don't get why so many gripe about them. I've been with the series since the US got them, so I've been with it almost since its birth. I love the route that things are going with the games.

That's strange, as it's the opposite from what I have seen. This is the only place where I have actually seen praise for the game, whereas in real life and several places I've seen nothing but negative opinions for the most part.

ESPECIALLY real life. None of my friends, some who are past huge Pokemon fans, liked the game, even after playing it. They beat it, but generally their responses were very underwhelming, with "I beat it..I guess. meh" or "I didn't like it, huge disappointment." I even know people who never played Pokemon tried it and their response were "what the hell. people actually like THIS?". Of course I could ask them what they don't like about it, but I let it go, since they don't really care enough anymore.

I've seen some praises for the game online, but overall it was mostly negative criticism. (By the way, they're not Pokemon sites or forums.) What I've seen:
-Horrible Pokemon (probably the nostalgic people)
-Horrible region
-Bad, niche story.
-The worst evil team, and N is stupid.
-Post-game is awful.
-Doesn't feel like a Pokemon game when beating it. (You don't really fight the champion on
-Easiest in the series*
-Boring and just not memorable.
-Bad design decision.

Basically all the problems I've mentioned on my previous post and the tiring statements towards the newer Pokemon.

*This is actually true. This is the only Pokemon game where I haven't used any items in battle except against Ghetsis, and it was also the fastest I beat.
Generally, Pokemon games are hard towards kids. My younger cousins, who are big time Pokemon fans, generally have problems in these games and refer to me for help. This is the only game where they didn't need me at all and beat it in TWO DAYS. (usually takes them months)

This game isn't exactly well liked by a lot of competitive players either. This generation is considered the worst by many.


I bet if B/W had Looker though everyone would love B/W. It worked with Platinum!

Cyclone July 17th, 2012 8:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spinosaurus (Post 7257838)
I bet if B/W had Looker though everyone would love B/W. It worked with Platinum!

Uh...B/W DOES have Looker. He appears after you beat the E4, when you end up with the National Dex. Afterwards, when speaking to the sages in their scattered spots post-Ghetsis, he shows up to arrest them.

Unless you mean his involvement in the maingame. I think he's fine where he is.

Cyclone

Xander Olivieri July 17th, 2012 8:10 AM

LOL Boring and not Memorable yet they complain that much about it? I can guarantee that they'll remember Unova if they hate it that much.

As for Post Game. Red/Blue had less Post game than B/W does. All you get is 1 extra cave and Mewtwo.

G/S/C has the biggest Post game allowing you to go back and battle Kanto Gym Leaders and Red (which honestly doesn't have a story so its still fairly short)

R/S No Post game at all except Battle Tower and Contests.

D/P Battle Island place with three new Exploration areas and Battle Tower.

B/W 3 new Cities, Battle subway, Giant Chasm, and Place where Landurus is..Oh and Abyssal Ruins.

B/W has more after game stuff than the previous Main series titles before their Thirds came out. So compared to those B/W has the most After Game events.

Team Plasma is like way better than Aqua/Magma. Not as grand as Galactic and not as mean as Rocket, but Plasma is far from the worse Evil Team. Now if you are like me and don't even Qualify Aqua/Magma as evil, then ya I can see it being true.

You have to beat the story before you get to fight the Champion. That's how it has been in ALL Pokemon games. You beat the story AFTER the E4 is the only difference with B/W cause normally you beat the story before the 8th Badge. Story ends when you beat the Bad Guy Team.


Not liked by Competitive players, and yet the competitive play was changed drastically by B/W. Its way harder to battle competitively than it was in the past and a good number of B/W Pokemon appear way more often.

As for easiest, I disagree on a personal level cause this is the first Pokemon game that I did not beat within a 30 hour mark. I don't usually count Grinding which takes 2-3 hours on all the previous games, while B/W it takes me 1 to 2 hours of straight grinding to get to levels I like.

I've never struggled as much against an entire region of Gyms as I did on this game and I've never lost to the E4 before B/W I had to change my team 4 times before I got the appropriate team balance for them. All in all this was the hardest Pokemon Game I've ever played.

Honestly the ones complaining are prolly just butthurt that they had trouble with the game and don't want to admit it. Kinda like that friend that everyone has that says stories he wants others to hear about how he broke up with his girlfriend cause she was too clingly/needy/whiny. Always bragging about how many girls he beds and stuff like that. Someone that just plays it up for attention.

Locally for me no one even touches the Gen 4 games anymore. We are all just focuses on Gen 5. Only complaint my friends have about Gen 5 was lack of Move tutor options.

Cyclone July 17th, 2012 8:50 AM

Someone else mentioned the fact that you do not become Champion until the Champion is actually beaten (i.e., Alder). Therefore, with this being the first game in the series where you do not actually battle the true Champion the first time through (N does, then you beat N, but you have yet to fight Alder), the events from Routes 11-15 cannot be considered "post-game" as you still have to prepare to fight the true Champion. Once you fight the Champion and defeat him, THEN starts the post-game...and sadly, there isn't really anything to do at that time.

Cyclone

Xander Olivieri July 17th, 2012 9:06 AM

That's not true. Story ends with N and after that you get Credits so yes, refighting the E4 and Champion are the Post Game events. Once you get the Credit roll, anything you do after that is Post Game.


(Though technically you never become Champion even after beating the old Champion cause every time you fight him, Alder is still the Champion. Same with Lance, Blue, Wallace, Steven, and Cynthia.)

Cyclone July 17th, 2012 9:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XanderO (Post 7257923)
(Though technically you never become Champion even after beating the old Champion cause every time you fight him, Alder is still the Champion. Same with Lance, Blue, Wallace, Steven, and Cynthia.)

That's typical with all sorts of games like that. See Pokémon XD for another Pokémon example: when you return to the room where you battled Greevil, he has six completely different non-Shadow Pokémon and acts like you lost the previous battle to him even though you already succeeded in purifying all six of his Shadow Pokémon, and may very well be fighting him using those Pokémon. If the game recognized the final possible feat in the game being done, then there would be no reason to replay the game and do it again.

Speaking of final events...while games like Black/White - typical standard ones - have a Hall of Fame, are you able to view your previous stats or does it only appear the once, you save the game, and you never see it again? If not, it goes with having to treat the final stage as unbeaten even if you've already beaten it.

Cyclone

(NOTE: let's not delve into a discussion about XD here; I use it merely as a point of reference here.)

Atomic Pirate July 17th, 2012 9:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by voicerocker (Post 7256585)
Strictly opinion only, with no evidence either. Compared to older Pokemon designs, these were very thought out.

http://sprites.pokecheck.org/i/561.gifhttp://sprites.pokecheck.org/i/576.gifhttp://sprites.pokecheck.org/i/584.gifhttp://sprites.pokecheck.org/i/615.gifhttp://sprites.pokecheck.org/i/569.gif
Wow, how so very thought out. You know, there was a time when Pokemon were creatures and plants (with the occasional robot or monster), not just random objects that had superpowers. A flying wooden Jack-O-Lantern? A lolita girl? Ice Cream? A snowflake? A trash bag? Those aren't things that make me think of Pokemon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by voicerocker (Post 7256585)
Which contradicts your earlier statement about them being lackluster, which usually translates into "They don't look like Pokemon". But Pokemon like Voltorb or Muk or any Gen 1 Pokemon was just extremely creative compared to Pokemon like the Tao Dragons, right?

You mean Reshirammon and Zekrommon? Or Kyuremmon? DI DI DI DIGIMON DIGITAL MONSTERS ARE THE CHAMPIONS.

Voltorb, Magnemite, Koffing and Grimer were in the First Generation to emphasize the human presence in the world of Pokemon. Voltorb and Magnemite were built by humans, and Koffing and Grimer spawned from pollution.

And about the Tao Dragons, let's take a walk through the history of Legendary Pokemon.

1st gen: We had a trio that included a Pokemon based off of the American-Indian Thunderbird, a Pokemon inspired by the legendary Phoenix, and one akin to the Roc. We also got 2 cats, with one being the creator of all Pokemon, and the other being an extremely badass, scientifically enhanced clone of the first.

2nd gen: We got a trio of beasts, which included a Sabretooth tiger, a lion, and a wolf. We were also treated to two immense flying creatures, which consisted of another, more powerful phoenix and a sea-dwelling dragon. We also got an elusive forest guardian that embodied all nature.

3rd gen: This is where Game Freak began to push the number of Legendaries. We got mineral-based golems, weather-based creatures (a dragon, a whale, and a tyrannosaur), a genetically-altered alien, a steel genie thing that is completely pointless, and two forgettable psychic dragons.

4th gen: This was probably the worst. We got a few overly detailed, Digimon-esque dragons embodying Time, Space, and... I guess whatever Giratina embodies. We also got 3 stupid-ass pixies, a pointless 4th Golem, a robotic volcano monster, a sea pixie, a flower hedgehog, these two nondescript ghost-monster-robots embodying dreams and nightmares, and let's not forget the all-powerful, almighty goat.

5th gen: We get 3 robot dragons that I guess were supposed to embody the Tao, 3 nondescript horse-dog-cat-monsters that represented the 3 musketeers (A great concept, but ruined by the fact that the Pokemon themselves were just monsters), 3 genie-kami things that serve no purpose, a pony thing that was probably designed by 12-year-old Bronies, a singer Pokemon, and a robotic-monster-gun-mantis thing.

Cyclone July 17th, 2012 9:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7257960)
3 genie-kami things that serve no purpose

Practical purpose in battle, maybe not, but it was a random addition to the storyline at the end. I wish they did more with it, myself, but it was the generational wanderer and isn't even in B2/W2 from what I understand (unless that was updated recently). I guess they realized how stupid it was and left it for trading, or they'll Mystery Gift it. Who knows?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7257960)
a pony thing that was probably designed by 12-year-old Brownies, a singer Pokemon, and a robotic-monster-gun-mantis thing.

Keldeo, Meloetta, and Genesect; I for one am actually looking FORWARD to these, as they may very well be the first gift Pokémon for B2/W2. Keldeo I am definitely interested in; Sacred Sword seems like an excellent Fighting move, and if the gift one doesn't include it, all you need are the three Musketeers in B2/W2 and whammo, he can learn the move. Genesect appears to me to be a confusing waste of time shuffling plates, and Meloetta I'll reserve judgment on for now.

Cyclone

Xander Olivieri July 17th, 2012 9:39 AM

When did Reshiram/Zekrom/Kyurem become Robots? This is news to me.

Also Sigilyph is based off the Nazca Hummingbird.

Gothorita is akin to both Mr. Mime and Jynx.

Trubbish and Garbador's existance is exactly the same as Grimer's. They were created through Human pollution.

Vanillite, while its like has the looks of Ice Cream, they are solid chunks of living Ice. As for Food based Pokemon, Cherim is a living Cherry.

You can't even call any of the Pokemon from the newer Generations Digimon. If you can, then there were Digimon in Generation 1 as well. Golem is very Digimon-Esque by the same deffinition. Gyarados looks like its covered in Plate Armor with the Segments it has. The designs of Pokemon have been controversial since Gen 1 when compared to Digimon. If you are a true fan you don't care cause if its made by GameFreak its a Pokemon. You can't even argue against that. Made by the company that made the game for the game, it belongs in the game.

Digimon aren't just complex, but no one seems to care about that little bit of info cause the only thing they want to do is complain about the ones that do get complex and metallic.

No, none of the new Pokemon look any more Digimon-esque than any Pokemon in any generation before.

Atomic Pirate July 17th, 2012 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
It had more of a Postgame than R/S, yet, for whatever reason, I never see any one complaining about their postgame. The only thing there was to do is the Battle Tower. B/W where about even with D/P.

Speak English and I might understand you better. But, from what I can pick out from this grammatical disaster, you seem to not understand that RS actually does get complained about regarding it's lack of postgame. It doesn't get complained about that much, though, because Gen. III also has Emerald with the Frontier and FRLG with the Sevii Islands. And you can't argue that B/W's piddly postgame was better than the colossal G/S/C/HG/SS postgames.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
*sigh* Voltorb, Ditto, Magnemite, Grimer, Jynx, Seel, etc.

Wait, Seel? What? What's wrong with Seel?
And Voltorb, Magnemite, and Grimer had good reasons to look man-made. They were man-made. Plus, Voltorb's Pokeball-like appearance is similar to the appearance of a Mimic, a common RPG monster that looks like a treasure chest. Ditto transformed, and while Jynx was odd, it was in fact a novelty Pokemon even at the time.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
Less than D/P, so it was an improvement, but yet again you ignore the previous releases and you only complain about the most current.

Actually, I hate D/P/Pt more than B/W. And plus, both games have 13 Legendaries, and I'm not even going into the insanely unnecessary amount of pointless Forms.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
I love how supported this statement is.

The region is full of gimmicky and forgettable locales such as Chargestone Cave, the ungodly number of bridges, and Pinwheel Forest, to name a few.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
Obviously Lillipup is covered in Spikes.

I didn't say Lillipup has spikes. Druddigon, Haxorus, Ferrothorn, Excadrill, Scolipede, Bisharp, and a few others do. Those spikes serve no purpose, besides to "look cool".
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
The game doesn't have the Battle Frontier because it is the first set of games, just as R/S and D/P didn't have one. Yet again, you seem to ignore that previous releases did the same thing.
Also, the game had the Battle Subway, which is the same thing as the Battle Tower.

Whatever, I was wrong, sue me.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
Oh no, we can't chunk balls at Pokemon in a Safari-like atmosphere. Whatever will we do.

The Safari Zone, like it or not, was a series mainstay and allowed for the capture of some of the most interesting Pokemon in the series (Scyther, Kangaskhan, Heracross, etc.). I liked it, and many other people did.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
I don't even get this one. What exactly constitutes as a "good rival"?

Oh, you liked the fact that the rivals were your best friends? I'm sorry, but many people, myself included, liked the more aggressive rivals such as Blue and Silver.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
See above.

Oh, you're one of the people who actually likes the stupid Fire/Fighting starters? Plus, the other starters, or at least one of them, should have gotten a secondary type.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
Well of couse your going to find a GAME MADE FOR EIGHT-YEAR OLDS too easy.

It's a game made for everyone to play. Not just little kids. And if you've ever played any of the Kanto games, not that I'd expect you to, you'd know that taking on the Kanto E4 and especially Champion Blue is a difficult task.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
I'm sure if precious, oh-so perfect HG/SS had Random Matchup, it would be the same situation.

Ah, now you've just gone from being passive-aggressive to aggressive-aggressive. What you may not understand is that HGSS didn't need random matchup. They already had rematches, Red, a number of wild Pokemon, an expansive region, and good features. And yes, if they had Random Matchup, I would still abstain from using it. I've never really used the Global Trade Station in any of the games (Yes, even in "precious" HG/SS), so I really don't care that HGSS doesn't have a random matchup system.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
You keep telling yourself that.

I started with the Hoenn games, yet the Johto games are my favorite. Plus, while I like Hoenn, I acknowledge that they have a number of flaws. Wow, with every reply you're looking more and more like an angry little kid.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
And cue the HG/SS fanboyism.

Wow, it's so horrible that HG/SS were my favorite games. That definitely deserves to be insulted.
And cue the B/W fanboyism.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
They set a new standard with remakes...... right.

They took everything that D/P/Pt did right, kept it, added new features and a truly interesting region, and all in all, set a precedent for the series. They were the series' best games at the time, and I really don't think that B/W lived up to them.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
Good, you know how hard holding a button is.

To you, convenience is the enemy! Eliminate the awful conveniences!
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
Oh yeah, if I wait 100 days I can throw balls at a Bagon. How fun.

I get it. You hate the Safari Zone. You don't need to keep saying it.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
I hated that feature. It added nothing to the game and served no purpose.

Oh no! How dare Game Freak make a new feature that fans love! How DARE they!
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
Red had a team with terrible move sets. All he has is levels. You can beat him with a team of level 60s, which is extremely underleveled compared to Red.

It's not exactly, you know, easy to get a team in the 60s. You need to work hard at it. But, judging by your extreme hatred, I'd expect that you're too lazy to train. And if you are too lazy to work hard and train a good team, then Black and White are perfect for you.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7256890)
Again, Voltorb, Grimer, Dunsparce, Seel, etc.
I'm sure you'll never respond to this, but if you do it'll be something like, "Hurr huur B/W has Ice Cream Pokemanz!!!!"

You're sure, huh? Well, I just did respond to it. Don't be hatin' on Dunsparce, I don't see what's so awful about it. Heck, it was even based off of something, that being a Japanese legend.
And why do you keep bringing up Seel? I know you Unova-obsessed newbies are all "HURR DURR KAYNTO AND JOTTO SUKS BEKAZ MANGMITE AND GRIMER AND YEAH!!!!1111", but Seel? What's wrong with Seel? It has a simple design, it's slightly cute, and it was an interesting Water-type option for a Gen. 1 team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by XanderO (Post 7257990)
If you are a true fan you don't care cause if its made by GameFreak its a Pokemon.

http://lparchive.org/Drill-Dozer/Images/9-drildozer1.jpg
Umm, so this is a Pokemon? I mean, by your knowledge, Drill Dozer was made by Game Freak, so the main character must be a Pokemon, right?

And plus, I'm sorry, but if Game Freak made a super-complicated, super-armored giant half tiger, half dragon demon, that looked nothing like a Pokemon, and called it a Pokemon, then it wouldn't look like a Pokemon. I'm sorry, but contrary to you Unova fans' beliefs, Pokemon does have a certain style to it.

Xander Olivieri July 17th, 2012 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
http://lparchive.org/Drill-Dozer/Images/9-drildozer1.jpg
Umm, so this is a Pokemon? I mean, by your knowledge, Drill Dozer was made by Game Freak, so the main character must be a Pokemon, right?

And plus, I'm sorry, but if Game Freak made a super-complicated, super-armored giant half tiger, half dragon demon, that looked nothing like a Pokemon, and called it a Pokemon, then it wouldn't look like a Pokemon. I'm sorry, but contrary to you Unova fans' beliefs, Pokemon does have a certain style to it.

Was Drill Dozer made for a Pokemon Game? No. Did you read what I said? Apparently not. If GameFreak made it FOR THE GAME, then its for the game. I.E. If Game Freak designed a Pokemon, for the Pokemon Games, then its a Pokemon and looks like a Pokemon. No argument can overrule that.

Yes if GameFreak made a super-complicated, super-armored giant half tiger, half dragon demon, FOR THE POKEMON GAMES, it WOULD be a Pokemon.

No, Pokemon doesn't have one specific design. It goes from Cute and cuddly to grotesque just as Digimon does, Digimon even goes further and into more detail. All 649 Pokemon would fit into the Digimon world because Digimon's art style is more broad than that of Pokemon's. So really, All Pokemon look like Digimon cause they all could fit in the Digimon world despite the fact that the two are completely separate entities, have stressed to fans that neither side is using concepts from the other, and are in no way are the two supposed to be related/compared because of core structural differences.


as for this:
Quote:

"HURR DURR KAYNTO AND JOTTO SUKS BEKAZ MANGMITE AND GRIMER AND YEAH!!!!1111"
Do you even know why that keeps being brought up? because of Blind ignorant nostalgia haters keep saying how stupid Trubbish and Klink are when THEY ARE BASED OFF THE SAME DAMNED THING GRIMER AND MAGNEMITE ARE. OH MY?! Its not that they suck. People simply need to learn their history before acting like a couple of 5 year olds in a daycare fighting over blocks. Magnemite and Grimer keep coming up to shove facts into the face of general haters and trolls who can't even do their homework on Pokemon.



Quote:

It's a game made for everyone to play. Not just little kids. And if you've ever played any of the Kanto games, not that I'd expect you to, you'd know that taking on the Kanto E4 and especially Champion Blue is a difficult task.
No it really wasn't. Yes Pokemon is made for younger audience. That is the target consumer. We are playing a Children's game. They do not target the older crowd for the In game events. The older crowd is drawn to the Metagame.

And yes Blue and Lance, the E4 in general for Kanto was easy. I beat them without too much trouble, and my brother beat the game faster than I did. He was 6 when he started playing. He beat his game in about 20ish hours and was underleveled by about 5 levels when he beat Blue. I beat mine in about 23ish hours and was evenly leveled with Blue.


Then and Now, there are Pokemon with horrible designs, don't fit with an expected Pokemon theme with "All" fans (cause yes I will acknowledge that not everyone views things the same way which is apparent in this thread).

And just to make something clear, my Favorite Pokemon Game is Yellow and Kanto is my favorite region. I think highly of Unova because for me its a Second Kanto even down to the design of the Pokemon, especially the ones everyone seems to hate which was roughly the same generic reception that Magnemite/Grimer got when they were released. The argument sadly blew up with the introduction of Digimon and the fact that we DO have 4 other Generations to compare all the Pokemon with.

Ironically two of my favorite Pokemon are from Kanto and Unova XD

Pokemon's Art is evolving over time, they even add to the older Pokemon, what with Gender Differences and all that. Who is to say that in 1 or 2 Generations they may sneak in new designs to older Pokemon without us knowing simply to have the older ones match the change they made to the newer ones.

Sydian July 17th, 2012 11:23 AM

Because people don't take off the nostalgia goggles. But that's all I'm going to say, as I don't want to be a part of this convoluted conversation.

Clucknadus July 17th, 2012 2:24 PM

I have yet to hear a person who blatantly hates the games as a whole to give a valid reason for hating the games. Most of those people refuse to take off their nostalgia goggles. Thus, they see Pokemon like Vanillite and Trubbish and completely reject the games as a whole. So, nostalgia, plain and simple. Also, those people who refuse to take off the nostalgia glasses make me very angry.

Atomic Pirate July 17th, 2012 3:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XanderO (Post 7258081)
Yes if GameFreak made a super-complicated, super-armored giant half tiger, half dragon demon, FOR THE POKEMON GAMES, it WOULD be a Pokemon.

Yes, it technically would be a Pokemon, but would it look like one? Pokemon does, in fact, have a distinctive visual style that impacts every Pokemon, from the cute to the monstrous. You can't simply take something and call it a Pokemon. Even the Unova Pokemon that I constantly criticize at least slightly stick to the Pokemon style.

The whole idea of the Pokemon style is one that you Unova fans often overlook while bashing anyone who dares prefer the older games over the new ones. You hate the idea that most Pokemon have a certain artistic style. For a decent retrospective on the Pokemon style, just look at some beginner Fakemon. Many of them look nothing like actual Pokemon, and much of the time it's due to a style that is quite unlike that of Pokemon, whether it be because of a larger reliance on realism, a more cartoonish style, or a different factor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sydian (Post 7258114)
Because people don't take off the nostalgia goggles. But that's all I'm going to say, as I don't want to be a part of this convoluted conversation.

Obviously you do want to be a part of this conversation, and you're just trying to add more fuel to the fire.

As for what you actually said, what part of "I started out with Gen. III" do you not understand? Just because I started with Gen. III, that doesn't mean I think that that generation is the only good one. In fact, I prefer Johto over the other generations.


I'll (hopefully) leave the conversation with this statement:

I don't hate all Generation V Pokemon.

Just look at my username: Elgyem

Sure, I do think that many of the Generation V Pokemon were lacklustre, but a few were decent. I thought that Elgyem and Beheeyem were cool, and the concept of Reuniclus was certainly interesting. I liked some of the more animal-inspired Pokemon of the Generation (ex. Joltik/Galvantula, Deerling/Sawsbuck, Stoutland, etc.). It's not that I hate, or even dislike, the games. They were still alright, but personally I didn't enjoy them as much as I enjoyed HG/SS. Overall, I thought the games were good, but not great. I certainly liked the Unova Pokemon better than the Sinnoh Pokemon, that's one thing for sure.

Overall, I'd give the games something like a 35/40. Not amazing, but still good. I just kind of wished the game was slightly harder and the postgame was better.

Munchlax11 July 17th, 2012 5:18 PM

There are only a few of the original designers still designing pokemon. The design style has really changed. There was nothing wrong with the games, but design wise I think they are going in the wrong direction. :(

Ho-Oh July 17th, 2012 5:29 PM

Reminder time - guys, this thread is about why you think others dislike the games, not for your own personal opinion on why they suck/why they were good, which is what Perfect Score/Compared to other generations and so on is for. We get the same discussions over and over, and if every new thread that remotely discusses opinions turns into this then I don't really think the section needs it. From now on guys, please, keep in mind you're not saying why YOU dislike them, or YOUR issues with them, and instead address other people's issues, which are the common complaints about the games. These include post game, too easy, only Unova Pokemon, Unova Pokemon are ugly, and so on. I'm sure you've seen enough about the common complaints to be able to discuss from those. :(

Kanto_Johto July 17th, 2012 6:05 PM

Reasons why I think bad remarks are made:

1. Some of the Pokemon's designs step over a lot of people's subconscious limit i.e. they're of the opinion that things like garbage and ice cream shouldn't form the basis of a Pokemon design. I'm slightly in agreement with this. I think that garbage and ice cream Pokemon is stretching a bit too far, but hey. It appeals to some people and has proven to be somewhat successful, so I can't knock Game Freak for that.

2. Simply put, many of us have grown older, which means it is impossible to replicate the feeling of excitement we once knew as kid playing Pokemon RGBY/GSC/RSE. In other words, nostalgia goggles are worn by too many people. I've grown to accept that newer Pokemon games will likely never be as special to me as the first three series of games, so now I just enjoy the games for what they are.

3. Problems that have cropped up before appear again in BW. Lack of post game, Gym Leaders cannot be rematched, too many legendaries etc.

To be honest, I preferred BW a whole lot more than I did DPPt. I could probably write pages of complaints about those games (or at least DP).

Haseyo July 17th, 2012 7:00 PM

I had the exact same amount of excitement playing old games as a kid and playing these newer ones. Goggles don't effect me. I know a good improvement to a series when I see one.

Rivvon July 17th, 2012 7:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spinosaurus (Post 7256758)
Gen 5 Pokemon being the only ones available until post-game. Before you jump the gun and start labeling me as a nostalgic-filled person, I like the new Pokemon, they're a step-up from past gens, and they were the only things done right in the questionable design choices that has happened in these two games. However, Pokemon is known for the variety available and the fun of catching them all. I'm not saying B/W isn't really varied and that you can't "catch them all", but having a team solely built of one generation kills some of that, makes the experience more boring. Gen I had the excuse of being the first in the series, this doesn't apply to B/W. I am against nostalgia glass, just to clarify.

It actually does apply to BW, because Game Freak has stated time and again that it was meant to mimic what gen 1 did--it removes the tendency to rely on Pokemon you already know so well. It's a completely fresh start. It's also why there were 156 Pokemon introduced (more than any previous generation). If anything, this "issue" is fixed post-game, where you can find Pokemon of all gens in the tall grass.


Honestly, the only "bad" remarks I've seen are those of people that are too picky. "The Pokemon's designs suck because [X]." "There are like a million legendaries." "I don't like the shape of Unova." And the list goes on.
Some of it is nostalgia talking, but a lot of it is just pickiness. Sure, the games weren't perfect, but they weren't terrible; however, if you expect everything in the games to be 100% how you want it, you're going to be disappointed, because Game Freak isn't going to come over to your house and make a game custom-tailored to your every whim.

crystalzapdos July 17th, 2012 7:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Speak English and I might understand you better. But, from what I can pick out from this grammatical disaster,

I misspelled on word, but whatever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
And you can't argue that B/W's piddly postgame was better than the colossal G/S/C/HG/SS postgames.

Never once did I say, "HG/SS had a worse postgame than B/W." You said, "There's effectively no postgame" which isn't true at all. It had more than R/S and the original R/B/Y, and its about even with D/P.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Wait, Seel? What? What's wrong with Seel?

Aside from its terrible name, it was so bland. Its basically just a seal. Nothing made it unique.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
And Voltorb, Magnemite, and Grimer had good reasons to look man-made.

Oh, so its only okay for some Pokemon to be man-made, but not all of them. That makes alot of sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
They were man-made.

I don't understand this reason at all. Its like saying water came out of a faucet because it did come out of a faucet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Plus, Voltorb's Pokeball-like appearance is similar to the appearance of a Mimic, a common RPG monster that looks like a treasure chest.

Okay? That doesn't change the fact that its just a Pokeball with eyes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Ditto transformed,

Fair enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
and while Jynx was odd, it was in fact a novelty Pokemon even at the time.

So because its a novelty Pokemon, its okay for them to be bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Actually, I hate D/P/Pt more than B/W.

Hey, something we both agree on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
And plus, both games have 13 Legendaries, and I'm not even going into the insanely unnecessary amount of pointless Forms.

You were right on this one. I forgot to count Victini.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
The region is full of gimmicky and forgettable locales such as Chargestone Cave, the ungodly number of bridges, and Pinwheel Forest, to name a few.

What classifies them as, "Forgettable." Maybe I think Mt. Mortar, Whirl Islands, and Ilex Forest are, "Forgettable."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
I didn't say Lillipup has spikes. Druddigon, Haxorus, Ferrothorn, Excadrill, Scolipede, Bisharp, and a few others do. Those spikes serve no purpose, besides to "look cool".

So what if a certain object, not just spikes, are non a Pokemon just to look cool? Don't you want them to look cool?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
The Safari Zone, like it or not, was a series mainstay and allowed for the capture of some of the most interesting Pokemon in the series (Scyther, Kangaskhan, Heracross, etc.). I liked it, and many other people did.

And I didn't, but I guess this is subjective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Oh, you liked the fact that the rivals were your best friends? I'm sorry, but many people, myself included, liked the more aggressive rivals such as Blue and Silver.

I honestly don't care about wither or not my rival is my friend or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Oh, you're one of the people who actually likes the stupid Fire/Fighting starters?

We've had three Pure Grass and Pure Water starters, yet you don't complain about those.

Also, there's two other starters you can choose from if it bothers you that much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Plus, the other starters, or at least one of them, should have gotten a secondary type.

Kanto had the same situation, and none of the Johto starters had a secondary type, yet you don't complain about them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
It's a game made for everyone to play. Not just little kids.

No, its made for little kids to play. If people like you and me want to play them then fine, but your not the target audience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
And if you've ever played any of the Kanto games, not that I'd expect you to,

My first game was FireRed, and my Third favorite region is Kanto.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
you'd know that taking on the Kanto E4 and especially Champion Blue is a difficult task.

Yes, it was difficult when I was a little kid with less experience, but going back to it I don't find it harder than any other regions league.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Ah, now you've just gone from being passive-aggressive to aggressive-aggressive.

And this has what to do with anything?....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
What you may not understand is that HGSS didn't need random matchup.

None of the reasons you gave had anything to do with this, but okay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
They already had rematches, Red,

Fun Fact: B/W had more daily rematches than HG/SS. In B/W, you had 16 daily trainers in the Stadiums, Morimoto, Cheren, and anywhere from 3 to 7 trainers on the Royal Unova. Sometimes you would be able to battle Cynthea, which make the total for B/W anywhere from 21-26 trainers a day. HG/SS had anywhere from 4-7 Pokegear rematches, 1-3 Gym matches, Red, and sometimes a rival battle. This means there's anywhere from 6-12 rematches a day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
a number of wild Pokemon,

Your point? Every game has wild Pokemon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
an expansive region,

Johto had 10 cities while Unova, not counting B/W2 exclusive cities, had 13 cities. I don't see how Johto was bigger than Unova, let alone any other region. It's the smallest of the five.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
And yes, if they had Random Matchup, I would still abstain from using it. I've never really used the Global Trade Station in any of the games (Yes, even in "precious" HG/SS), so I really don't care that HGSS doesn't have a random matchup system.

If you don't use it, why are you complaining?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
They took everything that D/P/Pt did right, kept it, added new features and a truly interesting region, and all in all, set a precedent for the series. They were the series' best games at the time, and I really don't think that B/W lived up to them.

Subjective. Everything here is a opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
To you, convenience is the enemy! Eliminate the awful conveniences!

I just don't get why people praise HG/SS so much for that. Most of the time I would hit B anyways out of habit. I don't see how not having to hold B is a convince. Its not that hard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
Oh no! How dare Game Freak make a new feature that fans love! How DARE they!

I didn't love it. I would have been totally fine with the feature if you were able to turn it off. And, as with the running shoes, it was a feature that didn't really do anything. I don't think HG/SS deserve a 10/10 for a auto-run feature and Pokemon following you. I also don't think B/W should be hated on for not having these pointless features.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
It's not exactly, you know, easy to get a team in the 60s. You need to work hard at it.

Yeah, it was pretty hard considering HG/SS had almost no rematches.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
But, judging by your extreme hatred, I'd expect that you're too lazy to train.

Yeah, I kind of am. I play Pokemon to have fun, and I don't exactly find raising 6 Pokemon 15 levels against level 40 wild Pokemon just to fight some trainer in a mountain fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
You're sure, huh? Well, I just did respond to it.

Yeah, I'm shocked. I applaud you for actually responding, unlike most people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
And why do you keep bringing up Seel?

Because, like I said earlier, I find it to be a bland, non-unique animal Pokemon that's named after a horrible pun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
I know you Unova-obsessed newbies

Again, my first game was FireRed so I hardly see how I'm a "newbie." I'm simply not stuck in the past like you seem to be.

Also, Unova isn't even my favorite region, Hoenn is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
are all "HURR DURR KAYNTO AND JOTTO SUKS BEKAZ MANGMITE AND GRIMER AND YEAH!!!!1111",

And you nostalgia-fans are all like, "HURR DURR UNIOVA SUKS BEKAZ KLANK AND RABBISH AND YEAH!!!!1111"

Really, I don't go around the internet hating on Magnemite and Grimer. The only time I do this is when you people say this.

Also, I don't quite get where you get the impression I hate Kanto.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7258025)
but Seel? What's wrong with Seel? It has a simple design, it's slightly cute, and it was an interesting Water-type option for a Gen. 1 team.

I've already explained this twice, so.....

Ninjagon July 17th, 2012 9:41 PM

Those are some good points guys, some of them i read, some i didn't. The reason why i didn't read some was because they were mostly just a great, big argument. Requility is right i just wanted your opinions :).

Oblivion Wing July 18th, 2012 5:03 AM

Honestly, I wasn't expecting much from this game when I first was informed of it's release. Yes, I agree that the new Pokemon don't look like previous art. I gave it a chance and thought that the story was pretty good, nothing like previous games (again). But I think that you can't expect everything to be better than before (happens with everything, from games, to music, anything really), just expect something good out of it. :)

Atomic Pirate July 18th, 2012 9:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
Aside from its terrible name, it was so bland. Its basically just a seal. Nothing made it unique.

And Roggenrola was a better name? It's an even worse pun.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
Oh, so its only okay for some Pokemon to be man-made, but not all of them. That makes alot of sense.

The few Pokemon that were man made are a good example of the human presence in the Pokemon World. However, they shouldn't all look robotic, it's Pokemon, not Robomon.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
Okay? That doesn't change the fact that its just a Pokeball with eyes.

Yet I don't see you complaining about Amoongus, which is just a mushroom with a Pokeball-like cap. This just proves you hate the old and only like the new.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
So because its a novelty Pokemon, its okay for them to be bad?

Yet again, I don't see you whining about the many bad B/W Pokemon. There are bad ones in every generation. If you're going to complain about Jynx, you can at least acknowledge that there were bad ones in Unova as well (Audino, Gothitelle, Swoobat)
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
So what if a certain object, not just spikes, are non a Pokemon just to look cool? Don't you want them to look cool?

Is Lugia cool? Judging by it's popularity, then yes, it is very cool. Does it have spikes? No. Spikes and armor don't make a Pokemon cool.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
Kanto had the same situation, and none of the Johto starters had a secondary type, yet you don't complain about them.

No, Kanto had only 1 starter with only 1 type, that one being Blastoise. Venusaur is Grass/Poison and Charizard is Fire/Flying. And with Johto, the three starters all only had one type, which was consistent within the trio. With B/W, you had a pure Grass and a pure Water, but Game Freak decided they like the Fire/Fighting tradition too much, so they just had to make Emboar a Fire/Fighting.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
And this has what to do with anything?....

It has to do with the fact that you're simply bashing me and my preferences without providing any real substantial points.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
Johto had 10 cities while Unova, not counting B/W2 exclusive cities, had 13 cities. I don't see how Johto was bigger than Unova, let alone any other region. It's the smallest of the five.

I believe that you're forgetting the fact that the Johto games also featured Kanto.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
I didn't love it. I would have been totally fine with the feature if you were able to turn it off. And, as with the running shoes, it was a feature that didn't really do anything. I don't think HG/SS deserve a 10/10 for a auto-run feature and Pokemon following you. I also don't think B/W should be hated on for not having these pointless features.

I know how much you hate conveniences, but when a Pokemon game has these conveniences, it's easy to get used to them. And I, personally, prefer conveniences over no conveniences.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
Again, my first game was FireRed so I hardly see how I'm a "newbie." I'm simply not stuck in the past like you seem to be.

Yes, I know how awful it is that I prefer the older games. I'm so sorry that I have the opinion that the older games are better. It certainly is horrifying.
Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalzapdos (Post 7258695)
And you nostalgia-fans are all like, "HURR DURR UNIOVA SUKS BEKAZ KLANK AND RABBISH AND YEAH!!!!1111"
Really, I don't go around the internet hating on Magnemite and Grimer. The only time I do this is when you people say this.

I know you think anyone who dares like the older generations better is simply "stuck in the past", but I must ask you: Have you heard of opinions before?

Kanto_Johto July 18th, 2012 3:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
And Roggenrola was a better name? It's an even worse pun.

Opinions differ, my friend. Personally I would agree that Seel is less creative than Roggenrola, so I prefer Roggenrola over it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
The few Pokemon that were man made are a good example of the human presence in the Pokemon World. However, they shouldn't all look robotic, it's Pokemon, not Robomon.

1. Again, that's your opinion, it's not a fact.
2. Not all of them look robotic anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
Yet I don't see you complaining about Amoongus, which is just a mushroom with a Pokeball-like cap. This just proves you hate the old and only like the new.

I somewhat agree with you on this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
Yet again, I don't see you whining about the many bad B/W Pokemon. There are bad ones in every generation. If you're going to complain about Jynx, you can at least acknowledge that there were bad ones in Unova as well (Audino, Gothitelle, Swoobat)

Pokemon that are "good" or "bad" in terms of design is a subjective matter. It's all about opinion. A lot of people would list Pokemon like Audino, Gothitelle, Swoobat, Jynx, Garbodor or whoever else in a list of their favourite Pokemon. All a matter of opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
Is Lugia cool? Judging by it's popularity, then yes, it is very cool. Does it have spikes? No. Spikes and armor don't make a Pokemon cool.

Again, some people may be of the opinion that spikes and armour do make a Pokemon cool, so the matter of what makes a Pokemon cool is also subjective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
No, Kanto had only 1 starter with only 1 type, that one being Blastoise. Venusaur is Grass/Poison and Charizard is Fire/Flying. And with Johto, the three starters all only had one type, which was consistent within the trio. With B/W, you had a pure Grass and a pure Water, but Game Freak decided they like the Fire/Fighting tradition too much, so they just had to make Emboar a Fire/Fighting.

I don't see why this is a problem and I never have been able to. Emboar's Fighting type is just an added bonus to create a more diverse moveset for a Pokemon that actually does suit the Fighting type. I can't understand why it annoys people as much as it does. It really doesn't matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
It has to do with the fact that you're simply bashing me and my preferences without providing any real substantial points.

Many of your replies to him are also based on your personal opinions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
I believe that you're forgetting the fact that the Johto games also featured Kanto.

They're still separate regions though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
I know how much you hate conveniences, but when a Pokemon game has these conveniences, it's easy to get used to them. And I, personally, prefer conveniences over no conveniences.

Small inconveniences like not having a permanent run button shouldn't be reasons for someone to dislike a game when it really doesn't matter all that much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7259480)
Yes, I know how awful it is that I prefer the older games. I'm so sorry that I have the opinion that the older games are better. It certainly is horrifying.

I know you think anyone who dares like the older generations better is simply "stuck in the past", but I must ask you: Have you heard of opinions before?

I agree with the opinion that the older games are better, but I'm sure crystalzapdos respects an opinion as much as anyone else on this board does and is simply arguing his point in the same way you are. Also, you accused him of being aggressive (which is somewhat true), but now you're being at least as aggressive, if not more so in your replies addressed to him.

At the end of the day, half of the posts on this forum include forms of opinions, which you may or may not agree with. There's no need for an unfriendly environment during these kinds of debate.

Dantethesaint7 July 18th, 2012 4:22 PM

1. Some people don't like any Nintendo DS pokemon games (or even any games outside of the 2nd generation)
2. The pokemon are ugly and unoriginal. (Trubish ugly) (Vanillish unoriginal)
I don't mind ugly pokemon but the unoriginal names are killing me
I love pokemon white and black i think it is one of the best duos and i think this game changed pokemon games forever.

xelarator July 18th, 2012 4:53 PM

To ^ Get ready to have a stern talking to by one of these debaters.

NOW, I think Pokemon B&W has received bad remarks because of opinions on the character design. Other than that, I think B&W was a good game to add to the Pokemon series.

Deokishisu July 18th, 2012 5:02 PM

Back from the grave to chime in on this topic.

To start off, I'm firmly in the "Gen 5 Haters" camp of Pokemon fans. I played through Black multiple times, trying harder each playthrough to like it and accept it as a legitimate continuation of the franchise, but I just couldn't.

Much of it is because of the Pokemon's designs, and how utterly cut-off from the older, more familiar Pokemon you are. It's a matter of how the Pokemon just don't LOOK like anything we've come to expect, which is a huge disconnect. It's as if Game Freak just decided to go a completely different style with this one, in regards to the Pokemon's designs, and it shows as it alienates many of the players that stuck with them all these years.

Part of me thinks it's to cater to the younger crowd. The spikes and the overly complicated "unPokemon-like" designs must make the kids squeal with how awesome and bada** they look. All in all, it makes the Pokemon this time around come off as hollow, wooden, and flat.

That's not to say we didn't get good ones this time! But normally, the good ones make up a majority of the new additions. This time, it seems they are in the minority. Pokemon like Joltik and Galvantula were welcome additions. Larvesta and Meloetta were wonderful designs as well. Many of the others were not. It didn't help that many of them used the same poses and graphics as their counterparts/evolutions. It's obvious that the Kling line was built on one sprite, in one uninteresting pose. The Thundurus trio is the same Pokemon with different tails. I could go on and on.

Gen 5 didn't really bring any new mechanics this time around either. Triple Battles and Rotation Battles got lukewarm reception, because they just weren't interesting. Double battles have been around since the second episode of the anime. They just fit when they were introduced in the Third Generation, and the new abilities played off them to make them feel incredibly natural and connected. In contrast, Triple Battles and Rotation Battles feel nothing like that. The system itself feels isolated and tacked onto the game as an afterthought. Another grab at "how awesome would this be?" without thinking it all the way through.

Reducing the pinnacle of Pokemon Contests as it was when it was introduced in Gen 3, to the sad but playable state in Gen 4, to dress up in Gen 5 was terrible. Taking away features, especially when there is no endgame and how linear and restrictive the region and story felt was a regrettable decision. The removal of the Safari Zone was also a strike against this generation. The difference between Black and say... Ruby in keeping the player engaged, during and after the story, is huge.

I felt like I was trapped on train tracks going through Unova. It was a frustratingly linear experience compared to where we were just a generation ago. I understand that roadblocks HAVE to be there occasionally. Snorlax kept you from being slaughtered in Gen 1 early on. Sudowoodo made sure that you couldn't head all the way to the Lake of Rage, catch powerful Pokemon, and come back to get your 3rd badge. Those Psyducks you need to pick up a SecretPotion to move were necessary as well. Unova, by comparison, felt like a game of "When will I be stopped next?". The answer to that question came up often. There are plenty of ways the story could've been written to allow for more player freedom, but they chose to constrict the player instead. Again, I believe that this may be another catering to the younger folks who may not get the story if it wasn't presented to them in pre-chewed little chunks at every stop.

I felt that the evil team this time around had a really, really good motive. How it was handled, however, right up to when Ghetsis turned into a stereotypical mustache-twirling villain, contradicted what they were founded on. You're working to free Pokemon from oppression... by oppressing your own by battling those who disagree with you. My house is on fire, I think if I chuck more fireballs at it, it'll go out. Team Plasma would've made a fine team, probably the best in the series, if they could really, REALLY make people think about what you were doing to your Pokemon. What the world was doing to Pokemon. With the exception of N, the grunts were stereotypical, power hungry, Pokemon abusing, thugs. The exact thing they were fighting against. Team Plasma should've been filled to the brim with incredibly caring, well intentioned people. People who cared about Pokemon enough to fight for their rights. I suppose it was the attitude of basically every member of the team that caused that disconnect. And Ghetsis turning into the flat take-over-the-world thing at the end was just terrible. Also, Plasma? That's what they named their organization? Reallllllly?

There was no endgame. You beat the evil team, and suddenly you find yourself 20 levels behind the wild Pokemon in the next area, with nothing to do. The online was full of hacks, hacks that Game Freak has already shown it has the technology to detect and weed out but didn't. Also, after the blissful convenience that was the HG/SS interface, it was jarring to be stuck with the mostly useless C-Gear.

All-in-all, Gen 5 turned out to be an incredibly disappointing and hollow experience.

Edited a bit for clarity and a few added points.

Nolafus July 18th, 2012 8:03 PM

My first game was Pokemon Black, but I did go back and play the older generation games and it made me realise something. A lot of people just look at the new pokemon seeing ones like vanilluxe and chandelure and say that they are stupid while remembering the good ones from earlier generations such as Charizard and Lapras, but in fact every generation has pokemon that are kind of lame with the design and naming (I never liked Farfetch'd because it's a duck holding a stick and what's with the name?). People say that every gen 5 pokemon is terrible, but I never got what was wrong with Zebstrika, Gigalith, Excadrill, Liepard, and Eelektross. My point is that every generation has it's up and downs and that a few bad designs that are put out there shouldn't mean that a generation is ruined.

Cyclone July 18th, 2012 9:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slayr231 (Post 7260161)
My first game was Pokemon Black, but I did go back and play the older generation games and it made me realise something. A lot of people just look at the new pokemon seeing ones like vanilluxe and chandelure and say that they are stupid while remembering the good ones from earlier generations such as Charizard and Lapras, but in fact every generation has pokemon that are kind of lame with the design and naming (I never liked Farfetch'd because it's a duck holding a stick and what's with the name?). People say that every gen 5 pokemon is terrible, but I never got what was wrong with Zebstrika, Gigalith, Excadrill, Liepard, and Eelektross. My point is that every generation has it's up and downs and that a few bad designs that are put out there shouldn't mean that a generation is ruined.

There is also the opinion factor. I for one can't wait to catch a Farfetch'd in the Route 1 swarms because I am curious what it can do,; even while playing older ROMs, I never caught one.

Cyclone

Hikamaru July 19th, 2012 8:08 AM

My thoughts on why Black and White got bad remarks:

Pokemon designs - This was one of the biggest backlashes relating to B/W, when people saw Pokemon like Klinklang, Vanilluxe, Garbodor and Chandelure they thought Nintendo were running out of ideas. However, I actually like the designs of most of the new Pokemon.

Postgame - Now, this one was well complained about, the Trainers, although having Pokemon 10 levels higher than when you beat Ghetsis were still a challenge. Then you had to find 6 of the Seven Sages, and also rematches against Cheren, Bianca and the trainers in the Nimbasa Stadiums were there for extra training. However, once you find all the Sages, people thought there was nothing to do after that.

Only Unova Pokemon in main story - The reason why only Unova Pokemon were seen before the National Pokedex was due to apparent fans of older games who relied on older gen Pokemon. This disappointed some players but not others, who knew it was the definition of a fresh start.

Battle Subway - There was basically NOTHING to do here, that was my big disappointment with the game. And most people also knew how disappointed they were, cos on the Normal lines all the Trainers use only Unova Pokemon which again made some fans not like the games. Also, Anville Town is totally optional so don't even bother.

Pokemon Musicals - Many people who loved the Contests in earlier games knew the Musical was an inferior Contest. It received a lot of distaste among players.

The Unova Starters - As I've seen, most people claim Unova has the worst starters of any region. I disagree with that cos their designs look cool. The main point on why the starters got so much hate was due to their types. First, we have Snivy, which stays pure Grass throughout its evolution. Second, Tepig which sadly became the most hated starter due to being the third starter to get a Fire/Fighting type when it evolves. People also hated Emboar's design. And finally, Oshawott which, just like Snivy, stays purely typed throughout evolution, in this case Water. On the subject of Emboar, while Fire/Fighting is an awesome type combo, many people think Game Freak are hiding a tradition.

Cyclone July 19th, 2012 8:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hikari10 (Post 7260962)
Also, Anville Town is totally optional so don't even bother.

Keep in mind an Ultra Ball and a Rare Candy are found there. Also, there are traders there on weekends, but you have to have stuff first (like two Escape Ropes for a Revive).

Cyclone

Atomic Pirate July 19th, 2012 9:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deokishisu (Post 7259982)
Back from the grave to chime in on this topic.

To start off, I'm firmly in the "Gen 5 Haters" camp of Pokemon fans. I played through Black multiple times, trying harder each playthrough to like it and accept it as a legitimate continuation of the franchise, but I just couldn't.

Much of it is because of the Pokemon's designs, and how utterly cut-off from the older, more familiar Pokemon you are. It's a matter of how the Pokemon just don't LOOK like anything we've come to expect, which is a huge disconnect. It's as if Game Freak just decided to go a completely different style with this one, in regards to the Pokemon's designs, and it shows as it alienates many of the players that stuck with them all these years.

Part of me thinks it's to cater to the younger crowd. The spikes and the overly complicated "unPokemon-like" designs must make the kids squeal with how awesome and bada** they look. All in all, it makes the Pokemon this time around come off as hollow, wooden, and flat.

That's not to say we didn't get good ones this time! But normally, the good ones make up a majority of the new additions. This time, it seems they are in the minority. Pokemon like Joltik and Galvantula were welcome additions. Larvesta and Meloetta were wonderful designs as well. Many of the others were not. It didn't help that many of them used the same poses and graphics as their counterparts/evolutions. It's obvious that the Kling line was built on one sprite, in one uninteresting pose. The Thundurus trio is the same Pokemon with different tails. I could go on and on.

Gen 5 didn't really bring any new mechanics this time around either. Triple Battles and Rotation Battles got lukewarm reception, because they just weren't interesting. Double battles have been around since the second episode of the anime. They just fit when they were introduced in the Third Generation, and the new abilities played off them to make them feel incredibly natural and connected. In contrast, Triple Battles and Rotation Battles feel nothing like that. The system itself feels isolated and tacked onto the game as an afterthought. Another grab at "how awesome would this be?" without thinking it all the way through.

Reducing the pinnacle of Pokemon Contests as it was when it was introduced in Gen 3, to the sad but playable state in Gen 4, to dress up in Gen 5 was terrible. Taking away features, especially when there is no endgame and how linear and restrictive the region and story felt was a regrettable decision. The removal of the Safari Zone was also a strike against this generation. The difference between Black and say... Ruby in keeping the player engaged, during and after the story, is huge.

I felt like I was trapped on train tracks going through Unova. It was a frustratingly linear experience compared to where we were just a generation ago. I understand that roadblocks HAVE to be there occasionally. Snorlax kept you from being slaughtered in Gen 1 early on. Sudowoodo made sure that you couldn't head all the way to the Lake of Rage, catch powerful Pokemon, and come back to get your 3rd badge. Those Psyducks you need to pick up a SecretPotion to move were necessary as well. Unova, by comparison, felt like a game of "When will I be stopped next?". The answer to that question came up often. There are plenty of ways the story could've been written to allow for more player freedom, but they chose to constrict the player instead. Again, I believe that this may be another catering to the younger folks who may not get the story if it wasn't presented to them in pre-chewed little chunks at every stop.

I felt that the evil team this time around had a really, really good motive. How it was handled, however, right up to when Ghetsis turned into a stereotypical mustache-twirling villain, contradicted what they were founded on. You're working to free Pokemon from oppression... by oppressing your own by battling those who disagree with you. My house is on fire, I think if I chuck more fireballs at it, it'll go out. Team Plasma would've made a fine team, probably the best in the series, if they could really, REALLY make people think about what you were doing to your Pokemon. What the world was doing to Pokemon. With the exception of N, the grunts were stereotypical, power hungry, Pokemon abusing, thugs. The exact thing they were fighting against. Team Plasma should've been filled to the brim with incredibly caring, well intentioned people. People who cared about Pokemon enough to fight for their rights. I suppose it was the attitude of basically every member of the team that caused that disconnect. And Ghetsis turning into the flat take-over-the-world thing at the end was just terrible. Also, Plasma? That's what they named their organization? Reallllllly?

There was no endgame. You beat the evil team, and suddenly you find yourself 20 levels behind the wild Pokemon in the next area, with nothing to do. The online was full of hacks, hacks that Game Freak has already shown it has the technology to detect and weed out but didn't. Also, after the blissful convenience that was the HG/SS interface, it was jarring to be stuck with the mostly useless C-Gear.

All-in-all, Gen 5 turned out to be an incredibly disappointing and hollow experience.

Edited a bit for clarity and a few added points.

Wow. Just wow. What you said here is pretty much everything I was trying to say.

pokemontrainer_samuel July 20th, 2012 11:21 PM

For someone who has been playing Pokemon since 1999 as an 8 year old, I still find myself quite excited about new pokemon games. Well sure, initially the pokemon would look really ugly (starting from div IV, I found that I disliked new pokemon designs until I start playing the games). Basically, after seeing the pokemon from BW for the first time, I kinda felt that they were quite messed up, like one of those fanboy creations of new pokemon. I mean, a starting pokemon that looks like a clown (Oshawott) and a Racoon that's infected by red eye and his evolution that looks like a ripoff from Lion King? Now, after playing for some time, I've sorta gotten used to the pokemon designs, and even love some of them.

Actually I don't see why so many people hate the game. I'm the only person with a DS in my class, and everyone would crowd around me watching me play the game and everyone was marveled by it (if you were wondering, all of us are aged 20 and above and have played every single game of the main series). Many of my friend loved the designs of the pokemon, especially Emboar. Emboar quickly became a favourite among them even though they were all Muslims (FYI due to religious reasons, pigs are quite a touchy issue for them to the extend that Tepig was the only starter excluded from McDonald's Happy Meal in Malaysia, but let's not discuss this please). So far the only pokemon which they found weird and funny was Patrat. So I kinda doubt that the design of Gen V pokemon are that bad since all the pokefans in my place love their designs (Well they didn't see all Gen V pokemon, but I have, and I don't think that they're exceptionally ugly or terribly designed).

I think BW received so many bad remarks because of it succeeding HGSS. But hey, BW and HGSS are two totally different types of games. I believed that Game Freak were trying to explore new concepts in BW. HGSS on the other hand, is basically GSC with better graphics and extra features. Although we cannot deny they added in some new features, but other than the pokewalker and the auto run button (which I found meaningless, since years of RSE and FRLG gaming has developed me a habit of holding down the B button when walking, no matter which RPG game I play, so it wouldn't matter at all since I'll be pressing B anyway), there isn't much originality to it. BW on the other hand, tried to introduce some new untested features (triple battle, rotation battle, random matchup, DW, camera angles, musicals, gym and E4 animations etc). Well we cannot deny that some of them were lousy (I've never touched the musicals after trying for the first time because I don't really understand it), but it was something which could potentially set a new hallmark for pokemon games and breathe new life into them, instead of producing 1001 remakes of previous versions.

ZetaZaku July 21st, 2012 1:53 AM

The only things I disliked about Gen V are the Dream World and Entralink. It's nice being able to get a Pokemon that can't be found before E4, but the mini games are really boring. I know that it's made for kids, but it doesn't even look like it's made for the same age as the main games. It looks like it's made for 3 year olds. I don't really have a problem with Entralink, but I wish it was Wi-Fi based and not Wireless.

I had no other problems with the game. Only Unova Pokemon until Post Game was okay to me. It was kinda refreshing just being able to play with the new Pokemon. If I want to play with older Pokemon, I'll play an older game. It would be bad of course if they excluded them from the whole game. Being able to catch older Pokemon after E4 and via Dream World is fine with me.

I can't see why people are complaining about the post game. There are new Routes to explore, new (old) Pokemon to see and catch, have rematches with Cheren and Bell, fight Cynthia and the sages etc. Gen III only had the Battle Frontier and Gen I didn't have anything at all. Just the Mewtwo challenge.

Loonie July 21st, 2012 1:58 AM

My Reasons hmm.. the pokemon from the original pokemon are much more cooler then black and white and those that are in the game are more like fakemons.... and also Soulsilver and Heartgold are two great games . but i was disappointed when black and white was released i prefer heartgold or soulsilver then pokemon black or white

pokemontrainer_samuel July 21st, 2012 5:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZetaZaku (Post 7263431)
The only things I disliked about Gen V are the Dream World and Entralink. It's nice being able to get a Pokemon that can't be found before E4, but the mini games are really boring. I know that it's made for kids, but it doesn't even look like it's made for the same age as the main games. It looks like it's made for 3 year olds. I don't really have a problem with Entralink, but I wish it was Wi-Fi based and not Wireless.

If I'm not wrong, you can access Entralink without WiFi connection, because when you wake up your pokemon, the data is already downloaded into your game pak. Plus, you don't have to connect to Nintendo WiFi server to get to entralink, so WiFi is not needed.

Edited In:
By the way, the mini games are definitely not made for 3 year olds. Sky race involves well developed hand eye coordination, try to get every single one (bet you've never achieved it. Neither have I though). Wailmer game also involves a lot of hand eye coordination, try getting a 30 ball streak. The Sableye gem game does not only require good reaction, but also precision. Blow out the candles game requires some decent analytic skills, try going on a long winning streak instead of spending a lot of time thinking. Scoop the ice cream game also requires analytic skills in planning which berry you should use, which ice cream you should put and where should you put them. The frozen treat sweep also involves a lot of analytic skills and hand eye coordination. I agree that the mini games may seem simple, but if you keep trying to beat your score, you'll find it quite challenging. But they're mini games after all. What kind of mini games do you expect TPC to give you? The only problem about DW is that they keep sending you to the same old stupid place again and again for several times in a row. I've finished catching all the pokemon I can get with less than 7000 dream points in the spooky manor, and some how TPC keeps trolling me by sending me there several times in a row until the 5 visit quota is up and then send me to somewhere like windswept sky and I don't get to meet any pokemon or get any items there.

Mentalii July 23rd, 2012 5:26 AM

All this hartred against BW is obviously due to the new Pokémon. To my mind, they look pretty bad, and I know that a lot of people that like or not Pokémon think the same. Some 5G lovers will say that the problem come from the players' difficulty to appropriate new Pokémons, but the 4G Pokémon receive a way better welcome, so, the problem come from the 5G Pokémon themselves.
Except this point, these games are really good. Maybe some feature are useless (Dream World...), but that's not enough not to like these games I guess. The Pokémon's design is a reason though. But anyway, we have to face up to the facts that we won't have good Pokémon anymore, the new ones will never be able to be up to the former ones.

pokemontrainer_samuel July 24th, 2012 5:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mentalii (Post 7266885)
Some 5G lovers will say that the problem come from the players' difficulty to appropriate new Pokémons, but the 4G Pokémon receive a way better welcome, so, the problem come from the 5G Pokémon themselves.

I think the pokefans were just excited about the DS, not the Gen 4 pokemon designs.

Ho-Oh July 24th, 2012 9:04 AM

Yeah I kinda agree with the above. I don't hear anyone really screaming praises of joy towards gen 4 Pokemon, and they say "they don't look like Pokemon" according to the thread dedicated to that. So yeah, I don't think it's specifically gen 5 and rather people don't like the change in the designs compared to the originals, so it's all kinda nostalgia based rather than a complete dislike.

ReshZek200 July 24th, 2012 12:08 PM

@Spinosaurus, i LIKE B/W kyruem because they are creative, I brought B/W 2 for 60$ and only because of the FUN. it`s about the strategies, the new characters and anime.... it`s about the new movies!! Think about it.... Why fight when we can play so much more PKMN?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loonie (Post 7263435)
My Reasons hmm.. the pokemon from the original pokemon are much more cooler then black and white and those that are in the game are more like fakemons.... and also Soulsilver and Heartgold are two great games . but i was disappointed when black and white was released i prefer heartgold or soulsilver then pokemon black or white

disagree... :/
B/W is okay, and so is Ss/Hg.... but ALL the gens are right for me..

HenkieDePost July 25th, 2012 3:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by voicerocker (Post 7256764)
What is a "real Pokemon"? All 649 Pokemon are REAL Pokemon.

Would you like to compare? I can find you several Pokemon that look odd in every generation.

So, how are these any better than the ones in Gen 5? They aren't. They're all Pokemon. Just because they look different doesn't mean they don't look like a Pokemon.

And "didn't even try"? How about these?


These Pokemon were very simple, but the only reason people don't complain about them is because they came first.

How is this:

any more or less creative than this?:

Answer: they're not. Game Freak has to find ways to make new Pokemon stand out from older Pokemon, which is why the don't all look alike. Don't get me wrong, I grew up with the first Gen, but those are some of the most basic designs of them all. There is nothing wrong with any Gen 5 Pokemon. The Taoism theme with the Unova dragons was a great idea, so I don't know how anyone can say they "didn't try" with such a great concept.



And no, they didn't go overboard. They introduced 13 Legendary Pokemon with 143 regular Pokemon. In all, 47 Pokemon are Legendary while 602 are not. That is only 7.2% of all Pokemon.

Listen man, you probably wont agree with me anyway, but I will try to make my point clear anyway. You tell me the gen 1 pokemon you showed in your second row (muk, magneton ed) aren't creative at all. That may be true, but you miss the point.

It is not about creativity. I could also give a piece of bacon a laser and a ice cone on his head and call it creative. Would you like a bacon with a laser and an ice cone in pokemon? (I was hoping you will say no but I am actually starting to like the idea now. ;p)

Creativity is no issue at all. Something doesn't have to be creative to be a succes. Charizard is just a red dragon, not very creative or something. But if you take a look at the strange fire pokemon you posted (emboar) or something, the only thing I can think of it looks like is a sad clown. I think it's design is horrible. It is childish, doesn't look like anything and is just too strange, even for a pokemon. It just doesn't look right for me. (and I quote FOR ME) (that means it is an opinion ;p)

Those new pokemon may be so creative as hell, but they just don't look like anything at all. Compare the way pokemon developed with the anime. AT first, things looked normal (at least normal in the terms of pocket monsters which you could put in tiny little balls) . Charizard is not very creative, he's just a red dragon. Ash is not very creative, he's just a 10 year old boy. brock is not very creative, his outfit is fairly normal. misty is not very creative, pikachu is not very creative and so on and so on and so on. They were just normal people with normal pokemon which looked alot like their animal counterparts.

Did we have a problem with it back then? NO. And now all of the sudde, with the new generations, everything has to be creative, weird looking and strange? Why's that? Are the pokemon you all loved since you were a child suddenly not good enough anymore because they put a heart shaped nose on a gentically modified zubat? Is a magneton suddenly not good enough because they set a clown on fire and called it an Emboar? Creativity might be good, to an extent. But if you make things too creative, nobody will be able to fell connected to it anymore. It is just like abstract art. It might be supercreative, but I don't feel connected with it. It feels hollow. It is just like the pokemon. The new pokemon just feel too distant for me. They don't feel like real pokemon anymore.

Please don't get me wrong, but since this generation came out, you guys all start to talk about things which are wrong about the older generations while you guys all loved them in the past. Suddenly, if you still like the old generations, you are sad and way too nostalgic. That is utter nonsence. I liked the new things in B and W, but I just don't like the pokemon. That is my opinion. That doesn't mean I'm sad or nostalgic, that means I have my own preferences. The old pokemon are the 'real' pokemon for me. The new pokemon (with some exceptions) are just hollow shells in comparison to the older ones. Not every new pokemon, they still got it in them, (the legendaries as an example are very well made) but this generation just doesn't work for me. (maybe if B and W 2 come out, if I put more time in the game the acceptance might come.)

I hope you guys realize this is just an opinion of mine. You don't have to agree (what you guys probably don't do anyway) but keep in mind that this is the way I think about it and that it is not 'fact based'

pokemontrainer_samuel July 25th, 2012 5:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Listen man, you probably wont agree with me anyway, but I will try to make my point clear anyway. You tell me the gen 1 pokemon you showed in your second row (muk, magneton ed) aren't creative at all. That may be true, but you miss the point.

It is not about creativity. I could also give a piece of bacon a laser and a ice cone on his head and call it creative. Would you like a bacon with a laser and an ice cone in pokemon? (I was hoping you will say no but I am actually starting to like the idea now. ;p)

Creativity is no issue at all. Something doesn't have to be creative to be a succes. Charizard is just a red dragon, not very creative or something. But if you take a look at the strange fire pokemon you posted (emboar) or something, the only thing I can think of it looks like is a sad clown. I think it's design is horrible. It is childish, doesn't look like anything and is just too strange, even for a pokemon. It just doesn't look right for me. (and I quote FOR ME) (that means it is an opinion ;p)

Those new pokemon may be so creative as hell, but they just don't look like anything at all. Compare the way pokemon developed with the anime. AT first, things looked normal (at least normal in the terms of pocket monsters which you could put in tiny little balls) . Charizard is not very creative, he's just a red dragon. Ash is not very creative, he's just a 10 year old boy. brock is not very creative, his outfit is fairly normal. misty is not very creative, pikachu is not very creative and so on and so on and so on. They were just normal people with normal pokemon which looked alot like their animal counterparts.

Did we have a problem with it back then? NO. And now all of the sudde, with the new generations, everything has to be creative, weird looking and strange? Why's that? Are the pokemon you all loved since you were a child suddenly not good enough anymore because they put a heart shaped nose on a gentically modified zubat? Is a magneton suddenly not good enough because they set a clown on fire and called it an Emboar? Creativity might be good, to an extent. But if you make things too creative, nobody will be able to fell connected to it anymore. It is just like abstract art. It might be supercreative, but I don't feel connected with it. It feels hollow. It is just like the pokemon. The new pokemon just feel too distant for me. They don't feel like real pokemon anymore.

Please don't get me wrong, but since this generation came out, you guys all start to talk about things which are wrong about the older generations while you guys all loved them in the past. Suddenly, if you still like the old generations, you are sad and way too nostalgic. That is utter nonsence. I liked the new things in B and W, but I just don't like the pokemon. That is my opinion. That doesn't mean I'm sad or nostalgic, that means I have my own preferences. The old pokemon are the 'real' pokemon for me. The new pokemon (with some exceptions) are just hollow shells in comparison to the older ones. Not every new pokemon, they still got it in them, (the legendaries as an example are very well made) but this generation just doesn't work for me. (maybe if B and W 2 come out, if I put more time in the game the acceptance might come.)

I hope you guys realize this is just an opinion of mine. You don't have to agree (what you guys probably don't do anyway) but keep in mind that this is the way I think about it and that it is not 'fact based'

Yea, I really enjoyed all the older pokemon generations and still love them, and I bet everyone here does. However, we don't (like you said) say bad things about the older generation. It's more of a "If you say this generation is bad, you are also condemning the previous generations because if you actually look at them closely they were also the same." We aren't condemning the older generations. New generation haters are the ones who are insulting their favourite gen 1, because the points they bring out can also be applied to the older generations.

I do agree that creativity is not the issue though. Pokemon is a very creative concept to start with, and you cannot doubt that there are very creative creatures created from back in gen 1. Who would have imagined a living creature with a plant on top of it? Or a simple fish that can evolve into giant blue worm that lives in a water and has fins with a giant mouth? Or a blue snake with wings at both sides of it's head? Or a black faced opera singer with thick lips? These creatures are definitely not natural like you imagine gen 1 to be, but they are certainly creative. It's not much different from the newer generation pokemons. As for the human characters, I'd say I would prefer the older generation people as they look more normal, although Ash's hair is still one of the world's biggest mysteries (how did he make them stick out like that?).

Liking the older generations do not make one nostalgic (I still worship Mew as the ultimate unchallenged best pokemon ever even though there are 649 pokemon now), but condemning the newer generations with points that can also be applied to older generations are what makes someone nostalgic.

I don't understand though: Why do people keep comparing Woobat with Zubat? Why not the bulbasaur line with the oddish line? Bulbasaur and oddish are both living creatures with grass on top of them, and their last evolution, Venusaur and Vileplume, are living creatures with a rafflesia on them. They have the same type as well, and both learn a lot of same moves. Woobat and Zubat however, are not even of the same type to start with. Why not compare the Mankey line to Woobat? The both of them are fluffy animals with a pig snout. And stop criticizing the heart shaped nose, because for your information, there is a species of bats in real life that have heart shaped noses. It's actually based on an animal that actually exists. How unnatural is that compared to a bat without eyes. Have you ever seen a bat without eyes in real life?

HenkieDePost July 25th, 2012 6:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pokemontrainer_samuel (Post 7269893)
Yea, I really enjoyed all the older pokemon generations and still love them, and I bet everyone here does. However, we don't (like you said) say bad things about the older generation. It's more of a "If you say this generation is bad, you are also condemning the previous generations because if you actually look at them closely they were also the same." We aren't condemning the older generations. New generation haters are the ones who are insulting their favourite gen 1, because the points they bring out can also be applied to the older generations.

I do agree that creativity is not the issue though. Pokemon is a very creative concept to start with, and you cannot doubt that there are very creative creatures created from back in gen 1. Who would have imagined a living creature with a plant on top of it? Or a simple fish that can evolve into giant blue worm that lives in a water and has fins with a giant mouth? Or a blue snake with wings at both sides of it's head? Or a black faced opera singer with thick lips? These creatures are definitely not natural like you imagine gen 1 to be, but they are certainly creative. It's not much different from the newer generation pokemons. As for the human characters, I'd say I would prefer the older generation people as they look more normal, although Ash's hair is still one of the world's biggest mysteries (how did he make them stick out like that?).

Liking the older generations do not make one nostalgic (I still worship Mew as the ultimate unchallenged best pokemon ever even though there are 649 pokemon now), but condemning the newer generations with points that can also be applied to older generations are what makes someone nostalgic.

I don't understand though: Why do people keep comparing Woobat with Zubat? Why not the bulbasaur line with the oddish line? Bulbasaur and oddish are both living creatures with grass on top of them, and their last evolution, Venusaur and Vileplume, are living creatures with a rafflesia on them. They have the same type as well, and both learn a lot of same moves. Woobat and Zubat however, are not even of the same type to start with. Why not compare the Mankey line to Woobat? The both of them are fluffy animals with a pig snout. And stop criticizing the heart shaped nose, because for your information, there is a species of bats in real life that have heart shaped noses. It's actually based on an animal that actually exists. How unnatural is that compared to a bat without eyes. Have you ever seen a bat without eyes in real life?

About the Woobat, the reason why I compere then to each other is first of all the name, and second, zubat has been the bat type pokemon in all pokemongames so far. Now suddenly, you have this woobat which has a lot of things in common, which takes over the role of a bat pokemon in the cave.

And about bulbasaur and oddish, bulbasaur never was the low level grass pokemon which you could find in the forests in the beginning. Bulbasaur and oddish always had another role in a game. Bulbasaur was a starter, while oddish was the low level grass pokemon. With zubat and woobat, zubat was always the bat pokemon untill woobat came along, now the woobat is the bat pokemon.

I know they are not the same type, and I also know there is a real bat with a heart shaped nose. (I might not be so stupid as you guys think I am ;p) but Woobat was the only pokemon I really knew the name and the appearance of, so that's the reason why I chose him for my posts. I will try to use other pokemons from now on if that makes you happier ^^

pokemontrainer_samuel July 25th, 2012 8:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269964)
About the Woobat, the reason why I compere then to each other is first of all the name, and second, zubat has been the bat type pokemon in all pokemongames so far. Now suddenly, you have this woobat which has a lot of things in common, which takes over the role of a bat pokemon in the cave.

And about bulbasaur and oddish, bulbasaur never was the low level grass pokemon which you could find in the forests in the beginning. Bulbasaur and oddish always had another role in a game. Bulbasaur was a starter, while oddish was the low level grass pokemon. With zubat and woobat, zubat was always the bat pokemon untill woobat came along, now the woobat is the bat pokemon.

I know they are not the same type, and I also know there is a real bat with a heart shaped nose. (I might not be so stupid as you guys think I am ;p) but Woobat was the only pokemon I really knew the name and the appearance of, so that's the reason why I chose him for my posts. I will try to use other pokemons from now on if that makes you happier ^^

Apart from having the same species, a secondary type and having a bat at the end of their names, there is nothing else in common between the two pokemon. Why does no one else compare Drilbur with Diglett? The only difference is that their second evolution's type. The rest are all very similar, if not the same. And Diglett was the only mole pokemon before the appearance of Drilbur.

No, I didn't think you were stupid, because if you didn't know that such bats existed and complained about his nose, it just means you were just not told of it's existence, therefore it's rational for you to think a heart shaped nose bat is stupid. But the fact that you knew that such bats exist and yet complain about the heart shaped nose, I really don't know what to say.

Bulbasaur and oddish have a lot in common too. Straight from the character design concept to the type, attacks and all. The only difference is the role in the game. And that is only 1 difference.

I'm not really that fond of the Woobat line actually. What irks me is not the Woobat line being criticized and compared to the Zubat line despite their differences. I'm more irked at the quality (or the lack of it) of negative views on the new generation. Most of them are baseless and lame excuses to why BW is terrible. So far, the only good one (and probably the best one ever) I've heard is about the character designs being more and more out of the norm.

Cyclone July 25th, 2012 9:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pokemontrainer_samuel (Post 7270104)
Apart from having the same species, a secondary type and having a bat at the end of their names, there is nothing else in common between the two pokemon. Why does no one else compare Drilbur with Diglett? The only difference is that their second evolution's type. The rest are all very similar, if not the same. And Diglett was the only mole pokemon before the appearance of Drilbur.

I stopped reading there to reply to that. Here are sprites of Drilbur and Diglett.

I'd say that's pretty self-explanatory, but here goes:

1. Drilbur walks. Diglett burrows in the ground.
2. Drilbur has metal claws. Diglett doesn't.
3. Drilbur evolves into a partial Steel type. Diglett stays only Ground type.
4. Drilbur evolves twice. Diglett evolves once.

In my eyes, Drilbur is the better Pokémon. Excadrill is badass.

Cyclone

Affliction July 25th, 2012 1:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninjagon (Post 7255993)
Why do you think Black and White has recieved so many bad remarks as oppose to the other main series games?

Is it because the pokemon seem much more fake than the others?
Is it because the of lack of post-game?

Personally, even though i stayed with Pokemon since the original 151, I think there is room for change, technology is changing drastically around us. Black and White in my mind are some the best pokemon games i've played.

Everyone and anyone, put your opinions here.

Sorry about the late reply.

I personally never played Pokemon Black or White, although I heard complaints from people in Youtube such as:

"I hate this."
"The new Pokemon look like Digimon."
"Who wants to play it?"
"The old games are so much better."

Of course, these aren't my views. The only people who seem to play it are (Very) young kids.

I also saw comments like this:

"Gameplay comes first, not graphics!"

Well, people say Pokemon had lost it's popularity after time, but at least kids still play it.

Hope this is helpful.

voicerocker July 25th, 2012 7:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Listen man, you probably wont agree with me anyway, but I will try to make my point clear anyway. You tell me the gen 1 pokemon you showed in your second row (muk, magneton ed) aren't creative at all. That may be true, but you miss the point.

No I didn't, and I didn't say Muk or Magneton were bad designs, I was comparing them to the Pokemon that the other person said were "lazy" and "lackluster".

People say "Living gears? That's stupid!" yet they forget Magnemite and Magenton from Gen 1 being living magnets.

Or "They didn't even try to be creative with Gen 5!" yet Gen 1 had the living Pokeball Voltorb. And as much as I like Charizard, it's just a fire breathing dragon at the end of the day. (Not saying it isn't creative, but compared to newer Pokemon like Haxorus, it just seems less creative. But Charizard is still one of my favorite Pokemon.)

It is not about creativity. I could also give a piece of bacon a laser and a ice cone on his head and call it creative. Would you like a bacon with a laser and an ice cone in pokemon? (I was hoping you will say no but I am actually starting to like the idea now. ;p)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Creativity is no issue at all. Something doesn't have to be creative to be a succes. Charizard is just a red dragon, not very creative or something. But if you take a look at the strange fire pokemon you posted (emboar) or something, the only thing I can think of it looks like is a sad clown.

A clown? Don't see it, especially when it's stomping around in its sprite animation. Nor do I see anything that says "sad". Perhaps looking up the inspiration for Emboar should come before criticizing it.

Bulbapedia:
"Emboar is based on the soldier of Romance of the Three Kingdoms.[1] It and its pre-evolutions, as stated by Ken Sugimori, were designed in a Chinese style. Because of its Chinese style, it may be based on Zhu Bajie, a pig demon from the Chinese tale Journey to the West. Infernape is also based on another character from the novel, Sun Wukong, and has a similar design as well as the same typing. It seems to also take inspirations of a pig or boar in a professional wrestler's or possibly a lucha libre's attire. The swirled pattern that surrounds its abdomen is visually similar to the patterns on ding or ancient Greek pottery."

So now you know a little of why it looks the way it does, besides just being a boar with flames.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
I think it's design is horrible. It is childish, doesn't look like anything and is just too strange, even for a pokemon. It just doesn't look right for me. (and I quote FOR ME) (that means it is an opinion ;p)

Again, you should research a Pokemon before you criticize it. And childish? What exactly about Emboar is childish? (I realize these are just your opinions, but if you dislike something and call it horrible, you should really explain why you believe that.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Those new pokemon may be so creative as hell, but they just don't look like anything at all.

How can they not look like "anything"? What does that mean? Are you saying there is a limit on what a Pokemon can look like?

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Compare the way pokemon developed with the anime. AT first, things looked normal (at least normal in the terms of pocket monsters which you could put in tiny little balls) . Charizard is not very creative, he's just a red dragon. Ash is not very creative, he's just a 10 year old boy. brock is not very creative, his outfit is fairly normal. misty is not very creative, pikachu is not very creative and so on and so on and so on. They were just normal people with normal pokemon which looked alot like their animal counterparts.

Not really. It's anime. None of them look that "normal", nor do the Pokemon look more like animals than the new ones do. Serperior is just as much of a snake as Blastoise is of a turtle.

Besides, the anime is based on the games, not the other way around. Not really sure what point you are trying to make here. So Pokemon should just look basically like a real animal with "upgrades"? You can't just keep turning animals into Pokemon without adding something to make them different than previous Pokemon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Did we have a problem with it back then? NO.

Because we only had 1 Generation of Pokemon. Only 151, not 649. You had nothing previous to compare it too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
And now all of the sudde, with the new generations, everything has to be creative, weird looking and strange? Why's that?

"Weird looking" and "strange" are strictly opinion, and easily apply to Gen 1 as well. Exeggcute and Exeggutor are certainly strange. "Weird looking" and "strange" is something every Pokemon is to an extent.

Plus, Game Freak can't just do the same thing time and time again. They have to try new ideas and come up with more Pokemon from more creative ideas. That's just business really. Without better ideas, Game Freak goes out of business and Pokemon ends.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Are the pokemon you all loved since you were a child suddenly not good enough anymore because they put a heart shaped nose on a gentically modified zubat?

No. Woobat is not a Zubat. 2 different Pokemon with different movesets and evolution lines. Just because they are both bats doesn't mean anything. Charizard and Dragonite are both very similar dragons, but no one complains about them. (and they're both from Gen 1!)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Is a magneton suddenly not good enough because they set a clown on fire and called it an Emboar?

Ok, this comparison is just wrong. Magneton and Emboar are NOTHING alike. And no, Klinklang doesn't make Magneton less important, nor does Emboar make Charizard less important. Why anyone would think that is beyond me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Creativity might be good, to an extent. But if you make things too creative, nobody will be able to fell connected to it anymore.

What? More creativity is bad? Makes no sense. I've played the games since the 90's and have never felt that way. Besides, Game Freak still designs their Pokemon to fit in with "the look" they've given all their Pokemon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
It is just like abstract art. It might be supercreative, but I don't feel connected with it. It feels hollow. It is just like the pokemon. The new pokemon just feel too distant for me. They don't feel like real pokemon anymore.

You appear to be putting a limit on what a Pokemon can be or look like. That's like saying "Game Freak should just make generic Pokemon like Gen 1 again". Creativity is not a bad thing, it keeps things from being boring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Please don't get me wrong, but since this generation came out, you guys all start to talk about things which are wrong about the older generations while you guys all loved them in the past. Suddenly, if you still like the old generations, you are sad and way too nostalgic. That is utter nonsence.

I love all 5 Generations. All I'm doing is showing people that the same things they say like "Ice cream Pokemon? That's stupid! That's food, not a Pokemon!" even though we had Exeggcute and Exeggutor (eggs and a pineapple) in Gen 1. See? People are unfairly accusing Gen 5 of having things that makes them suck or "not Pokemon" when Gen 1 had these things as well, but they refuse to acknowledge it and say "Nope, Vanillite sucks, Exeggcute is a REAL Pokemon!" yet they just said a food Pokemon is a dumb idea.

And no, I'm not overly nostalgic, in fact, that is what I'm trying to stop from happening. People just automatically say "Gen 1 is best! There are only 151 real Pokemon. The rest are crap!" THAT is nostalgia at its worst.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
I liked the new things in B and W, but I just don't like the pokemon. That is my opinion. That doesn't mean I'm sad or nostalgic, that means I have my own preferences. The old pokemon are the 'real' pokemon for me.

You don't have to like the Pokemon, but to say they suck or are "lackluster" as has been use, is just wrong and requires explaining. But yes, part of it is nostalgia, saying that the original Pokemon are the "real" ones is very much a nostalgic statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
The new pokemon (with some exceptions) are just hollow shells in comparison to the older ones.

Many of Gen 5's Pokemon were meant to be very similar to Gen 1's Pokemon. (Like Machop and Timburr, Magnemite and Klink, Sawk & Throh and Hitmonlee & Hitmonchan) It was part of the "reboot" that Black and White was supposed to be, which is why in the games, you only see new Pokemon, just like in Gen 1. But the new Pokemon are also still very different from the older ones, which still makes the old one relevant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
Not every new pokemon, they still got it in them, (the legendaries as an example are very well made) but this generation just doesn't work for me. (maybe if B and W 2 come out, if I put more time in the game the acceptance might come.)

Yes, usually, the more you see a Pokemon and understand it, you will grow to accept it. That's how Pokemon works. You generally have 3-4 years to get use to new Pokemon before a new Generation comes out and you have more new Pokemon to learn about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7269806)
I hope you guys realize this is just an opinion of mine. You don't have to agree (what you guys probably don't do anyway) but keep in mind that this is the way I think about it and that it is not 'fact based'

Yes, you are totally free to have opinions. But like I said before, you should really look up the inspirations for these Pokemon before you decide they are uncreative. Reshiram and Zekrom aren't just 2 dragons, they are based on the whole Taoism relation, which introduced Kyurem, and introduced the first ever time 2 Pokemon merge bodies in-game. All we want people (not just you, but everyone) to do is give the new Pokemon a chance before just deciding they suck.

Deokishisu July 25th, 2012 9:04 PM

Just because the ideas behind the Pokemon were creative, doesn't mean that those ideas translated well into a good looking Pokemon.

For example, Magnemite is not just magnets put together. They took the idea of a Pokemon with magnets, gave it a body and other details and then put the magnets on it. Kling is quite literally a gear... with a face. Surely anyone can see that the Magnemite and Kling lines had a similar concept, but the Magnemite line was more creative. Are Magnemite and Magneton simple? Yes. But they work. Their concept was translated well. Kling, and many of the other Gen 5 Pokemon were not so lucky.

Pokemon like Ditto, Exeggcute, and Charizard LOOK right because their concepts translated well into Pokemon. Yes, voicerocker, many of the Gen 5 Pokemon were a product of copying the original 150 for the reboot. Were their concepts translated as well? Sawk and Throh are red and blue people with karate uniforms on. Could you say they are more creative or more original than Hitmonlee and Hitmonchan? Their concepts translated incredibly well. Sawk and Throh fell short (though, unlike most of their Gen 5 brethren, they have good names). Zubat and Golbat may be simple, but Woobat and Swoobat look much more like composites of wings, a puff ball, and a heart nose than anything you'd see flying around. Their Kanto cousins look much more natural. Again, another similar concept that fell short in Gen 5.

Emboar looks very, shall we say, awkward and goofy if compared to the earlier fire starters. The fact that it was based off of a Chinese legend doesn't mean that that translated well into a Pokemon either, obviously.

I'd say this generation was all about (mostly) okay concepts that fell flat. Nintendo thought that rebooting with new Pokemon with Kanto-ish concepts was a great idea, but they failed to take the care to translate those concepts into their Pokemon.

Ho-Oh July 25th, 2012 9:41 PM

I really hate having to do this but this thread ALSO is starting to be a full on discussion about the Pokemon designs in gen 5 versus previous ones. So if you guys could just let this one be a little less Pokemon orientated, and let the thread for that thrive (this thread right here) I will love you guys. While a few posts are okay it's getting a little further than that and it would be quite awesome if you all just quoted the posts and discussed in the thread for that since this is getting a little into personal opinions whereas this thread is for an overall "why others hate it".

Just please don't run away from B/W forever and just stay in that thread for the uncreative gen 5 Pokemon discussion. :3 However feel free to continue discussing why the games received bad remarks just... as an overall view.

Golurks Were Meant to Fly July 25th, 2012 9:52 PM

I think the main reason others dislike these games is that they're opposed to change. Having a pokemon game where the region is far away, the pokemon are all different, and the general feeling of the game is more plot oriented instead of adventure/explore everywhere you can oriented. While I like all of these (although, I grew to love them rather than enjoying it right away) many people cling to the past, hug their favorite pokemon tight to their chest and let nostalgia guide them. (not saying there weren't SOME flaws and that all people who make a bad remark about pokemon are nostalgia fueled genwunners or whatever, but I mean, come on now...) If these pokemon games had been the first, none of the major complaints would really exist, I think.

Killjoy July 25th, 2012 10:02 PM

Apart from nostalgia, It sounds like people just really like to hate. Reading this thread, I can tell people are looking for reasons to hate it. Some of the responces were obviosly pondered over for several minutes, and writen simply to continue the argument, whether the argument makes sence anymore or not. Many of the posters have came out posting things that directly contradict what they posted earlier.

HenkieDePost July 26th, 2012 4:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GolurkIsDaBomb (Post 7271042)
I think the main reason others dislike these games is that they're opposed to change. Having a pokemon game where the region is far away, the pokemon are all different, and the general feeling of the game is more plot oriented instead of adventure/explore everywhere you can oriented. While I like all of these (although, I grew to love them rather than enjoying it right away) many people cling to the past, hug their favorite pokemon tight to their chest and let nostalgia guide them. (not saying there weren't SOME flaws and that all people who make a bad remark about pokemon are nostalgia fueled genwunners or whatever, but I mean, come on now...) If these pokemon games had been the first, none of the major complaints would really exist, I think.

Listen, I do not like these games alot, like you could have guessed because my post. But it seems that you guys just don't get it. I am not opposed to change, but change can be good or bad and that is what you guys are missing. As a wild example, if your country is a democracy (I am assuming it is. ;p) , and it suddenly becomes a dicatoriate where people randomly get murdered and slaughtered, would you like it? If I have to believe you people who are defending this game, I apperently must like it. Because it is change, and the people who say, wait wait wait, this is not what we want are suddenly nostalgic losers who need to do something with their lives. This may be an extreme example, but seriously, take a look at all the posts you defenders come up with. Alot of them end with: people who don't like this game are way too fed up with nostalgia and are a bit sad. Even the first reaction on this topic ends with that. (Which I actually find pretty offensive, that poster seriously had no reason to say that everyone who dislikes this game is sad and is fooling themselves. I think this is a bold accusation to make because first of all he didn't even know what the motives are of the people who dislike this game, and secondly, it just seems like he's trying to say there is only one option. Liking the game. If you do not liked it, you somehow automatically did not give it a chance, or you are fooling yourself... Seriously?)

Why can't you guys just accept that I just don't like those pokemon and characters? I only posted my first post here so you guys could know why I didn't like this game, and suddenly I and all the other guys who just don't like this game are nostalgic losers who are opposed to change? Can't people just have their preferences? I like RTS and RPG games as an example, while my brother only likes FPS and TPS games. I don't go saying to him that he HAS to like this game, otherwise he is not open to change and he is just fooling himself because he certainly didn't give AoE a chance because he MUST find it awesome if he did. Again, you might say it has nothing to do with it, but actually it has. You are forcing people to like things, and if they don´t they fall of the boat. That´s pretty strange isn´t it?

Just like I said in my example about democracy, change can come in good ways, or in bad ways. I think the new pokemon designs are a bad change, they try to look like something, or show they have a background and a interesting story (like emboar) but they just fail to resemble it for me. That is just my reason why I don't like these pokemon. I am not showing this as a fact, but as an opinion. You guys wanted to know why I think B and W might receive bad remarks? Here's my answer.

I also think the characters are a bad change. Just take a look at the characters you can choose from. I always play as a boy in a pokemon game, but this time I didn't even want to because they boy looked like he got hair growing out of his golf cap... :P Team plasma had some cool motives, but looked really, really rubbish. The white uniform of their grunts somewhat reminds me of nuns in the catholic church :P Why can't we just have a bada** guy at the top of a team like Giovanni or Archie, they at least looked like bad people. I also really prefer the normal cap guy from soul silver over the hair out of the cap guy. Those goofy people really destroy the immersion for me. Which is also a pretty big letdown for me. Immersion is very important, and if that fails you just can't really connect with your game and enjoy playing it. Atleast I can't. If I don't feel connected with the characters and animals (pokemon) in a game, I don't like it.

Furthermore, I DO like the changes of the unova region. I like the seasons, I can't say very much about the story because I have not finished it yet, but there are also good things about black and white. But the main point of any pokemon game are the pokemon of course, and quite frankly I do not like them, so that is just my biggest issue with the game. But the main point is that I DO like things about the game. It is not all about ranting and raving. They did a pretty good job making this game, and I still think pokemon has a bright future. Just because B and W are the first pokemon games ever that I don't like, doesn't make me a Gen V hater and a guy who is opposed to change. I am just putting up a list here of things I didn't really like about the game, just like the original poster asked.

I am not wanting to wage an all out war between the defenders of the game and the 'attackers', but seriously guys, you should stop labelling everyone who doesn't like this game as someone who is too nostalgic to like changes and is therefore a sad person. I liked alot of the changes, but I just don't like the pokemon and the characters, and that alone is gamebreaking for me. There is nothing more to it. I am looking forward to B and W 2, and maybe I will finish that game completely, but we will see about that when they come out.

pokemontrainer_samuel July 26th, 2012 6:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7271347)
Listen, I do not like these games alot, like you could have guessed because my post. But it seems that you guys just don't get it. I am not opposed to change, but change can be good or bad and that is what you guys are missing. As a wild example, if your country is a democracy (I am assuming it is. ;p) , and it suddenly becomes a dicatoriate where people randomly get murdered and slaughtered, would you like it? If I have to believe you people who are defending this game, I apperently must like it. Because it is change, and the people who say, wait wait wait, this is not what we want are suddenly nostalgic losers who need to do something with their lives. This may be an extreme example, but seriously, take a look at all the posts you defenders come up with. Alot of them end with: people who don't like this game are way too fed up with nostalgia and are a bit sad. Even the first reaction on this topic ends with that. (Which I actually find pretty offensive, that poster seriously had no reason to say that everyone who dislikes this game is sad and is fooling themselves. I think this is a bold accusation to make because first of all he didn't even know what the motives are of the people who dislike this game, and secondly, it just seems like he's trying to say there is only one option. Liking the game. If you do not liked it, you somehow automatically did not give it a chance, or you are fooling yourself... Seriously?)

Why can't you guys just accept that I just don't like those pokemon and characters? I only posted my first post here so you guys could know why I didn't like this game, and suddenly I and all the other guys who just don't like this game are nostalgic losers who are opposed to change? Can't people just have their preferences? I like RTS and RPG games as an example, while my brother only likes FPS and TPS games. I don't go saying to him that he HAS to like this game, otherwise he is not open to change and he is just fooling himself because he certainly didn't give AoE a chance because he MUST find it awesome if he did. Again, you might say it has nothing to do with it, but actually it has. You are forcing people to like things, and if they don´t they fall of the boat. That´s pretty strange isn´t it?

Just like I said in my example about democracy, change can come in good ways, or in bad ways. I think the new pokemon designs are a bad change, they try to look like something, or show they have a background and a interesting story (like emboar) but they just fail to resemble it for me. That is just my reason why I don't like these pokemon. I am not showing this as a fact, but as an opinion. You guys wanted to know why I think B and W might receive bad remarks? Here's my answer.

I also think the characters are a bad change. Just take a look at the characters you can choose from. I always play as a boy in a pokemon game, but this time I didn't even want to because they boy looked like he got hair growing out of his golf cap... :P Team plasma had some cool motives, but looked really, really rubbish. The white uniform of their grunts somewhat reminds me of nuns in the catholic church :P Why can't we just have a bada** guy at the top of a team like Giovanni or Archie, they at least looked like bad people. I also really prefer the normal cap guy from soul silver over the hair out of the cap guy. Those goofy people really destroy the immersion for me. Which is also a pretty big letdown for me. Immersion is very important, and if that fails you just can't really connect with your game and enjoy playing it. Atleast I can't. If I don't feel connected with the characters and animals (pokemon) in a game, I don't like it.

Furthermore, I DO like the changes of the unova region. I like the seasons, I can't say very much about the story because I have not finished it yet, but there are also good things about black and white. But the main point of any pokemon game are the pokemon of course, and quite frankly I do not like them, so that is just my biggest issue with the game. But the main point is that I DO like things about the game. It is not all about ranting and raving. They did a pretty good job making this game, and I still think pokemon has a bright future. Just because B and W are the first pokemon games ever that I don't like, doesn't make me a Gen V hater and a guy who is opposed to change. I am just putting up a list here of things I didn't really like about the game, just like the original poster asked.

I am not wanting to wage an all out war between the defenders of the game and the 'attackers', but seriously guys, you should stop labelling everyone who doesn't like this game as someone who is too nostalgic to like changes and is therefore a sad person. I liked alot of the changes, but I just don't like the pokemon and the characters, and that alone is gamebreaking for me. There is nothing more to it. I am looking forward to B and W 2, and maybe I will finish that game completely, but we will see about that when they come out.

If a democratic country suddenly turned into a murderous dictator country, it's a complete U-turn in governing system which doesn't have any similarities to the previous governing system at all, so if people don't like the new government, it's understandable since it's totally different from the old one and that any reasons they give cannot be used to describe the old democratic government. Like I said, apart from the weird new characters, are there any solid reasons you nostalgic people give out? Here are some baseless excuses your camp gives:
1. Gen 5 pokemon don't look like natural animals. Klink and Vanillish aren't natural animals. Jynx, Magnemite and Ditto are all natural animals I guess. And we have bats without eyes in real life eh?
2. Gen 5 pokemon designs are lacklustre, too simple and are not creative enough. Klinks is just a gear with eyes. Diglett, Ditto, Voltorb. Nuff said.
3. (Since they can't say Gen 5 pokemon are lacklustre in design) Gen 5 pokemon are overly creative and spoils the simplicity of pokemon. Please make up your mind guys. But still, Gyarados, Kangaskhan, even Feraligatr and the 3 dogs from gen 2 (whom are still considered original pokemon) are quite complex and creative designs.
4. Gen 5 pokemon are fake copies of their predecessors, their design is copied from the older generations, like Woobat is a fake Zubat. So a Kabutops is a fake Scyther eh? An Oddish is a fake Bulbasaur? A Clefairy is a fake Jigglypuff (I seriously though both of them were related when I started playing pokemon)?
5. Gen 5 pokemon don't look like pokemon. Contradiction from the top. Again, please make up your minds.
6. I mean they look like digimon more than they look like pokemon! Blastoise doesn't look like a digimon I guess? Golem? And why does Agumon remind me of a Charmander without flames.
7. Gen 5 pokemon should not be food. Vanillish is an ice cream, not a pokemon. Eggs are also food. Plus people like eating Farfetch'ds as well, therefore indirectly turning it into food.
8. Gen 5 pokemon are too girlish compared to previous generations. I think we've already solved this lol.
9. Woobat is a lousy pokemon compared to Zubat. Why compare 2 different things to each other? They were not meant to be the same. If we had a star pokemon which has the psychic ground type like Lunatone and Solrock, I bet you people will go: This is a fake staryu!
10. No pokemon out of the original 151 are real pokemon! This is obviously a nostalgic statement. It's like saying you will never have another girlfriend after your girl ditches you. It's called not moving on.

Then after all the above were proven wrong, comes the ultimate superpower excuse: Pokemon is very subjective. We like the older generation for no reason at all. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. O_o

Basically, with pokemon being the main reason why people dislike gen 5, it's very obvious that they can't accept new pokemon. They might accept change in other parts of the game, but not the pokemon because they can see these pokemon and actually nurture them and have grown attached to them over the years.

So now for the non-pokemon design related reasons (note that this is not a reply to the person I quoted above because he/she only talked about pokemon designs):
1. Metagame is the same. Well what other metagame changes do you want? The basic rule is do not fix anything that is not broken. If they did a change in the already great metagame and it ended up being lousy, you'll be here criticizing their metagame change and saying they should have stuck to the old metagame.
2. Auto run is disabled. How hard is pressing a B button? Haven't the previous generations trained you all enough to hold down the B button automatically? It's understandable if you all started from HGSS though.
3. Lack of postgame. GSC and HGSS are the only game with an actual post game that is long enough to be the game itself. Since game freak has only made other regions available only for Johto, then you all should understand it's kind of a Johto exclusive feature, and taking it away and putting it into other games would make every pokemon game seem the same. Plus BW (as I pointed out many times) actually has a bigger post game than RSE and RBGY.
4. There are no pokemon following you! I didn't see everyone complain about every game after Pokemon Yellow because there was no Pikachu following you.
5. The people don't look like people! They look like weird cosplayers! Okay, point taken. There is nothing left to rebut as I totally agree. Maybe the Japanese might be able to relate to this one since they have professors with shocking orange hair and maid cafes.

By the way, speaking about the boy character in BW and HGSS, in reply to HenkieDePost, Do you notice that the boy character in BW is closer to Ash, while the boy in HGSS has a hairstyle that is totally impossible to style in real life? Try wearing a cap and have a fringe that sticks out so well. You'll just get a tuff of hair stuck flat on your forehead. Sometimes I just feel that you're unlucky in picking examples, because you always pick the wrong ones where there are other more solid examples to give. Nevermind, can't blame you because you just played a small part of the game. Glad that you are giving BW2 a chance.

Galdr July 26th, 2012 7:25 AM

Hm, I think it has to do with the Pokemon and gameplay. Why BW didn't get received as well and having all these remarks about them is the replayability and post-game. I believe that's why. After Cynthia, Morimoto, the level-boosted trainers in the domes in Nimbasa City as well as having two rivals rebattle-able, yeah. Also, the Pokemon, even though they were detailed and creative, weren't pleasing to some people.

At first, I thought they looked stupid. The Pokemon, I mean. I saw Tepig and instantly fell in love with that thing. Who wouldn't want a bacon? But, when it evolves, it becomes Fire-Fight. This would be the third time the fire starters did this. Blaziken and Infernape are already those. I thought "shouldn't it be Fire/Ground instead? Pigs like to roll in mud, and the mud equivalent in Pokemon is Ground." Not only this, Emboar is the only dual type starter of the region.

I also thought the region design was dumb, too at first. Castelia City's port looked like a right hand, and it was just weird. I did my research and found out Unova was based off New York City, the US basically. This is the first time they based a region outside Japan. I think that's another reason why it was hated; it wasn't Japan-based. All the others were from actual Japan places, just either flipped, rotated or not.

Seeing Haxorus, I immediately remembered "Dragonite" because Dragonite was a dragon-type in Gen I that evolved so late. But, Hydreigon made me think about the game. A triple headed dragon? Who wouldn't like that?

Another thing, there's no Vs. Seeker. That item only made appearance in FRLG and DPPt; they should have brought it back because it would have been awesome to rebattle trainers you've already fought. I understand the game was like nostalgia, though they could have added at least that if they had the Vs. Recorder.

I personally like Black and White. I'm not saying it's the best because it lacked many things, but you can't please everyone. I also thought BW2 would finally have a Vs. Seeker--and I was wrong. I liked the animated sprites of the Pokemon, but after awhile, they were getting annoying. Too bad an option to turn them off wasn't made. The Battle Subway felt like a reminiscent of DP's Battle Tower. The Diving parts of the game weren't very exciting at all, it made me miss Hoenn. They also reused the 2D sprites ina 3D world. That's pretty boring, but if it worked, it worked.

I also thought they would return the Pokemon-tag-along like HGSS, but it didn't either. So, it has many flaws we can all point out and rant about until the day is done, but in the end, it won't change what BW is: a new approach. Perhaps in the future, they'll put in the Vs Seeker and everything else a Pokemon game should have. We just have to be patient.

So again, to reiterate, I like Black and White personally. I thought the designs were all right. I'm an old-time gamer and was one of those people who didn't accept BW when it was first coming out. However, I gave it a chance because I am a Pokemon fan. It turned out that I did like it, albeit there were some things I didn't like. It didn't stop me from fully enjoying the game, though. I even did this with Hoenn once, but once I got Sapphire, I immediately fell in love with it. So, I say the game should be given a chance before bashing it for what it doesn't have and praise it for what it is: a Pokemon game.

There's my two cents of this.

Atomic Pirate July 26th, 2012 9:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galdr (Post 7271561)

I also thought the region design was dumb, too at first. Castelia City's port looked like a right hand, and it was just weird. I did my research and found out Unova was based off New York City, the US basically. This is the first time they based a region outside Japan. I think that's another reason why it was hated; it wasn't Japan-based. All the others were from actual Japan places, just either flipped, rotated or not.

I actually liked the idea of a region outside of Japan. If you count sidegames, then it wasn't the first (Orre was based off of Phoenix, Arizona and I quite liked it). Personally, I thought that an Africa-based region would be cool (and it would work well with Pokemon like Cofagrigus), but a New York based region is still a decent idea. I just didn't like the horribly artificial-looking Pokeball island in the middle of the region.

DarkWolf13 July 26th, 2012 10:09 AM

In regard of the question, I think it's because of lack of post-game training. Not many non-Unova pokemon were available aside from the Dream World and, I might be wrong, but also lack of good movesets for the Unova Pokemon for competitive battling (which i still don't get the purpose). When I played it the first time, it was alright and I had a good team set-up too. The things I hate about B/W is that there are no non-Unova Pokemon in the normal Subway lines, and the Super line Subway Pokemon lacked good movesets and contained too many status-changing moves, which renders the Super Subway lines annoying and difficult to enjoy. B2/W2 will definitely change my views and ways of battling when the US version is released in October.

HenkieDePost July 27th, 2012 7:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pokemontrainer_samuel (Post 7271444)
If a democratic country suddenly turned into a murderous dictator country, it's a complete U-turn in governing system which doesn't have any similarities to the previous governing system at all, so if people don't like the new government, it's understandable since it's totally different from the old one and that any reasons they give cannot be used to describe the old democratic government. Like I said, apart from the weird new characters, are there any solid reasons you nostalgic people give out? Here are some baseless excuses your camp gives:
1. Gen 5 pokemon don't look like natural animals. Klink and Vanillish aren't natural animals. Jynx, Magnemite and Ditto are all natural animals I guess. And we have bats without eyes in real life eh?
2. Gen 5 pokemon designs are lacklustre, too simple and are not creative enough. Klinks is just a gear with eyes. Diglett, Ditto, Voltorb. Nuff said.
3. (Since they can't say Gen 5 pokemon are lacklustre in design) Gen 5 pokemon are overly creative and spoils the simplicity of pokemon. Please make up your mind guys. But still, Gyarados, Kangaskhan, even Feraligatr and the 3 dogs from gen 2 (whom are still considered original pokemon) are quite complex and creative designs.
4. Gen 5 pokemon are fake copies of their predecessors, their design is copied from the older generations, like Woobat is a fake Zubat. So a Kabutops is a fake Scyther eh? An Oddish is a fake Bulbasaur? A Clefairy is a fake Jigglypuff (I seriously though both of them were related when I started playing pokemon)?
5. Gen 5 pokemon don't look like pokemon. Contradiction from the top. Again, please make up your minds.
6. I mean they look like digimon more than they look like pokemon! Blastoise doesn't look like a digimon I guess? Golem? And why does Agumon remind me of a Charmander without flames.
7. Gen 5 pokemon should not be food. Vanillish is an ice cream, not a pokemon. Eggs are also food. Plus people like eating Farfetch'ds as well, therefore indirectly turning it into food.
8. Gen 5 pokemon are too girlish compared to previous generations. I think we've already solved this lol.
9. Woobat is a lousy pokemon compared to Zubat. Why compare 2 different things to each other? They were not meant to be the same. If we had a star pokemon which has the psychic ground type like Lunatone and Solrock, I bet you people will go: This is a fake staryu!
10. No pokemon out of the original 151 are real pokemon! This is obviously a nostalgic statement. It's like saying you will never have another girlfriend after your girl ditches you. It's called not moving on.

Then after all the above were proven wrong, comes the ultimate superpower excuse: Pokemon is very subjective. We like the older generation for no reason at all. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. O_o

Basically, with pokemon being the main reason why people dislike gen 5, it's very obvious that they can't accept new pokemon. They might accept change in other parts of the game, but not the pokemon because they can see these pokemon and actually nurture them and have grown attached to them over the years.

So now for the non-pokemon design related reasons (note that this is not a reply to the person I quoted above because he/she only talked about pokemon designs):
1. Metagame is the same. Well what other metagame changes do you want? The basic rule is do not fix anything that is not broken. If they did a change in the already great metagame and it ended up being lousy, you'll be here criticizing their metagame change and saying they should have stuck to the old metagame.
2. Auto run is disabled. How hard is pressing a B button? Haven't the previous generations trained you all enough to hold down the B button automatically? It's understandable if you all started from HGSS though.
3. Lack of postgame. GSC and HGSS are the only game with an actual post game that is long enough to be the game itself. Since game freak has only made other regions available only for Johto, then you all should understand it's kind of a Johto exclusive feature, and taking it away and putting it into other games would make every pokemon game seem the same. Plus BW (as I pointed out many times) actually has a bigger post game than RSE and RBGY.
4. There are no pokemon following you! I didn't see everyone complain about every game after Pokemon Yellow because there was no Pikachu following you.
5. The people don't look like people! They look like weird cosplayers! Okay, point taken. There is nothing left to rebut as I totally agree. Maybe the Japanese might be able to relate to this one since they have professors with shocking orange hair and maid cafes.

By the way, speaking about the boy character in BW and HGSS, in reply to HenkieDePost, Do you notice that the boy character in BW is closer to Ash, while the boy in HGSS has a hairstyle that is totally impossible to style in real life? Try wearing a cap and have a fringe that sticks out so well. You'll just get a tuff of hair stuck flat on your forehead. Sometimes I just feel that you're unlucky in picking examples, because you always pick the wrong ones where there are other more solid examples to give. Nevermind, can't blame you because you just played a small part of the game. Glad that you are giving BW2 a chance.


Sorry man, but you don't convince me at all. At first your post might look like solid and strong, but I urge you to take a look at it. Some things you said have never been said, you take two completely different post and merge them together, you think you can disprove opinions which have nothing to do with facts, but with personal preferences, and so on. I am going to try to tell you where you are right and where you are wrong.


Let's see your first point. You tell us that we said that Gen V pokemon do not look like animals, and then you give us some pokemon which indeed don't look like animals. I agree with this part. Pokemon doesn't have to look like animals, but your examples are not good comparisons to the examples given by the anti B and W community. Klink and Vanillish are pokemon which are almost entirely the objects they try to resemble. That's right, they resemble real life objects. Vanillish is almost truely an icecone, only with a face and Klink is a gear with a face. Magnemite and magneton might be of the similar concept, so in that way you are right, but with jynx and ditto you really are missing the point. Jynx and Ditto might not be based on animals, but they are not based on objects either, while Vanillish and Klink are truely just objects with a moveset. I understand your point, but the examples are just not very good chosen. The problem people have with these two, is that they are just objects with a face, not that they are not animal based.



Then about point 2 and 3, which I am going to review together. These two points are very weak, Why? You mix the posts of 2 users together and then act as if they have been written by the same person. You first point out that 'we' while only one poster has ever written this, think that the new pokemon are lacluster in design. Then you give examples of pokemon which are not very creative as well. That was a good thing, because they are indeed not creative. But then you suddenly say: since they can't say gen 5 pokemon are lacluster in design, they suddenly are overcreative.

What are you talking about man? I never said B and W pokemon are lacluster in design, but you suddenly use someone else's argument and make it seem that everyone who thinks B and W pokemon are not good first thought they were lacluster, and when they found it it didin't work they suddenly say they are overcreative. I am the only one who said anything about overcreative, while the other poster is the only one who said they were lacluster. And then suddenly you act like these two posts are written by the same person, and by everyone who dislikes B and W?. This renders your response on point 2 and 3 unreliable and irrelevant. Don't think that everyone who dislikes B and W went through this thinkingpattern and don't that the whole anti B and W community thinks the same. This is called overgeneralisation.

Then the part about their predecessors. I never said that the pokemon from B and W are "fake" copies of the pokemon from the generations before that. I never said they are fake, and I never said they are exact copies. Woobat has the same role of Zubat in the older generations. And that is a flying cave bat which you can only find in dark areas. It never had anything to do with types (although you keep saying that) and never had anything to do with names. It has to do with the role in the game. If you just think clear for a second, you can easily understand that the role of Woobat is almost exactly the same of Zubat. And if it comes down to the role in the game, I think zubat did a way better role than Woobat. Woobat does come of from a real life bat, but that doesn't mean that because it comes from a real animal it MUST be perfect for a pokemon game. I still stay with my point that Woobat just isn't a good design for a pokemon. I see this argument from the defenders alot. Emboar is based on a chinese sage, so you can't say that his design is bad. Otherwise you have no respect for his background. Woobat is based on a reallife bat, so you can't say that Woobat just doesn't fit in, because then you are practically denying that there is a real life bat which has a heart shaped nose. The background of these pokemon might be good, but that doesn't mean they look good in a pokemon game.

Furthermore, oddish and bulbasaur? Why do you keep saying that? I have said around 100 times now that the most important factor of comparing a pokemon to another one is the role in the game. Bulbasaur is a very rare starter, while oddish is just a weak grass pokemon. The role in the game is different, while the role of Woobat and Zubat is identical. They might look like each other, but that doesn't mean that we could also have had oddish as an starter while bulbasaur is terrorizing Ilex forest. Kabutops and Scyther might even be a worse example. Kabutops and Scyther are not only completely different in design, kabutops is also a thought to be extinct pokemon, while Scyther is just a ordinary bug pokemon. You wont even find them close to each other if Kabutops was a normal pokemon. The area would be extremely different, the role is extremely different and so on.

As for point 5, I never said they don't look like pokemon. Again, please don't use the words one poster might have used and put them here as: everyone who doesn't like B and W thinks this? I only used this argument as, they don't feel like pokemon to me in the end of my post, because I just can't 'connect' with them like I did with even the Gen IV pokemon. I think immersion is important in this game, but that is getting really hard if every five seconds you have to think: WTH IS THIS CREATURE?! That is by the way only my opinion, so please don't use it in your response as 'everyone who dislikes B and W thinks that the gen V pokemon are not feeling good.:'

I can't say much about point 6. I haver never heard someone saying this, and I think this is a quite silly argument. They still don't look like digimons ^^

I also never said anything about point 7, so I am not going to say anything about this one either.


About point 8, no, we have never solved this point, and that is the funny thing. First, how can you solve an opinion? Secondly, you were having trouble making a list of about 15 pokemon, while I could easily say alot of pokemon which looked extremely strange and fluffy. You also make it seem that we said ALL pokemon are fluffly. No, they are not. I have said numerous times that there are some cool pokemon, but it takes way to long to get them: Evolutions, Legendary or dragon. Your entire list was made with only these three kinds of pokemon. Please, name some pokemon then which are easy to get and look 'cool' ;p.(Except for RoggenRola and Sandile).

I think I have adressed this point already in my post, but I will say it again for you: Yes, their intention was for Woobat to replace Zubat. They HAVE THE SAME ROLE. It doesn't matter they don't have the same types, that argument has nothing to do with it. They are both designed to be the cave dwelling bat pokemon. And when it comes to that, I like zubat better. This argument of your's about Woobat is getting old, could you please stop using this in your rant? This could have easily fitted in with the fluffly pokemon argument.

I also never said anything about no pokemon following you, so I am going to leave this open. The same about 10. I liked every generation except this one, so this point doesn't involve me.

Then your conclusion. In the end, alot of points were proven incorrect. And that is the funny thing. First of all, you think you can prove opinions incorrect. If I say emboar looks bad, and you say emboar looks good, how can you PROVE that my opinion is incorrect? Half of your arguments don't even make sense, or are based on words people have never said, or combined sentences. Also, the ultimate conclusion about subjective pokemon is also a tad strange. This all comes back to the opinion part again. It is my opinion that I don't like the Gen V pokemon. We also give you argument after argument that we don't like the Gen V pokemon. You can't life with that and are defending yourself till the very end it seems, but the fact that our arguments don't even reach you because you put a steel shield around yourself does not mean that we suddenly only like the only generations for no reason at all. You just don't even care to take a look at our arguments it seems. That means that your conclusion is also incorrect. You got your comclusion to begin with only from my post. But I did not say we suddenly only like the older generation with no reason at all. I just said that we are entitled to our opinions, and the fact that I say in that post that I just like the older generation better doesn't mean I have no arguments. They have been said alot of times now, but whats the point of saying them over and over and over again while you don't listen?

About the non pokemon-design things, I have not much to say. I find most of those arguments silly as well. When it comes to the non pokemon side, this game is a fast improvement over the older ones. I really, really like the new battle system as an example. But about picking the wrong examples, I have one thing to say. My example wasn't even so bad. The guy from silver indeed did not have that 'strange' hair, but it would have been pretty hard for them to even give him strange hair. How is this going to look like on the map? Then about the guys from black and soulsilver. Although the guy from HGSS has somewhat impossible hair, it didn't look idiotic or extremely strange. If you see the guy from black you think: Dont they have a haircutter in the pokemon world, seriously? When I see him I really can't stop thinking about how hard he would have been pushed around if he was on my school. The guy from HGSS would probably not be the most popular kid, but atleast he didn't look so strange in comparison to the guy in black. It isn't only about the hair, it is about the general impression. The guy from HGSS did had fairly normal clothes to begin with. :P His hair isn't super strange either although it might be impossible. They guy from black has strange clothes, and even stranger hair, it looks really, really strange. That is my point.

I hope this is the conclusion to this debate. You might have had some good points, but there are also alot of arguments where you flat-out lose, mainly because of combining to posts together, or making false statements. Also overgeneralisation is a problem in your post. I also hope the mods will not delete this post. I try to stay as much on topic as possible, but I just have to respond to this post, although most of my post is about pokemon designs, again. I really try to let this be the last one mainly about pokemon designs, but I really feel I had to make this final post.

Altairis July 27th, 2012 4:19 PM

So I think what we've got here is a bunch of nostalgia lovers, and a bunch of Unova lovers (both are fine, not saying anything bad) and both sides are trying to convince the others that they're right, that these Pokemon suck/are the same as the originals/etc etc. I used to dislike the designs, I admit, and tbh I still hate some of them, but something to think about is stop thinking of the entire thing like a group of Pokemon, so if you dislike a bunch you won't start hating on the entire group (gen 5), if that makes sense. (I'm more leaning towards the Unova lovers's side, but I can be persuaded either)

Like, I personally dislike Gothitelle's line, Stunfisk, the monkey evolutions, Throh, Sawk, Maractus, Mandibuzz/Vullaby, Heatmor, Durant, and Meloetta. I dislike the graphics, various parts of the region, among other things. That's a lot of things to dislike, but just because I dislike factors of a generation doesn't mean the entire thing sucks. You get what I'm saying? Gen 5 brought a lot of new things to the table that contributed to Pokemon as a whole. That's kinda the vibe I'm getting from the few posts I've read (most of these are text walls, can't read them all)

Besides guys! This might just be me thinking but if there's this much of a disagreement, maybe just accept each other's opinions and stop trying to convince others you're right, idk, it just seems like it's turning into a hissy fit (from my viewpoint, that of an outsider to this convo), but I could be wrong.

Alright, my 2 cents! Probably a longer post than I intended.

pokemontrainer_samuel July 27th, 2012 9:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7272991)
Sorry man, but you don't convince me at all. At first your post might look like solid and strong, but I urge you to take a look at it. Some things you said have never been said, you take two completely different post and merge them together, you think you can disprove opinions which have nothing to do with facts, but with personal preferences, and so on. I am going to try to tell you where you are right and where you are wrong.


Let's see your first point. You tell us that we said that Gen V pokemon do not look like animals, and then you give us some pokemon which indeed don't look like animals. I agree with this part. Pokemon doesn't have to look like animals, but your examples are not good comparisons to the examples given by the anti B and W community. Klink and Vanillish are pokemon which are almost entirely the objects they try to resemble. That's right, they resemble real life objects. Vanillish is almost truely an icecone, only with a face and Klink is a gear with a face. Magnemite and magneton might be of the similar concept, so in that way you are right, but with jynx and ditto you really are missing the point. Jynx and Ditto might not be based on animals, but they are not based on objects either, while Vanillish and Klink are truely just objects with a moveset. I understand your point, but the examples are just not very good chosen. The problem people have with these two, is that they are just objects with a face, not that they are not animal based.



Then about point 2 and 3, which I am going to review together. These two points are very weak, Why? You mix the posts of 2 users together and then act as if they have been written by the same person. You first point out that 'we' while only one poster has ever written this, think that the new pokemon are lacluster in design. Then you give examples of pokemon which are not very creative as well. That was a good thing, because they are indeed not creative. But then you suddenly say: since they can't say gen 5 pokemon are lacluster in design, they suddenly are overcreative.

What are you talking about man? I never said B and W pokemon are lacluster in design, but you suddenly use someone else's argument and make it seem that everyone who thinks B and W pokemon are not good first thought they were lacluster, and when they found it it didin't work they suddenly say they are overcreative. I am the only one who said anything about overcreative, while the other poster is the only one who said they were lacluster. And then suddenly you act like these two posts are written by the same person, and by everyone who dislikes B and W?. This renders your response on point 2 and 3 unreliable and irrelevant. Don't think that everyone who dislikes B and W went through this thinkingpattern and don't that the whole anti B and W community thinks the same. This is called overgeneralisation.

Then the part about their predecessors. I never said that the pokemon from B and W are "fake" copies of the pokemon from the generations before that. I never said they are fake, and I never said they are exact copies. Woobat has the same role of Zubat in the older generations. And that is a flying cave bat which you can only find in dark areas. It never had anything to do with types (although you keep saying that) and never had anything to do with names. It has to do with the role in the game. If you just think clear for a second, you can easily understand that the role of Woobat is almost exactly the same of Zubat. And if it comes down to the role in the game, I think zubat did a way better role than Woobat. Woobat does come of from a real life bat, but that doesn't mean that because it comes from a real animal it MUST be perfect for a pokemon game. I still stay with my point that Woobat just isn't a good design for a pokemon. I see this argument from the defenders alot. Emboar is based on a chinese sage, so you can't say that his design is bad. Otherwise you have no respect for his background. Woobat is based on a reallife bat, so you can't say that Woobat just doesn't fit in, because then you are practically denying that there is a real life bat which has a heart shaped nose. The background of these pokemon might be good, but that doesn't mean they look good in a pokemon game.

Furthermore, oddish and bulbasaur? Why do you keep saying that? I have said around 100 times now that the most important factor of comparing a pokemon to another one is the role in the game. Bulbasaur is a very rare starter, while oddish is just a weak grass pokemon. The role in the game is different, while the role of Woobat and Zubat is identical. They might look like each other, but that doesn't mean that we could also have had oddish as an starter while bulbasaur is terrorizing Ilex forest. Kabutops and Scyther might even be a worse example. Kabutops and Scyther are not only completely different in design, kabutops is also a thought to be extinct pokemon, while Scyther is just a ordinary bug pokemon. You wont even find them close to each other if Kabutops was a normal pokemon. The area would be extremely different, the role is extremely different and so on.

As for point 5, I never said they don't look like pokemon. Again, please don't use the words one poster might have used and put them here as: everyone who doesn't like B and W thinks this? I only used this argument as, they don't feel like pokemon to me in the end of my post, because I just can't 'connect' with them like I did with even the Gen IV pokemon. I think immersion is important in this game, but that is getting really hard if every five seconds you have to think: WTH IS THIS CREATURE?! That is by the way only my opinion, so please don't use it in your response as 'everyone who dislikes B and W thinks that the gen V pokemon are not feeling good.:'

I can't say much about point 6. I haver never heard someone saying this, and I think this is a quite silly argument. They still don't look like digimons ^^

I also never said anything about point 7, so I am not going to say anything about this one either.


About point 8, no, we have never solved this point, and that is the funny thing. First, how can you solve an opinion? Secondly, you were having trouble making a list of about 15 pokemon, while I could easily say alot of pokemon which looked extremely strange and fluffy. You also make it seem that we said ALL pokemon are fluffly. No, they are not. I have said numerous times that there are some cool pokemon, but it takes way to long to get them: Evolutions, Legendary or dragon. Your entire list was made with only these three kinds of pokemon. Please, name some pokemon then which are easy to get and look 'cool' ;p.(Except for RoggenRola and Sandile).

I think I have adressed this point already in my post, but I will say it again for you: Yes, their intention was for Woobat to replace Zubat. They HAVE THE SAME ROLE. It doesn't matter they don't have the same types, that argument has nothing to do with it. They are both designed to be the cave dwelling bat pokemon. And when it comes to that, I like zubat better. This argument of your's about Woobat is getting old, could you please stop using this in your rant? This could have easily fitted in with the fluffly pokemon argument.

I also never said anything about no pokemon following you, so I am going to leave this open. The same about 10. I liked every generation except this one, so this point doesn't involve me.

Then your conclusion. In the end, alot of points were proven incorrect. And that is the funny thing. First of all, you think you can prove opinions incorrect. If I say emboar looks bad, and you say emboar looks good, how can you PROVE that my opinion is incorrect? Half of your arguments don't even make sense, or are based on words people have never said, or combined sentences. Also, the ultimate conclusion about subjective pokemon is also a tad strange. This all comes back to the opinion part again. It is my opinion that I don't like the Gen V pokemon. We also give you argument after argument that we don't like the Gen V pokemon. You can't life with that and are defending yourself till the very end it seems, but the fact that our arguments don't even reach you because you put a steel shield around yourself does not mean that we suddenly only like the only generations for no reason at all. You just don't even care to take a look at our arguments it seems. That means that your conclusion is also incorrect. You got your comclusion to begin with only from my post. But I did not say we suddenly only like the older generation with no reason at all. I just said that we are entitled to our opinions, and the fact that I say in that post that I just like the older generation better doesn't mean I have no arguments. They have been said alot of times now, but whats the point of saying them over and over and over again while you don't listen?

About the non pokemon-design things, I have not much to say. I find most of those arguments silly as well. When it comes to the non pokemon side, this game is a fast improvement over the older ones. I really, really like the new battle system as an example. But about picking the wrong examples, I have one thing to say. My example wasn't even so bad. The guy from silver indeed did not have that 'strange' hair, but it would have been pretty hard for them to even give him strange hair. How is this going to look like on the map? Then about the guys from black and soulsilver. Although the guy from HGSS has somewhat impossible hair, it didn't look idiotic or extremely strange. If you see the guy from black you think: Dont they have a haircutter in the pokemon world, seriously? When I see him I really can't stop thinking about how hard he would have been pushed around if he was on my school. The guy from HGSS would probably not be the most popular kid, but atleast he didn't look so strange in comparison to the guy in black. It isn't only about the hair, it is about the general impression. The guy from HGSS did had fairly normal clothes to begin with. :P His hair isn't super strange either although it might be impossible. They guy from black has strange clothes, and even stranger hair, it looks really, really strange. That is my point.

I hope this is the conclusion to this debate. You might have had some good points, but there are also alot of arguments where you flat-out lose, mainly because of combining to posts together, or making false statements. Also overgeneralisation is a problem in your post. I also hope the mods will not delete this post. I try to stay as much on topic as possible, but I just have to respond to this post, although most of my post is about pokemon designs, again. I really try to let this be the last one mainly about pokemon designs, but I really feel I had to make this final post.

Lame. I said didn't said you say them. Please read it properly. This thread is about why they received so many bad marks. I just showed what other people say. In fact I did state it wasn't just you, but people who dislike BW:
Quote:

Here are some baseless excuses your camp gives
How are you suppose to discuss something when you clearly do not read properly? Your lame attempts at trying to mislead my post are nothing but lame because you clearly got ahead of yourself and did not read properly. I won't push it any further, because you stating that I'm generalizing everything and making up your words shows that you think this thread is titled "Why do you think HenkieDePost thinks BW is bad" instead of its current title.

Well let me scope into 2 points which you discussed without going offtopic:

Since you said that Klink and Vanillish are pokemon which are almost entirely the objects they try to resemble and Vanillish is almost truely an icecone, only with a face and Klink is a gear with a face, then let me ask you what about the ball with a face, and a pile of eggs with faces, and a pinecone with a face and alphabets with an eye? All 5 of them are no different from a shampoo bottle with eyes, yet you can accept the other 3 while Vanillish and Klink are a no no for you.

As for your definition of strange clothes, and even stranger hair, it looks really, really strange is this:
http://www.pokemonelite2000.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/boy.png
Then if we compare it to these normal people:
http://www.cosplayisland.co.uk/files/costumes/6135/59560/CI_59560_1331925382.png http://download.minitokyo.net/Pokemon.466980.jpg
Mind telling me the difference between Hilbert, Ash and Ethan?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lapras* (Post 7273587)
So I think what we've got here is a bunch of nostalgia lovers, and a bunch of Unova lovers (both are fine, not saying anything bad) and both sides are trying to convince the others that they're right, that these Pokemon suck/are the same as the originals/etc etc. I used to dislike the designs, I admit, and tbh I still hate some of them, but something to think about is stop thinking of the entire thing like a group of Pokemon, so if you dislike a bunch you won't start hating on the entire group (gen 5), if that makes sense. (I'm more leaning towards the Unova lovers's side, but I can be persuaded either)

Like, I personally dislike Gothitelle's line, Stunfisk, the monkey evolutions, Throh, Sawk, Maractus, Mandibuzz/Vullaby, Heatmor, Durant, and Meloetta. I dislike the graphics, various parts of the region, among other things. That's a lot of things to dislike, but just because I dislike factors of a generation doesn't mean the entire thing sucks. You get what I'm saying? Gen 5 brought a lot of new things to the table that contributed to Pokemon as a whole. That's kinda the vibe I'm getting from the few posts I've read (most of these are text walls, can't read them all)

Besides guys! This might just be me thinking but if there's this much of a disagreement, maybe just accept each other's opinions and stop trying to convince others you're right, idk, it just seems like it's turning into a hissy fit (from my viewpoint, that of an outsider to this convo), but I could be wrong.

Alright, my 2 cents! Probably a longer post than I intended.

Lol I'm not really a Unova lover, although I love the game a lot. I actually love every single main pokemon game I've ever laid my hands on, since GBP up to the DS now. I just can't stand people criticizing a generation just because of one or two less satisfying parts of the game, when some (but not all) of these less satisfying parts have been present in the past game. I look at it as something like this: Even though there are 5 generations in the main series, but we should look at it as different generations and not try to compare them with each other, because every generation would have it's special points. BW was an attempt from game freak to breathe freshness into the game, and take a different approach to it, therefore it's meant to be different from the other generations. I think game freak was very daring in the making of this game, because it could either succeed as planned, or completely backfire and have everyone hate pokemon until they produce another improved remake of gen 2. I do applaud them for taking such a risk, and also their innovation. However many people do not see it like I do, and they expect game freak to stick to the tried and tested forever. Although sticking to the tried and tested guarantees security, however it's hard to expand if you keep running on the same spot.

Golurks Were Meant to Fly July 27th, 2012 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7271347)
Listen, I do not like these games alot, like you could have guessed because my post. But it seems that you guys just don't get it. I am not opposed to change, but change can be good or bad and that is what you guys are missing. As a wild example, if your country is a democracy (I am assuming it is. ;p) , and it suddenly becomes a dicatoriate where people randomly get murdered and slaughtered, would you like it? If I have to believe you people who are defending this game, I apperently must like it. Because it is change, and the people who say, wait wait wait, this is not what we want are suddenly nostalgic losers who need to do something with their lives. This may be an extreme example, but seriously, take a look at all the posts you defenders come up with. Alot of them end with: people who don't like this game are way too fed up with nostalgia and are a bit sad. Even the first reaction on this topic ends with that. (Which I actually find pretty offensive, that poster seriously had no reason to say that everyone who dislikes this game is sad and is fooling themselves. I think this is a bold accusation to make because first of all he didn't even know what the motives are of the people who dislike this game, and secondly, it just seems like he's trying to say there is only one option. Liking the game. If you do not liked it, you somehow automatically did not give it a chance, or you are fooling yourself... Seriously?)

Why can't you guys just accept that I just don't like those pokemon and characters? I only posted my first post here so you guys could know why I didn't like this game, and suddenly I and all the other guys who just don't like this game are nostalgic losers who are opposed to change? Can't people just have their preferences? I like RTS and RPG games as an example, while my brother only likes FPS and TPS games. I don't go saying to him that he HAS to like this game, otherwise he is not open to change and he is just fooling himself because he certainly didn't give AoE a chance because he MUST find it awesome if he did. Again, you might say it has nothing to do with it, but actually it has. You are forcing people to like things, and if they don´t they fall of the boat. That´s pretty strange isn´t it?

Just like I said in my example about democracy, change can come in good ways, or in bad ways. I think the new pokemon designs are a bad change, they try to look like something, or show they have a background and a interesting story (like emboar) but they just fail to resemble it for me. That is just my reason why I don't like these pokemon. I am not showing this as a fact, but as an opinion. You guys wanted to know why I think B and W might receive bad remarks? Here's my answer.

I also think the characters are a bad change. Just take a look at the characters you can choose from. I always play as a boy in a pokemon game, but this time I didn't even want to because they boy looked like he got hair growing out of his golf cap... :P Team plasma had some cool motives, but looked really, really rubbish. The white uniform of their grunts somewhat reminds me of nuns in the catholic church :P Why can't we just have a bada** guy at the top of a team like Giovanni or Archie, they at least looked like bad people. I also really prefer the normal cap guy from soul silver over the hair out of the cap guy. Those goofy people really destroy the immersion for me. Which is also a pretty big letdown for me. Immersion is very important, and if that fails you just can't really connect with your game and enjoy playing it. Atleast I can't. If I don't feel connected with the characters and animals (pokemon) in a game, I don't like it.

Furthermore, I DO like the changes of the unova region. I like the seasons, I can't say very much about the story because I have not finished it yet, but there are also good things about black and white. But the main point of any pokemon game are the pokemon of course, and quite frankly I do not like them, so that is just my biggest issue with the game. But the main point is that I DO like things about the game. It is not all about ranting and raving. They did a pretty good job making this game, and I still think pokemon has a bright future. Just because B and W are the first pokemon games ever that I don't like, doesn't make me a Gen V hater and a guy who is opposed to change. I am just putting up a list here of things I didn't really like about the game, just like the original poster asked.

I am not wanting to wage an all out war between the defenders of the game and the 'attackers', but seriously guys, you should stop labelling everyone who doesn't like this game as someone who is too nostalgic to like changes and is therefore a sad person. I liked alot of the changes, but I just don't like the pokemon and the characters, and that alone is gamebreaking for me. There is nothing more to it. I am looking forward to B and W 2, and maybe I will finish that game completely, but we will see about that when they come out.

I'm only responding to this as I'm uh *cough* lazy. And there's a LOT of text. Anyways...

First off, a democracy to a dictatorship? You say change can be good or bad so.... what about the good? (Plus that' a really harsh metaphor!)

I never said you HAD to like the games, go ahead. Dislike them. Really, where I live it's a free country so...
And about the nostalgia, I mean the OP is about why I think the games got such bad remarks and I definitely think that comes into play

Basically, I just wanted to say I accept you don't like aspects of the game and that's fine. I disagree, but it's your opinion, no one can tell you different and that isn't what I was trying to do.

Also, this is really off topic, and I apologize for that. I also wanted to add that I think people dislike the games because the art style has changed. I guess I kinda understand why one would dislike them more because the designs are wackier and a little more...interesting, but I like them. I think it really hinges on giving the games a chance, which a lot of people probably took one look and left, which cemented their opinion, which is kinda unfair. That's all. :D

Cerberus87 July 28th, 2012 9:20 AM

I think Game Freak was kinda forced to put only new Pokémon in the games. What's the point of having new Pokémon if people want to use the old ones, just because they're tried and true? They want to make you use the new ones, and they're right. I was playing through Blaze Black (hack of BW) the other day using a Feraligatr and a Murkrow, and despite the fact these are some of my favourite Pokémon, it just felt wrong to me.

156 new Pokémon is more than enough for a game. RBY had less and stood on its own feet rather well.

Also, some of the new designs, although overdetailed, are much more inspired than the old ones. Up until GSC (maybe RSE), the Pokémon designs were too simplistic. Pidgey was a basic bird, Rattata a basic rat, Growlithe a basic dog, and so on. Even Charizard and Dragonite were basic dragons. I like it that they're adding details and making Pokémon look more like monsters instead of toonified animals.

BTW the Gen V hero/heroine character designs are by far the best-designed in the history of the series.

And Emboar kicks ass. I wasn't too fond of it at the beginning, until I started to use it. I developed a thing for the fat boar. It even shakes the ground when it gets out of the Poké Ball! How cool is that?

It seems to me that too many people liked HGSS for the wrong reasons and are now nitpicking. Sure, HGSS were fantastic games, but they came with their fair share of annoyances too. The level curve in Johto is horrid, Team Rocket are pushovers (really, they're a joke), the availability of Pokémon based on time of day really sucks, the Safari Zone is a complete joke (need to wait 120 days to catch Bagon or Gible, WTF?), rematching trainers without the Vs. Seeker is a pain in the ass, and so on. Also, the Pokéthlon, a gimmicky way to sell evolutionary stones. For all the hits HGSS had, there were many misses, too, but people conveniently forget those because they're the remakes of the best games in the series (the original GSC).

Also, Archie as a kickass villain? Team Aqua and Magma were the most retarded villains in the Pokémon series. Their plans didn't make sense at all, and they made the game boring with all those Poochyenas/Mightyenas they had. Cyrus and Ghetsis are far better villains, even if Ghetsis' role in the story is predictable.

ReshZek200 August 5th, 2012 6:45 PM

opinion: B/W is an okay series, and we still might get another re-make.. if you think about it, garbordor and shrubish were gross, and genesect, but that`s the only three i see disgusting.... but then there`s Zekrom`s bra and Reshiram`s trousers and boobs.. Yeah, the plot was structured, but i think people hate 1st, 2d, 3d and 4th generation pokemon being un-avalible.. i could understand this... BUT! B/W 2 has the previous gens.. all of them... i`ve played the Black 2 rom so i know this is valid

Cyclone August 5th, 2012 7:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReshZek200 (Post 7287923)
opinion: B/W is an okay series, and we still might get another re-make.. if you think about it, garbordor and shrubish were gross, and genesect, but that`s the only three i see disgusting.... but then there`s Zekrom`s bra and Reshiram`s trousers and boobs.. Yeah, the plot was structured, but i think people hate 1st, 2d, 3d and 4th generation pokemon being un-avalible.. i could understand this... BUT! B/W 2 has the previous gens.. all of them... i`ve played the Black 2 rom so i know this is valid

I'm thinking the sequels were a nod to the complaints. Perhaps a third game WAS planned, now they're planning a FIFTH game. And who knows if we're getting Ruby/Sapphire rehashes complete with Unova Pokémon included?

Cyclone

Ammako August 6th, 2012 5:26 PM

All I'm going to say is that there is no point in attempting to argue with the stubborn.
That is all.

Ho-Oh August 6th, 2012 8:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingouin7 (Post 7289168)
All I'm going to say is that there is no point in attempting to argue with the stubborn.
That is all.

That isn't really much of a point, not everyone thinks negatively of Black and White because they're stubborn, but rather for certain reasons that other people also share the same view on. :(

Quote:

Originally Posted by CycloneGU (Post 7287978)
I'm thinking the sequels were a nod to the complaints. Perhaps a third game WAS planned, now they're planning a FIFTH game. And who knows if we're getting Ruby/Sapphire rehashes complete with Unova Pokémon included?

Cyclone

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReshZek200 (Post 7287923)
opinion: B/W is an okay series, and we still might get another re-make.. if you think about it, garbordor and shrubish were gross, and genesect, but that`s the only three i see disgusting.... but then there`s Zekrom`s bra and Reshiram`s trousers and boobs.. Yeah, the plot was structured, but i think people hate 1st, 2d, 3d and 4th generation pokemon being un-avalible.. i could understand this... BUT! B/W 2 has the previous gens.. all of them... i`ve played the Black 2 rom so i know this is valid

...Zekrom's bra? what. o_O But still, I can see why not having past Pokemon could be a reason for the complaints. tbh though on the other side, how else could've they had the fresh start?

Also discussion of possible future games doesn't really fit here. :(

soopaord August 6th, 2012 10:37 PM

B/W wasn't that bad. It took me a while, but I enjoyed it in the end. I loved the fact it was sort of a "fresh start", plus you didn't run into Zubats and Tentacools every five steps.

ReshZek200 August 7th, 2012 6:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Requility (Post 7289377)

...Zekrom's bra? what. o_O
But still, I can see why not having past Pokemon could be a reason for the complaints. tbh though on the other side, how else could've they had the fresh start?

Also discussion of possible future games doesn't really fit here. :(

if you look at the middle of zekrom. xD
----------------
nu B/W 2 on PC yet? kk! anyway... yeah, i agree, all that you said is true.. i also think that Ss/Hg are memories some can`t forget.. But i really am excited... some are excited too..

Sai_Kanzen August 7th, 2012 7:15 AM

Different people want different things and GameFreak cannot possibly give us everything all at once. That would put them out of business after all.

Timmetje August 8th, 2012 4:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HenkieDePost (Post 7271347)
Listen, I do not like these games alot, like you could have guessed because my post. But it seems that you guys just don't get it. I am not opposed to change, but change can be good or bad and that is what you guys are missing. As a wild example, if your country is a democracy (I am assuming it is. ;p) , and it suddenly becomes a dicatoriate where people randomly get murdered and slaughtered, would you like it? If I have to believe you people who are defending this game, I apperently must like it. Because it is change, and the people who say, wait wait wait, this is not what we want are suddenly nostalgic losers who need to do something with their lives. This may be an extreme example, but seriously, take a look at all the posts you defenders come up with. Alot of them end with: people who don't like this game are way too fed up with nostalgia and are a bit sad. Even the first reaction on this topic ends with that. (Which I actually find pretty offensive, that poster seriously had no reason to say that everyone who dislikes this game is sad and is fooling themselves. I think this is a bold accusation to make because first of all he didn't even know what the motives are of the people who dislike this game, and secondly, it just seems like he's trying to say there is only one option. Liking the game. If you do not liked it, you somehow automatically did not give it a chance, or you are fooling yourself... Seriously?)

I love how you say the defenders think every Unova-hater is same, so you just said everybody who defends the fact that the new Series isnt bad is the same. So you just did exactly what 'we' did

Why can't you guys just accept that I just don't like those pokemon and characters? I only posted my first post here so you guys could know why I didn't like this game, and suddenly I and all the other guys who just don't like this game are nostalgic losers who are opposed to change? Can't people just have their preferences? I like RTS and RPG games as an example, while my brother only likes FPS and TPS games. I don't go saying to him that he HAS to like this game, otherwise he is not open to change and he is just fooling himself because he certainly didn't give AoE a chance because he MUST find it awesome if he did. Again, you might say it has nothing to do with it, but actually it has. You are forcing people to like things, and if they don´t they fall of the boat. That´s pretty strange isn´t it?

(Again seeing everybody who defends liking the Unova region as a whole) I am just gonna make a 'wild example'

Translating the discussion to someone else you say: "I like pizza but I dont like tacos cause they taste like strawberries"
The people reacting on you say "tacos don't taste like strawberries" And you say "But there are tacos that taste like strawberries" I ('we') say "But there is also pizza that tastes like strawberry"

(Bad example is bad) But I hope you get it. (BTW Strawberry traco sounds awesome)

Just like I said in my example about democracy, change can come in good ways, or in bad ways. I think the new pokemon designs are a bad change, they try to look like something, or show they have a background and a interesting story (like emboar) but they just fail to resemble it for me. That is just my reason why I don't like these pokemon. I am not showing this as a fact, but as an opinion. You guys wanted to know why I think B and W might receive bad remarks? Here's my answer.

Did persian resemble the intersting background for you? aswel as Farfetch'd? And probably else i am forgetting?

I also think the characters are a bad change. Just take a look at the characters you can choose from. I always play as a boy in a pokemon game, but this time I didn't even want to because they boy looked like he got hair growing out of his golf cap... :P Team plasma had some cool motives, but looked really, really rubbish. The white uniform of their grunts somewhat reminds me of nuns in the catholic church :P Why can't we just have a bada** guy at the top of a team like Giovanni or Archie, they at least looked like bad people. I also really prefer the normal cap guy from soul silver over the hair out of the cap guy. Those goofy people really destroy the immersion for me. Which is also a pretty big letdown for me. Immersion is very important, and if that fails you just can't really connect with your game and enjoy playing it. Atleast I can't. If I don't feel connected with the characters and animals (pokemon) in a game, I don't like it.

1. See the picture that pokemontrainer_samuel posted
2. Yeah changing the world into dirt is awesome, but serious, I think the black and white bad guys are more badass, although i do think the grunts were a bit dull but at the E4 part with a giant Monster castle crushing out of the ground and those bridges crushing in the Pokemon League were alot awesome then the things Team rocket did, AKA nothing, they didnt actually do anything.
3. And why do you bond with the pokemon in a game: Nostalgia

Furthermore, I DO like the changes of the unova region. I like the seasons, I can't say very much about the story because I have not finished it yet, but there are also good things about black and white. But the main point of any pokemon game are the pokemon of course, and quite frankly I do not like them, so that is just my biggest issue with the game. But the main point is that I DO like things about the game. It is not all about ranting and raving. They did a pretty good job making this game, and I still think pokemon has a bright future. Just because B and W are the first pokemon games ever that I don't like, doesn't make me a Gen V hater and a guy who is opposed to change. I am just putting up a list here of things I didn't really like about the game, just like the original poster asked.



I am not wanting to wage an all out war between the defenders of the game and the 'attackers', but seriously guys, you should stop labelling everyone who doesn't like this game as someone who is too nostalgic to like changes and is therefore a sad person. I liked alot of the changes, but I just don't like the pokemon and the characters, and that alone is gamebreaking for me. There is nothing more to it. I am looking forward to B and W 2, and maybe I will finish that game completely, but we will see about that when they come out.

You are labelling all the defenders as people who label everyone who doesnt like this game as someone who is to nostalgic etc.

Comments in blue,
The reason B and W got bad remarks is cause people hate change,

Camzikazi August 8th, 2012 7:25 AM

it is because black and white only allows 5th gen pokemon before post game, and then when you can finally get your favourites, there is nothing to do with them.

Rubix33 August 8th, 2012 7:27 AM

Well I think it is the fact that the Pokemon look at lost worst then ever before.

rayan.b August 8th, 2012 7:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by voicerocker (Post 7256764)
What is a "real Pokemon"? All 649 Pokemon are REAL Pokemon.

Would you like to compare? I can find you several Pokemon that look odd in every generation.
http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/1/19/Spr_5b_103.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/0/0e/Spr_5b_124.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/9/9c/Spr_5b_122.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/c/cb/Spr_5b_097_m.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/4/4a/Spr_5b_235.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/6/65/Spr_5b_272_m.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/7/73/476.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/0/07/Spr_5b_400_m.png
So, how are these any better than the ones in Gen 5? They aren't. They're all Pokemon. Just because they look different doesn't mean they don't look like a Pokemon.

And "didn't even try"? How about these?

http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/8/8a/Spr_5b_100.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/b/b5/101.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/6/68/050.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/8/81/051.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/7/78/088.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/7/77/089.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/b/bc/081.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/6/63/082.png
These Pokemon were very simple, but the only reason people don't complain about them is because they came first.

How is this:
http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/6/68/Spr_5b_003_m.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/e/e1/Spr_5b_006.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/3/3d/Spr_5b_009.png
any more or less creative than this?:
http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/9/99/497.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/b/be/500.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/5/53/Spr_5b_503.png
Answer: they're not. Game Freak has to find ways to make new Pokemon stand out from older Pokemon, which is why the don't all look alike. Don't get me wrong, I grew up with the first Gen, but those are some of the most basic designs of them all. There is nothing wrong with any Gen 5 Pokemon. The Taoism theme with the Unova dragons was a great idea, so I don't know how anyone can say they "didn't try" with such a great concept.

http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/3/3c/643.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/f/f3/Spr_5b_644.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/d/d9/646.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/3/3b/646B.pnghttp://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/4/40/646W.png

And no, they didn't go overboard. They introduced 13 Legendary Pokemon with 143 regular Pokemon. In all, 47 Pokemon are Legendary while 602 are not. That is only 7.2% of all Pokemon.

exactly what i wanted to say, you couldn't have said it in a better way
by the way, in my point of view jynx is the worst looking pokemo ever

i like cinnamon :)

Galak August 8th, 2012 11:47 AM

Well, i guess it's because Nintendo are trying so hard to make people forget about the old games and buy the new ones, but it seems that people got so attached to those games, they won't just let go. And, Some of the Pokemon are really, how to put this, Fake.
They're over-doing it, i think they should make a re-make of Pokemon fire-red/ leaf-green, where the Pokemon move in battle, and follow you around!


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:50 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.