![]() |
Well, suffice it to say that Fire Red and Leaf Green don't deserve the ridicule that they're seeing here.
Hey You Pikachu! This. This game. What went wrong with Hey You Pikachu!? Everything. Worst Pokémon game ever. But I digress. . . It's astonishing that these games receive tons of heat for just existing, but this is beyond ridiculous at how they've become attacked and nitpicked to the point where I have to stop and scratch my head. For me, Kanto is better than Hoenn so it automatically has favor behind it, but that aside why continually permeate the area with tiny little nitpicks about the game? What's that? You don't like the Fame Checker or the Teachy T.V.? Well bully for you! That's like going to the grocery store and hating on all the grapefruits. Can't reach the bananas without passing the grapefruits so I suggest getting over the fact that there are items in the game that are 'useless' and don't add any significance to the game. You don't have to buy or eat the grapefruits and the same can be said about the Teachy T.V. Or maybe you're concerned that the addition of grapefruits in the produce section retracts from the experience of picking out potatoes. |
Quote:
Nobody is saying they're the worst remakes ever, and they were adequate for reliving our memories in Kanto. But they could have been on the same tier as HeartGold and SoulSilver, and that's what we're discussing here. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The idea of a remake isn't just to copy over an old game and put a new coat of paint on it. The idea is to improve things that could have been made better, and make it a more compelling experience. FireRed and LeafGreen were good but they weren't as good as they could have been. Maybe they didn't need a lot of bells or whistles, but they still could have added some things Red and Blue lacked while keeping the feel of the region. As they are, they're alright, but they could have been made the best freaking remakes of Red and Blue EVER. After all, the originals will always be there. If you enjoy the simplicity and maybe the numerous glitches you can always play the old games. You don't need to just do a copy paste and add virtually nothing, and unfortunately that's what FR/LG is. A copy paste with better graphics and layouts from Pokemon Red and Green. |
Quote:
|
All this talk about FRLG "forgetting" Yellow is funny, because ORAS also "forgot" Emerald, even going as far as cutting characters only introduced in Emerald (Juan and Scott), and reusing the inferior gym rosters from RS, yet ORAS is being praised for being a "proper" remake.
Let's not forget that the Delta Episode, which is NOT a nod to Emerald but an entirely new thing and a way to fit Rayquaza into the RS modified story, was where Pokémon pulled a Dallas with its "alternate timelines" story, which effectively renders all games from 3rd to 5th gen irrelevant. So no, I definitely don't consider ORAS a "proper" remake. I'll even go as far as saying the only reason they added so much stuff to HGSS is because the original game had a lot of things cut out from it, due to space, and the larger DS carts were more than enough to expand on the original regions. Also, GF addressed some fan issues with the games, namely the lack of Safari Zone. Compared to Hoenn, the Johto/Kanto pair of GSC had much more room for improvement. What would they add to Hoenn, really? There was nothing, because the region was already "locked down". The only way they could expand it was to the sky, which they did with the soaring feature. They could've added Johto to FRLG but it wouldn't work story-wise because Red is already supposed to be the "ultimate" trainer when he becomes Champion. What excuse would he have to go to Johto to earn more badges? GSC had an excuse: Red himself. But in FRLG there was no such further challenge. Adding to what Kip said, another feature in FRLG that carried over to future games was E4 rematches. FRLG were the first games to have that. |
As one who just recently completed Leaf Green for a challenge I did, allow me to state... Some people already mentioned, but as these games were meant to be remakes of the original RB, and not Generation I as a whole, I didn't mind that they left out things from Yellow. But in general, there was a lot about them I enjoyed - there were things about them left to be desired, but I don't mind playing them.
|
Quote:
I doubt we could really go into Johto in FR/LG, as we'd just be seeing the region in a beta state, but the Sevii Isles could use some expansion. The idea they had behind them was to make them bigger, and I'd love to see them bigger with maybe even some Hoenn Pokemon like Wingull available, seeing as how Sevii is pretty far out at sea like Hoenn. |
A remake doesn't really need to add much to the original game. Star Fox 64 3D was criticized for being too similar to the N64 original. But I think the criticism is baseless, because the game was already pretty solid from the get go, and adding more would make it worse.
SF643D is worth it because: - Graphics. The 3DS shits all over the N64 graphics wise, and it also has the 3D effect which I found good. - Portability. 3DS is portable, so you can play the game everywhere, unlike the N64. - Hiscore mode. This is a BIG plus that's often overlooked. For hardcore players, it's a great feature, because it means you don't have to play the story to try a high score on a specific level. - Better multiplayer. It only works locally but it's far more varied than on the N64. We lost Landmaster and on-foot characters, sure, but those were vastly inferior to the Arwing anyway, and the new power ups make up for it. Voices aren't the same, which is a bummer, but they had to change them because of rights issues. I had a blast playing through SF643D, even though it was just the same game I owned on the N64 with a new coat of paint. I also disagree that FRLG were "rushed". I could say the original Red and Green were "rushed", too, because of the incredible amount of glitches in those games, but there's no direct correlation to being "rushed". Games are usually planned at least 3 years before their release. It's quite possible GF made Ruby and Sapphire already with the idea they'd remake 1st gen some time later. Also, the timing of their release makes sense because they're remakes of Red and Green, which were released in Japan in 1996. FRLG were released in 2004, that's 8 years later, which is a lot of time. Finally, I never use the Teachy TV, to the point of not even knowing it's there sometimes, and the battle tutorial only lasts during a single battle at the very beginning of the game, so it's not a big issue, especially when a lot of modern games have amounts of handholding that far exceed what's in FRLG, and especially modern Pokémon games tend to have forced Pokémon catching tutorials. |
FRLG is good, it does everything it set out to do. Good remake, fixes every single bug with the original thanks to the Gen 3 engine, contributed some code to Emerald, made Pokemon available that weren't before, manages to look better and be better built than Ruby/Sapphire, and added a decent island postgame. It's a great game that... I don't understand the opinions in this thread about.
There is one thing I find went wrong with it though: though it succeeded in making Kanto feel like Kanto, it stuck too close. You have Pokemon in Gym Leader's teams for no reason other than because it was there in the originals, completely screwing up why they were there in the first place (Sabrina's Venomoth, Blaine's pre-evolved Pokemon, Bruno's Onix). You have the trainer fixed in facing just because they did it in the originals (though it's long been fixed, thanks Jambo51). Limited evolutions while a decent idea to preserve Kanto, end up more annoying than anything when only seven (five when taking complete lack of RTC into account) actually needed to be barred and could be easily incorporated in later teams because breeding and trading to other versions never happened until post-game (fixed without needing the National Dex). Some movesets, while improved over the originals later in the game, aren't very imaginative compared to their Hoenn counterparts (Lt. Surge, Blaine, Giovanni as leader). While it's true that the game didn't add too much and I'm more than fine with that approach, they went out of their way to replicate things long fixed. Nowadays we've easily hacked out these annoyances that were created for first-time players. Help was always able to be turned off, Oak tutorials are easy as whiting out six bytes, remove the intro/journal if desired, etc.. I get why they were there, but why didn't they do this with Ruby/Sapphire instead? The intended audience is people who played before obviously, so they don't need this stuff. The biggest crime about this however is twofold: in the beginning of the game, where before Brock the Nidorans are replaced with Yellow's Mankey making it about as easy as "Low Kick everything" as opposed to thinking around it with discovering what Nidorans/Butterfree/your starter learns, and SelfDestruct is removed from almost every trainer that can use it. Check the trainer data, it proves it via custom movesets. But hey, we've long since ironed these out. This is a good remake. I just hope later when they revisit they'll be ironed out officially. |
Quote:
And, the 8 years only applies to Japan, mind you. The rest of us got RBY in 1998-99, only 5-6 years before FRLG (technically, slightly less than 5 years in the case of Yellow). For most of us, the originals were still as fresh then as HGSS and BW are to us now... You don't see many people calling for remakes of either of those games, do you? Searching around YouTube, I found a very good review of FRLG. She does a good job of explaining everything that's wrong with these games... Namely, what few good things you can say about them also apply to the originals. She also had a very good point about GF using these games to try to replace Pokémon's original fanbase (as opposed to embracing them like GF did with HGSS and ORAS) with all of the excess handholding and tutorials. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
i agreed with her reasoning, but overall when she said there was no need for a remake, that was when it just clicked "then don't play it". or don't ask for one. Or at least: when a remake is made, don't hate on it for not having use or being a faithful, standard remake. Honestly, Gamefreak makes so little games....they make as much as Zelda games....and if you think about it hard enough, Zelda games are practically made one per generatio of console. Pokemon just make the first game, the expanded version, and maybe a remake. the only one that didn't get a remake was Gen 5, which instead got a direct sequel in the same gen. |
Well, Capcom did remake Resident Evil for the Gamecube only 6 years after the original was released, although it was probably just a bone thrown to Nintendo because the N64 didn't have the first one.
Super Mario All-Stars, which remastered all the NES Mario games, was also released for the SNES not long after the originals. Star Fox 64 rebooted the Star Fox series only 4 years after the original Star Fox was released on the SNES. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Honestly....its not even funny how much you streamline this point. As if FRLG was designed specifically for you. It has its merits....introducing to a group of newcomers who had never had a gameboy color, and trust me when i say when the Gameboy advance came out, the Gameboy Color and Gameboy were starting to fade FAST. I remember when GBA came out, i could no longer play Crystal, not only that but certain cartridges made the color glitched (and several of my friends had this issue s there was no going back). My friend's original Gameboy screen had faded aswell. Making a remake was a good choice, being fathiful isn't a problem. Especially if it was designed to make newcomers experience the original game with new updated graphics. Theres nothing wrong with that, theres nothing wrong with FRLG. it "Couldve" had more and it could've appealed to older fans who play the crap out of the original to thepoint that they would ruin any form of faithful remake. |
Personally not having the clock was a setback, but it made sense because the originals weren't designed with the clock in mind. It wouldn't feel like 1st gen if you started adding Hoothoots and other nocturnal 2nd gen Pokémon to the game just to take advantage of the clock. None of the remakes had completely new species of Pokémon in their regional Dexes. None. The only additions in HGSS and ORAS were the new evolutions. I could understand having Crobat/Espeon/Umbreon/Blissey but adding a clock just for one Pokémon (Eevee) would've been inefficient.
And the Berries aren't really that important. You can get most of the better Berries for battling in FRLG itself, and the stat Berries are exclusive to Colosseum/XD and events. Breeding only in postgame is fine. Who has time for breeding during the main game? I think starting with FRLG the GBA games had that nasty little thing called DMA (dynamic memory allocation) to prevent people from cheating, which required a special AR code to get rid of, otherwise you'd get Bad Eggs. |
I'm really getting tired of arguing about this over and over with you, Shiny Unown. Look, if you want to spend money on the exact same game over and over again, go knock yourself out, but don't whine and argue when people have the nerve to expect more than that.
Quote:
|
Quote:
i stopped at Gen 4 keep in mind, and i don't regret it. i don't hate gen 5, or gen 6. do i feel like they lost their way? sure...but i personally don't "HATE" them... I don't play Mystery dungeon despite being a huge fan of Roguelike RPGs, and Pokemon Conquest for sure doesn't entice me in the least, but i don't HATE these games aswell. Seriously....its remake...a standard, traditional, and overall "FAITHFUL" remake....it meets the expectation of what a remake is....and honestly....buying the same game, with updated graphics, fixed glitches, and slight story expansion isn't that bad of a deal. is it the same game in its core? yes....is that bad? NO!!! I've purchased Final Fantasy I on NES, PS1, and GBA. all with tiny, yet significant features of their own. Graphical updates,, updated dialogue, difficulty variation, and additional story is what makes me value each one. Quote:
i'm willing to bet RSE had the same issue.... Second:again...a standard remake....not a mediocre one. "below average" at best. but overall, still an enjoyable game. if you still own REd/Blue...you still play the crap out of it. and you enjoy every little bit...then go right ahead and not play FRLG....but for those who hate the sprites on them, found the original very Jarring to play with its color limitations. then FRLG is perfect for them...... if you knew anything about remakes, you would've hated FRLG the moment it was announced. |
I personally didn't even know what to expect when FRLG were announced. Just the existence of the Sevii Islands was a surprise for many, and even though they could have been fleshed out, I give FRLG credit for being the only remakes with a decent number of new areas. After I had played the games I wanted Game Freak to develop a 10th anniversary title focusing on Mew and Mewtwo, which is what FRLG were truly missing. But that didn't happen, nor has anything in that vein happened ever since. That doesn't make me want another set of remakes, though.
HGSS disappointed me a lot more than FRLG did. Granted, I had much higher expectations, but HGSS made me realize that remakes are not what I'm looking for. They don't allow for a notable story expansion, and the changes aren't always for the better. Quote:
|
Quote:
Sinnoh is as large as Hoenn and all they could fit in as a post game area were those small islands east of it. All the GBA Pokémon games are on 16MB carts. The GBA accepts up to 32MB carts. However, that space doesn't come for free... Bigger carts are more expensive. You'd have to direct this question to a romhacker, I'm afraid. But I'm pretty sure it's because of Hoenn's size. Heck, the Kanto in GSC was largely castrated to fit into the GB's tiny carts. We got two regions, yes, but at the expense of several maps being cut from the game. I think the thread title isn't adequate, because, for better or worse, FRLG were a commercial success and critically acclaimed at the time. So, from that point of view, "nothing" went wrong with them. The fact FRLG were a success was what enabled us to have further remakes. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
To me, that's the kind of remake that I want to see more of, especially now that ORAS has officially established the existence of a new timeline. Give me more reboots! Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'm Silktree, by the way. We've been through this song and dance before; I'm more interested in other people's opinions than yours. |
The Cerberus and The Shiny Unknown both have my full support when it comes to these responses.
I feel that most of these items are tiny nit-picks. Wanting a completely different game would be ludicrous when it's supposed to be a remake of a classic. Trying to cram a bunch of new stuff into the game could have potentially caused underlying issues with long time fans, so GF decided to play it safe and not include certain features: "What! This shouldn't be in the game! This is an outrage! Graah! 4/10!" - Nerd Fan #1 This is what GF wanted to avoid. And keep in mind that these games are the first of their kind and there wasn't a template for them to follow when making them; they took a huge risk financially and didn't feel like risking more with placing features that weren't in the originals that could detract from playing the game. It's supposed to feel like Kanto, so they kept it Kanto. It's especially difficult when you already have certain changes like Dark and Steel type moves; just because a Pokémon doesn't receive STAB doesn't make it less effective than Super Effective. And the split between Special and the change from Poison being Super Effective against Bug types is enough to actually say with certainty that "This isn't exactly the same". |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 7:35 AM. |
![]()
© 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.